Northeast Fisheries Science Center Reference Document 92-05 

The Right Whale in the 

Western North Atlantic: 

A Science and 

~anagernentVVorkshop 

14-15 April 1992 

Silver Spring, Maryland 

Edited by 

James Hain 

Marine Mammal Investigation 

Conservation and Utilization Division 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1097 

October 1992 
DISCLAIMER 

This report has been reviewed by NOAA/NMFS, and approved for release. The opl.n1ons, findings, 

conclusIons. and recommendations expressed in thls report are those of the a.uthors, and do not 

necessarily reflect the views or policies ofNMFS. Mention of trade names or commercial products does 

not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 

CITATION 

ThIs report represents the summariZed proceedings of a workshop. The summary reports 

contained within do not constitute a scientific publication. Citation of any report herein should only 

be done with the permission of the author. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Preface ........................................................................................................................... vU 

James Ham 

Abstract ............................................................................................................................ Ix 

Background InformaUon 

Right Whale Research 10 the Western North Atlantic: H!story. Status. and Future ................. 3 

Howard Wtnn 

Pre-exploitation Abundance of Right Whales off the Eastern United States ............................ 5 

Randall Reeves 

The Right Whale Catalog ........................................................................................................ 8 

Scott Kraus 

Right Wbale. Through Their Raace: A Geographic Treatmellt 

Right Whales off the Southeastern United States ........................................................... 13 

Scott Kraus 

Right Whales in the Great South Channel. 1975-1991 ................................................... 16 

Robert Kenney 

Occurrence and Distribution of Right Whales 10 Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bays ...... 20 

MartlynMarx 

Right Whales in the Bay of Fundy .................................................................................. 23 

Scott Kraus 

Right Whales on the Southern Nova Scotian Shelf .......................................................... 25 

Scott Kraus 

Biology and. Life Hiatol')" 

Value of Stranded Animals ............................................................................................ 29 

James Mead 

Right Whale Strandings ................................................................... .............................. 31 

Amy Knowlton 

Small-Scale Movements and Dive Profiles ...................................................................... 33 

Howard Wtnn 

Satellite-Monitored Movements of Right Whales ............................................................. 35 

Bruce Mate 

Right Whale Reproduction ............................................................................................. 37 

Amy Knowlton 

Segregation by Age and Sex In North Atlantic Right Whales ............................................ 38 

Scott Kraus 

The Use of VIsual and Molecular Sex Identification to Assess the 

Sexual ComposItion of the Catalogued Western North Atlantic Right 

Whale Population: SlgnUlcance to Population Recovery .................................................. 39 

Moira Brown 

Right Whale Population Structure .................................................................................. 40 

Catherine Schae:ff' 

Are North Atlantic Right Whales Suffering From Inbreeding Depression? ........................ 42 

Catherine Schae:ff' 

Right Whale Foraging and the Plankton Resources in Cape Cod and 

Massachusetts Bays ................................................................................................. 43 

Charles Mayo 

Population Modeling of the Northern Right Whale .......................................................... 45 

John Finn 

Western North Atlantic Right Whales: Abundance and Trends 

from Great South Channel Aerial Surveys ............................ ........................ ............ 47 

Robert Kenney 
Page IV 

Human Impact. and Mitigation 

Mortallty Rates and Causes in North Atlantic Right Whales ............................... " ........... 53 

Scott Kraus 

Mitigating the Effects of Ship Strikes on Right Whales ....... ; ............................................ 54 

James Haln 

Observations of the Southern Right Whale (Eu.ba.laena australis) Relevant 

to the Management of Right Whale Populations .............................................................. 58 

Roger Payne 

Agency Profile.: A.ctivttie •• Re.pon.ibWtie., ud Plan. 

Implementation of the Northern Right Whale Recovery Plan ................................. '" ........ 63 

Michael Payne 

The North Atlantic Right Whale: An Overview of Directed Management 

and Research Activities Conducted by the flOrida Department 

of Natural Resources ...................................................................................................... 65 

Jim Valade 

Right Whale Management in Georgia: The Role of the Georgia Department 

of Natural Resources ...................................................................................................... 67 

Michael Harris 

Minerals Management Service Right Whale Research 1978-1992 .................................... 69 

Carol Fatrfield 

Overview of the ResponSibilities of the Office of the Assistant Secretary 

of the Navy for Installations and Environment in Relation to Marine Mammal 

Issues (Right Whales) ..................................................................................................... 71 

Pamela Baker 

U.S. Army Corps of Eng1neers' Management Activities and Responsibilities for 

North Atlantic Right Whales (Euba1aena glacfalis) Outing Hopper Dredging 

in the Southeastern U.S ................................................................................................. 73 

Dena Dickerson 

Right Whale Activities of the Manne Mammal COmmission ............................................. 75 

David Lalst 

Focus of Recovery Efforts for Endangered and Threatened Species Within 

the NMFS Office of Protected Resources ......................................... ; ............................... 76 

Aleta Hohn 

WorJdnC Group Reporta 

Human Interactions and Disturbance ............................................................... , ............ 80 

Robert Brownell, Chair 

Habitat Identitlcation and Protection ................................................................ , ...... , ...... 82 

Tim Smith. Chair 

Appendix-·Meeting Part:lclpa:nts ........................................................................................... 86 

Figure 1. 

Figure 2. 

Figure 3. 

FIgure 4. 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Stghtlngs of right whales in the western North Atlantic. Identlfytng the five 

known pr:L1l1ary habitats , ................. , ........................... , ....................................... vii 

Preliminary results of model runs show1ng population trajectories for 

right whales off the eastern United States ............................................................. 6 

Long~distance matches. or re-sight1ngs. of photo-Identified right whales, 

suggesting an extensive range for at least some of the individuals within 

this population ........ " ...................... ,. .... tot. ~.""."''''''''' ••• i •• '' t._ ..................... ~ ................................ ~. _., ••• 9 

Right whale sightlngs. December 1991 through February 1992, in 

the area from Jacksonville Beach. Florida. to Cumberland Island. Georgia .......... 13 
Page .. 

Figure 5. Right whale sightings along the southeastern United States between 

1950 and 1989 ................................................................................................... 14 

Figure 6. Densities of right whales per survey mile off the southeastern U.S ...................... 15 

FIgure 7. The Great South Channel study area, an intensively uti.lJ.zed cetacean 

habitat located southeast of Cape Cod and east of Nantucket Island ................... 16 

Figure 8. Distribution of right whale slghtings in the Great South Channel by year, 

Including s~ghtings only from March through July except for 1975·1978 ............. 17 

Figure 9. Weekly shifts in the distribution of right whale slghtlngs in the Great South 

Channel region In 1988 ....................................................................................... 18 

FIgure 10. Right whale distribution in and near Cape Cod Bay. 1987-1991 ......................... 21 

Figure 11. Right whales are present in the Bay of Fundy from late July to the 

middle of October ............................................................................................... 24 

Figure 12. Right whales occur on the southwestern Nova Scotian Shelf from May 

through November .............................................................................................. 25 

Figure 13. Breakdown of the western North Atlantic right whale population according 

to their use of the Bay of Fundy .......................................................................... 40 

FIgure 14. Distribution of the mtDNA morphs among animals that use the Bay of Fundy 

nursery area and those that do not ..................................................................... 41 

Flgure 15. Predicted effect of ship strikes on the population growth of 

northern right whales ......................................................................................... 46 

FIgure 16. The Westinghouse Airship's 500HL airship. operated by SeaWorld of 

Orlando, Florida ................................................................................................. 55 

FIgure 17. Right whale slghtings off northeast Florida during January 1992 ........................ 56 

Figure 18. Ship strikes appear to be responsible for an average of one right whale 

Table 1. 

Table 2. 

Table 3. 

Table 4. 

Table 5. 

Table 6. 

Table 7. 

Table 8. 

Table 9. 

Table 10. 

mortality a year, mostly in young animals .......................................................... 57 

LIST OF TABLES 

Sighting-per-unit-effort indJces by month for right whales in the 

coastal waters of the southeastern United States ................................................ 14 

Estimated denslty (whales/kml X 10-3); variance of the density (X 10-:)); 

and abundance (with 95% confidence interval) for right whales 

in the Great South Channel from Skymaster line-transect aerial surveys ............ 48 

Mean (and SE) sighting effort (km); number of right whales sighted; 

and right whale sighting rate (SR. whales/lOOOkm) for aerial surveys in 

the Great South Channel region. AprU-June 1919-1989 ..................................... 48 

Back-calculated estimates of the 1935 abundance of western North 

Atlantic right whales. assuming a 1990 population of 350 and 

different annual rates of increase ....................................................................... 49 

Mean of the greatest number of adult right whales sIghted on Sept. or Oct. 

survey flights. by region ................................ _ .................................................... 58 

Mean swJ.mmtng speeds (km/hr), divided into readings taken at 

intervals of less and greater than 5 rnlnutes ....................................................... 59 

Summary of aerial survey sl.ghtings by flOrida Marine Research Institute, 

1987-1992 ......................................................................................................... 66 

Minerals Management Service right whale research. 1918-1982 ......................... 70 

Specific activities identi.tled by working group members necessary to 

begin implementation of the Right Whale Recovery Plan, with related 

Pliortty 1 and necessary Priority 2 objectives from the 

Implementation Schedule ................................................................................... 83 

Speciflc actiVities identi.tled by Working Group members necessar:Y to 

promote Inter-agency cooperation. coordination. and collaboration for 

implementation of the Right Whale Recovery Plan, with related Priority 1 

and necessary Priority 2 objectives from the Implementation Schedule ............... 84 
::>age VII 

PREFACE 

James Hain, Chairman 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

Woods Hole, Massachusetts 

A meeting on the science and management of 

the right whale. Eubalaena glactalis. was held in 

Silver Spring. Maryland. on 14-15 April 1992. 

This was a meeting of researchers, agency representatives, and managers invited to: 

l} present recent results and status of 

present research, 

2) discuss SCientific research needs relative 

to the implementation of the National 

Marine Fisheries Service' s Final Recovery 

Plan for the Northern Right Whale. released in March 1992, and 

3) broaden the base of involvement. expertise (science and management). resources, 

and funding in right whale research and 

management. 

The meeting was attended by approximately 

40 participants (see Appendix). 

Objectives of the meeting were tied to three 

events: 

1) The integrated research program (cooperative agreement between NOAA/NMFS 

and the University of Rhode Island) on the 

right whale in the western North Atlantic 

had been in place for about five years. 

This was judged to be an appropriate time 

to review the status and accompUshments of that program. 

2) The recently released recovery program 

would, in many ways, playa large role in 

future program and fundIng decisions. 

3} Deta1ls of the NMFS FY93 budget and the 

framework of the FY 94 budget were being 

developed. and input to these processes 

was envisioned. 

The two-day meeting was structured to in· 

clude three components: (1) presentations by 

researchers on past and present work. (2) "agency 

profiles" by agency spokespersons describing the 

activities, responsibilities, and plans of their 

agency. and (3) Working Groups to define plans. 

priorities, and tasks for the future. After some 

discussion, the participants agreed to focus on 

two Working Group topics: (l} human Impacts. 

and (2) habitat identification and protection. 

In the space of a day and a half. a concise and 

informative summary and update on right whale 

research off the eastern United States was proVided. Distribution, abundance, and behavior in 

five major study areas (Figure 1) was well described. Data available from stranded animals 

have been less than desirable- - largely because many strandings are not reported in time, 

and information Is lost. Satellite tracking of a 

handful of tagged animals Is causing us to ret:hink commonly-held notions a bou t movements 

and residence times. 

Calving success and calving rates are under 

close study. and provide information central to 

understanding population status and recovery 

potential. In addition. new information on social 

and genetic structure Is being provided by tissue 

sampling and the corresponding analyses. When 

right whales are on their feeding grounds, feeding 

success appears to depend. in great measure. on 

locating and exploltlng hlgh-denslty prey patches. 

This depends on feeding strategies that involve 

extraordinarily fine-scale horizontal and vertical 

movements. 

In addition to the aforementioned satellite 

tracking and genetic analyses. the application of 

new technologies includes the use of airships as 

research platforms. and increasing use of hlghresolution video for data acquisition. 

Of the various factors that detennlne the 

status and recovery of the population. the one 

most accessible to management actions is the 

broad area of human impacts. More than half the 

population has experienced either ship strike 

and/ or net entanglement. and perhaps a third of 

right whale deaths are caused by human activities. Some mitigation efforts have been initiated. 

but there was wide agreement that more effort is 

called for. 

Discussion, question.1ng. and suggestions 

during and following many of the presentations 
provtded valuable Interchange and Input. Toptcs 

for ge:.t>ral consideration Included the follo"Wing: 

• The priority rankings on several of the 

Implementation schedule items (p. 71-77 

In the Recovery Plan) were considered by 

some participants to be dlfferent from 

those agreed on by the Recovery Team. 

• PriOrity I1tems on the schedule appeared 

to some participants as predominantly 

management-related. while the support· 

Ing science received Priority 2 or lower 

rankings. 

• Opinions were expressed that the distance restrictions for the approach of 

whalewatchJ.ng vessels to right whales 

Lnappropriately restricted assocIated reI 

~ 

...... ) 

.,J1

) 

• 

search opportunities and data collection 

from these vessels. 

• Some concern was expressed that given 

(1) the Recovery Plan has been released. 

(2) a meeting has been held. and (3) a 

proceedings document will be generated. 

What happens next? If. when. and how 

will the plans. tasks. and actions be carried out? 

The followmg text. and Ln particular. the 

Working Group conclusions, provide guidance 

on directions and priorities. The meeting consensus was that With this guidance. the agencies 

Lnvolved should move forward to address important issues and continue to lnitlate the appropriate programs. 

I /~ 

~~~., -. * • __ t ttl • ••••• I , • • • ;f A . - . cc ...... \ 

.. 

• 

21 

~~~~~~·~~~~~~~~~~--~~2 . . SQ 

FIgure 1. Slghtlngs of rtght whales In the western North Atlantic. ldentlfytng the ftve known prtmary habItats: 

SEUS - Southeastem United States: GSC - Great South Channel; CCB • Cape Cod Bay: BOF - Bay 

of Fundy: and SS - Scotian Shelf. Number of 81ghttngs-4.119: period. of record is June 1960 through 

June 1988. 
ABSTRACT 

A meeting on the science and management of the right whale. Eubalaena gl.acialis. was held in 

Stiver Spring. Maryland. 14-15 April 1992. Researchers and agency representatives met to review 

present research, discuss scientific research needs relative to the Implementation of the Flnal 

Recovery Plan for the Northern Right Whale. and to broaden the base of involvement in right whale 

research and management. 

The meeting included presentations by researchers on past and present work. "agency protUes" 

by agency spokespersons describing the activities of their agency. and working groups on human 

impacts, and habitat identification and protection that set out plans. priorities, and tasks for the 

future. 

The summary and update on right whale research off the eastern Unlted States Included 

distribution. abundance, and behavior in five major study areas; the strandings program: satellite 

tracking; calVing success and calving rates; new information on social and genetic structure; feeding 

strategtes; the use of airships as research platforms; and Increasing use of hlgh-resolutlon video for 

data acqUisition. 

Recommended management actions assigned high priority to the broad area of human impacts. 

More than half the population has experienced either ship strike and/or net entanglement. and 

perhaps a third of right whale deaths are caused by human activities. Some mitigation efforts have 

been initiated. but there was wide agreement that a greater effort Is called for. 

The Ust of meeting participants is appended. 
Page 1 

Background Information 
Page :3 

RIGHT WHALE RESEARCH 

IN THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC: 

HISTORY, STATUS, AND FUTURE 

Howard E. Winn 

Graduate School of Oceanography 

University of Rhode Island 

Kingston, Rhode Island 

The history is easy, as is the status. The 

future is clouded. 

HISTORY 

The past history of the right whale 1s inextricably intertwined with man as he moved to the 

sea. The Basques tn the 11 th to the 17th 

centuries undoubtedly were the first·to significantly reduce the population of right whales in 

the western North Atlantic. Hunting continued 

through the firs t half of the 20th century by many 

nations. 

The North Atlantic right whale is the most 

endangered large whale in the world. Only the 

western North Atlantic has a significant number 

of tndividuals (300 to 350), with the eastern North 

Atlantic population virtually extinct, and so few 

sightings tn the Pacific that no significant concentrations are known. 

From about 1950 through the early 1970s, 

only SchevUl and Watkins (1976. 1982) supplied 

any information on western North Atlantic right 

whales. and at first concentrated on sounds. 

Since that time. others have contributed s1gn.lficantly to our understanding of the right whale, 

and most are giVing presentations at this meeting. Our newest knowledge on the right whale. 

based on NMFS support. is being summar1z.ed 

over the next year. An overdue report is in its final 

stages on SCOPEX (South Channel Ocean Productivity Experiment). supported by NSF and 

MMS. This study concerned the right whale and 

oceanographic processes in the Great South 

ChanneL A signlficant amount of new information has been obtained. 

A series of workshops during 1979-1982 

demonstrated how little was known about the 

right whale in the nortilem hemisphere. These 

culminated in an IWe workshop at the New 

England Aquarium (sponsored by many agencies). The report was published in 1986 (Right 

Whales: Past and Present Status, IWC, Special 

issue No. 10). At about that same time. 1982. an 

important study supported by MMS {ELM} was 

betng completed on the cetaceans and turtles of 

the Atlantic Coast (CETAP). This study also 

emphasized our lack of knowledge about the 

right whale. 

During the final IWC workshop. many persons were agitated because, while there were 

needs for right whale research. absolutely no 

funding was forthCOming. A representative of 

Greenpeace said that it was possible. by political 

action. to obtain such funds. Indeed. with the 

help of Greenpeace and many representatives 

and senators along the Atlantic Coast and elsewhere. funding was found. During the following 

six years. at NMFS/NOAA, Department of Commerce. and higher in the administration, consid· 

erable efforts were made to remove the funds for 

right whale research. 

Early in about 1981 or 1982. researchers 

from the New England Aquarium. Center for 

Coastal Studies. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and the University of Rhode Island. all 

who had been contributing to information concerning the right whale. formed a consortium to 

work together on the problem. Other investigators have been added as appropriate. 

THE RECOVERY PLAN AND· 

THE FUTURE 

Since there seems to have been no significant 

change in the status of the northern right whale 

tn recent years. much needs to be done in the 

future. However. one sees problems that will be 

created by man. One also sees the problem of a 

government agency trying to t.ake over all the 

research that has been accomplished in an exemplary fashion by private indivtduals and academic institutions. I am not convinced that the 

Job will be well done by the government. Future 
Page 4 

work and success will depend on younger Individuals. and I assume vou will hear much of 

hopes for the future of the right whale and right 

whale research. 

The Final Recovery Plan for the Northern 

Right Whale has been pubUshed and I cannot add 

much to that. It must Include a signtficant 

management program as well as studies tnclud· 

Ing monitoring. tagging. nev,t oceanographic studles. and others. A good Interim management 

strategy Is to provide protection until the scientific information required for sound management 

and decisions is collected. It Is only through our 

understanding of the ecology of the right whale 

that we will be able to predict the effects of 

perturbations. and thus contribute usefully to 

their conservation. As of now, a lack of funding 

to the private sector is severely I.nhI.bltlng this 

effort. 

REFERENCES 

Watkins. W.A. and W.E. SchevUl. 1976. Right 

whale feeding and baleen rattle. J. Mamm. 

57(1):58-66. 

Watkins. W.A., and W,E. Schevill. 1982. Observations of right whales. Eubalaena gIadalis. 

in Cape Cod waters. Flsh. BuU., U.S. 80(4):875· 

880. 
PRE·EXPLOITATION ABUNDANCE OF RIGHT WHALES OFF THE 

EASTERN UNITED STATES 

Randall R. Reeves 

Department of Geography 

McGill University 

Montreal, Quebec 

Jeffrey M. Breiwick 

Alaska Fisheries Science Center 

National Marine Mammal Laboratory 

Seattle, Washington 

Edward Mitchell 

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 

Los Angeles, California 

In the llterature it Is often implied. if not 

stated explicitly. that right whales were present 

in large numbers in the western North Atlantic at 

the time of European discovery and colonization. 

Schevill. Watkins. and Moore (l9S6) offered a 

contrary view for one region. noting that their 

own "encounterrateM (our tenn)With right whales 

off Cape Cod was not much different from that 

reported by Allen (19 16) for the Colonial period. 

Although they acknowledged that many whales 

might have been missed by both sets of observers 

(Woods Hole researchers and early European 

settlers), and that the number of whales present 

in recent years "would perhaps not have conSistently supported the whaling that was carried 

on. ~ Schevill et aL challenged the conventional 

Wisdom by suggesting that "the population of 

right whales passing near Cape Cod 1s at worst 

only sUghtly smaller now than it was in the 17th 

century.ft 

Reeves and Mitchell (1987, 1988) compUed 

infonnation on right whale kills by shore whalers 

between Maine and Florida from ca 1630 to 

1930. Although this work revealed that Allen's 

(1916) compilation had been far from complete. 

the fragmentary nature of the (mainly) published 

records still made it impossible to conclude that 

there were more than a few hundred right whales 

in the population migrating along the U.S. East 

Coast in the early to mid-17th century. 

Subsequent examination of unpubUshed 

records in British archives has made it possible 

to address somewhat more rigorously the problem of lnltial right whale abundance In this 

region. 

MATERIAL AND METHODS 

Data on whale oU and baleen imports from the 

colonies were extracted from documents In the 

PubUc Record Office in IAndon. These spanned 

the years 1696 to 1734 and included goods 

exported from New¥ork. Pennsylvanla. Vlrgln.1a, 

Maryland, Carolina, Bennuda, and occasionally. 

NGreenland. " and the West Indies. Average yields 

were used to convert the production figures to 

estimates of right whales taken each year. 

Several population trajectories were plotted 

(FIgure 2) based on arriving at a current popula~ 

tion size of 350, With a simple population model 

(no age or sex structure) and the usual "baleen" 

type recruitment function: 

P - (P • C)5 + P n·S)[1 + AU - (p/p)'n, (-\ t t t-ttn 

where the resilience parameter. A. is a function of 

the denstty-dependent exponent (z), the survival 

rate (S). and the maximum sustalnable yield rate 

(MS¥ rate), defined as the M5Y divided by the 

population size at MSY (MSYL). The MSY rate Is 

a measure of population productivity. with m..1nke 

whales. for example. having a higher rate than 

blue whales. We assume an MSYL of 60 percent 

(the ratio of population size at MSY to the 

unexploited ("lnitial"J population size), an age at 

exploitabillty (Le .• recruitment Into the fishery) of 

five, Instantaneous mortality rates of 0.05 and 

0.08, and MSY rates of 0.01, 0.03. and 0.05. 
Page 6 

2000 

1750 

1500 

V 

N 

..... 

(1l 1250 

s::: 

0 ,'"" ...., 

\1:1 1000 -::f 

Q.. 

0 

0.. 750 

500 

250 

YSYR = 0.01 

WSYR "" 0.03 ~ ..... ~ ...... -.. 

WSYR = 0.05 ...... " ... '" ... 

" 

Catch 

MSYL = 0.60 

tm = 5 

Final population = 350 

M = 0.05 .... ~.,,-. M = 0.08 

WSYR:I' 0.01 

WSYR = 0.03 "-

WSYB :I' 0.05 . '" 

. .. .. " ...... 

o+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=-~ 

1833 18S8 1883 1708 1733 17S8 1783 1808 1833 18S8 1883 1908 1933 1958 1993 

Year 

Figure 2. PreUmlnary results of model runs showtng population trajectories for tight whales off the eastern 

Untted States. 

RESULTS 

The population trajectories resulting from 

these parameters and the prellminary catch history indlcate that there were more than 1.000 

rtght whales in this population during the early to 

mid-l600s (Figure 2). Given the presumed slow 

recovery rate of the right whale in the North 

Atlantic. the higher MSY rate of 0.05 Is probably 

near the upper end of any plausible range. Estimates of initial population are relatively insensitive to the two morta.l1ty rates considered here. 

We expect that our detailed analysis of the export 

records and catch data will corulrm that the 

removals used in this prellminary set of iterations 

were estimated conservatiVely. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Before any firm conclusions can be drawn. it 

is important to consider the llmitations and 

biases of the data used to estJmate removals. We 

have not, as yet. attempted to make interpolations and extrapolations to account for catches in 

years without production or catch data. Nor have 

we settled on procedures for estimating species 

composition, yields of oU and baleen. and loss 

rates. Some proportion of the oU and baleen in 

the statistics must have come from drift whales 

that died of natural causes. These and other 

factors could affect the results in Important 

ways. 
PLANS FOR FURTHER WORK 

We intend to complete this project in two 

stages. First. we need to compile and analyze the 

aggregate data on removals so that there is a 

comprehensive table of kills. by year, similar to 

that used for Alaskan bowhead whales in the 

IWC. Second, we need to apply these removal 

estimates in an iterative model to examine pos· 

slble population traJectoties. It would be most 

usefultf at least two alternative sets of conclusions were offered: one using rock· bottom estimates of take based on conservative interpretations of the data along with "worst-case~ population parameters, and another using "best estimates" of take based on reallstic assumptions. 

Interpolations, and extrapolations along With the 

most plausible population parameters in Ught of 

what 1s known about tight Whales and closely 

related species. 

REFERENCES 

Allen, G.M. 1916. The whalebone Whales of New 

EngJ.a.nd. Mem BostonSoc. Nat. Hfst 8(2): 107· 

322. 

Reeves. R& and E. Mitchell. 1987. Shore 

whaling for tight whales In the northeastern 

United States. UnpubUshed report submitted undercontractNA85-WC-C-06194to U.S. 

Department of Commerce, Nat!. Mar. FIsh. 

Serv .• Southeast Fish. Cent., Miami. FL. 108 

p. 

Reeves, RR and E. Mitchell. 1988. History of 

whaling in and near North Carolina. NOAA 

Tech. Rep. NMFS 65: 1-28. 

Schev1l1, W.E .. W.A. Watkins. and K.E. Moore. 

1986. Status of Eu.balaen.aglaciaUs off Cape 

Cod. Rep. Int. 'M1aL Comrnn. (Spec. Issue 

10):79-82. 
THE RIGHT WHALE CATALOG 

Scott O. Kraus, Amy R. Knowlton, 

Jackie N. Ciano, and Philip K. Hamilton 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Right whales are indiVidually identifiable on 

the basis of patterns of cornifled skin (called 

callosities) that are found on their heads. In the 

North Atlantic. photographs of the callosity patterns have been used since the late 1970s to 

identify indiVidual whales. Researchers also use 

supplementary features such as scars. Up ridges. 

white belly patches, and occasional deformities 

to assIst in the identification of indiViduals. From 

photographs of the callosity patterns and other 

features. a un.tfted catalog of indiVidual right 

whales has been compUed by the North Atlantic 

Right Whale Consortium (Center for Coastal Stud· 

les, New England AqUarium. UniversIty of Rhode 

Island. and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution), and is curated at the New England Aquantun 

in Boston. 

RE .. SIGHTS OR "MATCHES'" 

To ensure accuracy and reliability in Identifying right whales. Consortium protocols require 

that three independent researchers must agree 

on a ~match" between any newly photographed 

whale and the existing catalog. In addition, we 

require that at least three distinc~ features 

match between the cataloged indlv1dual and the 

putative "match. M unless the whale has a uniquely 

distinctive feature such as a major scar or birthmark. 

SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

In this population. indivIdual1dentifications 

are the basis for most of what we know about the 

population biology of this species. Catalog data 

has been used to correct population counts (by 

eliminating the possibility of counting the same 

Whale twice), to estimate population size (using 

tag-recapture methods). to detennine the age of 

Sexual maturity and reproductiVe rates (by tracking known females through their lives), and to 

describe mortality rates and causes. movements, 

age and sexual segregation by area and season. 

and age and sex-speciflc behaViors. 

The catalog currently holds 5.535 records of 

the 316 right whales. It includes sightings of 

individual right whales by date and location. and 

incorporates information on age. sex. matriline. 

and behavior at each sighting. Annually. the 

Consortium processes approxImately 500 

sightings of about 160 known indiViduals. For 

the last three years, only three to five new whales 

(not including calves) have been added to the 

catalog, suggesting that nearly all North Atlantic 

right whales are known. Matches of known right 

whales have recently been made from Florida to 

Iceland (FIgure 3). suggesting a single western 

North Atlantic stock With an extensive range. 

Additional matches have yielded data on longevity, and shown movements of indiViduals between all five known right whale habitats. Catalog sightings data have been instrumental in 

correlating genetic data With movements and 

migration patterns, and w1ll continue to playa 

major role in research and monitoring efforts for 

this species. 

REFERENCE 

Crone. M.J. and S.D. Kraus. 1990. :Right whales 

(Eubalaena glactaUsJ in the western North 

Atlantic: A catalog of identified individuals. 

Published for the North Atlantic :Right Whale 

Consortium. Boston. Massachusetts: New 

England Aquarium. 223 p. 
80' 

Canada 

. 

South 

America 

• • , 

50' 

, 

• 

I 

I • 

O CaC<e Fa'.ew~1I C(ovnd 

cent'H 

A to, .. 

",' 

60' 

50' 

20' 

Africa 

10' 

',.' 

Figure 3. Long-distance matches. or re-sightings. of photo-ldent1fled r1ght whales. suggesting an extensive 

range for at least some lJ1di\1duals Within this population. 
Right Whales through Their Range: 

A Geographic Treatment 
RIGHT WHALES OFF THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES 

Scott D. Kraus, Amy R. Knowlton, 

and Chris K. Slay 

New England Aquarium 

Boston,Massachusetts 

Aerial surveys of right whales have been 

conducted since 1984 during the winter months 

between Savannah. Georgia. and Cape Canaveral. 

F1orida. Starting In 1988. the Anny Corps of 

Engineers has supported dally aerial surveys 

locally around the dredging actiVities at the St. 

i 

I 

j 

31"' 

! 

I II 

.. 

10' 81' 

RIGHT WHALE SIGHTINGS 

31 'I 

I. 

G 12 

(i 

\\ .;.. 

'" /:"" 

~ <O~ Q) .. Q)IQ & 03 1$ 

" U 

lS 

'6} *&4) ee 1f 

o ,. aile \)'41.: 

sa •• dredq. eransi~ 

ur 81' 

FIgure 4. Right whale stghtmgs, December 1991 through February 1992.1n the area from JacksonvUle Beach. 

Florida. to Cumberland Island. Georgta. 'ThIs 1s apparently the highest denstty right whale area off the 

southeastern United States. 
~ary's Channel. the highest density right whale 

zone in the Southeast (Figure 4), The ~inerals 

Management Service fMMS) has supported most 

of the Right Whale Consortium research in the 

Southeast since 1989, willi aerial surveys to 

assess the temporal distribution In the region. 

MMS also supported an expansIon of these surveys to Cape Hatteras In 1991 and 1992. 

SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

, A total of 133 right whale stghtlngs were made 

In the region between 1980 and 1991. 80 of which 

were adult females (FIgure 5). Photographic 

Identifications of six cows have been obtained in 

the region bolli before and after calving. More 

than one-half of all of llie calves recorded in ilils 

population since 1980 were observed in this 

calving ground as neonates. Since our aerial 

surveys covered, only about 50 percent of the 

area. we suspect that most right whales calve in 

the region. Two cows photographed during llie 

summer months in Newfoundland waters and off 

Iceland respectively were both observed In the 

winter months in the southeastern U.S. calving 

ground. These data suggest that the coastal 

waters of the southeastern U.S. are the primary 

calving ground for western North Atlantic right 

whales. 

The distribution of right whales In the region 

appears to be concentrated in the area between 

Jacksonville, F1orlda. and BrunswiCk. Georgia. 

although the region around Cape Canaveral may 

also prove important in the late Wlnter just prior 

to northern migration. A slghttngs-per-uniteffort analysis (SPUE - * right whales per survey 

trackllne mile) shows the high densIty areas In 

Flgure 6. Opportunistic slghtings data indicate 

that right whales are occasIonally present in the 

area from September through April. but a SPUE 

analysis shows that December through February 

Is the right whale "season" rrable 1), 

.. -31 "I I ! I :/ , I 

,J /; 

: ! 

FIgure 5. RtghtwhaleslghtlngsaJongthesoutheastern 

UnltedStates between 1950 and 1989. The 

black line enclosing all stghtlngs denoted 

wtth "Ie the boundary of the critical habitat 

proposed by the U.S. National Recovery 

Team. N'" 303 Slghtlngs. 

Annual variation in the numbers of right 

whale slghtlngs made In the region each year is 

high. ranglngfrom 4 to 53, but some of this lsdue 

to variable survey effort within each \V1nter season. RIght whales observed more than once in 

Table 1. Sightmg-per-untt-etl'ort mdices by month for right whales in the coastal waters of the southeastern 

Unlted States 

Month , Whale. Survey MUeace SP'U1t AblUldance Index 

Nover" Jer 7 9224 0.00075 

Decer:. ',-e1' 27 5014 0.00538 

January 615 5776 0.01125 

February 57 12208 0.00466 

March 9 6443 0.00139 

AprU 0 680 0.00000 
the region wlth1n a given year have been residents 

from 13 to 76 days. 

SHIP STRIKES 

RIght whales are apparently at rtsk in the 

region from vessel collisions. At least one Juvenile 

was killed in 1991, and at least two calves have 

survived encounters With ship propellers. U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers contracts for the St. 

Maxy's Channel have mandated on board observers and aertal surveys. and require that dredges 

s.c. 

\ 

slow to less than flve knots Ii rtght whales are 

present. These measures have probably eUminated any danger to right whales from dredging 

operations in that locality. Extensive militarY 

and commercial shipping traffic exists around 

Jacksonville and Mayport~ Flortda. the St. Maxy's 

Channel at the Flortda/Georgia border, and from 

BrunsWick and Savannah. Georgia. Seasonal 

measures to reduce the possibility of whale I ship 

collisions In the region may be necessary. Aerial 

surveys could continue to proVide "early warnIng" data for dredging operations, and may be 

approprtate for heavily u~d commercIal shipping ports or naval bases. 

--r-- , 00 !oV561 

~41~-:""-..".c... - - _1- -

~~iP~~-+-----------+-----------+---""------~----------H 

,,,' 

I---~==t-"=-=-:.-=..:-=-=-=-=-~~-------I u' ,.' 

FL. 

Figure 6. Densities of right whales per survey mile off the southeastern U.S. nus slghtlngs-per-Un1t effort 

analysis is partitioned by 3Q-mmutes-of-latitude sections. 
RIGHT WHALES IN THE GREAT SOUTH CHANNEL, 1975-1991 

Robert O. Kenney 

University of Rhode Island 

Narragansett, Rhode Island 

The Great South Channel (GSC) region Is one 

of the most Intensively utilized cetacean habitats 

off the northeastern United States. and comprtses the primary spring feeding ground for 

western North Atlantic right whales (Figure 7). A 

continuous time-series of Sighting data from 

,< 

: ' j 

GULF 

, ; 

, ; 

..... - .... ---1 ',_ 

'--"-.-- _M ......... -. 

, 

• 

"---

--

Figure 7. The Great South Channel study area. an intensively ut1llzed cetacean habitat located southeast of 

Cape Cod and east of Nantucket Island. It Is the prtmary sprtng feeding ground for right whales. 

Surveys have resulted in a nearly continuous time-series of sIghting data for the spring season. 1979· 

1992. Depth contours in meters. 
spring aerial and shJpboard surveys from 1979 

through 1989. With additional data from 1975-

1978 and 1991. prOvides a picture of consistent 

patterns of occurrence with several interesting 

inter- and intra-annual variations. 

RESULTS 

&tween 1975 and 1991. there were 969 

Sightings of right whales in the GSC area. totaling 

, ! ' I ++ 

i 

.. 

2.157 individuals. The slghtings were concentrated in April. May. and June in the central. 

deeper portion of the area, WIth the pattern 

persisting after adjusting for survey effort. 

Slghtings were significantly concentrated In a 

relatively narrow depth range. WIth 36 percent In 

140 to 160 m of water. and 79 percent In 100 to 

180 m. 

GSC right whale c!lstribution Is hJghlyaggregated (Flgure 8). In most years the center of 

aggregation occurred on the western side of the 

, 1 ' 

+ 

1 I 

-1 

....... i 

i 

"'\.: 

i ... i 

--i 

Figure 8, Distribution of right whale sightings In the Great South Channel by year. Including only sighttngs from 

March through July. except for 1975-1978: (a) 1975·1978: (b) 1979: (e) 1980: (d) 1981: (e) 1982: (1) 

1983: (g) 1984: (h) 1985; (1) 1986: U) 1987: (kj 1988; {U 1989. 
Page 16 

; I ' I f I T 

figure 9. Weekly sh1fts in the distr:tbutlon of rtght whale slghtlngs In the Great South Channel region. 1988: (a) 

17 March (0) and 24·30 April: (b) 1-7 May; (el 8-14 May: (dl 15-21 May; (el 21·28 May: (0 29 May-4 

June; (g) 5-11 June; (h) 12·18 June. 

central basin. In 1984. we first saw a pattern with 

the main aggregation on the eastern side of the 

area. This pattern recurred in 1987. 1989. and 

1991. A smaller aggregation ofslghtings occurred in 1986 and 1987 in the northwestern 

portion of the study area, relatlvely close to Cape 

Cod. 

There are apparent differences in arrival or 

departure dates in the regton. but these are 

confounded by effort. Numbers of right whales 

have been sighted as early as mid- to late March. 

but in some years few whales have arrived by late 

April. Date of departure varies by a month or 

more between "ear~ and "late"years~ EarlyJuly 

surveys in 1981 and 1987 found right whales. 

but in 1985 and 1991. for example. the whales 

had departed by late May! early June. 

In years with suffiCient effort. a general trend 

over the season could be discerned: dispersed 

SIghting! early; followed by aggregation In a 

smaller area, which oftensh1ft:s toward the south 

and more central. deeper portion of the study 

area: and finally, dispersal and disappearance 

from the area. The 1988 data. extending from 17 

March through 13 June. are thf: ·.:ost extenslve 

and show this pattern most cleR .. T (Figure 9). 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 

The main area of Gse right whale distribution, in central waters deeper than 100 meters, 

iles north of a thennal front that roughly parallels 

the V-shaped l00-m isobath. The front dtvtdes 

stratifled waters with warmer surface temperatures to the north from tidally miXed water wlth 

cooler surface temperatures to the south of the 

front (Wishner et aL 1988). The prlmary right 

whale aggregation occurs in the stratifled water. 

usually In the central-western portion of the 

baSin. and gradually sh1fts southward over the 

season. The principal aggregation area shifts 

greater distances between ·years than 1t does 

within a year. There are also major differences In 

the timing of right whale occurrence between 

years. 

There 1s an apparent relationship between 

surface temperature and whether the main ag. 
gregation occurs on the east or west side of the 

GSC region. Through 1989, In years when the 

average sea surface temperature north of the 

thermal front during the first week of May was 

Jess than 8°C. the whales were on the east side of 

the region. The 1991 data were used to test this 

prediction. Temperatures north of the front In 

early May 1991 were examined on satellite images. and were less than 8°C. All 25 . right whales 

seen on 26 April. and 22 of24 seen on 9 May, were 

on the eastern side of the area. In accord With the 

prediction. However. since the whales have 

typically made their choice earlier. in mid· to late 

April. the Situation Is obviously more complex. 

Whale distributions are largely in response to 

the distribUtions of their prey (Katona and 

Whitehead 1988). Western North Atlantic right 

whale ci1stributions are correlated with the occurrence of dense patches of Calanusjinmarchicus 

(Mayo and Marx 1990; Murison and Gaskin 

1989; Wishner et at 1988). In the GSC. feeding 

Is presumed to occur most often near the bottom. 

but surface and near-surface feeding was observed regularly in four years: 1980, 1986. 1987. 

and 1989. Deep feeding Is correlated with diel 

vertical migration by Ca.lanus, while near-surface feeding Is correlated with Calanus in surface 

patches without vertical migration (Wishner et aL 

1988). 

Despite a seemingly clear relationshlp of right 

whale ci1stribution to the occurrence of dense 

Calanus patches. many questions remain as to 

the specific underlying factors. All relate to the 

causes of and influences on zooplankton distribution patterns. and they include: 

• What causes the optimal feeding areas to 

occur within the central basin of the GSC 

so preci1ctably each spring? 

• Why does the feeding area shift to the 

eastern side of the region in some years? 

• What influences the hOrizontal and vertical 

patchIness and vertical migratlon of 

Ca1anus? 

• What is the influence of bottom topography 

and the thermal structure of the water 

column on zooplankton distributions? 

The SCOPEX investigations. (a mul· 

tlci1sclplinary study of the region) included inten· 

sive study of the hydrography of the area and of 

zooplankton distribution and bIology. We hope 

the integrated results of the project will begin to 

shed some light on these and other questions. 

Page 19 

LITERATURE CITED 

Katona. S, and H. Whitehead. 1988. Are cetacea 

ecologically important? Oceanogr. Mar. BeoL 

Ann.. Rev. 26;553·568. 

Ma.yo. C.A. and M.K. Marx. 1990. Feeding 

behavior of northern right whales. Euba1aena 

glaclalis. in Cape Cod Bay. and associated 

zooplankton characteristics. Can. J. Zoot 68: 

2214-2220. 

Murison. L.D. and D,E. Gaskin. 1989. The 

distribution of right whales and zooplankton 

in the Bay of Fundy. Canada. Can. J. ZooL 

67:1411-1420. 

Wishner, K.. E. Durbin. A. Durbin. M. Macaulay. 

H. Wlnn. and R. Ketmey. 1988. Copepod 

patches and right whales in the Great South 

Channel off New England. BulL Mar. Sci. 

43(3): 825-844. 
Page 20 

OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF RIGHT WHALES IN CAPE ,:;00 

AND MASSACHUSETIS BAYS 

Marilyn K. Marx and Charles A. Mayo 

Center for Coastal Studies 

Provincetown, Massachusetts 

Since 1984, the CenterforCoastal Studies in 

ProVincetown. Massachusetts has been studying 

the dIstribution, occurrence. and population 

characteristics of right whales in the Cape Cod 

and Massachusetts Bays (Hamilton and Mayo 

1988). TIlls ongoing work has been the Center's 

contribution to the North Atlantic Right Whale 

Consortium. which was fonned in 1986 and with 

whom we have worked ever since. 

METHODS 

Observations were made from two types of 

vessels: 30 m commercial whalewatchlng boats 

that operate between m1d~April and October each 

year, and a 12 m diesel-powered research vesseL 

The tracks of the whalewatchlng vessels were 

detennlned by the captains and were not random. Our Winter survey work from our research 

vessel generally followed fixed LORAN tracks in 

Cape Cod Bay. Because of frequent unfavorable 

weather conditions. the tracks were not surveyed 

eq ually; effort has been concentrated in the eastern portlon of Cape Cod Bay. 

Indlvid ual whales were identified usingvarlations in callosity pattern, lip ridges. and prominent scars (Payne et aL 1983: Kraus et at 1986), 

From black-and-white photographs. we attempted 

to match each whale to a previously cataloged 

animal. Copies of the photographs were sent to 

the North Atlantic RlghtWhaleConsortlumCatalog at the New England Aquarium in Boston. 

where each whale match was confirmed or assigned a new catalog number. and then archived. 

RESULTS 

Right whales are usually seen in Cape Cod 

Bay beginning in February. In late March and 

early April. mothers and their calves begin to 

arrive. By mid-May. most right whales appear to 

have left the study area. 

The yearly observed dIstribution of right 

whales In Cape Cod Bay has rematned relatively 

stable. Usually the major concentrations have 

been seen in the eastern part of the bay (FIg, 10). 

However, we do record many sightlngs of right 

whales outsIde Cape Cod Bay every year, and 

oc cas tonally significant concentrations are found 

both north and east of Cape Cod. 

From 1987 through 1991, 75 Individual right 

whales were Identified from photographs taken in 

Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays. Sixty·six 

were observed in more than one year. Of the 54 

whales for whom gender was determined, 19 are 

males and 35 are females. Twelve mothers 

brought seventeen calves here. We have seen an 

average of 40 right whales each year. The whales 

were resident for an average of 7 days. but the 

longest residency was one of 67 days, 

Using Consortium data from allyears to date, 

165 individual right whales h~we been identified 

in this study area. This 1s more than half of the 

Individually Identified right whales in the North 

Atlantic. Of the 165 whales. 84 were observed in 

more than one year. The sex of 108 individuals 

has been determined; of these, 38 are males and 

71 are females. The number of females repre~ 

sents more than 50 percent of all the known 

females in the population. Through 1991. we 

have identified 28 mothers who brought 54 calves 

to Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bays. 

DISCUSSION AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Clearly. Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bays 

are lmportant habitats for the North Atlantic 

right whale. We beUeve it Is critical that research 

continue in this reglon and offer the following 

recommendations: 

1) Shipboard surveys during the late fall' and 

early winter months of November through 

January, so that we may gain a better under-
" o 

o 

It. 

o . 

" ·~t).\I. 

" . 

'. 

' .. .. ' .. 

, I iii I 

o • 

KM. 

. . 

.. 

. 

" . 

. . 

. .. 

• 

. ' 

. 

.... ., ... 

. , 

,. 

. . 

· · · • • . 

. • 

, 

... : . 

•• • 

• •• • • • • .e' .. • -... *" . • • • ~~. • • N •• 

• • ... , • -

. 

• • 

• 

•• 

• • 

. , 

• 

• • II- ••• " • 

. 

. '. ... ~. ." . . . . ' "" . .. !. .:: . -- .. lilt· 

... · . Ie, - ••. .,. , .. ! ••• 

....... , ,. . 

.• r ...... .. .. 

-:- ... . 

.... . 

-, . 

• 

• 

. . . 

Figure lO. RIght whale distribution In and near Cape Cod Bay. 1987·1991. 

... . 

• • 

• • 

. . . 

· . . . 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

. . . 

. . . . 

• 

• 

.. ( . 

. . 

. 

" 

. , 

. 

• 

• " • • 

• • • • 
Page 22 

standing of right whale occurrence. distribution. and habItat use In the Massachusetts 

and Cape Cod Bays. 

2) Weekly or biweekly aircraft surveys during 

the winter and spring, to get an accurate 

population estimate for the entire bay region. 

as well as to assess the wider distribution of 

right whales. 

3) Expand shlpboard effort to assess right whale 

distribution In central and southern Massachusetts Bay where the proposed Boston 

sewage ou tfail wUl likely have the greatest 

impact on the habitat. 

4) Institute genetics studies on the right whales 

in Cape Cod Bay to better define the genetic 

stocks of the North Atlantic. 

REFERENCES 

HamUton. P.K and C.A. Mayo. 1988. Population 

characteristics of right whales (Eu.ba1aena 

gl.actalis) observed in Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bays. 1978·1986. Rep. Int. \\1ha1. 

Commn. (Spec. Issue 12):203-208. 

Kraus. S.D .. KE. Moore. C.A. Price. M.J. Crone. 

W.A. Watkins. H.E. Wlnn, and J.H. Prescott. 

1986. The use of photographs to identify 

individual North Atlantic right whales 

(Eubala.enagla.cia11.s). Rep.1nt. WhaL Commn 

(Spec. Issue 10): 145-5L 

Payne. R.. O. Brazier, E. Dorsey, J. Perkins. V. 

Rowntree, and A. Titus. 1983. External 

features in southern right whales (Euba1aena 

australis) and their use in identifying individuals. pp. 371-445, In: R. Payne. ed., 

Communication and Behavior of Whales. 

AAASSelectedSymposium 76, Westview Press. 

Boulder CO. 643 p. 
Page 2'3 

RIGHT WHALES IN THE BAY OF FUNDY 

Scott D. Kraus and Amy R. Knowlton 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Right whales are present In the Bay of Fundy 

annually from the end of July to the middle of 

October. Their cUstribution 1s usually centered 

around the noriliernmarg1ns of the Grand Manan 

BaSin. as shown In Figure 11, although the 

location and degree to which they aggregate 

varies with tide phase and magnitude. 

SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

The number of tight whales observed annually since 1980 has ranged from 24 to 73. With a 

mean of 44 indMduals. The seasonal population 

of right whales found In the Fundy reglon Is 

primarily comptised of cows with five- to tenmonth-old calves. and Juvenlles of both sexes. 

Over half of all cow I calf pairs observed In the 

North Atlantic since 1980 have used the Bay of 

Fundy as the sununer and fall nursery. It is the 

only summer and fall nursery for North Atlantic 

right whales Identified at this time. 

The reglon Is used by cows to nurse their 

young, and by all right whales for feeding. Feces 

collected from right whales In the reglon contained almost exclusIvely remnants of the copepod CalanusjironarchJcus. Surface-active groups 

of apparently courting tight whales are rare In the 

area, and were observed In only 6.7 percent of all 

sig,htings. 

HUMAN IMPACTS 

There Is a small whalewatchJng industry in 

the region, based on Grand Manan Island. On 

average. one or two boats can be found seeking 

tight whales from August 1 through September 

10. Fishing activities are uncommon within the 

right whale distribution zone. although some 

fishing draggers operate on the eastern side 

dUring the later summer. One right whale was 

killed in the area in November of 1988 by an 

offshore lobster trapllne. a fishery that Is unusual for the area. The shipping lane from St. 

John. New Brunswick. transits through the eastern portion of the right whale area. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Continued surveys of the right whales in this 

region are important to monitor the calf produc· 

tion and reproductive health of this population. 

They may also be useful in monitoring potential 

threats to the population from fishing and shipping. 
.':1 

,v, 

~- ' 

.,,:.. ..... 

... ! 

~ 

-i 

440 5::"1 

~ 

66 O' 30' 6 

Ffgure 11. Right whales are present In the Bay of Fundy from late July to the mtddle of October. Their 

distribution. particularly In recent years. has been centered around the northern margin of the 

Grand Manan Basln (the darker of the areas shown). 
P!toQ<I 2S 

RIGHT WHALES ON THE SOUTHERN NOVA SCOTIAN SHELF 

Scott D. Kraus and Moira W. Brown 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Right whales occur on the southeastern Nova 

Scotian Shelf from May through Novemb<!r (Figure 12). In May and June. right whales are 

distributed from Browns Bank along the shelf to 

the east up nearly to Sable Island. However. by 

August. the highest densities of this species have 

been recorded b<!tween Browns and Baccaro 

Banks. 

SURVEVEFFORTANOABUNOANCE 

Since 1982. annual shipboard surveys have 

been conducted in this area from late July through 

the middle of October. with most of "the effort 

concentrated in September. The number of right 

whales identified in the Browns/Baccaro Ba.nks 

region annually since 1982 has ranged from 10 to 

~, (}(:!IN 

"p---------~------------------------------------~==----------__, ~oow 

43WN : 

" 

"BroW'\1.au" 

"', . Bank " , , 

\ , 

'" . 

. 

. 

. 

~~ ... ~bse~~t. 

: Bank' 

. .... .,," .. f ' 

/ 

'-', , 

, 

, 

, 

LOO Ill. 

I 

J 

Sable Island 

I • 

42WN t ............................ ~ .......... ~~ ........ ~~:-........ ~~~OOW e4 WN a «III ez OlIN 81 rnN 

Ftgure 12. Right whales occur on the southwestern Nova ScOtian Shelf from May through November. The 

highest densIties tn August appear to be between Browns and Baccaro Banks. 
Page 26 

10 1. with this variation primarily due to variations in survey effort. Since the Consortium 

formation In 1986. a mean of 72 light whale 

identifications have been made there annually. 

Survey effort In this reglon has been llmited by 

the open ocean location and poor weather. 

HABITAT USE 

Right whales feed in this area. as defecations 

have been frequently observed. However. the 

most striking aspect of right whale behavior in 

the area is surface activity by large groups of 

whales apparently engaged in courtship. These 

groups average about six whales in size. but can 

be as large as t.h!rtY individuals, and are usually 

comprised of a single focal female surrounded by 

males. These groups average more than an hour 

in time duration. and are at the surface nearly all 

of the time while undelWay. These courtship 

groups occur on the Scotian Shelf in more than 

52 percent of all stghtlngs. an occurrence rate 

more than three times that observed in any other 

known right whale habitat. Since the gestation 

period for this species Is unlmown. the high rate 

of courtship activity in the fall In this area sug· 

gests it may be a slgn1flcant breeding ground. 

HUMAN ACTIVITIES 

Very Uttle fishing activity occurs In the right 

whale zone between Browns and Baccaro Banks. 

with the exception of a few longLtners. gillnetters. 

and draggers. One or two cruise ships stop here 

to observe whales once or twice in the summer 

and fall. but there Is no other whalewatchlng 

activity. Large commercIal shipping vessels traveUng between the maritimes to ports In the 

northeastern U.S. transit across Baccaro Bank 

and may present a threat to right whales. Because right whales within a courtship group 

appear to be oblMous to the approach of any 

vessels. there Is the potential for a ship/whale 

collision With slgn.tficant consequences for the 

population. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The temporal cUstributlon and cUsperslon of 

right Whales along the Nova Scotian Shelf is only 

known from observations taken by whaling vessels in the 1960s. Dedicated surveys for right 

whales In the region are essential to detennlne 

th~ habitat use patterns there. to better define 

the critical areas, and to monitor potential threats 

to the species. 
Page 27 

Biology and Life History 
Page 29 

VALUE OF STRANDED ANIMALS 

James G. Mead 

Marine Mammal Program 

Smithsonian Institution 

Washington, D.C. 

The Smithsonian Institution's Matine Mammal Events Program. begun in 1975. is acomputenzed database of matine manunal strandlngs 

(live or dead) and unusual sightings (rare animals 

or animals outside of their normal range). 

The records of strandings and incidental 

catches for the northern right whale worldwide 

number 53, the North Atlantic records (including 

Europe) number 46, and the U.S. records number 42. This database and the associated specimen material. where available. Is a source for 

taxonomic and morphological infonnation. 

SYSTEMATICS 

There may be morphologic differences in different populations of right whale, but. because of 

the lack of sufficient specimens. these have yet to 

be statistically demonstrated. Most workers 

have accepted the eXistence of two species of 

right whale, Eubalaena glacialis, the northern 

right whale, and Eu.ba1a.enaaustralis, the southern hemisphere right whale. Yet there is reason 

to believe that those differences would not stand 

up if the studies were based on a larger sample. 

Because these differences appear to be minor, 

one would want good biological data on the 

specimens to allow for possible sexual and age 

related differences. 

If you accept the North Atlantic right whale as 

one species and the southern right whale as 

another species, what are we going to call the 

North Pacific right whale? It has been geographically isolated for at least as long as the other two 

species, is it not likely to constitute a third? 

ANATOMY 

In a group such as this, weighted heavilywtm 

management-oriented workers. I feel obliged to 

give a plug for anatomy. both descriptive and 

functional. We know a little bit about the anatomy 

of balaenopterid whales through the efforts of 

such workers as Schulte. Ommaney, and SUJper 

who took advantage of the whaling industry to 

provide specimens for their dissection. We have 

this brief look at these whales from an industry 

that took hundreds of thousands in recent years. 

But what have we got for right whales, who have 

not been taken in any numbers for better than 

100 years? I was fortunate to be allowed to 

participate in a dissection of a newborn stranded 

right whale at the New England Aquarium. That 

work turned up far more questions than It did 

answers. We are hoping to confl.nn at least some 

of our findings with other stranded specimens. 

LIFE HISTORY 

In order to ma.xim.ize the value of the data 

recovered from a stranded carcass, certain ele· 

ments that relate to the life history of the individual need to taken. First are its sex and total 

length. If it is a female. the ovaries and a 

manunary sample need to be taken. because the 

interpretation of fat soluble toXins in females is 

highly variable according to how many calves she 

has successfully born. Tissues to estimate the 

age of the individual should be taken. At present, 

the only reliable age estimates on balaenlds 

involve sectioning the auditory bullae (the bullae 

are located on the ventral surface of the skull just 

medial to Ule Jaw articulation). 

IDENTIFICATION 

Since we know a substantial portion of Ule 

North Atlantic right whale population by individual. it Is important to get photographs of Ule 

head. both lateral and dorsal, to attempt to 

document the animal's identity. If it turns out to 

be a known animal, the year of birth may be 

known. This will give us not only an absolu te age 

for interpretation oftoXin levels, but will also give 

us a known-age animal to test the age estimates 

based on sectioning the bullae. 
Page 30 

TOXICOLOGY 

Monitoring the potential effects of deleterious 

anthropogenic compounds is important. All major 

organ systems should be sampled. and tissues 

analyzed and archived. Comprehensive analysis 

of toxins needs to be done. Even though we do not 

know of any problem with right whales ingesting 

tox:lns because of their low level on the food chain. 

we must still monitor the species. 

CAUSE OF DEATH 

Cause of death. especially if human related, 

should be determined. Out of 25 dead stranded 

right whales that have been investigated durmg 

the period 1970-1991. 5 (20 percent) have been 

struck byvesse1s; of the 196 appropriately photographed North Atlantic right whales. 22 (11 

percent) bear scars that could have been caused 

by ship collisIon (Final Recovery Plan for the 

NortilemRightWhale). This indicates thatvesse1 

collision Is an important mortality factor. Care 

must be taken in the interpretation of this. 

because it Is possible that the right whales that 

suffered ship collisIons may have been sick or 

injured beforehand. or the vessel collision may 

have occurred after the animal was dead. 

The Smithsonian's file on right whales that 

stranded between 1950 and 1991 reveals that 11 

out of 40 (28 percent) were entangled in fishing 

gear ranglng from crab pot lines to g1ll nets. It Is 

important to document such occurrences with 

specimens of the fishing gear. 
RIGHT WHALE STRANDINGS 

Amy R. Knowlton 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Strandlngs of North Atlantic nght whales are 

an infrequent event. in part because of the endangered status of this specles. It is becoming 

clear. however. that the cause of many of these 

mortalities 1s human-induced. Kraus (1990) 

concluded that one-third of all nght whale mortalities were caused by etther ship strtkes or 

fisWng gear entanglements. TIUs estimate may 

be lower than the actual number of humancaused mortalities. as necropsies are not always 

perfonned on stranded nght whales. There may 

also be a small number of mortalities that go 

undocumented If. for example. they never reach 

the beach. 

Seven right whale mortalities have been docu· 

mented since 1988. Detailed necropsies were 

perfonned on two of these whales. Each necropsy 

furthered our knowledge on nght whale physiology. anatomy, and the cause of death. 

TWO WHALES WITH NECROPSIES 

On January 3. 1989. a newborn nght whale 

beached al1ve and later dIed on Cumberland 

Island, Georgia. With the assistance of the 

National Park Service and the Navy, we were able 

to transport the calf intact to a freezer on the 

mainland. Five days later the whale was trucked 

to Boston where a detailed necropsy was perfonned at the New England Aquanum. Because 

the animal was so fresh and had been transported to a laboratory. a team of specIalists 

representing many different organiZations was 

invited to participate in the necropsy. Prelim1-

nary results indicate the animal may have died of 

a heart defect, possibly a result of inbreeding. 

On March 11. 1991. a two-year-old female 

nght Whale stranded on AmeUa Island in Flonda. 

ThIs animal had been seen alive three weeks 

earUer. but looked noticeably ill and had a gUlnet 

tightly wrapped around her tall. Our records 

show she had acquired that gUlnet the preceding 

summer. This animal was transported by a log 

lifter to a remote area on the island where a threeday necropsy was performed by the U.S. Fish and 

Wlldllfe Service with support from other agendes. While it was initially thought that this whale 

had died as a direct result of the entanglement. 

it was only after fiensing the animal to retrieve the 

skeleton that it was detenuined the whale had 

dIed from a shattered skull. TIUs was thought to 

be a direct result from impact With a large vessel. 

Also as a result of this extensive necropsy, 

Bob Bonde of the U.S. Fish and WUdlife Service 

discovered the presence of a postanal sac. an 

organ not previously descnbed in nght whales. It 

Is thought these sacs may be scent glands used 

in ~track laying" during migration. or for main· 

talnlng group integrity. 

Numerous samples. in addItion to the routlnelycollected tissue samples. were collected for 

analysis and ongoing studies being performed by 

vanous researchers. 

FIVE WHALES WITHOUT NECROPSIES 

Necropsies were not performed on the remaining five whales. A newborn calf was found 

dead on January 17, 1988. on Ormond Beach. 

Flonda. The whale was in an advanced state of 

decomposition. but the skeleton was collected by 

Sea World of Flonda. An addItional newborn calf 

was found dead on January 26. 1989. at 

Melbourne Beach. Flonda. however. samples 

were not collected and the animal was photographed and subsequently buried. A reproductively active female stranded on St. Augustine 

Beach in FlOrida in September 1989. Although 

stranding personnel were in the process of making plans to do a necropsy. the town of St. 

Augustine independently deCided to bury the 

whale in a landfill and disallowed access to the 

carcass. 1bree days later. what was thought to 

be a manatee washed up a couple of miles down 

the beach. It was buried and later unearthed only 

to find it was a right whale fetus. The cause of 

death for both mother and fetus was therefore not 

detemlJned. 

A whale stranded on a remote Maine island 

(Head Harbor Island. south of Machias) in November 1991. Marine mammal personnel were 

not notified of the stranding until weeks later. 
making a necropsy or determination of cause of 

death impossible. How~'.,·er. measurements were 

ot . ,lined and It may re ~ . '~sent the longest male 

right whale ever docum'.:nted. 

SUMMARY 

Bight whale mortalities and our qUick access 

to them can provtde Important data for our 

understanding the causes of death. as well as 

learning more about right whale phYSIology and 

anatomy. Since thls reqUires data ~yond what 

would be routinely collected. I am presently in the 

process of creating a necropsy protocol specUlcally for right whales. This protocol will outline 

special :-~"J,uests for samples: collection techniques '-itertals needed. and the research that 

the sar. '.:: ,es will be used for. It will also provide 

phone numbers for New England Aquarium right 

whale personnel. as well as researchers interested in participating in a necropsy. This protocol will be ::>rovtded to all stranding network 

personnel . full cooperation with NMFS. 

It Is oU.·tope that with this protocol in hand. 

fu ture rtght whale strandlngs will not go unstudied 

and will add to a growing and valuable body of 

knowledge about this endangered species. Funding to support transportation of trained personnel to and from a right whale stranding as well as 

for acquisition of needed materials will be essential to ensure the protocol could be carried out. 
SMALL~SCALE MOVEMENTS AND DIVE PROFILES 

Howard E. Winn 

University of Rhode Island 

Kingston, Rhode Island 

The distribution of the right whale and other 

organisms is not random. but at least during the 

feeding season. is determined by adequate concentrations of their prey. The eVidence supports 

the idea that across the northern hemisphere, 

the annual cycle oflong- and short-time hortzontal and vertical movements of right whales in the. 

North Atlantic is determined by the life cycle of 

calanoid copepods. in particular. Calanus 

flnmarchfcus . 

COUPLING OF RIGHT WHALES AND 

C. FINMARCHICUS 

Upon examination of the annual. temporal 

distributional patterns of feeding right whales. 

there appears to be a tight coupUng of these to the 

cycUc population development of their preferred 

prey conststIng of calanold copepods (C, 

flnmarchfcus) In the western North Atlantic. The 

right whale's annual distributional cycle In the 

western North Atlantic includes a springtime 

feeding period In the Great South Channel and 

Cape Cod Bay. followed by a summer-early fall 

feeding period in the Bay of Fundy and off the 

sou them coast of Nova Scotia. Duling the Winter, 

a small percentage of the population goes to 

nearshore areas off the Georgia-Florida Coast to 

calve, while the remainder of the population 

reSides In largely unknown areas to the north. 

The springtime feeding period coincides with the 

development of large concentrations of Cal.anus 

flnmarchicus. which last sometimes into June. 

These prey concentrations occur later In the 

northern Gulf of Maine, probably due to a colder 

temperature cycle COinciding with the summerearly fall feeding perlod. There are probably 

times and places where other zooplankters form 

part of the diet but do not seem to be driVing 

forces in the whales' maJor movement patterns. If 

they feed in the Winter. then other zooplankters 

are probably important. However. we know Uttle 

about the Winter distribu tion of the right whale in 

the western North Atlantic. 

SEARCH STRATEGIES 

Since there are a variety of Interannual and 

Intra-annual variations in dense-patch distributions of the right whales' preferred food, particu· 

larty dUring the sprtng to summer period, there 

should be mechanisms to ensure that the whales 

can find food supplies suffiCient for their energetic needs. Search strategies can vary. but the 

eVidence to date suggests that durtng anyone 

annual feeding period. such as the April to June 

sprtngfeedlngperlod. some indiVidUals take time 

out to explore adjacent areas. For instance. some 

indiViduals visit Stel1wagen Bank. Cape Cod Bay, 

and areas south to the Great South Channel. 

Resightings of known individuals between those 

areas within one season cohfirms thls hypothesIs 

(Mayo. Dorf, Wlnn. Kenney. Kraus; unpublished 

data). It is possible that information on adequate 

food supplies is stored by the whale so that if in 

a following year food was inadequate where they 

fed preViously, they could go to the new area. It 

was suggested by Klein et aL (manuscript) that 

humpbacks, byextenslVe exploratory movements. 

could store Infonnatlon on food suppUes for 

future use. Thus. the strategy of temporary 

movements of whales out of immediate feeding 

areas are Important surVival mechanisms to 

ensure adequate food suppUes in response to 

changfng temporal and geographical concentrations of their principle prey. 

Right whales have to adapt to both horizontal 

and vertical changes in the distribution of adequately dense patches and/or layers of copepods (CalaruJ.sflnmarchicus) both intra- and interannually as well as within one area such as the 

Great South Channel. The copepods vertically 

migrate to the bottom (more than 100 m) during 

the day in some years such as 1988. but not in 

others such as 1989, and thls may vary from 

place to place in one year (Wishner and Macaulay, 

manuscrtpts). The locations in the Great South 

Channel where the zooplankton concentrations 

within patches are adequate vary from year to 

year, and within years, as evidenced by the shifts 
Page 34 

of the major aggregations of right whales from one 

side of the channel to the other (Kenney. Wlnn. 

and Macaulay. manuscript). As evidenced from 

fecal eliminations and foul-smelling breaths, the 

whales were feeding during the observations we 

made of dives in 1988 and 1989 in the SCOPEX 

program. Whether or not they fed during all dives 

could not be detemlined. 

Although the whale prey search and detection methods are unknown. several observations 

allow some general speculations. In some instances. large groups were observed to disperse 

out many meters. and minutes to hours later 

would return directly to a focal animal. Perhaps 

certain sounds tell individuals where another 

individual has found food. In all cases where the 

central aggregation Is on a scale of several kilometers, there are a few individual outUers many 

kilometers away. perhaps representing pioneers 

searching for food concentrations. There are 

occasional dives that go out of the main prey 

patches. perhaps preparing the whales for any 

changes Ln depth distribution of prey patches. 

Clearly the dive patterns of 1988·1989 exhibited 

adaptations to prey distribution. The shorter 

dive durations and preponderance of dive depths 

of 20 m or less during 1989 was an adaptation to 

the prey concentrations being in the upper water 

column throughout 24-hr periods (no vertical 

migration). Concentrations of Calanus are also 

the primary stimulus of how long whales will 

Unger on a specific feeding area. 

CONCLUSION 

Any management proposals must t:a.ke Into 

account this close coupling of the right whale and 

Lts prey. 
SATELLITE-MONITORED MOVEMENTS OF RIGHT WHALES 

Bruce R. Mate and Sharon L. Nieukirk 

Hatfield Marine Science Center 

Oregon State University 

Newport, Oregon 

Despite more than 50 years of protection 

from commercial whaling. the North Atlantic 

right whale (Euba1aenag1acialis) continues to be 

the most endangered of the large cetaceans. Of 

the estimated 350 right whales remaining. 70 

percent are scarred from fishing gear entanglement and ship collisions (Kraus 1990) and Uttle 

is known of their winter distribution. We used 

Argos satellite-monitored radio tags to study the 

movements and dive habits of right whales inhabiting the Bay of Fundy (BOF) in the early fall 

of 1989 and 1990. 

RESULTS 

Our satellite tracking of free-ranging anlmals 

reshaped much of what we know about right 

whales. They were previously thought of as a 

slow-moving and nearshore specIes. From this 

study. we know that right whales can travel long 

dlstances, sometimes at high speed, and can 

travel reasonably far from shore (500 kIn) into 

deep (4,000' m) water. There was no coherent 

migration observed. IndMdual right whale movements were qUite variable. This study provided 

more specific detail on the movements and 

around-the-clock dive patterns of right whales 

than any previously reported. 

Regions and Distances 

Seven North Atlantic right whales were tagged 

and tracked dUring 1989 and 1990 in the BOF 

with satellite-monitored (Argos) radio transmitters. These whales traveled at least 9,590 kIn 

between 366 locations. In 43 days. one female 

and her seven-month-old calf traveled 3,800 kIn 

along a nearshore route, while an adult male 

traveled 3,000 kIn rangtng far from shore. All 

three whales returned to the BOF. changing our 

previous notion that multiple seasonal sightings 

are a minimum estimate of residency time in the 

BOF. Some movements were assocIated With 

oceanographic features including convergence 

zones, upwellings, eddies. and warm core rings 

(WeR). These features may have stimulated local 

primary productivity or resulted In concentrating 

the density of prey. Surface active breeding 

groups (SAGs) were common south of Nova Scotia, 

and many animals moved the 160 km between 

the BOF and this area within two days. A 

preference for traveling along the 200 m contour 

of the continental slope may have increased the 

whales' risk of collisions with ships espec1ally 

since some animals appear to rest at the surface 

for extended periods. 

Individual whales averaged 30 to 113 km/ day 

(1.3-4.7 km/hr) with an overall average of 3.7 

km/hr for all whales combined. Speeds as high 

as 16 km/hr were recorded; some ( > 10 kIn/hr) 

were associated With currents in the same direction. The fastest whale was a pregnant female 

who spent more time at the surface (33 percent) 

than any other whale. 

Diving Records 

Data were collected from 92,963 dives. Dives 

averaged 86 ::.48 seconds. Whales were sub· 

merged most of the time (x - 78 ::. 13 percent) 

although some individuals spent long periods at 

the surface. The shortest dives occurred from 

dusk to midnight and the longest dlves occurred 

from midnight to dawn. There were substantial 

differences in dive patterns among individual 

whales. In 43 days of monitored dlves, one adult 

male dove twice as frequently (With dives that 

were half as long in duration) as the comparable 

female With a calf. 

One tagged male was eqUipped With a pressure sensor for 22 days. He dove routinely to the 

bottom in waters up to 200 m deep. and had a 

maximum dive depth of at least 272 m. We 

observed whales surfacing with mud on their 

dorsum In water 200 m deep confirming dives to 

the bottom. AJJ copepoda may be distributed 

anywhere from the surface to the bottom. this 

deep diving may inVOlve both searching and feeding activity. 
Page 36 

Effects of Tagging 

There was little reaction to tagging. MUd 

swelllng at the tag attaclunent site was seen up 

to three days after tagging. A tagged female with 

a calf was tracked for 43 days and observed 16 

days after tag loss. still with her calf. We saw no 

evidence of unusual scars or swelling after tag 

loss. We believe that tagging does not cause 

serious stress or pose a serious health risk to 

right whales. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

We recommend the following additional tagging research: 

1) WCntertng Growu1s: It 1s not known where 

most tight whales winter. Many of our preViously tagged whales went to an area off the 

southern tip of Nova Scotia after leaVing the 

Bay of Fundy. This area may be important for 

fall feed1ng. as copepods there move off the 

banks (or are advected) and concentrate in 

the basins. Tagging animals here Is highly 

recommended to discover right whale winterIng grounds. Additional tagging in the Bay of 

Fundy would also be adVisable. Tagging 

indiViduals we have already tagged could 

resolve whether they have stereotyplc movement and dive patterns. Taggtng related 

indiViduals (grandparents. parents, and previous calves) could determine whether these 

patterns are .. taught." 

2) Winter calving GroW1ds: Tags could be appUed to pregnant females and females with 

calves off Georgia and FlOrida to determine 

their movements during the Winter as well as 

spring migration routes northward. The infonnation from the calVing area could be 

helpful in making survey and traffic control 

decisions where barge. ship. and dredge traffic is deemed potentially dangerous. 

3) Greenland Feeding Stock: There appear to be 

three matrilineal stocks of right whales. one 

of which does not visit the Bay of Fundy but 

has been seen in Cape Cod Bay during the 

spring and off Greenland in the summer. We 

recommend tagg1ng up to 12 individuals in 

Cape Cod Bay or the Great South Channel 

dUring the spring to determine the migration 

route of this third matrilineal line. Tagging 

animals which are not known to the BOF 

would tncrease the probability of tagging 

animals gomg elsewhere. 

4) Spring Dispersion.: Animals could be tagged 

in the Great South Channel to look at spring 

dispersion. 

In all cases. additional tags w1ll resolve some 

of the questions regarding indiVidual variability 

versus correlated differences between age, sex. 

and reproductive classes. 

It may also be deSirable to conduct aerial or 

shipboard surveys off the Scotian Shelfin the late 

summer or early fall to detennlne how many 

whales use this area. Additionally. it might be 

worth examining photographs and records from 

natural history cruise ships which transit this 

area in the late summer and early fall. 

We are conVinced that satell1te*morutored 

tracking of free-ranging animals Is an important 

technology that can continue to add vital infor4 

mation regarding the distribution. natural history. and critical habitat requirements of right 

whales. It Is our belief that enough information 

exists currently to move forward and recommend 

that the U.S. and Canadian Coast Guards work 

to establish shipping channels beyond the 200 m 

contour to avo1d additional ship strike injuries 

and mortalities. In addition to designating the 

calVing areas in Georgia and northern Florida as 

critical habitat. we believe that seasonal periods 

within Cape Cod Bay. the Great South Channel. 

Bay of Fundy. and the southern Scotian Shelf 

also deserve attention from both Canadian and 

U.S. Governments to further protect this endangered specIes. 

REFERENCES 

Kraus. S.D. 1990. Rates and potential causes of 

mortalIty in North Atlantic right whales 

(Eubalaena glactalts). Mar. Mamm. Set 

6( 4):278-291. 
Page 37 

RIGHT WHALE REPRODUCTION 

Amy R. Knowlton and Scott O. Kraus 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

A low reproductive rate has been suggested 

as a possible reason for the slow recovery of the 

North Atlantic right whale. The New England 

Aquarium, in conjunction With the Right Whale 

Consortium, has been curating the right whale 

photocatalog for the past 12 years. From the 

sightings database. we have detailed. longItudinal data on the number of calves born per year. 

calving intervals, and Gross Annual Reproductive Rate {GARR). 

SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

Sixty-two females have given birth to 134 

calves, over the study period (1980-1991). The 

mean number born per year is 11.08, However, 

there 1s no sIgnificant increase or decrease in the 

number of calves since 1984 when effort was 

consistent in all known habitats. 

Seventy-six calving intervals ranging between 

two and seven years have been observed since 

1980 With sixty-one percent at three years. The 

mean observed calvlngintervai equals 3.68 years. 

Six females first observed With calves have now 

been Sighted With calves of their own. The mean 

age at first parturition is 7.33 years. 

Gross Annual Reproduction Rate (GARR) Is 

the ratio of calves born in a given year versus the 

total population size and 1s used as a measure of 

population increase. Using a mtnimum population size count of 308 animals in 1991. and 

subtracting ca.lws born each year, and adding 

known non-calfmortallties. the resulting annual 

GARR's range between 2.7 percent to 5.7 percent 

With a mean of 4.6 percent. 

TIlls rate of population increase Is significantly lower than South Atlantic right whale 

populations studied off South America and South 

Africa. which are growing at 7.6 percent and 6.8 

percent respectively. However. these population 

increases were calculated using different methods and direct comparisons may not be appropriate. 

POSSIBLE CAUSES OF LOW 

REPRODUCTIVE RATE 

If this population is in fact reproducing at a 

signUlcantly lower rate than their southern counterparts. this might be accounted for by inbreeding. higher rates of mortality. or a high percentage of senescent females. Inbreeding has been 

cIted as a potential cause of reduced fecundity 

and increased mortality of inbred young. Studies 

to investigate the level of inbreeding using genetic 

fingerprinting are now underway. Mortality. 

especially human caused. could be sIgnificantly 

reducing the number ofvtable females Within the 

population. Three of the four recent non-calf 

mortalities have been juvenile or adult females. 

At least two of these were human-caused mortalities. Senescence may also playa part in lowered 

reproduction. however. we now have documentation of several females calving over a 20- year 

period. We would not expect this to be a significant factor unless an unusually high number of 

known cows are of advanced age. 

Habitat degradation and reduced food availability. while its effects on reproduction are more 

difficult to assess, cannot be ignored when evaluating the health of the population. It. remains. 

therefore. critically important to continue the 

long-tenn monitoring of this population. 
Page 38 

SEGREGATION BY AGE AND SEX IN NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALES 

Scott O. Kraus and Jackie N. Ciano 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Of the 312 Uving right whales. 167 (54 percent) are known to be more than ten years old and 

have been classliled as adults. Although the age 

of sexual maturity Is thought to be around ten 

(hence the classlilcation). several females have 

been observed that are older than this and have 

not yet had calves. Including data collected prior 

to 1980. there are 62 females who have been seen 

with calves at least once. Since 1976. these 

females have produced a total of 134 calves of 

which 113 were photographically identified. 

Calves are not identifiable before they are four to 

five months old, so that the total number of calves 

identified was less than the total number born. 

Animals from one to nine years of age are 

c1asaifled as Juveniles (there are 90 (29 percent)), 

and animals less than one year old are classliled 

as calves (11 to date in 1992 (3.5 percent)}. There 

are 47 whales that were beyond the calf stage 

when first identified. but have sighting histOries 

oflesa than ten years. and are therefore classifled 

as of unknown age (15 percent of the cataloged 

whales). 

Right whales can be sexed by observations of 

the genital area. by molecular identification of 

DNA from the Y chromosome. or in the case of 

females. repeated association with a calf. Although callosity patterns do statistically show 

sex differences. these differences are not useful 

in sexing individuals. A total of 197 (62 percent) 

North Atlantic right whales have been sexed. 38 

genetically and the remainder by visual confirmation (when inverted). There are 89 known 

males and 108 mown females. nus does not 

indicate a biased sex ratio. since there are more 

methods of sexing females. 

Demographic analyses by region are still 

underway. so only prelimlnary infonnation Is 

given here. Calves have been excluded from the 

data in this discussion. Slgn1ficant segregation 

eXists in the southeastern calving ground. For 

the period 1980 to 1990. 74 females and 13 males 

were observed in the region. and none of the 

males were adults. Slgnlficantly more females 

than males are also observed in Cape Cod Bay. In 

the Great South Channel and the Bay of Fundy. 

more females than males are observed. but it 

does not appear to be sIgnificantly different than 

eXisting population frequencies. 

The Nova Scotian Shelf right whale distribution appears to have more males than females. 

As the genetics data is Incorporated Into the 

catalog, these preliminary findings will be up· 

dated and published. 
Paqe 39 

THE USE OF VISUAL AND MOLECULAR SEX IDENTIFICATION 

TO ASSESS THE SEXUAL COMPOSITION OF THE CATALOGED 

WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE POPULATION: 

SIGNIFICANCE TO POPULATION RECOVERY 

Moira Brown 

Dept. of Zoology 

University of Guelph 

Guelph, Ontario 

David E. Gaskin 

Cept. of Zoology 

University of Guelph 

Guelph, Ontario 

Prevtous efforts to examine the sexual composltion of the cataloged western North Atlantic 

right whale population have been hampered by 

our inability to consistently sex animals at sea. 

The sex of an indlvtdual whale can only be 

confirmed by Visual examination of ventral morphology. This requires that an animal roll over 

and remain inverted at the surface. Visual 

observation of the genital region has resulted in 

the sexing of 39 percent of cataloged animals. 58 

males and 49 females (n - 308. based on II years 

of sIghting data collected between 1980 and 

1990). An additional 43 females have been 

identlfied based on their repeated association 

with the same calf, however this requires that a 

female be sexually mature and be seen in the year 

in which she bears a calf. The excess of identified 

females can be attributed to haVing two methods 

to sex females and only one to sex males. 

DNA ANALYSIS 

To identify the sex of more animals. biOpsy 

skin samples from 95 Indivtdual right whales 

were examined usmgmoleculartechn1ques. When 

EcoRI dlgested DNA was hybridized with a human Y-chromosome probe PDP 1 007, a clear. sex 

dlscriminatlng banding pattern was apparent. 

The probe detectedmale-{presumably Y -) speclftc 

bands as well as bands common to both sexes. A 

male 1s dlst1nguished from a female by the presence of a 3.4 kilobase band. 

nus method vertfted the sexes of 54 animals 

previously sexed in the field and added the sex of 

Scott O. Kraus 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Bradley N. White 

McMaster University 

Hamilton, Ontario 

an addltional 41 indlviduals. By combining all 

three methods, the sex of 191 of 308 (62 percent) 

photographically identified animals has been 

determined. 

The data Indlcate that the sex ratio of this 

population does notdllTer signtftcanUyfrom unity. 

However. it has identified ten adult females that 

have not had calves during the past ten years and 

this may, in part, explain why no measurable 

population increase has been detected. 
Page 40 

RIGHT WHALE POPULATION STRUCTURE 

Catherine M. Schaeff1 

Queen's University 

Kingston, Ontario 

Moira Brown 

University of Guelph 

Guelph, Ontario 

Although Information about migratlon pat~ 

terns at the population level Is informative. a 

great deal of additlonalInformatlon abou t habitat 

use, populatlon structure, and breeding biology 

can also ~ gained from investlgating migration 

patterns for indiVidual animals. Since right 

whales can be identified individually using callosity patterns and scars or markl.ngs. mtgration 

patterns and habttat use can now ~ t.nvestlgated 

for individual right whales. Mitochondrial DNA 

(mtDNA) 15 inherited maternallywtth no paternal 

leakage. and. as a result. mtDNA matrtllnes as 

well as sIghting data can be used to interpret the 

migration patterns of females and their offspring. 

Thus, mtDNA analysis provides a un1que tool for 

confirming migrational information based on 

sighting data. It also enables the testing of 

predictions about geographicallocatlons that are 

thought to exist. but which have not been iden· 

Ufied. 

RESUL 1S AND CONCLUSIONS . 

Photo-identification and 11 years of sighting 

data reveal that only two·th1rds of the western 

North Atlantlc right whale reproductive females 

take their calves to the Bay of Fundy, the only 

known summer nursery (Figure 13). Study of 

cow-calf pairs further indicate that female. and to 

a lesser extent male. calves are philopatrlc with 

respect to nursery. These findings suggest that 

the right whales use at least two summer nursery 

areas and that the use of a given nursery by 

females 1s culturally transmitted. 

To further examine population structure, 

mtDNA composite restriction morphs were deter· 

mined for 150 antmals (47 percent of the popula· 

tion). USing eleven restriction enzymes. three 

composIte mtDNA morphs were identified. One 

morph was not found among reproductlve fe· 

! so 

'" so • • ;; 

z 

.. 40 

~ 

c 

.! 20 "; 

~ .. 

Q 0 

Scott O.Kraus 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Bradley N. White 

McMaster University 

Hamilton, Ontario 

FemalM Mal .. \JflUltcl 

AI;/'It wll., •• 

• F"o(ly 

• Non·Ful'<lY 

Figure 13. Breakdown of the western North AtlanUc 

right whale populaUon according to their 

use of the Bay of Fundy: N .. 1 ~n. 88. and 

126. for females. males. and unsexed 

animals, respecUvely. 

males that brought all of their calves to the Bay 

of Fundy (FIgUre 14a). In contrast, all three 

morphs were present, in the same relative fre· 

quency, among males that were seen in the Bay 

of Fundy and those that were not (Figure 14b). 

These findings support the hypothesis that this 

population may be divided into two subgroups. 

which are defined by their use of the Fundy 

nursery. and that males are generally less 

philopatric than females. 

Animals from both subgroups were seen on 

the southem Scotian Shelf. which 1s where most 

right whale courtship behavior occurs. Furthermore. the relatlve frequency of the mtDNA mOfphs among these a.nJ.mals was the same as among 

those from the two nursery areas combined. 

Hence. although segregated by nursery areas, 

the westem North Atlantic right whales probably 

represent a single breed.Jng population. 
P1IoQ<t 41 

(a) 60 

'0 so »-

\.I~ c ..... <10 

4> {II 

:::I,:: O'a, 30 IV ... ..:: 0 

:i 20 IV 

• Morpn 1 

• Morph;2 

• Morph:3 

. .:: « 

~Q 

-z 10 

<U - ex: e 0 

Fundy Non-Fundy 

Females 

(b) 60 

-0 

50 

» 

\.I 

C 40 

<U ::I,:: '" 

O'a, <U 30 ... ..:: 0 

2 

CD 20 

• Mofph t 

• Morph 2 

• Morph:3 

=-< =Z J!Q 10 

<»-

a: e 

0 

Fundy Non·Fundy 

Males 

Figure 14. Distrtbution of the mtDNA morphs among animals that use the Bay of Fundy nursery area and those 

that do not. (a) Females (N .. 67 and 8, for Fundy and non -Fundy females. respectively). and (b) Males 

(N .. 50 and 12. for Fundy and non-Fundy males. respectively), 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The discovery that only two-thirds of the 

western North Atlantic right whale reproductive 

females use the Bay of Fundy nursery has slgntftcant implications for assessment of right whale 

population recovery. Specifically. additional information ls required to conftrm that the two 

subgroups are a single breeding population and 

to reassess our estimates of population growth. 

One factor that may be lnfluencing this 

population's recovery Is inbreeding depression. 

Since inbreeding is a consequence of small population size, predictions for recovery will be very 

different if the 350 individuals from the North 

Atlantic population represent two rather than 

one gene pool. An inbreeding assessment Is 

currently underway (see Schaeft' et aL. this report). However. in order to interpret the data from 

this study. we need to mow whether the animals 

included represent one or two populations. To 

accomplish thIs. females. who are highly 

philopatrtc. should be surveyed for subgroupspecific population nuclear DNA markers. 

Numerous Fundy females have already been 

biopsy sampled. but very few non-Fundy females. Hence. before this work can be completed. non-Fundy females w1ll need to biOpsy 

sampled, in conjunction With photo-ldentlftca+ 

tion. either in the Cape Cod and Massachusetts 

Bays in the spring. or on the southern Scotian 

Shelf'ln the summer. 

The discovery that not all reproductiVe females bring their calves to the Bay of Fundy has 

led to the reaUzation that approXimately 35 percent of the non-Fundy calves are not seen in their 

first year. As well. because these calves are 

missed. a number of females that are reproduc+ 

tiVely actiVe are not designated as such. Since 

both of these factors affect our perception of 

population growth. accurate information about 

th.ls second subgroup is required. Because the 

location of the second nursexy area is unlmown. 

this will require increased photo-ldentification 

efforts in the southeastern U.S. in the winter, and 

in the Great South Channel and Cape Cod and 

Massachusetts Bays in the spring. 
Page 4.2 

ARE NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALES SUFFERING 

FROM INBREEDING DEPRESSION? 

Catherine M. Schaeff1 

Queen's University 

Kingston, Ontario 

Scott D. Kraus 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

The North Atlantic right whale (ELiXllaena 

glacialis) is the most endangered large whale 

species in the world. Severely depleted by centu· 

ries of commercial whaling. these whales have 

shown no significant signs of recovery. despite 

more than 50 years of international protection. 

Because inbreeding depression frequently retards recovery of populations that have been 

reduced below some critical number. this study 

examines the potential for inbreeding depresslon 

among the North Atlantic right whales. 

GENETIC ANALYSIS 

To assess this potential. the level of genetic 

similarity among unrelated North Atlantic right 

whales. 1s being compared to that of unrelated 

South Atlantic right whales (E. australis} and 

unrelated bowheads (Ba1a.ena mysttcetus), two 

closely related species that appear to be recovering successfully. Using DNA fingerprinting. the 

average bandsharing coefficIent (BSC). of unrelated North Atlantic right whales Is expected to be 

sIgnificantly higher than that of the other two 

species. 

In order to quantify the amount of genetic 

variation that Is rema1ning, BSCs are also being 

detennined for known first and second degree 

relatives. Ifinbreeding depression Is affecting the 

North Atlantic rigbtwhales' recovery. then. based 

on results from studies With other species that 

are slmllariyaffected (e.g., Brock and White in 

press). the average BSC among unrelated animals is Ukelyto have increased such thaUt1s now 

stmllar to that for second degree relatives. If this 

Is the case. then It would suggest that some of the 

matings that occur may be unsuccessful because 

the individUals involved are too closely related. 

1 .................. __ ___ ~._ A __ ....... __ 1;"'~ _ _ t ... 

Bradley N. White 

McMaster University 

Hamilton, Ontario 

RESULTS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The data for the Inbreeding assessment have 

been collected and wlll be analyzed within the 

next few months. This infonnation wlll provide 

an indication of the inbreeding potential for the 

whales. However. to determine the severity of the 

situation and the chances of recovery. we also 

require infonnation about this species' mating 

strategy. The number of animals that contribute 

to the gene pool (Le., the effective population 

size), signIficantly influences the rate at which 

genetic variation within a population increases. 

Hence. our predictions for right whale recovery 

will be very cUfferent if one or two males account 

for all of the offspring produced. rather than a 

number of males each fathering one or two 

offspring. 

The most effective way to detennlne the patemlty of right whale calves will be genetically. 

using minisatel11tes (Le.. DNA fingerprints) or 

mlcrosatel11tes. As a number of right whales have 

already been biOpsy sampled, some of the DNA 

required for this analysis is available. Additional 

biopsy samples of potential fathers will probably 

also be needed. 

REFERENCE 

Brock. K. and B. N. White. In press. Appllcation 

of DNA fingerprinting to the recovery program. 

of the Puerto Rican parrot. Proc. National. 

Acad. Scfence. 
RIGHT WHALE FORAGING AND THE PLANKTON RESOURCES 

IN CAPE COD AND MASSACHUSETTS BAYS 

Charles Mayo and Laurie Goldman 

Center for Coastal Studies 

Provincetown, Massachusetts 

Studies of the foraging behavior of the right 

whales and of the zooplankton resources of the 

Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bays ecosystem 

began at the Center for Coastal Studies in 1984, 

The focus of early efforts was the small-scale 

foraging movements of the right whales. and a 

comparison of the concentration and composttion of surface zooplankton found in the path of 

the feeding whales With samples collected at 

regular (or control) stations. A comparison of the 

angularity of the path of whales when their 

mouths were open With the path shape when the 

whales were Msearch1ng~ demonstrates that right 

whales employ area-restricted searching movements typical of many taxa of animals. Further, 

our data support the view that skim feeding Is 

dependen t on the density of zooplankton encountered by the whale. With a feeding threshold of 

4.000 zooplankters/mJ of water filtered ultimately 

governing the behavior. The dominant species of 

zooplankter collected in the feeding path was the 

calanoid copepoci. Pseudoca1anu.s minutus, With 

other copepods, Ca.larw.s jlnmarchtcus. Centropages sp., and Temora longtcomis, and cyprid 

larvae of barnacles occasionally dominating the 

feeding patches. 

FEEDING RATES 

Using the mouth dimensIons. rack size, and 

estimated body mass of a 10-m long whale killed 

off Provincetown in 1986. and applying foraging 

velocity estimates from the path studies and 

baleen filtration efficIency calculations. we estimate that this particular surface-feeding whale 

would take in over 29,000 kcal/hr in an average 

acceptable patch. This value exceeds a theoretical break-even value. calculated from Lockyer's 

1981 estimate, of 26.000 kcal/hr. When the inpath samples from the studywere compared With 

the proposed feecUng and energy thresholds. 

whales in 39 percent of the feeding observations 

were consuming a surplus of food. and 63 percent were feeding, but at a predicted energy 

deficit. By treating the bay-Wide surface station 

samples in the same fashion. an index of the 

suitability of the bays for successful feeding was 

obtained. ApprOximately 80 percent of the surface of the bays during the peak of the feeding 

season were below ilie feeding threshold (feeding 

behavior would Ukely not be released). 16 percent 

of the area would release feeding behavior. but 

the whale would be working at defiCit. whUe in 

only 4 percent of the bays during the season 

would feeding result in an energy gain. 

FEEDING DECISIONS AND PATCH 

CHARACTERISTICS 

Recent investigations of the deciSion-making 

behavior of whales at the vertical and horizontal 

margins of patches has been driven by the need 

to better understand the characteristics of the 

patch that define its acceptability to ilie whales. 

Shallow vertical pump arrays were pushed in 

front of the research vessel to collect plankton 

from the feeding path immediately after the passage of the whale. Results of these studies do not 

clearly demonstrate the gradients in the horizontal plane on which the whale ought to be cuing. 

Nevertheless. these high-resolution samples 

clearly demonstrate the extremely variable character of the patch. with densities along the path 

varytng by several orders of magnitude over 

distances of 10 to 15 m. In the vertical plane. the 

consequences of decision-making processes are 

clear. By feeding with the axis of the mouth. or 

.. the center of the feeding cylinder". at a depth of 

50 em below the surface, the whale at the edge of 

the patch takes in approximately 25.500 kcall 

hr. whUe if it were to feed 40 em deeper it would. 

on average. capture 17.000 kcal/hr. less than 

the estimated energy threshold. Our results to 

date seem to suggest that very fine adjustments 

by a feeding right whale produce stgnUlcant 

changes in feeding success. 
Page 44 

Ultra-dense surface mlcropatches that may 

comprise a critical but as yet undescribed source 

of food for right whales are presently ~1ng studied. In the bays system it appears that conditions 

may occasionally conspire to cause the aggregation of zooplankters. particularly Centropages 

and Temora, in concentrations sometimes exceeding 3 x 1 ()6! m3 • Althougl:. the extent of these 

mlcropatches and the condItions that fonn them 

have not been studied. we suggest that these thin 

and exceedingly dense aggregations may be critical to the feeding success of the whales. 

CONCLUSION 

In view of the many human activities in the 

bays. it is clearly Important that the zooplankton 

resources of the Cape Cod and Massachusetts 

Bays habitat be deSCribed, and that right whale 

foragtng behavior in the context of the food 

resources be accurately modeled to pennit reasonable management of the habitat. 

REFERENCE 

Lockyer, C. 1981. Growth and energy budgets of 

large baleen whales from the southern hemisphere. FAO Advisory Committee on Marine 

Resources Research: Marine Mammals. p. 

379·484. Rome: United Nations Food and 

Agriculture Organlzation. 
POPULATION MODELING OF THE NORTHERN RIGHT WHALE 

John T. Finn 

Dept. of Forestry & Wildlife Management 

University of Massachusetts 

Amherst, Massachusetts 

A population model of the Northern Right 

whale (Eubalaena gladalts) was constructed using a combination of age and stage classes. The 

model consists of five juvenile age classes (0 to 4). 

sub-adults. adult males. senescent males, available, pregnant and nursing adult females, and 

senescent females. Time moves in discrete Jumps 

of one year in the model. Parameters include 

mean age-atjlrst-reproductfon, reproductive cycle 

time (the average tim.e between births), nwnberof 

years ma.tu.re,· successful pregnancy rate. and 

natural mortality rates and mortality due to ship 

strikes and gear entanglements. Mortalities are 

highest for age zero (13 percent), are lower for age 

one (9 percent), two (7 percent), and three (1 

percent), and then remain constant through the 

subadult stage. Ship strikes and gear entangle· 

ments affect age zero-, one- and two-year classes 

only (6 percent). After age four. individuals enter 

the multi-age sub-adult class and remain there 

until they mature. The rate of maturation depends on mean age atftrst reproduction (nominal 

,. 10). At maturity. males enter a single stage 

class. and stay there until they die or have been 

in the adult male stage longer than the numberof 

years mature (nominal • 40 years). At maturity. 

females enter the available female stage. Depending upon the parameter reproductl.ve cycU! 

time (four years), a portion of the avaUable females become pregnant and enter the pregnant 

female stage. After one year, a proportion of the 

pregnant females are successful in giving birth. 

All pregnant females move on to the nursing 

stage, whether successful or not. After one year, 

all nursing females return to the available stage. 

When females have been in the adult stages 

longer than the number of years mature, they go 

through menopause and become old females. 

Adult mortality rate 1s 0.05 percent. Senescent 

adults die at a much higher rate (90 percent). 

With the nominal (best guess) parameters. the 

population grows at a rate of about 0.5 percent 

per year. 

RESULTS 

A sensitivity analysis of this model showed 

that population growth rate is not very sensitive, 

Le., small changes in the parameters produce 

even smaller changes in the population growth 

rate. The most sensitive parameter Is the number 

ojyearsmature, butltalsohad the greatest range 

(30 to 50 years). Population growth rate was not 

sensItive to a change in reproductive cycle time 

from three to five years. The sensitivity of popu· 

lation growth rate to the remaining parameters in 

the model was tested over a range of :t 10 percent, 

and found to be moderate to low. Over the range 

of parameters tested, the population went from 

slowly increasing to slowly declining. 

The model was fitted to the southern right 

whale population (Eubalaena australts) using the 

data in Payneetal. (1990). PayneetaL estimated 

values for age atftrst reproduction. and reproductive cycle time, and gave ranges for mortalities. 

He also estimated the population size from 1972 

to 1984, and calf production from 1974 to 1986. 

By adjusting mortalities and the successful preg· 

nancy rate, the model fit Payne et aL (1990) 

estimates of population wtthin the error bounds. 

The number of calves predicted by the model fell 

between Payne's observed and estimated number of births. The northern right whale has a 

much lower number of births per year (l0) and 

successful pregnancy rate (0.45) than the southern right whale (40 per year and 0.77), 

Of all the parameters in the model, only the 

mortality caused by ship strikes and gear entanglements Is amenable to direct manipulation 

by management. Figure 15 shows the effect of 

reducing ship strikes from 6 percent to zero on 

population growth over a century. Regardless of 

the actual parameter values fot the population, a 

reduction in ship strikes and gear entanglements 

can slgn1flcantly improve the growth of the population. 
700 

o No Ship Strikes 

600 

500 

o~~~~~ 1998 2008 2018 2028 

2048 2058 2068 

YEAR 2078 2088 

Figure 15. PredJcted effect of ship strikes on the population growth of northern right whales. The 'Nominal' run 

Is With the best guess parameters. and the 'No Ship Strikes' run is With the parameter for ship strikes 

and gear entanglement changed from 6 percent to 0 percent. 

DISCUSSION 

The ranges of the parameters are still too 

broad to provide good pred.1ctlons of populatlon 

trends. IndMdual-based modeling. that can 

incorporate the genetlc. and spatlallocatlon data. 

may be able to make better pred.1ctlons with the 

currently avaUable data. but better data are st1ll 

reqUired. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

Many th.anks to Scott Kraus who helped 

estlmate the nomJ.nal values of the parameters. 

and commented on the structure of the model. 

Thanks also to Laurie Thorpe who ran the sensitMty a.nalysls as part of a class project. 

REFERENCE 

Payne, R., V. Rowntree,J.S. Perkins,J.G. Cooke, 

and K. I..ankester. 1990. Populatlon siZe. 

trends, and reproducttve parameters of right 

whales (Eubalaena australis) off Peninsula 

Valdes. Argentina. Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 

(Spec. Issue 12):271-278. 
Page 47 

WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALES: ABUNDANCE AND 

TRENDS FROM GREAT SOUTH CHANNEL AERIAL SURVEYS 

Robert D. Kenney 

University of Rhode Island 

Narragansett, Rhode Island 

As the most endangered large whale in the 

world. the abundance of right whales Is a .critically important issue for management decisions 

relative to the animals and their habitats. The 

issue actually includes two inter-related questions: 

• How many right whales are there in the 

population? 

• Is the number increasing. stable, or decreasing? 

We have used data from aerial surveys in the 

Great South Channel (GSC) regton east of Cape 

Cod. Massachusetts. to address both questions 

for western North Atlantic right whales. At the 

same time. the data address the often-asked 

question of why northern right whale stocks have 

not recovered following protection from commercIal whaling. although this assumption of nonrecovery is based on nearly no data. 

METHODS 

Estimates of the denSity and abundance of 

right whales in the GSC area were computed 

using line-transect methods from dedicated aerial 

survey data flown With a Cessna 337 Skymaster. 

All of the GSC aerial survey data from 1979 

through 1989 for April. May. andJune,includlng 

three different aJrcraft, were used for the trend 

analysis. Surveys conducted largely outside the 

defined study area, or concentrated on only a 

small area around lmown right whale aggregations, were rejected as biased. 

Sighting rate (SR) was defined as the number 

of right whales sighted per 1.000 kIn of trackllne 

flown Within acceptable survey conditions (visibility ?:. 2 nml Beaufort sea state ~ 3, and altitude 

< I,O<X> tt). The analysis for trends was done by 

linear regreSSion of log (SR + I) on the year. 

RESULTS 

Between 1979 and 1989. there were 54 GSC 

aerial surveys useable for trend analysis, and 29 

Skymaster surveys resulting in non-zero linetransect densIty estimates. Single-day abundance estimates range as high as 179 animals 

(Table 2). 

For the 54 surveys in the trend analysis, the 

mean sighting rate was 12.2 right whales I UX)() 

kIn, with a range of 0 to 36.7. Annual mean effort 

was lowest in 1986 and highest in 1988, and 

annual mean sIghting rate was lowest in 1980 

and highest in 1984 (Table 3). 

The sightlngrate regressIon analysis resulted 

in the relationship: 

log, (SR + 1) - -6.696 + 0.104 (YEAR) 

There was a large amount of noise in the data 

(rl- 0.104), but the slope Is positive and signtilcantly different from zero(p - 0.018). The magrutude of the slope parameter indicates that sighting rate in the GSC. over the ten-year period 

between 1979 and 1989. was increasing exponentially at an annual rate of 10.4 percent. 

DISCUSSION AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The abundance estimates (Table 2) do not 

account for animals missed while diving. Applying previously computed correction factors suggests that the entire population may occupy the 

regton at given times. Of the five known western 

North Atlantic habItats, only the GSC appears to 

be occupied over the course of a season by a 

signiflcant proportion, or even all, of the population. The reglon also seems to form a geographic 

bottleneck for right whales moving into northern 

feeding grounds from southern or offshore win-
Page 48 

Table 2. Estimated dens1ty (whales/ kml. x 10-)). vartance of the density (x 1O-~1. and abundance (with 95 percent 

confidence interval) for right whales In the Great South Channel from 29 Skymaster line-transect 

aerial surveys 

Date Den.ity Variance Abundance 95% 

C.I. 

03/28/80 1.969 1.698 45 +54 

04/02/80 1.899 1.326 43 + 43 

04/19/80 3.225 3.856 74 + 48 

04/20/80 1.282 0.527 12 + 12 

05/06/80 3.610 4.150 29 + 126 

05/16/80 2.213 l.719 16 + 49 

05/09/81 2.968 3.091 37 + 87 

05/10/81 2.999 3.205 38 + 89 

05/14/81 89.350 2096.000 55 .. 75 

05/19/81 1.578 0.872 20 .. 46 

07/09/81 12.170 51.570 154 ... 712 

OS/25/84 12.415 33.790 179 .;. 278 

06/22/84 5.008 17.346 72 ... 199 

:)5/09/85 2.448 L673 35 + 73 

)5/30/85 1.769 1.360 25 + 44 

)5/07/87 5.075 8.545 73 + 140 

OS/26/87 9.274 22.108 133 + 179 

06/01/87 11.449 18.945 165 ;: 208 

06/07/87 7.769 7.951 ll2 + 135 

06/11/87 1.897 1.769 27 + 96 

07/07/87 0.888 0.704 13 ... 32 

04/26/88 2.083 1.662 30 +54 

05/05/88 2.624 1.943 38 + 53 

05/15/88 7.711 13.881 III ... 142 

06/l1/88 0.782 0.545 11 .. 28 

04/26/89 2.293 1.484 33 + 46 

05/09/89 1.469 0.938 21 ... 37 

06/19/89 0.851 0.646 12 + 31 

06/30/89 1.421 0.877 20 + 36 

Table 3. Mean (and SE) sighting effort Oem), munber of right whales sighted, and right whale slghtlrig rate (SR. 

whales/l.OOO kIn) for aerial surveys in the Great South Channel region. Aprll..June 1979·1989 

Year n mort Whale. sa 

1979 11 564.3 (103.9) 5.8 (1.8) 11.1 (3.?) 

1980 11 697.9 (65.1) 1.4 (O.3) 2.1 (0.5) 

1981 9 784.4 (45.9) 8.2 (3.3) 10.3 (4.21 

1984 2 700.5 (6.6) 21.0 (4.0) 30.4 (6.0) 

1985 4 1118.2 (63.0) 10.0 (4.5) 9.5 (4.4) 

1986 2 541.0 (287.5) 8.0 (8.0) 9.7 (9.7) 

1987 5 891.1 (119.6) 16.8 (5.8) 17.7 (4.5) 

1988 4 1226.2 {i73.6} 25.0 (5.3) 22.6 (6.5) 

1989 6 1207.3 (89.3) 10.5 (3.8) 9.3 (3.5) 

Total 54 894.6 (51.3) 11.2 (1.8) 12.2 (1.9) 
tertng areas. As such. the GSC seems to be the 

best choice of the known habitats as a location for 

effective long-term monltoring of population 

trends. 

The 10.4 percent annual rate of increase 

resulting from the sighting rate trend analysis 

does not seem biologically realistic. The potential 

bias due to increasing effectiveness of surveys 

was estimated by changes in the effective halfswath. which was 1.0732 kIn for 1979·1981 and 

1.8235 for 1987-1989. a 6.6 percent annual 

increase. Subtracting this from the lOA percent 

rate resulting from the regression analysis leaves 

an annual increase in right whale sighting rate in 

the GSC of 3. 8 percent. Thls Is much closer to the 

rates of 3 to 3.5 percent estimated from calving 

and mortality rates in the western North Atlantic 

(Kraus pers. cormn.) or 6.8 percent for Argentine 

(Whitehead et al. 1986). and South African (Best 

1990) right whales. 

It is often assumed that northern right whale 

stocks have exhibited little or no recovery in 

response to protection from whaling. Assuming 

a 1990 population of 350, what might the 1935 

population have been? Using an annual rate of 

increase ranging from 1 percent to 9 percent. the 

population in 1935 would have been between 2 

and 202 animals (Table 4). Genetic data also 

suggest that the population was reduced to very 

low numbers at some point (Brown 1991). It is 

not unrealistic to suggest that the western North 

Atlantic right whale population might have been 

reduced to a handful of animals by 1935, and 

that current numbers represent a significant 

recovery from this extreme depletion. 

Any effective monitoring of right whale population trends and the effectiveness of recovery 

measures will require a long time-series of data. 

The regression technique enables the demonstration of statisticallyvalld trends in these highly 

variable data. Using sighting rates also eUminates the effects ofvarlable effort. whJ1e maximiZing the number of sighUngs that can be used in 

analysiS. The GSC monitoring surveys should be 

continued. At amln1mum. the time-series should 

be long enough so that inclusion of data from one 

additional season does not drastically change the 

computed trend. Slmultaneous monltoring via 

photo-identitlcation will allow cross-comparison 

of results between the two methods. 

Table 4. Back-calculated estimates of the 1935 

abundance of western North Atlantic right 

whales. assumlng a 1990 population of 350 

and different annual rates of Increase. 

Annual Inereue Rate 

0.01 

0.02 

0.03 

0.04 

0.05 

0.06 

0.07 

0.08 

0.09 

LITERATURE CITED 

1936 Population 

202 

117 

67 

39 

22 

l3 

7 

4 

2 

Best. P.B. 1990. Trends in inshore right whale 

populationofi'SouthAfrlca. 1969-1987. Mar. 

Mamm. Sct. 6(2):93-108. 

Brown. M.W. 1991. Sex. Ues and autoradiographs. Wha1ewatcher 25(3): 13-15. 

Whitehead, H., R Payne, and M. Payne. 1986. 

Population estimate for the right whales off 

Peninsula Valdes. Argentina. 1971·1976. Rep. 

Int. "W'haL CoI11TTl1l. Spec. Issue 10: 169-171. 
Human Impacts and Mitigation 
Page S,J 

MORTALITY RATES AND CAUSES IN NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALES 

Scott O. Kraus 

New England Aquarium 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Because the North Atlantic right whale popu * 

lation did not appear to be growing at the rate of 

those In the southern hemisphere. an analysis of 

mortality rates and causes was conducted. Natural mortality rates were estimated from known 

strandings and sighting histories of Identified 

lndividual right whales. When known whales not 

observed for a period of five years slnce 1980 are 

assumed to have died, mortality rates are 17 

percent for year one. and average slightly over 3 

percent for the next three years. Adult mortality 

rates are very low, less than 1 percent. 

An analysis of data collected on 28 right 

whales that have stranded slnce 1970 shows that 

11 of these deaths were neonates or very young 

calves. This probably represents normal natural 

mortality. but one carefully examined carcass 

showed signs of an enlarged heart, a birth defect 

that may be an indication of lnbreecUng. Of the 

11 non*calf right whales stranded since 1910. 

only two were larger than 13 m (42 ft) In length. 

The remainlng animals appear to have been 

Juveniles or young adults. 

Nine (32 percent) of aU known strancUngs 

were caused by human actiVities. Six right 

whales were killed by ships and three were killed 

due to fishing activities. Since strandlngs only 

provide information on whales that died and 

washed ashore, it is possible that comparable 

rates and causes of death occur in offshore areas 

where a whale's death will not be recorded. As 

confirmation of this suspicion, an analysis of 

scarring patterns in living North Atlantic right 

whales showed that 51 percent of the cataloged 

animals have scars indicative of entanglements 

with fishing gear at some time in their lives. An 

additional 1 percent have scars that indicate the 

whales survived a collision with a propeller of a 

large vessel. 

These data demonstrate that right whale! 

human interactions are not uncommon. and 

show that such sources of mortality rates may be 

more common than indicated in the stranding 

records. Regardless. the cumulative effects of 

human causes of mortality appear to be responsible for increasing death rates of right whales. 

and could be a significant contributing factor In 

depressing population growth. 

REFERENCE 

Kraus, S.D. 1990. Rates and potential causes of 

mortality In North American right whales 

(Eubalaena glactalis). Mar. Mamm. Set 

6(4):218-291. 
Page 54 

MITIGATING THE EFFECTS OF SHIP STRIKES ON RIGHT WHALES 

James Hain 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Woods Hole, Massachusetts 

This proJect. in its second year, is almed at 

reducing human impacts, specifically ship strikes, 

on right whales off northeast Florida. This nec· 

essarily involves describing the whales and their 

habitat to provide the sCientific basIs for management actions. The work has been carried out in 

collaboration with 10 agencIes and organizations: Associated Scientists at Woods Hole, 

FlOrida Department of Natural Resources, Geor· 

gla Department of Natural Resources. Marine 

Manunal Commission. Minerals Management 

Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, U. S. 

Navy, New England Aquarium, Sea World, and 

the University of Rhode Island. 

The project involves three major components: 

technology, and technology transfer 

the airship as a research platform 

video data acquisition 

basic science 

bIology and behavior of right whales 

habitat characterization 

management 

awareness and education 

mitigation reconunendations 

TECHNOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGY 

TRANSFER 

The station-keeping and positioning capabilities of the airship are complementary to data 

acquisition with new high-resolution video. 

The Airship as a Research Platform 

We are in our third year of flying airships as 

research platfonns for marine mammal studies 

(Figure 16). In this. our second year of working 

off flOrida. we made six flights totaling 40 hours 

and 600 nautical miles of overwater surveys in 

sea states of Beaufort three or less. The flIghts 

tookplace9to 17January 1992. and included 12 

hours of station time, where position was maintamed near whales for observations, photos. and 

video. Our work With multi-platform efforts 

continued. and we coordinated With New England Aquarium and FlOrida DNR aircraft on 

several occasions. At this time, the airship can ~ 

considered fully operational for research app ilea· 

tions. 

Video Data Acquisition 

With the recent developments in high-resolution video at relatively modest cost. video data 

acqUisition will play an increasingly valuable role 

in research. In this study. we were able to identify 

and sex right whales; document marks. scars, 

and wounds: and record behaviors for later analyses. The video complemented other methods, or 

often acqUired information not otherwise possIble. 

BASIC SCIENCE 

A solid understanding of the biology and 

behavior of the right whales will necessarily 

underlie any management actions. Our studies 

add to the data collated at the New England 

Aquarium, the University of Rhode Island. and 

elsewhere. 

In January 1992. we sighted 16 different right 

whales: five mother/calf pairs, a surface-active 

group of four individuals. and two single juveniles. Data were obtained on Identifications. 

distribution. behavior, and in at least one case, 

human impacts. A sununary with examples follows. 

Identifications 

Identlflca1ion photos !video were obtained for 

all slghtlngs except one. The positioning capability of the airship provides for high-quality photos. 

One noteworthy video analysis shows how key 
\ 

\ 

"-

" 

p~ss 

Figure 16. The Westinghouse Airships 500 HLa1rship. operated by Sea World of Orlando. florida. In right whale 

studies conducted durmgJanuary 1992. this ship typically carried three scientists and equipment 

on overwater operaUons for B·hr flight days. . 

callOSity characteristics change with sighting 

angle and animal orientation. We also noted 

apparent pre-callosity markings on calves. as 

well as orange cyam1ds typically along the Ups 

and trailing edges of the flukes. The Video was 

also useful in capturing spUt·second "looks" that 

could be used later to sex the an1mal1n several 

cases. 1b.is was also true for data on ventral 

coloration-· "white bellied" vs. wblack bellied" ani· 

mals. 

Distribution 

Habitat use and movements relative to potential human impacts will be essentlal. As an 

example. one mother/caifpatr (' 1001, Fermata) 

was sighted eight times over the course of about 

seven weeks (our data combined with that of the 

NEAl. Sightlngs ranged from off South Carolina 

(no calf) on 12 December 1991 to off Daytona 

Beach on 17 January 1992. These kinds of 

resight records are invaluable for deseriblng distribution. movements. and habitat use. 

Some areas contalned several tight whales. 

On the other hand, repeated fllghts in other areas 

turned up no rtght whales··at least on those 

dates. ConSistent with previous findings by NEA 

and others. some areas appear to contain most of 

the occurrences. while others have few or none. 

Additional within-year and between-year data 

will pl'O'Ve interesting. 

Behavior 

Largely through tape· recorded observations 

and Video records. good data In various situationa was gathered. Several pattern.s appeared to 

be present in mother/calf behaVior. These included a general maintenance of close proxfm1ty 

by mother and calf. "nose Ufts .. or "pushes~ by the 
i' 

II 

LU' a1' 

-

.; 

.1 

-

E 

" :n 

-I' 

., 

:,1, 

.. 

", 

;- h) 

FIgure 11. Right whale stghtlngs off' northeast Florida during January 1992 (key: 0 .. motherl calf. A .. single). 

The area fromJacksonvtlle Beach. Florida. to Cumberland leland. Georgia. appears to be the highest 

density right whale area In the southeastern U.S. It Is al80 here that human impacts may occur. 

as then: are shipping. fishing. dredging. and recreational boating activtties. 

mother. and characteristic surfacel dive I respiration patterns. 

In at least one Instance, on 10 January, there 

may have been a behaVioral response of a mother / 

calf pair to a passing fishing boat--a previously 

somewhat distant calf drew up close to the 

mother rather quickly. 

Five instances of possible whale/vesseilnt:eraction ftre recorded. In two instances. there 

appeared to be no reaction by the whales. In two. 

the mother I calf distance decreased. and In one 

involving a Navy submarine. the whales appeared to move to a safe avoidance situation as 

the vessel ,passed. In no instance did there 

appear to be a threat of danger. 

Human impacts 

On 11 January. we sIghted an animal we 

guessed was a ~arUngassoclated With a surfaceactive group northeast of Amelia Island. 'Ibis 

indMdual appeared unwell. and the body color 

included large areas of Ught grey. The dorsal 

surface of the flukes was moetlywhlte. and there 
800 

j . 

700~ i 

C 600 

.2 

-\'tI 500 

::l 

CO 400 

a. 

(i; 300 .. -

0 

I200 

100 

F!gure 18. 

-+- Nominal 

___ NO ShlO $tflkes 

Year 

Ship strikes appear to be responsible for 

an average of one right whale mortality a 

year. mostly In young animals. By 

reducing or eUmlnating this factor. 

population growth will be Increased. 

(Source: J. Finn. University of Mas.sa* 

chusettsl. 

was a large cyam1d-occupled wound on the peduncle and anterior dorsal fluke. There were 

other marks and niCks on the lateral edges. The 

wound appeared to be consistent with a propeller 

strike. In the previous year. 1991. a two-year-old 

female came ashore on Amelia Island. dead from 

a ship strike. This. and the 1992 observation. are 

consistent With the report of Kraus (1990), and 

suggest that one or more ship strikes may occur 

in this area in many or most years. 

MANAGEMENT 

There remains Uttle doubt that ship strikes 

are a problem. In collaboration with the groups 

previously listed, we are work:lng on two fronts: 

(1) awarenesa and education. and (2) recommendations for changes in vessel operations. traffic 

lanes. and/or speed. These areas. of course, 

overlap. At present. most efforts are in the first 

category. providing vessel operators with information about when and where whales occur and 

descrtbtng what we lmow about the ship strike 

01191' 57 

problem. Voluntary participation in sighting and 

avoldJng right whales Is encouraged. As more 

and better data become available. we may be able 

to make suggestions and recommendations for 

(required) changes in vessel operations. At 

present. it 1s our View that with awareness. 

education. and cooperation. voluntary and reasonable changes and adjustments within stan· 

dard maritime practices and existing regulations 

will make addJtional regulations and more restrictive adjustments largely or totally unneces* 

Sa.r:Y. 

In 1992. we focused our efforts on the 

Cumberland Island to Jacksonville Beach area. 

This Is the area with the highest density of 

mother / calf right whales, and also an area of 

more concentrated vessel traffic (FIgure 17). In 

this year, we Ukewise focused our efforts on the 

milltary: the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Navy. 

TIlls decisIon was based primarily on the very 

positive past efforts of these groups, and the 

existence of a structure and receptivity to the 

issues we sought to address. On all counts. the 

outcome was positive. In the future. we hope to 

broaden our efforts to include the local· pUot 

associations and other commercial operators. 

Clear progress is being made on the mitigation of 

ship strikes in the southeastern United States. 

and additional work will follow. 

Dr. Jack Finn at the UniversIty of Massachu ~ 

setts (see also report. this volume) has suggested 

that if the average ship strl.ke mortality of 1.2 

whales per year is reduced or eUmtnated. a 

substantlalimprovementin the population growth 

of right whales over time will result (Figure IS}. 

mspection of this figure will reveal that our efforts 

must be sustaJned in the face of a rather low 

incidence of this event. and over a long period of 

time. Ship strike mortality. however. Is one 

population parameter where a positive change 

can be effected. Planning and organization are 

now underway for the 1992·1993 season. 

REFERENCES 

Hain. James. 1991. Alrships for marine mammal research: Evaluation and recommendations. ~port No. T68108863 to the Marine 

Mammal Com.mlsslon. National Technical 

information Service Document No. PB92-

128271. 34 p. 

Kraus, Scott D. 1990. Rates and potential 

causes of mortality in North Atlantic right 

whales. Eubalaena gladaUs. Mar. Mamm. 

ScL 6(4):278-291. 
Psg- 58 

OBSERVATIONS OF THE 

SOUTHERN RIGHT WHALE (Eubalaena australis) 

RELEVANT TO THE MANAGEMENT OF 

RIGHT WHALE POPULATIONS 

Roger Payne and Victoria Rowntree 

Whale Conservation Institute 

Lincoln, Massachusetts 

The 20th year of our study of a population of 

southern right whales (Eubalaen.a australis} was 

in 1990. TIlls population occurs along the shores 

of Peninsula Valdes, Argentina. The whales 

beg1n to appear in June, reach peak numbers in 

September and October, and have left the area by 

December. Every year s.ince 1971 we have made 

a t least one aerial survey of the 500 lmt perlmeter 

of the Peninsula. We fly at an altitude of 500 ft in 

a single-eng1ne CESSNA 182. When we encounter whales. we circle over them at 200 to 300 ft 

and take photographs of each individual's callosity pattern. We note the whales' location. their 

behavior. and the presence of any calves. 

SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

The whales concentrate in three distinct regions. which are always near shore. along the 5-

m depth contour. The three aggregation areas 

appear to have different functions as incUcated by 

their different proportions of females with calves, 

females Without calves. and males and subadults 

(Payne 1986). Not all the whales return to the 

Peninsula each year. We see about 130 adults 

and 35 calves .in a typical year, though a total of 

1.099 incUvtduals have been identified during the 

20 years of the study. Mature females tend to 

return to the Peninsula only In the years when 

they calve. The mean calving interval is estimated to be 3.6 years. The mlnimum age of first 

calVing Is seven years; the model age Is nine 

years. The population was estimated to contain 

1.200whalesIn 1986, and to be Increasing at 7.6 

percent per year (payne. Rowntree. Perkins. 

Cooke. and Lankester 1990). 

OBSERVATIONS RELEVANT TO 

MANAGEMENT 

In adcUtion to the biology and habItat use 

described above. we report here four observaTable 5. Mean of greatest number of adult right whales 

sighted on September or October survey 

I11ghts. by region 

1971·1980 1981·1990 

Golfo San Jose 46 ± 15.1 42 ± 24.5 

(northern bay) 

Eastern outer coa.st 49 ± 18.5 24 ± 16.6 

Golfo Nuevo 19 ± 8.6 56 ± 19.4 

(southern ba.y) 

tions of the right whale population at Peninsula 

Valdes that may be useful in the management of 

right whale populations. 

1. Over the course of the study. we have seen a 

net movement of whales away from the east* 

ern outer coast of the Peninsula and into the 

southern bay. To quantify this shift we 

compared the mean number of whales in 

each area in the 1970s to that in the 1980s. 

For each year. we calculated the largest num· 

ber of adults sighted in each area in either 

September or October (the months of peak 

abundance); these maximum abundances 

were then averaged for the decades 1971-

1980 and 1981-1990 (Table 5). While the 

number of adults in the northern bay remalned roughly constant. the number along 

the eastern outer coast decreased. and the 

number In the southern bay increased. The 

northern bay has been set aside as a sanctuary'for right whales. The southern bay contains the largest port on the Peninsula. and is 

the site of an aluminum plant that cUscharges 

toxic effluent into the bay. StraggUng whales 

are frequently seen In this port swimming 

under the pier. around moored fishing boats, 

and amongwtnd surfers. However, it Is more 

usual to find whales in the southern bay 

concentrat1ng near a town that has a growing 
Page 59 

Table 6. ~~ swtmmlng speeds (km! hrL divided Into readlngs taken at Intervals of less than and greater than 

Group type 

Bay Reading' <: 5 min 

M"'C non·M"'C All 

Readf..ng. > 5 m.i.n 

M"'C nOll· M"'C All 

Golfo San Jose 

(protected bay) 

Golfo Nuevo 

(near whalewatch) 

1.62 

1.78 

whalewatch industry. Here. mothers and 

calves are frequently visited by whalewatch 

boats. We are unable to explain the Increased 

popularity of the disturbed southern bay. and 

decreased popularity of the relatively pristine 

eastern outer coast. However. our observa· 

tions clearly Indicate that patterns ofhabttat 

use may change over time scales on the order 

of decades. 

2. In collaboration with Jose Truda Palazzo and 

Maria do Carmo Both (FloriamopoUs. Brazil), 

we have documented two instances in which 

females were seen with calves at Peninsula 

Valdes and at Laguna. Brazil (some 2.100 km 

to the north) in different years. A third female 

was seen at Peninsula Valdes without a calf 

and in a latter year with a calf off Laguna. The 

females were not seen with calves at both 

locations In the same year. These observations Indicate that females may use more 

than one calving ground. 

3. In the 1980s. large oval marks began to 

appear on the backs of some Whales at the 

Peninsula. The marks seem to occur on 

indiViduals of both sexes and all ages. and the 

number of whales with marks has increased 

with time. We do not know what causes the 

marks. Two obVious possibilities are disease 

and inJury. to distinguish between them we 

are currentlytrylng to obtain skin samples for 

analysis. We hope that other right whale 

researchers will report any simUar marks 

found on the whales they are studying. 

4. Finally. we describe some direct interactions 

between right whales and people. We worked 

with three Argentine students who compared 

the swtmming speeds of whales in the north· 

ern bay. which 1s a whale sanctuary with 

restricted boat traffic. to swtmmlng speeds of 

whales in the southern bay in an area with1n 

sight ofwhalewatch actiVity (Colombo. Arias, 

and Garciarena 1990), Theswtmm.lngspeeds 

of mother/calf pairs In the two bays were the 

1.2l 

2.03 

1.30 0.52 0.62 0.59 

1.83 1.14 1.56 1.24 

same, but other whales swam stgn1flcantly 

faster In the southern (more disturbed) bay 

(Table 61. The results could Indicate either 

that mother / calf paIrs are unaffected by boat 

activity or that the calves restrict the paIrs' 

movements to slower speeds. SWimmlng 

speeds recorded at longer intervals (>5 min) 

were signUlcantly slower in the northern {undisturbed) bay Indicating that the whales 

there were spending more time stopping and 

turning (Le., milling). The differences in 

swimming speeds in the two bays could be 

caused by boat activity, but it is also possible 

that they are caused by different levels of 

social activity by whales In these areas. 

REFERENCES 

Colombo, GA .• A.M. Arias, andA-D. Garciarena. 

1990. A posslble effect of whale watching on 

right whales (.Eu1:xI1aenaaustralts). Abstract 

from N Reunion de TrabaJo de EspeclaUstas 

en Mamiferos Acuatlcos de America del Sur. 

November. 1990. Valdivia. Chlle. 

Payne. R. 1986. Long-term behavioral studies of 

the southern right whale (.Eu1:xI1aena australis). Rep. 1m. M1a1. Commn Spec. Issue 10: 161· 

167. 

Payne. R.. V. Rowntree,J.S. Perkins. J.G. Cooke. 

and K. Lankester. Population size. trends. 

and reproductive parameters of right whales 

(Eubalaena australis) off Peninsula Valdes. 

Argentina. Rep. In!. \¥hal. Commn Spec. Issue 

12:271·278. 
Paq861 

Agency Profiles: 

Activities, Responsibilities, and Plans 
;>3913 53 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 

NORTHERN RIGHT WHALE RECOVERY PLAN 

P. Michael Payne and Robert C. Ziobro 

Office of Protected Resources 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Silver Spring, Maryland 

The Endangered Species Act {ESA}, Section 

4(0. requires the National Marine Fisheries &rvice {NMFS} to develop and implement a Recovery 

Plan (plan) for any species Us ted as either threatened or endangered under the ESA. A.ccorcUngly, 

NMFS appointed a ten-member Recovery Team 

(ream) to develop a plan for the northern right 

whale. The plan was completed and approved in 

December 1991. In addition to the blology and 

life history of the northern right whale. the plan 

identifies known and potential factors affecting 

the northern right whale. rt also reconunends 

management, research. and conservation activIties to reduce or eliminate adverse effects to the 

species, and considered necessary by the team to 

promote the recovery of the species. 

WhJle it 1s difficult to consider how any management activity would increase the biological 

productivity of the northern right whale. It 15 

possIble to conSider those activities that could 

reduce or eliminate human-induced mortality. 

thereby haVing a potential affect on the rate of 

recovery of this species. The plan outlined the 

following objectives towards that goal: 

• Identify and!or eliminate sources of human-caused injury or mortality. 

• MaxJmize efforts to free entangled or 

stranded northern right whales and ac· 

quire sclentiftc infonnation from all specimens. dead or alive. 

• Identify and protect habitats essential to 

the survtval and recovery of the northern 

right whale. 

• Molliter the population size and trends In 

abundance of the northern right whale. 

• Detennlne and rn1nirn.1ze any detrimental 

effects of directed aircraft. or vessel interactions. 

• Coordinate federal. state, International. 

and private efforts to Implement this Recovery Plan. 

The Recovery P1.an recommended and priori* 

t1.zed managementl recovery actions considered 

necessary to reach each of the stated objectives. 

These recovery actions were assigned a priority 

from 1 to 3 on the following criteria: 

• Priority 1 - an action that must be taken 

to prevent extinction or to Identl.fy.those 

actions necessary to prevent extinction. 

• Priority 2 - an action that must be taken 

to prevent a significant decline In population numbers, habitat quality. or other 

Significant negative impacts short of extinction. 

• Priority 3 - all other actions necessary to 

provide for full recovery of the species. 

WIth the completion of the plan. the Intent of 

NMFS is to focus implementation efforts on those 

management and recovery issues! actions outlined in the plan. and which were conSidered as 

haVing the greatest priority. The following actions were recognized In the Plan as havlng a 

Priority 1 ranking: 

• Reduce mortality from ship colliSions and 

entanglement With fishing gear. Identify 

those agencies and groups responsIble 

for aSSisting in the implementation of 

mitigating measures. 

• Implement seasonal or spatial regulations for use of certain fishing gear In 

high-use habitats. 

• Minimlze adverse effects ofwhalewatchlng 

by adopting regulations aimed to protect 

northern light whales. 

• Identify genetic variability In the northern 

right whale population. 

• Protectlmownhigh-usehabltats, reduce! 

eUminate pollution, restrict oUI gas ex· 

ploration. restrtctdredglng/ spoll disposal. 

• Locate/protect unknown wintering 

area(s). 

• Promote slmllar recovery actions In 

Canada. 
Page 64 

• Coordinate multi-agency efforts to lmplemen t the Recovery Plan. 

Cooperation and support by many fed· 

era!. state. local. and private organiza· 

lions will be needed to implement the 

objectives of the Recovery Plan. To help 

tnitiate the Implementation of this plan. 

the Implementation COmmittee is suggested. 

• Develop an education program to increase 

awareness of northern right whale habitats. seasonal high-use areas. and behavIor. 

Certain measures to assist the protection/ 

recovery of the northern right whale are already 

m place. and a number of the recovery actions 

identtfled in the plan are either ongomg. or have 

been Implemented. NMFS has funded population assessment surveys. and the matntenance of 

mcllvidual photO-Identification systems. a tool' 

that has provided !nfonnation on the genealogy 

and life history (l.e .• calving intervals. age at first 

reproduction. stock Isolation. and movements) of 

this species. Research has also been conducted 

on the population dynamics. and migration patterns of northern right whales. Important calving 

grounds have beenidentifted in the southeastern 

U.S. for right whales. and migratory pathways 

between calving areas and foraging areas in the 

North Atlantic have been identified. Research 

has also been conducted on habitat requirements and use of northern right whales. Genetic/stock relationships in the North Atlantic 

right whale population are considered a high 

priority and are currently being studied. 

Recovery actions have also been implemented 

through the ESA. Section 7 consultation process. 

Dredge projects along the southeast coast are 

reqUired to have observers on board to watch for 

right whales when the dredges are transiting to 

and from spoU dumpsttes. The designation of 

EPA durnpsltes are also subject to consultation 

regarding this. and other. endangered and threatened species of whale. as are outer continental 

shelf oU and gas activities. 

The plan Is subject to modification as determlned by completion of actions described in the 

plan. The intent ofNMFS Is to provide a long-tenn 

commitment to the implementation of the actions 

outlined In the plan to affect the recovery of the 

northern right whale. Achievement of this goal 

W1ll require the continuous cooperation of federal. state. and local agencies Within the United 

States. the governments of the United States and 

other nations. and priVate organizations. throughout the recovery period. 
Pag4165 

THE NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE: 

AN OVERVIEW OF DIRECTED MANAGEMENT AND 

RESEARCH ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY 

THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

James A. Valade 

Florida Department of Natural Resources 

Florida Marine Research Institute 

Jacksonville, Florida 

William B. Brooks 

Florida Department of Natural Resources 

Office of Protected Species Management 

Tallahassee, Florida 

The North Atlantic right whale. the most 

critically endangered of all the great whales. can 

be found in the coastal waters of Florida during 

the cool winter months. While in Florida waters, 

the State of Florida protects this whale via the 

Florida Endangered and Threatened Species Act 

of 1977. (The right whale Is offiCially recognized 

as endangered under the Wildlife Code of the 

State of Florida.) These measures additionally 

provide for the "conservation and Wise management" of the specIes. conferring these duties on 

the Florida Department of Natural Resources 

(FDNR). 

To date, the FDNR's Office of Protected Species Management and FDNR's Florida Marine 

Research Institute's Resource Recovery and Assessment Section have been involved in right 

whale management and research activities. 

Resource managers have d1rected their initial 

efforts at mln.im..Izing the effects of maritime 

activities on these whales. Research efforts have 

focused on developing a better understanding of 

right whale abundance, distribUtion. behavior, 

and mortalltywtthin the coastal waters of Florida. 

Coordination of these efforts should result in the 

establishment of stateW1de management guIdelines to protect the right whale. 

RESULTS 

Management 

initial management efforts ha~ targeted su b· 

merged-land lease applicants who propose to 

construct shipping facilities that would increase 

large vessel traffic in sensitive right whale areas. 

Lease applicants must sign leases that have been 

conditioned to ensure that vessel owners and 

operators using the leasee's facilities will, dUring 

the seasonal presence of right whales, take steps 

to avoid collisions With right whales. These steps 

have included controlllng ~ssel speeds during 

periods of low vislbility. requiring changes in 

course to avoid colliSions. and requiring the presence of observers to assist in locating whales. To 

date, three applicants have recel~d leases that 

include these provisos. 

In addition. the Mayport Naval Station has 

applied for a pennit to dump spoil material dredged 

from their basin into an offshore dump site. The 

FDNR Office of Protected Species Management 

has requested that the facility initiate a program 

in which observers watch for whales in the path 

of vessels going to and from the spoil site. 

Research 

The FDNR Florida Marine Research Institute 

has been conducting aerial surveys within the 

coastal waters of northeast Florida to describe 

right whale distribution. abundance. and behavior. These flights supplement survey efforts 

lnitiated by the New England Aquarium. The 

results are summa.r1zed in Table 7. 

Survey data are being supplemented by coordination of a sightinge network. In 1991·1992. 

the network documented 19 incidental sighting 

reports: these described the presence of 42 whales. 

FDNR has also assisted in coordinating right 
Page 68 

Table 7. Summary of aerial survey slghtings by 

florida M .rine Research Institute. 1987-

1992 

Wtnter 1987-1988 

Winter 1990-1991 

Winter 1991-1992 

No. of adulU/ca1ves 

o adultS 

I adult 

12 adults 

o calves 

1 calf 

4 calves 

whale carcass reco~ries in an effort to further 

understand causes of mortality within Florida 

waters. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The State of FlOrida supplements the protection of the North Atlantic right whale dUring lts 

seasonal presence in coastal FlOrida waters. 

Management efforts have been directed at m.I.n1-

m1z1ng the impact of human activltles on right 

whales. specifically targeting the threat of vessel 

collisions to whales. Management decisions 

have been based on historical data and on 

tnfonnation collected by FDNR and other research programs. Ongoing FDNR research efforts have documented right whale distribution, 

abundance. behavlor. and mortality. 

Coordinated right whale management and 

research activlties within coastal Florida waters 

will complement overall reco~ry efforts and Will 

provlde a sound basis for the protection of right 

whales within flOrida waters. 
Page 67 

RIGHT WHALE MANAGEMENT IN GEORGIA: 

THE ROLE OF THE 

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

Michael J. Harris 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

Brunswick, Georgia 

Within the State of Georgia. management 

responsibility for marine mammals 1s vested in 

the Coastal Resources Dlvision of the Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources. Coastal Resources Dlvislon's involvement with right whales 

began In 1979 when a cow and calf were photographed and filmed off St. Simons Island. TIlls 

film was included in our state's endangered 

species film "'A Time for Choice·. During the early 

19805, incidental sightings of right whales were 

collected and forwarded to the Sighting Network 

coordinated by Dr. Howard Wlnn. In 1984. CRD 

provided lOgistical support to the New England 

Aquarium for aerial surveys that were flown by 

volunteers from Delta Airlines and con.finned 

that right whales were calvIng In southeastern 

waters. In 1985, the right whale was designated 

Georgta's officIal marine mammal. The Coastal 

Resources Division and the Georgta Conservancy 

cosponsored a symposium on right whales at 

Jekyll Island in 1986 to increase awareness of 

right whales and to identify research and management needs. Throughout this period CRD 

biologtsts continued photographing right whales 

sighted incidentally to other work. Photographs 

were provided to the New England Aquarium for 

inclusion in the right whale Identitlcation catalog. 

CURRENT ACTIVITIES 

Current activities by Coastal Resources Dlvision to promote conservation of right whales 

include: coordination of the Marine Mammal 

Stranding Network in Georgta. maintenance of 

an incidental sIghting program. envirorunental 

review of development projects to ensure that 

consideration Is given to m.1n.lmJze potentialimpacts to right whales. and provision of educational materta.ls to harbor pilots to increase awareness of right whales and to decrease riSks of 

vessel collisions. 

Stranding Network 

Three neonatal right whales have stranded In 

Georgia since 1981. The most recent occurrence 

was a live stranding on Cumberland Island on 4 

January 1989. This animal died and the entire 

carcass was recovered. frozen. and shipped to the 

New England Aquarium for detailed examination. 

Incidental Sightings 

Since 1988. CRD has maintained a toU-free 

number for the public to report whale slghtings. 

The number has been pubUcized through posters 

distributed to marinas. boat landings. and commercial fishing docks throughout the coast. Information is recorded on a standard fonn and 

provided to the New England Aquarium. Efforts 

have been made to obtain copIes of any photographs taken by the person making the slgi1tlng. 

Environmental Review 

All harbor development and other projects 

that may Impact right whales are reviewed and 

recommendations are made to mitigate potential 

impacts to right whales. Recently. Georgla has 

utilized the 40 1 Water Quality Certification provision of the Clean Water Act to ensure that 

dredges utilized in deepening the Savannah Harbor would l1mit speeds to reduce the risk of 

collisions with right whales. These recommenda· 

tions will be included in all Corps of Engineers' 

channel dredging projects in Georgia in the fu· 

ture. 

Education 

In 1988. copies of the right whale video "'The 

Fate of the Right Whale: It's Up to You~ were 

purchased and provided to Brunswick and Sa-
Page 68 

vannah Harbor Pilot Associations to Increase the 

knowledge of pilots and reduce collision risk. 

Follow-up correspondence has been used to 

maintain interest and awareness. Stories and 

articles on the right whale have been Included In 

Georgia's nongame wildlife newsletter to educate 

the general public. 

FUTURE PLANS 

Coastal Resources Dlv1sion Intends to continue all of the activities that are currently underway. In addition. consideration 1s being given to 

establishing systematic aerial surveys to complement surveys conducted by the New England 

AqUarium and Florida Department of Natural 

Resources. The goal of these surveys would be to 

more accurately define the seasonal and spatial 

distribution of right whales off Georgia to better 

define areas and times of greatest activity. 

Finally. CRD would like to cosponsor With 

New England Aquarium a tra.tning session for 

commercial and military Harbor Pilots and the 

U.S. Coast Guard to further Increase awareness 

of right whales and to ensure that pUots know 

what to look for and how to avoid right whales. 
MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE 

RIGHT WHALE RESEARCH, 1978-1992 

Carol P. Fairfield 

Minerals Management Service 

Herndon, Virginia 

PSQ.69 

The Minerals Management Service (MMS) 

has funded $6.2 million of research since 1978 

focused either directly on right whales, or on 

right whales and other cetaceans utilJ.z1ng habttats along the eastern U.S. coast \fable 8). 

MMS-funded surveys In the Paclfic Ocean have 

also looked opportunistically for right whales. 

Although only two right whales have been reported during these surveys. this contrtbution 

15 substantial as it constitutes one-third of the 

recent Paclfic right whale slghtings. 

and reporting during this year. At present. MMS 

has no plans to fund additional studies focusing 

on right whales in Atlantic waters during fiscal 

year 1993. 

l\ItMS-supported efforts have focused on obta.ining baseline distrtbu tional1nforma tion along 

the outer continental shelf from Nova Scotia to 

Cape Hatteras during all seasons, and In the 

nearshore waters from Cape Hatteras to northern Florida during the winter. Detailed studies 

of the distribUtion. relative abundance. movements, Individual identification. feeding ecology, and habitat use have been supported in the 

Great South Channel area off Cape Cod. Massachusetts. Studies on mother / calf behavior and 

distribution have been supported in the southern U.S. range of this species. Satellite tag 

development and deployment research has been 

au pported by l\ItMS. With successful deployment 

occulTing in the Bay of Fundy area. Results of 

tagging have revealed new information on habitat use, site fideUty, and short-term movements 

that require review of previously postulated 

theories. MMS efforts have also supported 

preparation of pubUcations for submission to 

peer-reviewed JOurnals, a Uterature synthesis, 

and assessment of airships as a platform for 

studying right whale behavior. 

During fiscal year 1992. five of the MMS 

supported studies will be completed, Including: 

(1) SCOPEX. which Is in the final stages of 

manuscript preparation. (2) two tag develop· 

ment efforts. both of which are In the final 

manuscript preparation stages With regard to 

right whale tagging results, and (3) two aerial 

studies of right whale distribution and behavior 

off the southern U.S .• which Willftnlsh analyses 
Pag_ 70 

Table 8. Minerals Management Service nght whale research 1978-1992 

Project Date. FundJ..nC 

Cetacean and Turtle Assessment Program (CETAP) 9178-3/83 $3.704.863 

Analysts of High Use Cetacean Habitats. NE. U. S. 8/83-9/85 $19.361 

Distrtbutional Biology of Right Whales. NE U.S. 8/83-3/86 $19.303 

Visual Matrtx Charts Categortztng Uterature 9/84-8/90 $74.689 

PublJcation of IWC Right Whale Workshop Proceedings 3/85-9/87 $2,000 

Study of Right Whales in South Atlantic, Sprtng 1986 1/86-2/87 $5,000 

Right Whale Survey-North Atlantic 5/86-9/86 $4.950 

South Channel Ocean Productivity Experiment 6/87 -Present $559,938 

Surveys of Right Whales In GSC. Sprtng. 1987 6/87-9/87 $9,600 

Right Whale Recovery Project Video 3/88-4/88 $1.000 

Right Whales In South Atlantic. Sprtng 1988 3/88·9/88 $3,500 

Development of Satellite Tags 9/88-Present $1.040.130 

Endangered Right Whales in the South Atlantic 9/89·Present $675.267 

Design of Satellite Tags for Large Cetaceans 7/90·Present $32.283 

Southeast Atlantic Right Whale Airship Study 9/90-Present $35.559 

Northeast Shelf SymPOSium 8/91-1/92 $2.000 

TOTAL $6,170,1« 
Page 71 

OVERVIEW OF RESPONSIBILITIES 

OF THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY 

FOR INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT 

IN RELATION TO MARINE MAMMAL ISSUES (RIGHT WHALES) 

Pamela B. Baker 

Office of Assistant Secretary of the Navy 

(Installations and Environment) 

Washington, DC 

The posItion and office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations and Environ· 

ment (OASN (I&E» was established in 1990 to 

effectively plan. develop. and manage shore eS4 

tablishment and base structure for the Department of the Navy (DoN) with up-to-date. forwardlooking envirorunental. safety, and occupational 

health programs. OASN (I&E) responsibilities 

include formulation of policies and procedures 

for, and oversight of. all DoN functions and 

programs related to "environmental protection. 

planning, restoration. and natural resources con· 

servation" , The Special Assistant for Ocean 

Resources on the OASN (I&E) staff exercises 

oversight for marine mammal issues as well as 

other ocean and coastal resource issues such as 

National Marine Sanctuaries. National Estuary 

Programs, and envirorunental quality research 

and development among others as they relate to 

the DoN .. 

The OASN (I&E) coordinates implementation 

of environmental poliey with which the Navy and 

Marine Corps must comply. Marine mammal 

issues associated With the End~red Species 

and the Marine Mammal Protection Acts and 

marine mammals as natural resource issues are 

administered for the Navy through the Environmental Planning Office under the Deputy Chief of 

Naval Operations (Logistics), and for the Marine 

Corps under the Deputy Chief of Staff (Installations and Logistics). Various marine mammal 

research efforts are conducted by the Naval 

Command. Control. and Ocean SUl"'Veillance Center in coordination with the OASN for Research. 

Development. and Acquisition. 

The DoN 1s aware of the potential for ship 

strtkes to right whales, especially off the southeast coast of the United States. Vessels in the 

Mayport. Florida. area may encounter concentrations of rtght whales that use the nearshore 

area as a calving ground. Because of these 

concerns and a desire to learn more abou t how 

ships can avoid strikes. the DoN provided partial 

funding to the Marine Mammal Corrunlssion for 

1992 Right Whale Stuciles. St. Mary's Channel to 

Cape Canaveral. 9-11 January 1991. Data from 

these on-gomg stuciles will provide a basis for 

recommendations to mitigate the effects of ship 

strikes and other human actiVities on right whales. 

As Department of Defense leaders in marine 

envlronmentallssues and to satisfy established 

environmental protection responsibilities associated with marine mammals. OASN (I&E) has 

developed an environmental protection strategic 

plan. The plan has several goals. one ofwhich is: 

..... to enrich the biological health of the 

marine environment In which the Navy 

operates and increase the productivity of 

natural resources found on DoN installations." 

Specific strategies have been established to meet 

this goal. Strategies which may be of interest to 

right whale meeting participants include: 

Impl'o"le eJrlat1D.C .,nculture outleutuc aad 

foreatry pro&ram. in aupport of utura1 Ieaource manacement. 

TIlls Is extremely important because revenue 

generated in excess of operation and maintenance of these programs are used to fund installation level natural resource projects. 

Detel'Dline the opportunity lor de • .,:nati.DC 

marine-baaed W .. tchable WIldlife &reu. 

Several opportunities have been Identlfted 

and are at various stages of investigation. Naval 

Out-LymgFleld. SanNlcholas Island. California, 

has populations of elephant seals and California 

Sea lJons: Naval Undersea Warfare Center. indian Island in Port Hadlock. Washington. has 

property serving as a seal haulout: manatees are 
Page 72 

present in the viclnlty of Naval Air Station, Jacksonville; and whales are often present in the 

viclnlty of Marine Corps Air Station, Kaneohe. 

Hawail, and Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, Kaua1, Hawail. 

Identify opportualtie. for the wider uae of 

Navy expertise in marine mammal health and 

physiology. 

To facilitate transfer of natural history. mecUcal. and nutritional infonnation to universities. 

aquaria, and zoos, reView of data is on-going for 

possible declass-lficatlon; and an annotated bibliography of publications from the DoN's Marine 

Mammal Program has been published. 

There are several complementary programs 

within the DoN which relate to natural resources 

and potentially relate to marine mammals: 

Le.acy Re.ource Manacement Pro~ 

This fund was established by Congress in 

1991 to be used to elevate natural resource and 

cultural resource protection on Department of 

Defense (000) installations to a new level of 

priority. Ninety-one projects were funded in 

1991. Under this program. the DoN designed, 

tested, and evaluated a propeller shroud for 

protecting manatees from ship thrusters. The 

shrouds proved successful and have been Installed on C-tractor tugs at the Naval Submarine 

Base. Kings Bay. 

Department of Defense and Environment Initiative 

This ln1tiative supports efforts to increase 

environmental awareness and compliance within 

000 and to work with the conununities and 

organizations in the private sector to communicate 000 awareness and lmprove DoD performance. The DoN Is supporting several projects 

including the Puget Sound Initiative and Coastal 

America Initiative. 

Other 

Miscellaneous projects consIstent with OASN 

(I&E) goals are supported. For example. as 

mentioned previously, DoN participated In the 

1992 right whale studies off the coast of Florida. 

DoN also funds grey whale migration stu cUes and 

~landlng craft air cushion" Interactions stucUes 

off the West Coast. 

The DoN Is committed to excellent steward· 

ship of natural resources. When the DoN discovered that its actions were impactlng manatees in 

the southeast U.S., propellor shrouds were designed and fitted to C-tractor tugs. allev1atlngthe 

problem. Official Navy INsmUcnONS were also 

written to guide the DoN operations In areas 

where manatees occur. Impacts on sea turtles 

due to dredging operations in the Southeast have 

been mitigated through piacement of observers 

aboard vessels and restricting dredging to speci· 

fied windows of time. DoN concern with marine 

mammal Issues, and speclfically right whales. Is 

genuine and, through interagency coordlnatlon. 

we hope to continue to contribute to the welfare 

of this and all endangered species. 
?age 73 

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS' MANAGEMENT 

ACTIVITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

FOR NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALES (Eubalaena gJacia/is) 

DURING HOPPER DREDGING IN THE SOUTHEASTERN U.S. 

Dena Dickerson 

USAE Waterways Experiment Station 

Vicksburg, Mississippi 

John Bushman 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Washington, DC 

Current population estimates lndlcate that 

no more than 350 North Atlantic right whales 

survive today (Kraus and Brown 1991). The 

death of even a few anJmals Is likely to have a 

significant detrimental effect on such very small 

populations. Data suggest that a minimum of 

one-third of the current right whale mortalities 

may be due to human activities such as collisions 

with ships and propellers and entanglements in 

fishing gear (Kraus and Brown 1991). Ship and 

boat traffic may also be excluding them from 

some former calving areas (Kraus 1990). 

North Atlantic right whales move to northern 

feeding grounds In spring and return to the 

southern temperate waters in autumn and wtnter. The only known calving ground of these 

anJmals Ues off the coast of northeastern FlOrida 

and southern Georgia (Kraus et al. 19861. Because right whales depend on lnshore areas for 

reproductive activities and the females have a 

very strong protective maternal instinct. they 

may be more vulnerable to the effects of human 

activity than are many other cetaceans. 

Off eastern North America. collisions with 

ships or ship propellers have resulted in documented right whale deaths; however. the effects 

of dredging actMties on North Atlantic right 

whales remain largely unknown. No known 

incidents With right whales have been docUmented during eastern North American dredging 

operations; however. one right whale calf was 

known to be killed by a dredging propeller at East 

London Harbour. South Africa (Best 1984). 

Hopper dredge operations In the shipping 

channels along the flOrida to Georgia coastline 

constitute a potential threat to North Atlantic 

right whales during the faU/winter season at this 

calving ground location. AU existing dredging 

projects require Endangered SpecIes Act Section 

7 consultation and coordination with National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The two major 

groups of anJmals conSidered in every dredging 

related consultation are sea turtles and right 

whales. As a result of the Section 7 consultation. 

each project has a biological opinion with specific 

requirements relating to sea turtles and right 

whales. 

Slnce documented Incidents of hopper dredging related sea turtle mortalities have occurred 

along the southeastern U.S. coastline. hopper 

dredging activities in this area are restricted by 

NMFS to occur only from December through 

March. This Is the window of time in which sea 

turtles are thought to be least abundant In the 

shipping channels; however. this 1s the time 

when right whales are inhabiting the calving 

grounds from flOrida to Georgia. As a result. 

during this time the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maintains NMFS~trained observers onboard 

the dredges to watch for right whales and sea 

turtles. Additionally. in the more crucial calving 

grounds. aerial surveys are conducted three hours 

per day In the channels and adjacent offshore 

areas throughout the duration of the dredging 

operations. 

These surveys are designed to detect the 

presence of right whales within 10 nmi of the 

dredging location. the offshore dlsposal site and 

the transit zone between the two. The exact 

location of whales sIghted during the surveys is 

relayed to the dredge personnel In order to m.1n.lm1ze the potential for dredging collisions with the 

whales. When right whales are Sighted within the 

10 nautical miles of survey area, the dredge 

reduces its ntghttime transit to and from the 

dIsposal site from normal speeds of 8 to 12 knots 

to 3 knots. 1£ flights are not made. the dredge 

must reduce speed to 5 knots at night. 
Page 74 

The Corps of Engineers recogntzes the sever· 

ity and gravity of the status of the endangered 

North Atlantic right whale and the Importance of 

maintaining the security of the only known ,calvLng grounds off the F1orida/ Georgia coasts. Much 

research Is needed to answer questions for better 

management strategies. More basic blolo~ca1 

information Is needed on these animals and the 

effects of disturbances which' can only be accom~ 

pUshed through continued communication and 

cooperative efforts between all responsible parties involved. 

REFERENCES 

Best, P.B. 1984. Two right whales calves die in 

accidents. A.frtcan Wi1d11Je 38(6):243. 

Kraus. S.D. 1990. Rates and potential causes of 

mortallty in North Atlantic right whales. 

Eubalaena glacialis. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 

6(4):278~291. 

Kraus. S.D. and M.W. Brown. 1991. A right 

whale conservation plan for the waters of 

Atlantic Canada. J.H. Marlin Willison et 01, 

eds .• Science and the management of protected areas. Acadia University. Wolfv1lle. 

Nova Scotia: Acadia University. p. 79-85. 

Kraus. S.D .. J.H. Prescott. A.R Knowlton. and 

O.S. Stone. 1986. Migration and calving of 

right whales, Eubalaenaglacial:ls. in the westem North Atlantic. RL. Brownell. Jr., P.B. 

Best. and J.H. Prescott. eds. Right whales: 

past and present status. Cambridge, England: International Whaling Commission. 

Spec. Issue No. 10; p. 139-144. ' 
Pa.ge 75 

RIGHT WHALE ACTIVITIES OF THE MARINE MAMMAL COMMISSION 

David W. Laist 

Marine Mammal Commission 

Washington, D.C. 

The Manne Mammal Commission was established under Title II of the Manne Mammal 

Protection Act. It is charged with developing. 

reviewing. and making recommendations on actions and policies of all Federal agencies with 

respect to marine mammal protection and conservation. To help meet this responsibility, Italso 

is charged with carrying out a research program. 

The cOmmission has supported work related 

to northern right whales since the late 19708. In 

1979. it convened a workshop to identify research 

priorities for East Coast cetaceans, inclUding 

right whales. The results helped identify work 

later supported by the Bureau of Land Management (and subsequently the Minerals Management Service). the National Marine FIsheries 

Service. the CommissIon. and private groups. In 

1983, the commission provided partial funcUng 

for an International Whaling COmmiSSion Workshop to review the status of right whale stocks 

world -wide. The report of that workshop (Brownell 

et aL 1986) Is stlll one of the most complete 

sources of information on right whales available. 

In 1984. the commission also provided funds for 

aerial surveys of right whales In the Great South 

Channel (Winn et aL 1984) and in the Bay of 

Fundy. 

In the mid-1980s, the commission provided 

the Initial recommendation to the National Marine FIsheries Service for developtnga right whale 

recovery plan. It has since provided advice on 

priority research and management rieeds throughout the preparation process. For example. In 

cooperation With the service, the commiSSion 

funded two workshops convened at the New 

England Aquarium in 1985 to identify steps to 

protect and encourage recovery of right whales in 

the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. The report of the 

workshop (Kraus 1985) was intended to be a 

proto~ for the Right Whale Recovery Plan. 

Other right whale studies that the COmmission 

has supported include development of a right 

whale sighting network in the southeastern United 

States (Wlnn 1984). a workshop to examlne 

management needs for right whales off F10rlda 

and Georgia (!be Georgia Conservancy 1986) 

and a review of information bearing on the desIgnation of three areas off the U.S. East Coast as 

critical habitat for right whales (Kraus and Kenney 

1991). 

The COmmission recognizes that no one agency 

has the resources or authority needed to gather 

all the basic lnformation and assure protection of 

right whales. This must be done as a cooperative 

undertaking and the Right Whale Recovery Plan 

Is the appropriate vehicle for coorcUnating involvement by government agenCies and private 

organizations. For its part. the commission Is 

prepared to continue to provide assistance and 

advice as it has In the past. 

REFERENCES 

Brownell, Jr .. RL., P.B. Best. and J.H. Prescott, 

editors. 1986. RlghtWhales: past and present 

status. Proceedings of the Workshop on the 

Status of Right Whales. Cambridge, England: International Whaling COmmission. 

Reports of the International Whaling Commission. Spec. Issue 10. 

Georgia Conservancy. The. 1986. Report of the 

southeastern U,s. right whale workshop. 18-

20 February 1986. Jekyll Island. Georgia. 

Savannah. Ga.: The Georgia Conservancy. 

Kraus, S.D. 1985. A review of the status of right 

whales (Eubalaena glacialts) in the western 

North Atlantic With a sununary of research 

and management needs. Final Report to the 

Marine Mammal Commission. AvaUable from 

National Technical Information Service. 

Springfield. Vlrgln.ia. 61 p. 

Kraus. S.D. and RD. Kenney. 1991. Information 

on right whales (Eubala.enag1acialtsJ in three 

proposed critical habitats in United States 

waters of the western North Atlantic Ocean. 

Final Report to the Marine Mammal Comrn.ission. Available from National Technical In· 

formation Service. Springfield, Virgln.ia. Re· 

port no. PB91-194431. 

Winn. H.E .• G.A. Scott. and RD. Kenney. 1985. 

Aerial surveys for right whales In the Great 

South Channel. Spring 1984. Final Report to 

the Manne Mammal Commission. PB85-207 

926. National Technical Information Service. 

Springfield. VIrginia. 18 p. 
Page 76 

FOCUS OF RECOVERY EFFORTS FOR ENDANGERED AND 

THREATENED SPECIES ~ ,:ITHIN THE NMFS OFFICE OF PROTECTED 

RESOURCES 

Aleta Hohn 

Office of Protected Resources 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Silver Spring, Maryland 

One critical factor for ensuring that recovery 

efforts for endangered and threatened species 

are adequate Is an adequate level of funding. 

During fiscal year 1992. $1.234 milllon was 

appropriated specifically for endangered species 

recovery etTorts. With additional appropriations 

for northern sea lions ($1.5 m.1ll1on). Hawallan 

monk seal ($550.000). and northern right whales 

($230.000). In fiscal year 1993. the recom~ 

mended appropriation for right whales is higher. 

Right whales are one of the many endangered 

or threatened species of critical concern to the 

National Marine Fisheries Service. Otl)er species 

that need Immediate attention Include Snake 

River sockeye salmon and four runs of chinook 

salmon; sea turtles; monk seals; and northern 

sea lions. Each of these species or species groups 

is currently at relatively low levels. and still 

declining. or only recently have ceased declining. 

in addition. due to entanglement and habitat 

issues. humpback whales In the northwest Atlantic continue to need attention. Even if funds 

targeted for recovery efforts are divided only 

amongst the species of greatest Immediate concern. they rapidly become limiting. 

Because available funds cannot cover all of 

the needed or desirable recovery efforts and 

research on all of the critical species. funds that 

are available must be directed at management 

questions as identified In the recovery plans. 

Those actions! needs classified as Priority 1 are 

the most critical to prevent the extinction of a 

species. They will given highest priority for the 

limited funding tllat is avaJlable. 
Working Group Reports 
SESSION FOUR: WORKING GROUPS 

After heartng from scientists and managers 

on progress to date, it was agreed that it would be 

useful to draw on the collective expertise of the 

attendees to provide guidance for the future. On 

the afternoon of the second day, two concurrent 

Working Group sessions were held. The structure and definitions were set forward at the 

outset. The reports follow. 

~orkinCGroup Structure 

Goal: Determine specific activities necessary to begin implementation of the Right Whale 

Recovery Plan 

Method: Divide Priority 1 tasks identified in the Recovery Plan into two groups: Human Interactions 

and Habitat Protectlon. Establish working groups to Identlfynecessaryactivities (i.e .• tasks 

and people). 

WorkJ.njt Group Term. of Reference 

1. Activities necessary to implement and evaluate management 

2. Research tasks necessary to support management activities 

Choose among tasks in step-down outline by the numbers 

Include justification of the necessity 

3. Agency actions to promote inter-agency communication and cooperation 

(Priority 1 tasks 61. 62. 63, 11. 12. 13. 32) 

Program requirements. funding requirements, Canadian involve~ent 

WorkiDI Group Defl.nltlona 

(Reflects a subjective grouping of indicated Priority 1 tasks designed to mlnJ.mize overlap and 

facilitate discussion) 

WGi: Human Interaction and Disturbance 

(Priority 1 tasks 11. 12 (except 1212), 13 (except 1313-1315). 15,51.521.522) 

WG 2: Habttat Identification and ProtectfDn 

(Priority 1 Tasks 14. 31, 32. 361. 41) 
Page 80 

WORKING GROUP ONE: 

HUMAN INTERACTIONS AND DISTURBANCE 

Robert Brownell, Chair 

Department of State 

Washington, D.C. 

Working Group 1 met from 2:00 pm to 4:00 

pm on Wednesday. April 15. The charge was to 

identify specific activities that would begin implementation of the Recovery Plan relative to hwnan 

Interactions and disturbance. The Worktng Group 

members were: 

Pamela Baker 

Jeff Brown 

Kim DePaul 

Dena Dickerson 

Sara Ellis 

Sherrard Foster 

Nina Garfield 

Jim Ham 

Mike Harris 

Scott Kraus 

David Laist 

David l.lttleJ0hn 

James Mead 

Roger Payne 

Chris Slay 

Karen Steuer 

Jim Valade 

Usa Volgenau 

HowardWlnn 

Robert Ziobro 

others ... 

1b.ree subtopics were identified. and with 

sometimes vigorous discussion. a llstIng of activities emerged: 

A. Reduce eolllalou. 

1. Establlsh task force to reduce/mitlgate 

collisIons with right whales. 

2. ~Data call" --compilation of all regulations. 

guidelines, etc. from all agencies and 

sources now on the books that pertain to 

avoiding collisions of ships and light 

whales. 

a. CoIRega. 

b. Look into abUity to regulate 3-200 

miles from shore. 

c. Use as example Industry/bowhead 

regs/ agreements. 

3. Identify major users of areas. which types 

of vessels most often involved in collisions, and locations of strikes. 

4. Solicit USCG assistance in not1flcation of 

location of whales. 

a. Broadcasts, published Notice to Mariners. 

b. Put right whale essential! crlt:1cal habitat on navigational charts. 

5. Place some burden on indUStry. 

6. Place observers on a sample of commercial vessels to determine effectiveness of 

some of the mitigating actions. 

a. Talk to harbor pUots. 

b. Develop trainlng program for observers (L e., folks who would be on vessels 

anyway). 

1. Education/awareness 

a. Task force to identify best means of 

educating 

b. Attend Industry! association expos--

gather Info. educate. 

c. Assign person(s) to visit various facUities to educate. 

L Possibly work with or through con~ 

servation organiZations. 

2. Examples: port authorities and 

shipping companies In ports of 

concern. 

8. Reduce vessel speeds~ 

9. Restrict time-of-day movements of large 

commercial vessels. . 

10. Ensure that stranded light whales are 

fully worked-up. in a timely fashion, to 

determine. at least, If death was caused 

by collision. 

a. Establish contingency plan for coordinating response to stranded right 

whales. 

11. Continue monitoring of scars. 

12. Longer term: 

a. Evaluate usefulness of designating 

clitical habitat. 

b. Suggest! evaluate specific regulations 

relating to boat speed and traffic lanes. 

B. Reduce Eat.a.nc1emenu 

1. Identify gear most involved in (or Ukely to 

be involved In) entanglements. 

2. Require fishermen to tag/identify their 

gear so gear entangling whales can be 

ident1fled as to location and season of 

entanglement. 

3. MOnitor number of whales entangled or 

with signs of entanglement. 
4. Evaluate possibility of a program to dlsentangle whales (lncluding contingency 

funds), 

a. Conununicatlon system/mechanism 

will be required. 

5. Evaluate possibility of gear modtilcatlon 

and/or seasonal areal closures. 

c. Whalewatch.tn& 

1. Status--proposed regs at OMB. 

2. Distribute proposed regs to scientific community for reView and lnput. 

3. Reiterate need to do what's listed under 

521 and 522 

a. Evaluate the Significance of shortterm disturbance. 

b. Evaluate the long-term effects of disturbance. 

P~81 
Page 82 

WORKING GROUP TWO: 

HABITAT IDENTIFICATION AND PROTECTION 

Tim Smith, Chair 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Woods Hole, Massachusetts 

The memlx!rs of Working Group 2 were: 

Doug Beach 

Ben Blaylock 

Carol Fa1rlleld 

Jack Finn 

Bob Kenney 

Amy Knowlton 

Marilyn Marx 

Bruce Mate 

Stormy Mayo 

Elizabeth Moses 

Charles Potter 

Randy Reeves 

VictOria Rowntree 

others '" 

The Working Group identified severalspeciflc 

actM.ties that it beUeved should be addressed 

lnitially to both implement and evaluate management actions to meet those tasks involving habl· 

tat identification and protection deSignated as 

Priority 1 in the Recovery Plan. In this discussion. some particIpants who had been members 

of the Recovery Team that prepared a draft of the 

plan noted that the priorities assigned in the final 

version of the Recovery Plan are not those developed by the team. Further. they disagreed strongly 

with some of the priorities aSSigned. Specific 

concern was raised abou t the low priority given to 

several tasks, which the Working Group saw as 

essential for planning for. and evaluation of. the 

success of tasks that had been assigned top 

priority in the plan. 

Leaving the concerns about the priorities. the 

WG identified activities that it felt would be 

undertaken immediately. These have been summarized into a lesser number of actiVtties (Table 

9). 

The specific activities are associated there 

with specific objectives from the Implementation 

Schedule contained within the Final Recovery 

Plan. Shown separately are the numbers for 

those objectives assigned Priority 1 in the plan, 

and the numbers for the objectives which were 

given lower priority which the WG judged are 

necessaxy to begin implementing the plan. The 

large number of necessary but Priority 2 obJectives shown illustrates in part the conflicts noted 

above about the assigrunent of priorities wtth1n 

the Plan. The WG felt that pursuing genetic 

studies, habitat identification and characteriza· 

tion. and necropsy support were necessary to 

meet the Priority 1 objectives of the plan. The WG 

also noted that a strong monitoring program was 

also essential, but 1t was agreed that the most 

useful approach for such monitoring was not 

clear. Therefore. it recommended a workshop to 

evaluate the several monitoring programs that 

have been pursued in recent years and. based on 

that experience. to design a long-term monitoring 

program that would meet the needs for implementing the plan. 

The WG also identified other agency actions 

related to promoting inter-agency communication. coordination. and collaboration that it felt 

should be undertaken to begin implementing the 

plan. These are shown in Table 10. alongwtth the 

related Priority r and Priority 2 objectives from 

the Implementation Schedule. The WG fel t that 

increased interaction with Canada was essential. 

Further. the WG recommended that forma.liz1ng 

the ad.m1n1strative structure for implementation 

was essential. 
Table 9. Specific activities ldenWled by Working Group II members necessary to begin unplementation of the 

Right \'v'hale Recovery Pian. with related Prtorlty 1 and necessary Priorlty 2 objectives from the 

Implementation Schedulel 

Activity 

1. Design and lmplement stud.!es of genetic variability 

> 2. DetennJne location of winter grounds 

3. Determine location of nursing ground lmpUed by recently 

collected matriline data 

4. Identify all sources of calf mortallty. and control actiVities 

to prevent mortallty 

5. Reduce nutrient and conta.nUnant levels. especially from new sources 

6. Evaluate effect of human actiVities In Ught of habitat reqUIrements. 

and protect lmportant habitats from slgntficant negative Impacts 

7. Complete necropsy protocol. and Integrate it Into the 

National Stranding Program. 

8. Conduct a workshop to estabUsh prtorlUes for monitOring programs 

designed to measure success of Recovery Plan 

I x.,. to IUl1lUtrlcaJ objectl". cod" appeAded to thJtI WG report. 

Related Objec::tive. 

Priority 1 

41 

361 

41 

14 

Priority ~ 

362.363,364 

362.363.364 

21. 221. 222 

141. 142. 143 

341. 342 

24 

33. 42. 43. 44. 

45.47 
Page 84 

Table 10. Spectftc activtties tdent1fled by Working Group 11 members necessary to promote Inter-agency 

cooperation. coordination. and collaboration for Implementation of the Right Whale Recovery Plan. 

With related PrtOrity 1 and necessary PriOrity 2 objectives from the Implementation Schedule ' 

Activity 

1. Conduct workshop With representatives of Canadian government 

2. Increase Interaction with Canada at State Department levels and 

possibly higher levels relative to right whale recovery 

3. Assign national coordinator who can direct a substantial amount of 

time toward Implementation of the plan 

4. EstabUsh two regional Working Groups to address specific regional 

needs. one tn the SE U.S. and one in the NE U.S. 

5. Ensure Interaction among those implementing other ESA Recovery Plans, 

especially humpback whales 

6. Conduct technical workshop to define spectftc methods of analysis. to 

faclUtate comparison of results from different habttat areas 

7. Construct overlay maps shOwing human activtties such as fishing 

and vessel traffic 10 comparison to right whale seasonal distribution 

and movements 

8. Evaluate use of funds available for handUng mass strandings for 

faciUtatlng collection and analysls of samples from stranded right whales 

Related Objectives 

Priority 1 

1111. 1112. 

1116.1311. 

1312.32 

32 

Priority 2 

61 

62 

62 

351.352 

63 

24 
ATIACHMENT TO WORKING GROUP 2 REPORT 

Key to Numerical Codes for Objectives in Preceding Tables 

1111 Identify those responsible for ship collisions - Brown/Baccaro Ba.nks 

1112 Identify those responsible for ship collisions - Bay of Fundy 

1116 Identify those responsible for ship collisions -migratory routes 

1311 Implement regulations on fishing gear - Bay of Fundy 

1312 Implement regulations on fishing gear· southern Scotian Shelf 

14 Reduce/eliminate enVironmental pollution in right whale habitat 

141 Assemble data on contaminant effects on habitat 

142 Studies on effect of contaminants 

143 Monitor contaminants in right whale enVironment 

21 Improve/maintain system for reporting strandings/ distressed animals 

221 Develop centralized stranding system 

222 Identify facilities/ system to handle rehab of right whale calves 

24 Establish or identify funding for rescue and rehab efforts 

32 Promote Canadian action to protect Canadian critical habitats 

33 Review effectiveness of protective measures 

341 Conduct studies of habitat use and modify protection strategy as appropriate 

342 Understand feeding ecology 

351 CompUe data for lmown high·use habitats 

352 DesIgn/ co'nduct studies to characterize habitats 

361 Locate/protect unknown wintering area(s} 

362 Review data to ID other possible areas 

363 Examine oceanographic data for likely areas 

364 Design/ conduct surveys of likely wintering habitats and other areas 

41 Design/implement studies to establish genetic variation 

42 Maintain catalog 

43 MalntaIn sighting database 

45 Design/Implement other programs--population monitoring 

47 Encourage development of new technology for population monltoring 

61 Designate Implementation coordinator 

62 Establish Implementation team 

63 Identify representatives to periodically review and update Plan 

Page 85 
PageM 

APPENDIX - MEETING PARTICIPANTS 

Baker. Pamela 

Special Assistant. Coastal Resources 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy 

Room 236. Crystal Plaza 15 

Washington. D.C. 20360-5000 

(703) 602·2990 

Beach. Douglas 

Protected Species Office 

Northeast Region 

NMFS 

1 Blackburn Drive 

Gloucester. MA 01930 

(508) 281-9254 

Blaylock. Ben 

Sou theast Fisheries Science Center 

75 Vlrgtnla Beach Drive 

Miami. FL 33149 

(305) 361-4264 

Brown. Jeff 

Protected Species Management 

NMFS 

9450 Koger Blvd. 

st. Petersburg. FL 33702 

(813) 893-3366 

Brown, Moira 

Department of Zoology 

Axelrod Bldg. 

University of Guelph 

Guelph. Ontario NIG 2Wl 

(519) 824-4120 x8386 

Brownell. Robert 

OESjOA 

Room 5801 

U.S. Department of State 

Washington. D.C. 20520 

(202) 647·3262 

Capuzzt. Will1am 

Center for Marine Conservation 

1725 DeSales Road 

Washington. D.C. 20064 

(202) 429-5609 

Chu,Kev!n 

OESjOA 

Room 5801 

U.S. Department of State 

Washington. D.C. 20520 

(202) 647-3262 

Coogan. Coleen 

Protected Species Office 

NMFS 

1 Blackburn Drive 

Gloucester. MA 01930 

(508) 281-9291 

Credle, Vicki. 

Office of Protected Resources 

NMFS 

1335 East-West Hwy 

SUver Spring. MD 20904 

(301) 713-2325 

DePaul. Kimberly 

(CNO OP.44E) 

Room 10N67 

U.S. Navy 

Hoffman Bldg. No. 2 

200 Stovall Street 

Alexandria, VA 22332 

(703) 325-7344 

Dickerson. Dena 

Coastal Ecology Group 

Waterways Experiment Station 

Army Corps of Engineers 

3909 Halls Ferry Road 

Vicksburg, MS 39180 

(60l) 634-3772 

Ellis. Sara L. 

Associated Scientists at Woods Hole 

Box 721 

Woods Hole. MA 02543 

(508) 564-4449 

Fairtleld. Carol 

Protected Species Office 

MS-4310 

Minerals Management Service 

381 Elden Street 

Herndon, VA 22070 

(703) 787·1709 

Finn, John 

Department of Forestry & WUdllfe Management 

Holdsworth Hall 

University of Massachusetts 

Amherst. MA 01003 

(413) 545-1819 
Foster, Sherrard 

Sanctuary Program 

NOAA/NOS/OCRM/SRD 

Suite 714 

1825 Cormecticut Avenue, NW 

Washington. D,C. 20235 

(202) 606-4126 

Garfield. Nina 

Sanctuary Program 

NOM/NOS/OCRMjSRD 

SUite 714 

1825 Cormecticut Avenue, NW 

Washington. D.C. 20235 

(202) 606-4126 

Hain. James 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

NMFS 

166 Water Street 

Woods Hole. MA 02543-1097 

(508) 548-5123 x210 

Hamilton, Susan 

Office of Federal Activities 

A-104 

Environmental Protection Agency 

401 M Street, SW 

Washington. D.C. 20460 

(202) 260·5906 

Harris, Michael 

Coastal Resources DivisIon 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

1 Conservation Way 

BrunsWick. GA 31523 

(912) 264-7218 

Hohn. Aleta 

Office of Protected Resources 

NMFS 

1335 East-West Hwy 

SUverSpr1ng.~ 20910 

(301) 713-2289 

Holliday, Barry 

Dredging and Navigation Branch 

US Army Corps of Engineers 

(CECW-OD) 

20 Massachusetts Avenue. NW 

Washington, D.C. 20314 

(202) 272-8832 

Horstman. Kathy 

Office of Protected Resources 

NMFS 

1335 East-West Hwy 

SUver Spring. MD 20910 

(301) 713-2289 

Kermey. Robert 

Box 41 

Graduate School of Oceanography 

University of Rhode Island. Bay Campus 

South Ferry Road 

Narragansett. RI 02882 

(40 1) 792-6664 . 

Knowlton. Amy 

New England Aquarium 

Central Wharf 

Boston. MA 02110 

(617) 973-5253 

Kraus. Scott 

New England Aquarium 

Central Wharf 

Boston. MA 02110 

(617) 973-5253 

Laist. David 

Marine Mammal Commission 

Sutte 512 

1825 Cormecticut Ave .• NW 

Washington. D.C. 20009-

(202) 606-5504 

Lang. William 

Env. Sci. Inform. Mngmnt. 

MS-4310 

Minerals Management Service 

381 Elden Street 

Herndon. VA 22070 

(703) 787·1724 

Uttlejohn. David 

Commandant (G-06-2) 

U.S. Coast Guard 

USCG Headquarters 

Washington, D.C. 20593 

(202) 267·1770 

Marx, Marilyn 

Center for Coastal Studies 

Box 1036 

Provincetown, MA 02657 

(508) 487-3622 

Page 87 
Mate. Bruce 

Hat11eld Marine Science Center 

Oregon State University 

Newport. OR 97365 

(503) 867-0236 

Mayo. Charies 

Center for Coastal Studies 

Box 1036 

ProVincetown. MA 02657 

(508) 487·3622 

Mead. James 

Division of Mammals 

National Museum of Natural History 

NHB Stop 108 

Smithsonian Institution 

Washington. D.C. 20560 

(202) 357-1923 

Moses, Elizabeth 

Universi ty of Massachusetts 

P.O. Box 2922 

Amherst, MA 01004 

Payne. Michael 

Office of Protected Resources 

NMFS 

1335 East-West Highway 

SUver Spring. MD 20910 

(301) 713·2322 

Payne. Roger 

Whale Conservation Institute 

191 Weston Road 

Lincoln. MA 01773 

(617) 259-0423 

Potter. Charles 

Marine Mammal Program 

Smithsonian Institution 

Washington. D.C. 20560 

(202) 786-2497 

Reeves. Randy 

27 Chandler Lane 

Hudson. Quebec JOP lHO 

(514) 458-7383 

Rowntree. Victoria 

Whale Conservation Institute 

191 Weston Road 

Llncoln. MA 01773 

(617) 259-0423 

Schadf. Catherine 

Biology Department 

Earl Hall 

Queens University 

KIngston. Ontario K7L 3N6 

(613) 547-4447 (h) 

Slay. Chris 

173 Vlrginia Avenue 

Athens. GA 3060 1 

(404) 543·6859 

Smith. Tim 

Northeast FIsheries Science Center 

NMFS 

166 Water Street 

Woods Hole. MA 02543-1097 

(508) 548·5123 x251 

Valade. Jim 

Florida Department of Natural Resources 

Suite 115 

3100 University Blvd. South 

Jacksonville. FL 32216 

(904) 723~5845 

Volgenau, Lisa 

Code N/ORCAI 

Room 220 

NOM/NOS 

600 1 Executive Blvd. 

RockviUe. MD 20852 

(301) 443-8921 

Wtnn, Howard E. 

Box3l 

Graduate School of Oceanography 

University of Rhode Island. Bay Campus 

South Feny Road 

Narragansett. RI 02882 

(401) 792·6251 

Ziobro, Robert 

Office of Protected Species 

NMFS 

1335 East-West Highway 

SUverSprtng,MD 20910 

(301) 713-2322