Fall Boat-Based Surveys on Jeffreys Ledge for North Atlantic Right

Transcription

Fall Boat-Based Surveys on Jeffreys Ledge for North Atlantic Right
Whales: Distribution, Abundance, Behavior, Ecology, and PhotoIdentification: September 2004 – December 2007 with an emphasis on
September 2004 – January 2006
Mason Weinrich, Kate Sardi, Cara Pekarcik, and Jennifer Tackaberry
The Whale Center of New England
PO Box 159
Gloucester MA 01930
February 28, 2008
Submitted in fulfillment of Award # NA04NMF4720401
1
Summary
Between 2004 and 2007 we conducted fall boat-based surveys for North Atlantic right
whales on Jeffreys Ledge, a glacial deposit located in the waters between Cape Ann, MA,
and southeastern Maine. Surveys were initiated in mid-September in 2004 and 2005, and
mid-October in 2006 and 2007; they concluded in mid-December in 2004, 2006, and
2007, and at the end of January 2006 for the fall 2005-winter 2006 effort. Surveys took
place along three transect lines. One transect surveyed waters over the shallow parts of
the Ledge itself, the others surveys the deep waters to the west and east of the Ledge.
Right whales were seen on 34 of 81 cruises (41.9%) overall, and 30 of 60 (50.0%) cruises
between 15 October and 15 December. Right whales were abundant in every year except
2005, when we saw only four. They typically appeared with regularity in mid- to lateOctober. However, the continued presence of whales when we concluded our annual
surveys, combined with sightings well after completion of our work by National Marine
Fisheries Service aerial observers, does not allow us to determine either the duration of
their presence or when they depart the area. Whales were seen both surface feeding
(skimming) and repeatedly diving within a small, confined area (suggesting sub-surface
or bottom feeding), indicating that whales were aggregating around prey. Surface-active
groups were also seen frequently, with up to 19 animals in a single group. Twenty-six
unique individuals from 2004 and two from 2005 were matched photographically to
known whales in the New England Aquarium’s right whale catalog; two more from 2005
and all of the numerous animals photographed in 2006 and 2007 remain to be matched,
although the data have been contributed to the Aquarium. Mother-calf pairs were seen in
all years except 2005, and had occupancy periods of up to 40 days. Plankton samples
(both 19 m oblique tows and 5-min surface tows in 335-µ nets equipped with digital flow
meters) were taken twice each cruise at reference stations and at right whale sightings to
assess habitat quality for the whales. Samples were analyzed by Dr. Charles Mayo and
his collaborators at the Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies. Zooplankton density
was relatively even in 2003, 2004, and 2005, but was significantly lower than those years
in 2005. Zooplankton density was higher on cruises where right whales were seen than
when they were not, and were higher at whale-focused sampling stations than at the
randomly chosen reference stations. All sightings of human uses, including vessels,
fishing gear markers, or other indications of human presence were recorded as well.
When plotted over 10’ x 10’ grids of the study area, right whale use was found to be
highest in the deep waters on the northwest side of the study area, but human use and
greatest risk of harm to whales was along the margin of the Ledge further to the
southwest. Other whales sighted included sei whales (which, surprisingly, were most
often seen in a different portion of the study area than right whales), humpback whales,
fin whales, minke whales, one blue whale, and several odontocete species. Our data
suggests that Jeffreys Ledge is an important fall and early winter habitat for North
Atlantic right whales for feeding, raising calves, socializing, and possibly conceiving
calves. Further, it is an area where extensive human use presents risk of harm to whales
from both entanglements and collisions with commercial vessels, and it is one of the few
areas where consistently high whale use overlaps with intensive human activities.
2
Introduction
The annual movement patterns of many North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena
glacialis) are well known from their late winter appearance in Cape Cod Bay through the
end of summer in the Bay of Fundy and Scotian Shelf (Winn et al. 1986; Kraus et al.
1988). However, their distribution during the fall, after they leave their summer feeding
grounds, and through most of the winter remains poorly understood. Since right whales
are at risk from human threats, especially entanglements in fishing gear and ship
collisions, at any time, it is important that our knowledge of their movements and habitat
use patterns during this period be expanded in order to assess when, where, and if
management measures may be appropriate to promote species recovery.
Jeffreys Ledge is a submerged glacial deposit that stretches from just northeast of
Rockport, MA, to southeast of Portland, ME. Because of its bathymetry and associated
upwelling, the Ledge is an important feeding habitat for many species of large whales,
including piscivorous humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae) and fin (Balaenoptera
physalus) whales during spring, summer, and fall (CETAP 1982; Agler et al. 1990;
Weinrich et al. 1997; Weinrich 1998). Weinrich et al. (2000) and Mate et al. (1997)
presented evidence that right whales use Jeffreys Ledge, especially in the fall when they
move out of the Bay of Fundy. In 2002, aerial surveys from the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) located a feeding aggregation of at least ten whales on the
Ledge that persisted from mid-November until mid-December1.
The first boat-based systematic surveys of Jeffreys Ledge took place in the fall of 2003.
Between 15 September and 31 December, 23 dedicated surveys sighted at least 19
different right whales, including four mother-calf pairs (Weinrich and Sardi 2004).
Individual right whales had occupancy periods of up to 42 days, and were still abundant
when the study ended. The whale’s behavior suggested that they were likely to be
feeding, particularly on a deep prey resource. Although whales were seen on almost
every portion of the Ledge, sightings were concentrated in the northeast section of the
survey area typically in waters from 150-200 m deep. The data from that effort,
supplemented with aerial sightings from NMFS, led to a Dynamic Area Management
(DAM) restriction from November through early January to reduce the whales’ risk of
entanglement in fishing gear. That action was renewed in February 2004, when a NMFS
aerial survey spotted seven right whales in a surface active group on the Ledge.
While Weinrich and Sardi (2004) showed significant use of Jeffreys Ledge by right
whales in the fall of 2003, they also posed a series of questions raised by their initial
efforts. These were:
1) Is right whale use of Jeffreys Ledge consistent between years? If not, how great
is the variation?
2) Is distribution of right whales consistent between years?
3) Are right whales also using waters east of our study area with any consistency?
1
Sightings were reported on updates through the Sighting Advisory System, Northeast Regional Office of
the National Marine Fisheries Service.
3
4) Does right whale behavior, ecology, and prey resource vary annually and, if so,
how?
5) How long into the fall/winter are right whales present on Jeffreys Ledge?
6) How is the prey resource of right whales on Jeffreys Ledge best described and
quantified?
7) Does the risk of entanglement to right whales while they are on Jeffreys Ledge
exist and, if so, does it vary annually with either whale use of the area or
variations in fishing effort?
The data from the proposed project will answer these questions by providing a much
more detailed description of how whales are using Jeffreys Ledge on an annual basis,
including residency time, distribution, and prey sources, and risk from fishing and
shipping efforts in the area.
Methodology
Boat-based surveys for right whales were initially conducted for this project from 15
September to 31 December 2004 on Jeffreys Ledge using a 30 m vessel following
systematic track lines (Fig 1). Surveys were conducted twice weekly as weather
permitted. Sightings from the 2004 efforts supported extending surveys past 31
December in years 2 and 3 of the project. While we had initially proposed extending
field efforts until 28 February in each subsequent year, increased vessel costs (primarily
for fuel, which nearly tripled in price) allowed an extension only through the end of
January in year 2.
While the original study plan was three years of field work, federal budget restrictions
prevented allocation of the year 3 funding. However, The Whale Center of New England
was able to procure private funding for a more limited field effort during 2006 and again
in 2007. In each year survey protocols were identical to those of other years (which are
described in detail below). Surveys were started on October 15 in each of these years,
and continued until mid-December. The later starting date in 2006 and 2007 represented
the time at which sightings became more predictable during 2003-2004 efforts, while the
terminal date was dictated by availability of funds.
In many other studies, boat-based surveys for right whales have been conducted on
smaller vessels than the one used in this study (e.g. the 9 m Neriad from the New
England Aquarium or the 13 m Shearwater from The Provincetown Center for Coastal
Studies). However, a larger vessel (30 m) was used in this study both for safety (given
the unpredictable and often rapidly changing weather found in the northeast in the fall
and winter months) and to maximize the range of acceptable weather conditions under
which surveys could take place (Fig. 2). Further, the greater height of eye for observers
(nearly 8 m from the waterline) offered by the larger vessel made spotting distant whales
more likely.
Boat-based surveys were considered to be the most appropriate platform for this study.
While past sighting data indicate that there are times when whales aggregate in the
4
habitat (e.g. November 2002) and/or spend much of their time at the surface, our 2003
effort and our past experience in the project area suggested that right whales were often
spread out, typically spending 75% or more of their time below the surface (Weinrich and
Sardi 2004). Hence, an appropriately paced vessel offered the greatest chance of sighting
whales that were diving for extended periods, while a plane might miss an animal if the
over-flight was during a dive. Further, the use of the vessel allowed us to collect
plankton tows and other habitat data that informed our assessment of how and why
whales are using the area.
Each full survey covered the length of Jeffreys Ledge and completed two of three predetermined survey tracks (Fig.1). Track 1 ran over the shallow water on top of the Ledge
starting at its southwestern tip (total length approximately 35 nm). Two short
(approximately 4 nm) additional V-shaped legs which mirror the topography of the Ledge
interrupt the straight line (one approximately mid-way up and one near the northern tip of
the Ledge, where the shallow area widens considerably). Tracks 2 and 3 were
approximately parallel to the Ledge and were placed over the deeper water on the western
and eastern side of the Ledge, respectively. On each cruise we would survey the
trackline not sampled in the previous survey, and would either choose between the other
two at random or re-sample a track where right whales had been seen on the previous
survey. In the 2003 surveys, the deep-water basin on the eastern side of Jeffreys Ledge
(Track 3) received the highest use (Weinrich and Sardi 2004), although sightings took
place on all tracks. In addition to regular surveys, we also undertook two directed cruises
to maximize photo-identification opportunities of whales in aggregations identified using
survey protocol.
Each survey had three observers – one looking ahead of the vessel, and one looking on
each side. All observers had extensive experience spotting and identifying whales to
species. The vessel maintained a speed of 12 knots when on protocol, in order to
minimize the risk of missing a diving whale. In addition to the observers, one or two data
collectors accompanied each cruise (two in most cases).
Data were recorded with a laptop computer that was interfaced with a GPS system.
Every ten minutes, the vessel position was recorded along with environmental parameters
including visibility (estimated by eye), wind speed and direction, and sea and swell state.
These and all other data were stored in a Microsoft Access relational database, and were
plotted using ArcView GIS software.
When a right whale was seen, we broke from our survey track to photo-identify and
observe the animal(s). If there was a question as to whether a sighting was of a right
whale or another species, we either slowed the vessel while remaining on the track line or
approached the animal to verify species on its next surfacing. We would also approach
aggregations of whales at least briefly to determine if there were any right whales present
in the aggregation, even if they were not seen initially.
All approaches to right whales were done under permission of, and with the conditions
noted in, marine mammal research permit 65-1607. Photo-identification was conducted
5
using high-resolution digital images taken by a Cannon SLR camera equipped with a 75300 mm zoom lens. Photos were taken of the callosities, flukes, and any other notable
scars or marks on each animal. Behavioral data included dive times and respiration rates,
dive displacement, and other notable surface behaviors (surface skim feeding, surface
active groups, etc.). However, we usually stayed with whales long enough to obtain
sufficient identification photos, rather than for pre-set behavioral sampling periods. This
typically led to relatively short behavioral records. All photos were contributed to the
New England Aquarium photographic catalog for individual identification and archiving
per their specified format (New England Aquarium 20032). All right whale sightings
were reported in near real time (within four hours, once we were in a location in which
sufficient cell phone signals were available) to the National Marine Fisheries Service
Sighting Advisory System. Whale, effort, and human use data are now in near-final form
for submission to the Right Whale Consortium Database at the University of Rhode
Island, under the direction of Dr. Robert Kenney.
In order to develop a further understanding of the influence of prey on the abundance and
distribution of the whales in the Jeffreys Ledge area, we sampled plankton in several
ways. In 2003, we established two reference stations for plankton tows on trackline 1
(stations A and B), where we conducted a 5-min surface plankton tow. Based on our
results from the pilot project, in 2004 we added two extra stations (one each on tracklines
2 (station C) and 3 (station D; Fig. 1)) and modified the sampling design to incorporate
oblique, or vertical, tows along with surface tows. During each survey, we conducted
oblique tows to depths of 19 m at one station on each trackline; in the case of trackline 1,
we determined which station to sample by random methods (e.g. coin flip). In addition,
we conducted a single 5-min surface plankton tow at one of the two reference stations at
which an oblique tow was also conducted, chosen randomly. Both surface and oblique
tows were conducted using a 335-micron plankton net equipped with a General
Dynamics mechanical digital flow meter. We also sampled plankton using similar
methodology when right whales were sighted. In such cases, samples were taken as close
to the animal (or to the mouth if the whale was feeding) as possible. The plankton
sampling scheme used was based on the behavior of the whale; if it was feeding at or
near the surface, a surface tow was conducted, otherwise, an oblique tow was used.
These samples were used to assess the general plankton composition and density around
right whales. This data collection scheme and analysis of the samples was designed by
and coordinated with Dr. Charles Mayo, at The Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies,
to be compatible with long-term habitat studies undertaken in Cape Cod Bay.
We recorded all sightings of human uses, including the presence and location of all fixed
fishing gear markers (including the type of marker (e.g. buoy, high flyer, etc) and boats.
For vessels, we classified the type of vessel, its position, activity, course, and
approximate speed. While it was impossible to assign gear to a fishery by its surface
buoy system, starting in 2005 commercial fishing vessels were assigned to specific
fishery types based on the configuration of equipment on the vessel. These data were
2
New England Aquarium. 2003. Data and photographic submission to the North Atlantic right whale
photographic database. Unpublished report available from Data Coordinator, The Right Whale Research
Program, New England Aquarium, Central Wharf, Boston MA 02110. 9 pp plus appendices.
6
mapped with whale sightings to help determine risk of human impacts on whales when
they are present on Jeffreys Ledge.
In order to understand differences of use within Jeffreys Ledge and its surrounding
waters, as well as where right whales faced the greatest risk of human interaction, the
study area was divided into a series of 10’ x 10’ cells in a grid fashion (Fig. 3). Each cell
was assigned a letter (reading from west to east, and north to south). Relative use and
overlap was analyzed using ArcView 9.0 from ESRI software. Since there is no
established methodology to assess risk based on these data, we used two methods. In
one, the gridded cells were simply overlaid on each other (referred to as “overlap”); the
more heavily gridded an overlapped cell, the greater the importance of the cell to both
whales and the specific human use. We also present analyses which assess risk by
multiplying the number of sightings of right whales in a cell by those of a particular
human use. Since sightings of human use are more frequent than right whale sightings,
results of these analyses are predominantly driven by the human use. While we do not
suggest that this is a preferred method for assessing risk, certainly the presence of any
number of whales amongst heavy levels of human use certainly presents a risk of
entanglement or vessel collision. Grid analyses were run only on cumulative 2003-2007
data sets, which were less susceptible to fluctuations and annual variability.
In addition to sightings of right whales, sightings of all marine mammal species
(including sei, fin, humpback, and minke whales, Atlantic white-sided dolphins, and
harbor porpoises, among others) were noted and plotted along with vessel effort.
Results:
1) Survey Effort
2004: Twenty-six cruises for North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) were
conducted on Jeffreys Ledge between 15 September 2004 and 30 December 2004 (Table
1; Fig 4). Two cruises were aborted due to rough seas; two were hampered by fog for at
least a portion of the survey; two were directed searches for right whales, and did not
involve following survey protocol; one involved a modified survey protocol; and
nineteen completed two full tracklines. The first directed cruise took place on 27
September, when we encountered a significant aggregation of large whales
approximately half-way up the first survey leg. A radio conversation with a nearby
charter fishing vessel indicated that they had seen close to 50 whales that morning, and
had seen a right whale in the area on the previous day. As we had yet to see any right
whales, we made the decision to spend the remainder of the survey day in the aggregation
and its surrounding waters. While we found numerous feeding humpback (Megaptera
novaeangliae) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), we were unable to locate any
right whales. The second dedicated cruise was on 19 November 2004, when we
undertook a dedicated photo-identification cruise for right whales based on the number of
animals we had sighted on a full survey cruise on 18 November. Finally, between 10
November and 23 November we sighted right whales on the southern half of all three
survey legs, and none on the northern half of any survey leg. To maximize our chance to
7
photo-identify right whales, on 27 November we conducted a cruise where we completed
only the southern half of all three survey legs.
Survey effort was hampered by two weather factors during 2004. In late October, an
unusually windy and rough period extended for almost two weeks, preventing any effort
between 14 October and 29 October. This is usually a period where it is rare for weather
to impact our ability to undertake two surveys within seven days. A significant amount
of fog during fall 2004 also hampered completion of tracklines in workable visibility, and
even caused us to abort one cruise. Despite these limitations, we undertook all but three
of the proposed cruises; one additional cruise was undertaken during the spring of 2005,
when we retrieved the bottom-mounted autonomous hydrophones set in early December
2004 (see below).
2005: Twenty-five cruises were conducted between 19 September 2005 and 24 January
2006 (Table 2, Fig. 5). Four cruises were shortened due to rough seas; on two of those,
one of two tracklines was completed and the other aborted prior to completion, while on
two of the cruises the decision was made to turn back prior to completion of even a single
survey track. Two cruises were hampered by fog for at least a portion of the survey; and
nineteen were successfully completed.
Survey effort was hampered by two weather factors during the report period. Like the
previous year, a significant amount of fog during the first three weeks of October
hindered completion of two surveys, and prevented departure on several additional days.
In addition, there was a higher than usual amount of wind, rough seas, and stormy
weather from mid-October through December. Two cruises were aborted due to rough
seas, and two transect lines on other cruises were halted prior to completion due to
deteriorating conditions.
2006 and 2007: In 2006, we were able to undertake 17 surveys between 16 October and
14 December (Table 3, Fig 6). Of these, three were aborted because of rough seas, and
we took one dedicated cruise to a location where a number of right whales had been
sighted. In 2007, we were able to undertake 13 surveys between 15 October and 5
December (Table 4, Fig. 7). Of these, one was aborted due to rough seas, and one was a
directed cruise to a right whale aggregation area. The 2007 field effort was scheduled to
end on December 8, 2007, but consistently strong winds and rough seas hampered field
efforts in the project’s final two weeks. As explained above, the later scheduled starting
and earlier ending date for the study’s fieldwork in the last two years was largely due to
funding constraints.
2) Right whale sightings:
2004: Right whales were sighted on nine cruises (34.6% of total), starting on 13 October
and ending on 27 November, with a total of 38 individual sightings (Fig. 8). When seen,
numbers of right whales per cruise ranged from 1 (n=2) to 14 (n=1), with a mean of 4.2
(s.d. = 4.0; Table 1). Many of the October sightings were in the deep water in the
northwestern portion of the study area (cells G and H, Fig, 3), including one surface
8
active group (SAG) as well as several adults and one cow-calf pair apparently feeding on
a sub-surface prey source. In two of the first three surveys following the extended period
of bad weather referred to above, no right whales were seen. However, one whale was
seen on each of the second and fourth cruises after the storm, near where the whales had
been sighted earlier in the season.
Starting on 16 November sightings increased further south in our survey area. Whales
were seen surface skim feeding over both the deep water on the west side of the Ledge
and over the shallow water of the Ledge itself (Cells L and M, Fig. 3). The number of
whales sighted increased steadily over the next several cruises, with many animals
engaged in surface skim feeding. The aggregation reached its peak on the 23 November
survey, when we sighted at least 14 right whales, when eight whales were seen skim
feeding over the shallow water of the Ledge, one juvenile was sighted several miles
away, and an additional five animals, including a surface active trio and a surface skimfeeding adult, were seen over the deeper waters southeast of the Ledge. Four days later
only four whales were seen, none of which were surface feeding. No right whales were
seen on any subsequent survey.
2005: Right whales were sighted on only three cruises (12.0%), starting on 21 November
and ending on 28 December, with a total of four confirmed individuals seen (Fig. 9). An
additional sighting of a probable right whale took place on 5 December.
The first right whale sighted (# 1039, a 25-year old female seen on 21 November 2005)
appeared emaciated, had numerous older scars indicative of entanglement, and had a pale
right flipper. However, no evidence of active entanglement or other obvious stressors
were seen despite a close inspection of the animal. This individual had been nursing a
calf in 2005, which had apparently weaned by the time that we saw her, likely
contributing to her thin appearance. She was seen again on March 6, 2006 in Cape Cod
Bay, but has yet to produce another calf as of mid-January 2008 (A. Knowlton, pers.
comm.).
On 19 December, a small right whale was sighted off-effort in transit back to Gloucester
harbor. The whale was sighted in extremely close proximity to Milk Island, off
Rockport, MA. Water depth was less than 10 m where the animal was originally sighted.
The whale was approached for photo-identification, and appeared to be circling in the
area.
Two right whales were seen in a surface active group (SAG) on 28 December. During
the approximately 45 minutes during which they were observed, they intermittently
would engage in bouts of rolling, “spy-hopping,” and close body contact with rapid travel
on a course to the west. No evidence of feeding was recorded.
An additional animal was seen on the cruise of 5 December; its blow, and a brief glimpse
of the back seen as the animal dove suggested it was a right whale. Despite waiting for
the animal to re-surface for over an hour, it was never re-sighted. Heavy seas may have
9
obscured the whale’s presence when it did come up. This sighting was counted as a
probable, but not confirmed, right whale.
No right whale mother-calf pairs were seen in 2005.
2006: Right whales were seen on ten cruises (58.8%; Tables 3, 7). The first right whale
was seen on the first survey, on 16 October, and sightings continued until the penultimate
survey on 11 December. The minimum number of whales ranged from one to eight in a
cruise (mean = 3.1, sd = 3.4 whales per cruise for all 17 cruises). Whales were were seen
on every cruise between 6 and 27 November. In the four remaining cruises, right whales
were only seen on one cruise, and none were seen on the final cruise of 14 December.
The great majority of 2006 sightings took place in the northwestern portion of the study
area where we had seen whales consistently in October 2004 (Figure 10). The whales
appeared to be feeding on a deep prey resource, as dives would typically range from 8-12
minutes, but there was little component movement either in individuals within a sighting
or of the aggregation between sightings. No surface feeding was seen during 2006.
2007: Right whales were seen on 12 cruises (92.3% of all cruises; Tables 4, 8; Fig. 11).
The only cruise on which a right whale was not sighted was the first cruise, which had to
turn back very early due to rough seas. The minimum number of whales ranged from
three to 20 in a cruise (mean = 9.1, sd = 5.6 whales per cruise for all 13 cruises).
Numbers appeared to decrease slightly in the last several cruises, but whales were clearly
still abundant when the study ended.
Like October 2004 and most of 2006, many whales were seen over deep water in the
northwestern portion of the study area (Figure 9). However, whales were seen on all
tracks of the surveys. Sightings in the northeastern portion of the study area were
common and sightings over the shallow waters over the Ledge itself also occurred
regularly.
Behavior of whales in 2007 was more varied. Apparent deep feeding behavior was again
common, although dive times were somewhat shorter than the long dives that were
common in 2006 (typically 5-8 minutes in 2007 as opposed to 8-12 minutes in 2006).
Surface feeding was seen on one occasion, in the northeast portion of the study area. Six
SAGs were seen on six different cruises. An unusually large SAG was seen on 22
October, in the northwestern portion of the study area. Although photo-identification
analysis of that group is on-going at the time of writing, it appears that we identified a
minimum of 18 individuals in less than 40 minutes of observation.
Right whale mother calf pairs were seen on four cruises in 2007; two different pairs were
seen on the cruise of 16 October, and one each were seen on cruises on 22 October, 18
November, and 26 November. Although photo-analysis is not complete as of this
writing, X different mother-calf pairs were identified in total on those cruises.
10
2004-2007 combined: Right whales were abundant in three of the four years (2004,
2006, and 2007) but were uncommon during 2005. In total, 81 cruises were undertaken
during the four years, of which right whales were seen on 34 cruises (41.9%; Fig. 12). If
the window of surveys is narrowed to October 15 to December 15 (in order to standardize
effort across all four years), right whales were seen on 30 of 60 cruises (50%), which still
includes one year of unusually low use when compared with any of the other years.
Our data suggest that right whales typically arrive on Jeffreys Ledge in mid-to lateOctober. In 2004, no right whales were seen until 13 October, despite a mid-September
start date for the study. In 2006 and 2007, whales were seen on the first cruises
undertaken in mid-October, but numbers were relatively small (one animal in 2006, three
in 2007) compared to those seen later in each year’s effort. A similar arrival date was
also suggested by the results of our 2003 pilot study, when whales were not seen with any
regularity until after 25 October (Weinrich and Sardi 2004).
We have less data to suggest when whales depart the area. In 2004, it was clear that the
whales had departed by the end of November; there were no right whale sightings in
December. This is similar to the sudden departures of right whale aggregations often
seen in Cape Cod Bay (S. Mayo, pers. comm.). Although sightings of right whales were
uncommon at any point in 2005, we did see two animals in a SAG on 28 December (the
only year in which we have effort past 15 December). In 2006 and 2007, whales were
seen on December surveys, in the same areas where we had seen them in earlier work,
although in slightly smaller numbers. Like 2007, in 2003 whales were seen on our last
survey on 10 December (Weinrich and Sardi 2004). Our data suggest potential residency
through at least mid-December. Aerial sightings by National Marine Fisheries Service
observers in our study area in February 2004, January and February 2007, and late
December 2007 through January 2008 suggest that whales may be present throughout at
least the first half of the winter.
When we examined relative use of each gridded portion within the study area, cell H
showed the highest use, with adjacent cells G, I, and L showing lower, but still relatively
high use (Fig. 13). Cells G, H, and L contain the deeper waters of Jeffreys Ledge western
basin. Cell I also contains deep water on the eastern side of the Ledge, where the
majority of the sightings in that cell have taken place. Based on these results, we suggest
that the deeper waters surrounding the Ledge, especially on the western side, are more
important for right whales than the shallow waters of the Ledge itself.
3) Photo-identification of right whales:
2004: Identification photographs were obtained in 36 of 38 sightings (94.7%). In the
other two instances, waning daylight and elusive whales prevented photography.
Photographs of all animals were contributed to the New England Aquarium’s right whale
catalog; the results of their matching efforts are shown in Table 5.
The catalog was able to identify 26 different individual whales from the data set we
provided, including four calves (all still with their mothers), three juveniles, and 19
11
different adults. Five individuals (19.2%) were seen on more than one day. Female #
1321 and her calf were seen on four surveys between 16 November and 27 November;
Adult female # 2240 was also seen on four days between 18 November and 27
December. Right whale # 2617, an eight-year old female, was seen on three surveys
between 16 and 19 November. Right whale # 1306, an adult male, was only seen twice,
but had the longest occupancy (first to last sighting) period (13 October to 2 November,
21 days).
Three mother-calf pairs were sighted during our surveys. RW # 1266 and her calf were
seen on a single day (14 October), when the mother was doing apparent sub-surface
feeding. RW # 2460 and her calf were also seen on a single day (18 November), when
both the mother and the calf were surface skim feeding. Finally, RW # 1321 and her calf
were seen on four days between 16 November and 27 November. On three of these days
both # 1321 and her calf were surface skim feeding.
In only two sightings were catalog matchers unable to match the whale to the catalog
because of poor photographic quality.
2005: All confirmed sightings of right whales resulted in photographs that will allow
photo-identification of individual animals. Photographs were submitted to the New
England Aquarium’s right whale catalog in winter, 2006. As of this writing, two of the
four individuals have been matched to previously identified animals (Table 6), while two
(the juvenile whale seen off-effort and one of the adults in the 28 December SAG) have
yet to be matched.
2006: Images of 54 individual whales were sent to the New England Aquarium in spring
2007 for matching. This number certainly contains duplicate sightings of the same
individual on different days (for instance, we know that animal # 2602, a male (??) was
seen on both 18 and 22 November, and is therefore counted at least twice). At the time
this report is being written matching at the catalog has yet to be finalized. Of note is the
presence of whale # 1151, seen frequently in 2003 and 2004, who was sighted on 31
October 2006. One right whale mother-calf pair was sighted in 2006, on 31 October; the
mother has yet to be matched.
2007: At the time of submission, we are preparing photographs from 94 sightings for
which we have photos, regardless of the number of whales per sighting (so for instance,
our SAG of 18 or more whales counts as one sighting). Based on our internal matching,
a minimum of 40 individual whales were photographed during our survey period.
We have confirmed sightings of two different mother-calf pairs in our 2007 effort.
Female # 1620 and her calf were seen on 26 October and 5 December; Female # 1425
and her calf were seen on 26 October, 18 November, and 5 December, meaning that the
minimum occupancy for each pair was 40 days, comparable to that of the longest
occupancy of any animal recorded in our Jeffreys Ledge efforts (42 days for female #
1553 and her calf in 2003; Weinrich and Sardi 2004).
12
4) Plankton sampling: Details of plankton sampling are presented in Tables 9-12. In
2004, we obtained 64 plankton samples, including 22 surface tows and 42 oblique tows.
In 2005, we obtained 65 samples, of which 26 were surface tows and 39 were oblique
tows. This included five tows at stations where whales were present, and 60 at reference
stations. In 2006, we collected 58 samples, including 19 surface tows and 39 oblique
tows. This included 19 samples at stations where whales were present, and 39 at
reference stations. Finally, in 2007 we collected 59 samples, including 45 oblique tows
and 14 surface tows. This included 28 samples at stations where whales were present,
and 31 at reference stations. Only a portion of the 2007 samples (31 samples collected
between 18 October and 5 November) were analyzed for inclusion in this report.
Because only a portion of the year’s samples were available at the time of writing, the
2007 samples were not included in our analysis of inter-annual variability.
When all years and all tows were combined, the total count of zooplankton/m3 (zpl/m3)
per sample were significantly higher on cruises where right whales were seen then on
those when they were not (Table 13; Independent 2-tailed t-test, t=3.09, df= 249,
P=0.002). This was also true of the values for just the oblique samples (t=2.02, df= 128,
P=0.047) and the surface samples (t=3.09, df= 119, P=0.002). In addition, zpl/m3 values
were significantly higher at whale-directed sampling stations than at reference stations, in
the entire sample (Table 14; Independent 2-tailed t-test, t=4.96, df=249, P<0.001) as well
as the separated oblique samples (t=2.87, df= 128, P=0.005) and surface samples (t=5.67,
df=119, P<0.001). These results indicate that plankton is available in higher densities
throughout the system when whales are seen as opposed to when they are not, but that the
density at the whale’s locations are significantly higher than the reference stations.
On cruises where right whales were seen, there was no statistical difference in the zpl/m3
between any of the four reference stations, either in the combined sample (One-way
Anova, F=3.12, df = 3, 70, P=0.81) or the isolated oblique samples (F=2.76, df = 3, 31,
P=0.84) or the isolated surface samples (F=5.80, df = 3, 35, P=0.63; Table 15). This
would indicate that no reference station is a better indicator of plankton density available
to whales than any other, either at the surface or in the top 19 m of the water column.
Overall zpl/m3 annual variability was complex. There was no significant difference
between mean zpl/m3 regardless of sample type in 2003, 2004, and 2006 (Table 16;
F=0.00, df = 2, 154, P=1.00); in fact, the values were almost identical between those
years. However, 2005 was notably lower than any of those years, and when all four years
are compared, they are significantly different (F=2.91, df = 3, 217, P=0.03). The
significant difference also exists when only mean zpl/m3 per sample at the four reference
stations is considered (since the inclusion of whale-driven sampling stations in the other
years could bias their results upwards; (F=3.47, df = 3, 159, P=0.01). The lower plankton
density in 2005 would also explain why whales were unusually scarce in that year. It
should also be noted that the mean zpl/m3 recorded in the partial 2007 sample was several
orders of magnitude higher than in any other year, which also correlates well to the
extremely high whale use we recorded during that period (Table 16).
13
These results suggest that, like Cape Cod Bay, the presence of whales is highly correlated
with the availability of a suitable zooplankton resource. This further suggests that
Jeffreys Ledge is important for whales at least in part as a feeding habitat. While our
results suggest that monitoring of plankton availability at reference stations throughout
the habitat may allow insight into whether whales are likely to use the area or not, the
differences in plankton densities between those areas and those where whales have been
found suggest that the relationship is complex and requires further examination.
A more complete analysis of plankton samples, including greater details on temporal and
spatial patterns as well as species composition, is attached as Appendix 1.
5) Bottom-mounted hydrophones: In order to monitor the presence of right whales
autonomous acoustic recording devices, also known as “pop-ups,” were placed around
Jeffreys Ledge by a team from the Cornell University Bioacoustics Research Program.
Four units were initially deployed on 29 October 2004 (Fig. 14). Prior to deployment, the
majority of whales had been observed in the deep water on the east or west side of the
Ledge, as opposed to over the shallow waters of the Ledge itself. Therefore, two units
were placed on each of the western and eastern transect legs. In each case, one unit was
placed near the middle of the leg, and the other near the northern end. One unit on each
leg recorded at a higher frequency (5 kHz, capable of detecting sei whales (Balaenoptera
borealis)) but had a shorter recording life and one unit recorded at a lower frequency (2.5
kHz), but had a longer recording life. The units were recovered and replaced with new
pop-ups on 16 December 2004, which were recovered in April 2005. All of these latter
units were set to record at a lower frequency with a longer recording life, to see if right
whales used the area in the winter following completion of the boat-based survey
activities.
Data from the hydrophones were downloaded at Cornell University and transferred to an
external hard drive which is currently at The Whale Center’s facility in Gloucester MA.
Analysis of this data is ongoing, and we are currently in discussions with National
Marine Fisheries Service personnel to screen them through auto-detection filters to
determine right whale presence in the immediate future.
6) Human uses: The study area is highly used for commercial fishing vessels, including
both active fishing (e.g. trawlers) and fixed gear fishing (e.g. gill net and lobster fishing).
In 2004, we recorded a mean of 26.2 ± 12.6 buoys (Fig. 15), 8.8 ± 4.4 fishing vessels, and
1.8 ± 0.9 commercial vessels per cruise (Fig, 16). In 2005, we similarly recorded a mean
of 23.6 ± 13.6 buoys (Fig. 17), 7.7 ± 5.0 fishing vessels, and 0.4 ± 0.5 commercial vessels
per cruise (Fig. 18). When all four years are considered, a mean of 23.5 ± 12.3 buoys,
7.6 ± 5.0 fishing vessels, and 0.6 ± 0.9 commercial vessels were sighted per cruise. The
only notable annual variability in these data sets was fishing gear sightings in 2007,
which decreased to 15.2 ± 5.6 per year, despite coverage in similar periods to the
previous years. Details of the sightings of the various human use types are shown in
Table 17.
14
Data across all years were also consistent in the locations of fixed fishing gear markers
(Fig. 23) and vessel use (Fig. 24). In general, human activity was highest on the
southwestern portion of the study area (especially quadrants L and P in Figs. 3, 23, and
24, and to a lesser extent in their surrounding quadrants). Fixed gear markers were seen
commonly on the southern portion of all three survey legs. However, if sightings of
fishing vessels of known gear type are overlaid on buoy sightings, several clear patterns
can be seen (Fig. 253). In the gear cluster west of the Ledge (track 2), only lobster
vessels were seen. In the gear cluster on the east of the Ledge (track 3), only gill net
vessels were seen. Along the center of the Ledge itself, where buoys were very common,
both gill net and lobster fishing vessels were seen, with gill net boats more common.
Hence, it is likely that west of the Ledge lobster fishing strongly predominates; the area
east of the Ledge is used almost exclusively by gill net fishing; and the Ledge itself can
be used by either, with gill net fishing more common than lobster fishing. Whether this
variation is due to differing bottom topography, or the proximity to the shoreline of Cape
Ann (since lobster boats are typically smaller than gill net vessels and may not have the
same range) is unknown.
While the northern half of the study area received far less human use than the southern
half, there was a consistent scattering of buoys, especially prevalent on the shallow
waters of “the Fingers” of Jeffreys Ledge (Blocks C and D of Fig. 23). Most of the
fishing vessels sighted in this region were lobster boats (Fig. 25). There was relatively
little fishing effort in the northeastern section of the study area. This is probably a
combination of the relatively large distance from nearby ports, and the inclusion of much
of it in the “Western Gulf of Maine closure,” an area where fishing for “ground-fish”
(bottom dwelling species such as cod and haddock) was banned throughout the study
period in order to promote recovery of fish stocks. However, only one lobster boat was
sighted east of the Ledge, most of the sightings were still of gill net boats, although these
were far fewer than those seen further south in the study area.
While commercial fishing was relatively common on the Ledge, sightings of commercial
ships were not frequent. Most of the commercial traffic seen were either large ships
traversing the waters well to the east of our study area, or tugs with tows that traveled
directly through the study area.
Human Risk to Right Whales
Jeffreys Ledge is like many other North Atlantic right whale habitats in that the whales
share the area with a myriad of human uses, some of which are known to be serious
threats to right whales. However, there seems to be some spatial separation of right
whales and human uses on a small scale within the study area. Right whales were more
prevalent in the northern portion of the study area, while fishing activity was biased
towards the southern portion of the study area, allowing spatial separation at some times.
Similarly, since there is no designated shipping lane through the area, commercial vessel
traffic is less prevalent than in other habitats such as the Great South Channel or Cape
3
This analysis includes only 2005-2007 sightings, as not all fixed gear fishing vessels were identified to
fishery (gill net or lobster) in 2003-4).
15
Cod Bay. Nonetheless, whales are in close proximity to, and are likely at risk from,
human impacts when they are present on Jeffreys Ledge.
The relative risk to whales presented by fixed fishing gear activity and commercial
vessels is shown in Fig. 28-31. All four analyses show the highest degree of risk to
whales coming in quadrant L. This quadrant received moderate use by whales, and very
heavy human use, especially by fishers. While commercial ships were less common in
the entire area, this cell clearly stood out when sightings of each were multiplied. Most,
although not all, of the commercial ship sightings in that cell were tugs and tows.
Other Cetacean Sightings
A range of other cetaceans were seen during our surveys. Plots of both mysticete and
odontocete sightings for each year are shown in Fig. 32-39. As with right whales,
numbers and locations of each species were variable between years. For each commonly
seen species, density of sightings by quadrants is presented in Fig. 40-45.
Sei whales (Balaenoptera borealis) are often thought to be sympatric and possibly
competitive with right whales (Mitchell 1975; Payne et al. 1990). Sei whales were also
seen during our study (No sightings in 2004; one sighting of two animals during 2005;
seven sightings of seven animals in 2006, and 31 sightings of 41-55 animals during
2007). It is interesting to note how different the quadrants of sei whale sighting density
were when compared with right whales (Fig. 40). While some sei whales were seen in
cell H, where right whales were most prevalent, they were more common further north
(cell C) and especially east of the Ledge (cell I), where right whales were only
moderately abundant. Whether this suggests that the species are using different prey
sources, or exploiting their prey differently (e.g. at different depths) remains unknown.
Rorqual whales (humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), fin whales (Balaenoptera
physalus), and minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata)) shared certain features of
their distribution. They were all found most commonly in cell L, where the Ledge
widens to the NE (likely creating upwelling and notable marine productivity), to a lesser
extent, in cell I along the eastern margin of the Ledge. Cell L is also the one that receives
the highest use from humans, suggesting that risk of impact during the study period
extends beyond just right whales.
While there was not a strong or systematic emphasis on photo-identification of any of the
other species besides right whales, we did try to photo-identify humpback whales
wherever possible. Humpbacks were approached for identification if they were on or
near the trackline, at times where limited daylight was unlikely to limit our time with
right whales, or at times where they were aggregated with other species (as described in
Weinrich and Sardi 2004). Many of the identified whales were not among those seen
regularly in the southern Gulf of Maine during the earlier portions of the season. These
identifications were added to the on-going long term studies of Gulf of Maine humpbacks
and, where appropriate, fluke photographs were contributed to either the oceanic fluke
16
catalog at the College of the Atlantic and the Humpback Whale Naming Workshop cohosted by The Whale Center of New England and The Provincetown Center for Coastal
Studies. Our results suggest that additional efforts on these whales may prove
worthwhile.
In addition to the more regularly sighted species, we also saw one blue whale during a
survey on 26 October 2007. This turned out to be the third blue whale identified on
Jeffreys Ledge between 15 September and 30 October, and represented a new whale to
the North Atlantic blue whale catalog (R. Sears, pers. comm.).
Among odontocetes, it is notable that other than 2004, sightings were far more common
in deeper water than over the Ledge itself (Fig. 35, 37, 39) and, in 2007, they were only
seen in deep waters around the northern portion of the study area. Atlantic white-sided
dolphin sightings, in particular, decreased annually throughout the study period.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the research team who collected data in often harsh and cold
conditions. Observers and data collectors who were especially helpful included Michelle
Anderson, Tracy Bowen, Claudio Corbelli, Katie Craig, Laura Ganley, Kathy Gilmore,
Allison Glass, Jonathan Gwalthney, Jay Frontierro, Nancy Heins, Cyndy McInnis, Amy
Smith, and Jennifer Spross, among others. Interns at the Whale Center of New England
in each fall collected field data on effort and sightings, and were very helpful. Captains
Marc Cunningham, Sean Cunningham, and Jeff Eagan, were not only skilled boat
handlers around whales, but often had very good insight into the daily research plan, were
always very helpful in spotting whales, and were always a pleasure to work around. The
owners and operators of Capt. Bill and Sons Whale Watch, especially Capt. Marc
Cunningham, were very helpful in arranging logistics and providing vessel support, at
times at very short notice. Dr. Charles Mayo and Moriah Bessinger of the Provincetown
Center for Coastal Studies were gracious with their time and advice in designing our
plankton sampling scheme and in training Whale Center staff in the necessary techniques.
National Marine Fisheries Service personnel, especially Dr. Phil Clapham, Richard
Merrick, and Richard Pace provided guidance on the study at key times, and were both
helpful and encouraging overall. The Cornell Bioacoustics Research Team, especially
Dr. Chris Clark, was also helpful and encouraging throughout. In 2006 and 2007,
funding for the study was provided by grants from The Marisla Foundation and The
Davis Conservation Foundation. Research on this project was conducted under Marine
Mammal and Endangered Species Research Permit # 605-1607.
Literature Cited
Agler, B.A., Beard, J.A., Bowman, R.S., Corbett, H.D., Frohock, S.E., Hawvermale, M.P.,
Katona, S.E., Sadove, S.S., and Seipt, I.E. 1990. Finback whale, Balaenoptera physalus,
photographic identification: methodology and preliminary results from the Western North
Atlantic. Spec. Rep. Int. Whal. Comm. 12.: 349-356.
17
CETAP, 1982. A characterization of marine mammals and turtles in the mid- and north Atlantic
areas of the U.S. outer continental shelf. Final Report of the Cetacean and Turtle
Assessment Program, University of Rhode Island to the Bureau of Land Management,
Washington D.C.
Kraus, S. D., M. J. Crone and A. R. Knowlton. 1988. The North Atlantic right whale. Pp.
684-698 in: W. J. Chandler (ed). Audubon Wildlife Report, 1988/1989. Academic Press,
New York, NY.
Mate, B.R., S.L. Nieukirk, and S.D. Kraus. 1997. Satellite monitored movements of the northern
right whale. Journal of Wildlife Management 61: 1393-1405.
Mayo, C.A., and M.K. Marx. 1990. Surface foraging behavior of the North Atlantic right whale,
Eubalaena glacialis, and associated zooplankton characteristics. Canadian Journal of
Zoology 68: 2214-2220
Mayo, C.A., Letcher, B.H., and Scott, S. 2001. Zooplankton filtering efficiency of the baleen of
a North Atlantic right whale, Eubalaena glacialis. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. (Special
Issue) 2, 225-229.
Mitchell, E.D. 1975. Trophic relationships and competition for food in northwest Atlantic
whales. Proc. Can. Soc. Zool. Ann. Mtg:123-133. (SC/26/35)
Payne, P.N., Wiley, D., Young, S., Pittman, S., Clapham, P.J., and Jossi, J.W. 1990. Recent
fluctuations in the abundance of baleen whales in the southern Gulf of Maine in relation
to changes in prey abundance. Fish. Bull. U.S. 88: 687-696.
Weinrich, M. 1998. Early experience in habitat choice by humpback whales (Megaptera
novaeangliae). J. Mamm 79: 163-170.
Weinrich, M., M. Martin, R. Griffiths, J. Bove, and M. Schilling. 1997. A shift in distribution of
humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in response to prey in the southern Gulf of
Maine. Fishery Bulletin 95: 826-836.
Weinrich, M.T, R.D. Kenney, and P.K. Hamilton. 2000. Right Whales (Eubalaena glacialis) on
Jeffreys Ledge: A Habitat of Unrecognized Importance? Mar. Mamm. Sci. 16: 326-337.
Weinrich, M. and KA. Sardi. 2004. Surveys for North Atlantic Right Whales (Eubalaena
glacialis) on Jeffreys Ledge: Fall 2003. Final report to National Marine Fisheries
Service in fulfillment of contract # NA03NMF4720494.
Winn, H.E., Price, C.A., and Sorensen, P.W. 1986. The distributional biology of the right whale
(Eubalaena glacialis) in the western North Atlantic. Rep. Int. Whaling Comm. (Special
Issue 10): 129-138.
18
Table 1. North Atlantic right whale survey effort details, fall 2004
Survey
Number
04-01RW
04-02RW
04-03RW
Date
9/15/2004
9/21/2004
9/24/2004
Track 1
1
1
3
Track 2
3
2
2
Right
whales?
No
No
No
# Right
Whales
0
0
0
04-04RW
9/27/2004
N/A
N/A
No
0
04-05RW
04-06RW
10/1/2004
10/4/2004
3
1
1
2
No
No
0
0
Fog on both legs
04-07RW
10/8/2004
2
1
No
0
Fog on upper 1/3 of E leg
04-08RW
10/13/2004
1
3
Yes
3
SAG
04-09RW
10/14/2004
2
3
Yes
2
04-10RW
04-11RW
04-12RW
04-13RW
10/29/2004
11/2/2004
11/4/2004
11/10/2004
3
1
3
1
2
2
2
2
No
Yes
No
Yes
0
1
0
1
Deployed 4 pop-ups
04-14RW
11/16/2004
3
2
Yes
3
Skim feeding
04-15RW
11/18/2004
2
1
Yes
6
Skim feeding
04-16RW
11/19/2004
N/A
N/A
Yes
4
Directed photo-ID cruise;
skim feeding
04-17RW
11/23/2004
1
3
Yes
14
04-18RW
11/27/2004
N/A
N/A
Yes
4
04-19RW
04-20RW
04-21RW
11/30/2004
12/4/2004
12/9/2004
1
3
1
2
2
2
No
No
No
0
0
0
04-22RW
12/12/2004
N/A
N/A
No
0
Aborted due to rough seas
04-23RW
12/16/2004
3
2
No
0
Replaced pop-ups; survey
aborted on leg 2 - seas
04-24RW
12/18/2004
1
2
No
0
04-25RW
12/22/2004
3
1
No
0
04-26RW
12/30/2004
1
2
No
0
Notes
Became directed search
1/2 way up 1st leg
Skim feeding & SAG
Ran S 1/2 of all 3 legs
19
20
Table 2. Fall 2005 – Winter 2006 North Atlantic right whale survey effort details.
Date
9/19/2005
9/23/2005
9/28/2005
10/3/2005
10/18/2005
10/21/2005
10/28/2005
10/31/2005
11/5/2005
CruiseNo
RW01
RW02
RW03
RW04
RW05
RW06
RW07
RW08
RW09
Right
whales?
Track 1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
3
2
Track 2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
3
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
11/8/2005
RW10
1
3
11/12/2005
11/19/2005
11/21/2005
11/26/2005
11/28/2005
12/5/2005
RW11
RW12
RW13
RW14
RW15
RW16
N/A
3
1
3
1
1
N/A
2
2
2
3
N/A
N
Y
N
N
Y
12/12/2005
RW17
2
3
N
12/19/2005
12/21/2005
12/28/2005
1/6/2006
1/10/2006
1/13/2006
1/17/2006
1/24/2006
RW18
RW19
RW20
RW21
RW22
RW23
RW24
RW25
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
N/A
3
3
3
2
3
3
2
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
# Right
whales
Comment
Both legs aborted due to fog
Track 3 aborted due to fog
Track 3 aborted due to rough
seas
1
1 Probable
1
2
21
Table 3. Fall 2006 North Atlantic right whale survey effort details
Comments
Neither leg completed
Date
CruiseNo Leg 1
Leg 2
# Eg
16-Oct-06 RW01
1
2
19-Oct-06 RW02
2
3
24-Oct-06 RW03
N/A
N/A
27-Oct-06 RW04
1
2
31-Oct-06 RW05
2
3
05-Nov-06 RW06
1
2
06-Nov-06 RW07
2
3
11-Nov-06 RW08
2
3
15-Nov-06 RW09
2
3
18-Nov-06 RW10
1
2
20-Nov-06 RW11
2
3
22-Nov-06 RW12
1
2
27-Nov-06 RW13
2
3
29-Nov-06 RW14
N/A
N/A
03-Dec-06 RW15
N/A
N/A
11-Dec-06 RW16
1
3
14-Dec-06 RW17
1
2
1
0
Rough Seas - Aborted
0
0
2
0
2
8
8
7
5
8
7
0 Directed cruise to right whale area
0 Zig-zagging because of weather
6
0
Table 4. Fall 2007 North Atlantic right whale survey effort details
CruiseNo
RW01
RW02
RW03
RW04
RW05
RW06
RW07
RW08
RW09
RW10
Date
15-Oct-07
18-Oct-07
22-Oct-07
26-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
02-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
12-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
RW11
RW12
RW13
20-Nov-07
26-Nov-07
05-Dec-07
Leg 1 Leg 2
N/A
N/A
1
2
2
3
1
2
2
3
1
2
2
3
1
2
2
3
1
2
N/A
2
1
N/A
3
2
# Eg
Comments
0 Aborted - Rough Seas
3
20
12
Blue whale!
15
6
15
11
6
11
7
4
8
Directed cruise
22
Table 5. Right whales photographed on Jeffreys Ledge surveys, Fall 2004
EGNO
Sex
Age
Class
Month
Day
1283
1306
1803
1266
3466
1245
1306
1321
2617
3421
1321
2240
2460
2617
3420
3421
M
M
M
F
M
F
M
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
M
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
J
C
A
A
A
J
C
C
10
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
13
13
13
14
14
17
2
16
16
16
18
18
18
18
18
18
1321
F
A
11
19
2240
2617
1131
1156
1250
1250
1607
1607
1706
1804
1804
2201
2201
2240
2340
1320
1321
2240
3421
F
F
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
M
M
M
M
F
M
M
F
F
M
A
J
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
19
19
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
27
27
27
27
Latitude
Longitude
43.0667
43.0667
43.0667
42.9617
42.9617
42.7017
43.0317
42.8483
43.0083
42.8483
42.86
42.8567
42.9
42.8833
42.9
69.96833
69.97833
69.97833
70.23333
70.23333
70.37167
70.16
70.38667
70.23667
70.38667
70.25667
70.25333
70.13
70.28833
70.13
42.86
70.25667
42.865
70.53
42.865
42.85
42.7667
42.7783
42.7717
42.66
42.7717
42.77
42.7717
42.7783
42.66
42.77
42.7733
42.85
42.7717
42.7083
42.8133
42.6483
42.8133
70.53
70.38167
70.345
70.42833
70.34667
70.295
70.345
70.33833
70.345
70.42833
70.295
70.43
70.345
70.33833
70.34833
70.36
70.31833
70.42167
70.31833
Behaviors
SAG
SAG
SAG
W/CALF
CALF W/MOM
SKM FD, W/CALF
CALF W/MOM, SKM FD
SKM FD, W/CALF
SKM FD
SKM FD, W/CALF
SKM FD
CALF W/MOM, SKM FD
CALF W/MOM, CO FD,
SKM FD
SKM FD, W/CALF
UNPH
SKM FD
SKM FD
SKM FD
ECH, SKM FD
SKM FD
SKM FD
SKM FD
ECH, SKM FD
SKM FD
SKM FD
SKM FD
W/CALF
CALF W/MOM
Table 6. Right whales photographed on Jeffreys Ledge surveys, Fall-Winter 2005-2006.
Two individuals have yet to be identified by the catalog.
EGNO
Sex
Age
Age Class
Month
Day
Latitude
Longitude
1039
F
25
A
11
21
43.1422
70.063
2709
M
8
J
12
28
42.7905
70.27667
Behaviors
SAG
23
Table 7. 2006 right whale sightings
Lat
Cruise
RW01
RW01
RW01
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
Date
16-Oct-06
16-Oct-06
16-Oct-06
31-Oct-06
31-Oct-06
31-Oct-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
06-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
11-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
15-Nov-06
Long
#
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
Behavior
Circling
42
59.17
70
17.17
43
43
43
42
43
43
42
42
42
42
42
43
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
43
43
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
07.41
07.28
07.48
55.01
08.10
07.71
54.87
54.85
54.67
54.4
54.4
07.98
56.00
53.54
53.31
54.90
54.93
54.93
54.57
54.55
55.76
56.07
56.10
47.11
46.97
47.05
54.54
46.77
54.52
57.17
58.03
07.41
00.04
59.84
57.54
57.49
57.21
58.03
57.39
58.08
57.97
069
069
069
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
57.94
57.65
57.61
20.60
09.99
09.84
20.49
20.38
20.42
20.6
20.6
09.91
15.56
14.69
15.43
15.81
16.05
16.04
15.86
16.42
15.88
15.42
15.40
17.66
18.28
18.77
16.44
19.43
16.57
15.71
01.28
08.61
11.87
11.22
15.65
15.58
15.71
01.26
15.87
01.45
01.33
Circling
Straight Line
Subsfc Undet
Subsfc Undet
Mod Dives
Display
Mod Dives
Straight Line
Straight Line
Straight Line
Straight Line
Social
Straight Line
Social
Social
Social
24
Lat
Cruise
RW10
RW10
RW10
Date
18-Nov-06
18-Nov-06
18-Nov-06
RW11
RW11
RW11
RW11
Long
#
Behavior
5
2
1
42
42
42
56.98
57.22
57.42
070
070
070
17.64
17.87
18.37
20-Nov-06
20-Nov-06
20-Nov-06
20-Nov-06
1
1
1
1
42
42
42
42
56.07
58.98
55.47
55.95
070
070
070
070
15.45
13.21
18.32
17.48
RW11
20-Nov-06
1
42
55.89
070
16.20
RW11
RW11
20-Nov-06
20-Nov-06
1
1
42
42
56.12
56.37
070
070
15.26
14.64
RW11
RW12
RW12
RW12
20-Nov-06
22-Nov-06
22-Nov-06
22-Nov-06
1
1
1
1
42
42
43
42
56.01
56.13
05.08
57.09
070
070
070
070
16.07
17.61
10.35
18.28
RW12
22-Nov-06
1
42
55.73
070
16.26
RW12
22-Nov-06
1
42
54.05
070
19.33
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW16
22-Nov-06
22-Nov-06
22-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
27-Nov-06
11-Dec-06
11-Dec-06
11-Dec-06
11-Dec-06
11-Dec-06
11-Dec-06
11-Dec-06
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
43
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
53.53
57.95
56.31
56.29
53.46
57.31
57.35
59.22
58.99
02.63
53.49
52.77
59.31
59.46
56.60
56.43
56.51
54.63
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
19.28
17.89
16.24
12.53
16.52
13.67
13.49
10.87
10.67
00.47
16.89
01.41
04.62
05.08
08.74
08.74
08.70
09.21
Long Dives
(flu)
Logging
Long Dives
(flu)
Long Dives
(flu)
Long Dives
(flu)
Long Dives
(flu)
Long Dives
(flu)
Long Dives
(flu)
Display
Social
Social
25
Table 8. 2007 right whale sightings
Lat
Lon
CruiseNo
RW02
RW02
RW02
RW03
RW03
RW03
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
Date
#
18-Oct-07 1 43
18-Oct-07 1 43
18-Oct-07 1 43
22-Oct-07 18 43
22-Oct-07 1 43
22-Oct-07 1 42
26-Oct-07 1 43
26-Oct-07 2 42
26-Oct-07 2 42
26-Oct-07 1 43
26-Oct-07 2 43
26-Oct-07 1 43
26-Oct-07 1 43
00.90
00.51
04.78
00.92
04.28
51.03
03.39
46.56
59.55
02.10
02.58
06.91
06.91
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
12.39
13.00
09.93
14.22
12.16
04.62
00.06
21.65
02.51
00.33
02.41
10.23
10.23
RW04
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW06
RW06
RW06
RW06
RW06
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
26-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
31-Oct-07
02-Nov-07
02-Nov-07
02-Nov-07
02-Nov-07
02-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
03.61
04.67
04.44
55.53
56.44
08.89
04.75
04.57
56.50
04.74
04.53
56.12
56.13
56.33
03.14
03.26
56.20
05.13
06.10
05.85
04.61
04.56
58.80
06.16
05.30
04.92
04.76
58.64
58.86
069
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
59.46
11.04
11.04
02.25
01.80
09.59
11.18
11.16
12.16
11.11
10.93
12.39
12.34
12.31
11.99
12.01
12.37
09.02
08.13
09.80
09.08
09.08
12.03
08.80
10.34
10.22
09.48
12.40
12.06
1 43
1 43
2 43
1 42
1 42
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 42
1 43
1 43
2 42
1 42
1 42
1 43
1 43
1 42
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 42
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
2 42
1 42
Behavior
SAG
Feeding
Mod Dives
Long Dives (flu)
Circling
Long Dives (flu)
Feeding, Mouth
Open
Long Dives (flu)
Long Dives (flu)
traveling
26
Lat
CruiseNo
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW11
RW11
RW11
RW11
RW11
RW11
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
Date
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
05-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
09-Nov-07
12-Nov-07
12-Nov-07
12-Nov-07
12-Nov-07
12-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
18-Nov-07
20-Nov-07
20-Nov-07
20-Nov-07
20-Nov-07
20-Nov-07
20-Nov-07
26-Nov-07
26-Nov-07
26-Nov-07
26-Nov-07
26-Nov-07
05-Dec-07
05-Dec-07
05-Dec-07
05-Dec-07
05-Dec-07
#
1 42
1 43
1 42
3 43
1 42
1 42
2 42
1 42
2 43
1 43
1 43
2 43
2 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
3 43
1 43
1 42
1 43
1 42
2 42
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
2 43
1 43
1 42
1 42
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
1 43
2 43
2 42
1 43
1 43
2 43
Lon
58.08
08.41
43.68
04.35
49.78
48.82
49.98
49.75
06.05
03.16
05.89
05.77
05.77
09.10
05.40
04.24
05.65
06.09
03.93
04.38
02.69
01.88
01.50
52.45
03.05
58.96
45.07
02.16
02.35
01.58
01.06
02.99
00.39
59.37
58.96
00.61
02.97
05.76
00.80
00.34
05.26
59.68
00.37
00.18
03.12
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
069
070
070
070
069
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
12.99
02.12
12.23
09.44
07.64
08.43
08.26
07.45
09.25
10.75
10.03
09.85
09.85
08.95
02.63
58.51
09.27
09.26
10.20
59.12
11.31
13.89
12.56
20.50
09.82
03.80
19.23
12.14
11.59
09.29
10.50
08.36
09.99
09.13
08.13
11.50
11.79
01.01
01.59
11.55
09.44
03.24
04.15
05.05
04.26
Behavior
Long Dives (flu)
Long Dives (flu)
SAG
Long Dives (flu)
SAG
SAG
Social
Breaching
Long Dives (flu)
traveling
Mod Dives
Long Dives (flu)
Long Dives (flu)
traveling
traveling, nursing
Mod Dives
Mod Dives
traveling
Mod Dives
Mod Dives
Long Dives (flu)
traveling
Long Dives (flu)
traveling
traveling
Long Dives (flu)
traveling
w/ calf, social w/lags
traveling
traveling
traveling
27
Table 9. Plankton samples, 2004. Sampling types were 19 m oblique tows (O) and 5min surface tows (S). See text for details of sampling equipment and protocols.
Survey
Number
Lat
Long
Type
Station
04-01RW
04-01RW
42 51.42
42 51.42
70 20.02
70 20.02
O
S
A
A
04-01RW
04-02RW
04-02RW
04-02RW
43 06.90
42 50.51
43 06.88
43 06.88
70 07.95
70 19.47
70 07.96
70 08.04
O
O
O
S
B
A
B
B
04-03RW
04-04RW
04-04RW
04-04RW
04-04RW
04-05RW
04-05RW
04-06RW
04-06RW
04-08RW
04-08RW
04-08RW
04-09RW
04-11RW
42 48.09
42 51.09
42 51.09
42 54.77
42 54.69
42 51.26
42 51.26
42 50.31
43 05.61
42 50.55
43 06.75
43 03.61
42 57.33
42 51.12
70 27.66
70 20.08
70 20.08
70 13.29
70 13.02
70 19.51
70 19.51
70 17.11
70 05.03
70 20.32
70 07.59
69 58.14
70 13.95
70 20.30
O
O
S
S
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W1
A
A
W1
W1
A
A
A
B
A
B
W1
W1
A
04-11RW
04-11RW
04-11RW
04-13RW
04-13RW
04-13RW
04-13RW
04-14RW
04-14RW
04-14RW
04-14RW
04-15RW
04-15RW
04-15RW
04-15RW
04-15RW
04-15RW
04-15RW
04-15RW
04-17RW
04-17RW
42 51.02
43 06.85
43 01.75
42 51.53
43 07.13
43 07.13
43 01.20
43 06.48
43 00.15
42 50.84
42 50.92
42 53.19
42 51.21
43 00.16
43 06.74
43 06.74
42 55.15
42 51.59
42 51.59
42 46.17
42 46.09
70 20.18
70 07.62
70 09.43
70 21.31
70 07.96
70 07.96
70 10.16
70 08.52
70 15.50
70 23.11
70 23.67
70 16.71
70 14.48
70 10.32
70 08.76
70 08.76
70 08.45
70 15.79
70 15.79
70 20.75
70 20.28
S
O
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
S
O
O
S
O
S
O
S
S
O
S
S
A
B
W1
A
B
B
W1
C
W1
W2
W2
W1
W2
C
B
B
W3
W4
W4
W1
W2
Notes
Current kept depth to
approx 25'
Current kept depth to
approx 25'
Mn plankton feeding near
surface
Cow-calf pair
Cow-calf pair
Cow-calf pair
Cow-calf pair
Cow-calf pair
Cow-calf pair
28
Survey
Number
04-17RW
04-17RW
04-17RW
04-17RW
04-18RW
04-18RW
04-18RW
04-19RW
04-19RW
04-19RW
04-20RW
04-20RW
04-20RW
04-21RW
04-21RW
04-21RW
04-22RW
04-22RW
04-23RW
04-24RW
04-24RW
04-24RW
04-25RW
04-25RW
04-25RW
04-26RW
04-26RW
04-26RW
Lat
42 50.98
42 54.55
42 38.95
42 51.022
42 50.67
42 50.67
42 42.41
43 07.04
43 07.04
42 56.19
42 54.50
42 54.39
43 00.13
42 51.19
42 59.87
42 59.61
42 54.08
42 53.91
42 54.04
43 06.89
43 00.45
43 00.28
42 53.95
42 51.25
42 51.25
42 51.24
42 51.24
42 59.82
Long
70 20.47
70 01.09
70 18.58
70 20.74
70 18.52
70 18.52
70 21.80
70 07.30
70 07.30
70 15.24
70 01.61
70 01.27
70 10.33
70 20.73
70 10.12
70 10.24
70 01.86
42 53.70
70 00.75
70 07.30
70 10.05
70 09.96
70 01.10
70 21.76
70 21.76
71 21.81
71 21.81
70 10.34
Type
(S)
O
O
S
S
S
O
O
O
S
O
S
O
O
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
O
S
O
S
O
Station
A
D
W3
A
A
A
W1
B
B
C
D
D
C
A
C
C
D
D
D
B
C
C
D
A
A
A
A
C
Notes
3-min tow
Gunshot - vocalizing
29
Lat
CruiseNo
RW01
RW01
RW01
RW02
RW02
RW02
RW03
RW03
RW04
RW05
RW05
RW06
RW06
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW10
RW10
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW14
RW14
RW14
RW15
RW15
RW15
RW16
RW17
RW17
RW18
RW18
Station
C
C
A
C
C
D
B
D
A
A
C
C
D
C
B
B
D
D
A
W1
D
C
C
B
B
C
C
D
C
C
W1
A
D
C
C
D
A
D
W1
C
C
W1
A
43
43
42
43
43
42
43
42
42
42
43
42
42
43
43
43
42
42
42
42
42
43
43
43
43
43
43
42
43
43
43
42
42
43
42
42
42
42
42
43
43
42
42
Lon
.0613
.0606
.8545
.0018
.0056
.9072
.12097
.95375
51.27
51.20
00.32
59.89
57.15
00.17
07.05
07.12
57.15
57.63
51.15
46.37
57.21
00.39
00.11
07.86
07.75
00.22
00.22
56.98
00.24
00.29
08.19
51.18
57.10
00.10
00.10
57.07
51.27
57.07
49.98
00.30
00.21
37.42
51.15
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
.1609
.1624
.2341
.1836
.1823
.0222
.14188
.01913
21.69
21.02
10.58
10.38
00.98
10.20
07.85
07.88
00.59
00.09
20.66
08.31
00.58
10.19
10.35
05.23
05.55
10.29
10.29
00.58
10.03
10.43
04.49
20.70
00.59
10.13
10.13
00.74
20.65
00.72
24.46
10.23
10.43
34.90
20.41
Type
S
O
O
S
O
O
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
S
O
S
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
S
S
O
O
O
S
O
O
S
30
Lat
CruiseNo
RW18
RW19
RW19
RW19
RW20
RW20
RW20
RW20
RW21
RW21
RW21
RW22
RW22
RW23
RW23
RW23
RW24
RW24
RW24
RW25
RW25
RW25
Station
A
D
C
C
B
W1
D
B
D
C
C
C
C
D
A
A
C
D
D
B
C
B
42
42
43
43
43
42
42
43
42
43
43
42
42
42
42
42
43
42
42
43
43
43
Lon
51.15
57.19
00.63
00.63
07.21
48.05
57.22
07.28
57.24
00.05
00.10
59.98
59.83
57.09
51.06
51.06
00.50
56.84
56.72
07.05
00.02
07.03
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
20.51
01.15
09.96
09.96
07.65
17.00
01.11
07.65
01.12
10.33
10.30
10.14
09.56
01.09
20.51
20.69
10.53
01.00
01.04
07.91
10.69
07.85
Type
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
S
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
S
31
Survey
#
RW01
RW01
RW01
RW01
RW02
RW02
RW02
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW06
RW06
RW06
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW11
RW11
RW11
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW13
RW13
Station
A
W1
C
A
D
C
C
B
B
C
C
D
W1
C
B
A
A
W1
C
W2
D
W1
W1
C
W2
W2
W1
C
D
C
B
B
C
W1
W1
C
C
W2
W3
D
D
W1
W1
W2
Lat
42
42
43
42
42
43
43
43
43
43
43
42
43
43
43
42
42
42
43
43
42
42
42
42
42
43
42
43
42
43
43
43
42
42
42
43
42
42
43
42
42
42
42
42
50.58
59.29
00.21
50.58
57.13
00.18
00.25
06.88
06.88
00.12
00.23
57.15
07.38
00.19
06.88
50.89
50.88
55.32
00.48
08.40
48.18
47.14
47.48
59.60
55.68
08.34
57.59
00.07
57.90
00.37
06.77
06.97
59.79
56.82
55.97
00.08
59.96
57.63
05.30
57.06
56.96
53.53
59.22
53.57
Long
70
70
70
70
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
069
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
20.09
17.18
10.37
20.09
00.73
10.33
10.69
08.25
07.93
10.37
10.10
00.68
57.72
10.05
07.70
20.24
20.23
19.76
09.98
09.55
07.77
17.67
17.89
10.55
16.01
08.37
14.84
11.82
00.94
11.94
07.79
07.23
11.11
16.68
16.06
10.58
09.82
18.13
10.38
02.17
02.18
19.28
10.93
16.94
Type
S
O
O
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
O
O
S
O
O
S
S
S
S
S
O
S
O
S
O
O
O
O
S
O
S
O
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
32
Survey
#
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW15
RW15
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW16
RW17
RW17
RW17
Station
D
C
C
C
C
D
D
C
W1
W2
W3
D
C
C
Lat
42
42
42
43
43
42
42
43
42
42
42
42
43
43
57.13
59.37
59.49
02.61
02.50
57.20
57.30
06.86
59.51
56.34
54.18
57.14
00.26
00.46
Long
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
00.70
10.63
10.59
08.67
08.62
00.40
00.36
08.36
05.26
08.68
09.49
01.27
10.30
09.75
Type
O
S
O
S
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
O
O
S
33
Survey
#
RW02
RW02
RW02
RW02
RW02
RW02
RW03
RW03
RW03
RW03
RW03
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW04
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW05
RW06
RW06
RW06
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW07
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW08
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
RW09
Station
A
W4
W3
W1
A
W2
W1
W2
W3
D
D
W1
C
W3
C
A
W4
W2
D
W2
C
D
W1
W3
C
B
B
W2
W3
C
C
W1
W2
B
B
W3
C
W1
W1
D
C
W2
W3
C
Lat
42
43
43
42
42
43
43
43
42
42
42
43
43
43
43
42
42
43
42
43
42
42
42
42
43
43
43
42
43
43
43
42
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
42
43
43
43
43
51.14
00.40
04.79
57.59
51.14
07.70
04.33
04.18
50.96
56.52
57.08
06.78
00.25
03.61
00.21
51.31
46.56
03.26
57.07
04.63
59.98
57.05
56.11
56.20
00.24
07.04
07.05
50.02
08.46
00.42
00.39
44.39
09.08
06.93
06.99
06.20
00.10
05.22
04.18
57.150
00.05
06.103
03.99
00.06
Lon
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
70
070
070
070
070
070
069
70
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
069
070
070
070
070
070
20.25
13.23
10.23
00.61
20.69
08.11
12.00
12.26
04.68
01.17
01.16
10.20
10.19
59.46
10.31
20.75
21.56
00.57
01.14
11.16
10.50
01.11
02.02
12.33
10.26
07.96
07.96
08.18
01.92
10.53
10.59
11.04
09.10
08.21
08.03
09.33
10.28
02.11
58.66
00.651
10.69
09.191
09.96
10.66
Type
O
O
O
S
S
S
O
O
O
S
O
O
S
S
O
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
34
Survey
#
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW10
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW12
RW13
RW13
RW13
RW13
Station
C
W4
W3
B
B
W2
W1
C
D
W1
D
C
B
B
w1
Lat
43
43
43
43
43
42
42
43
42
43
42
43
43
43
42
00.16
01.48
02.37
06.81
06.81
59.59
45.772
00.12
56.33
00.77
56.57
00.29
06.90
06.86
59.67
Lon
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
070
10.56
13.87
11.60
08.15
08.16
04.29
19.542
10.67
01.55
02.42
01.53
10.02
08.01
08.01
03.07
Type
O
O
O
S
O
O
O
O
O
O
S
O
S
O
O
35
Table 13. Mean zooplankton/m3 (zpl/m3) on cruises where right whales were seen and
those when they were not for all stations.
N
All Samples
W/ whales
W/out whales
Mean
SD
141
110
1472.6
348.4
3742.2
786
Oblique Samples
W/ whales
W/out whales
69
61
1705.3
446.1
4827.1
964.9
Surface Samples
W/ whales
W/out whales
72
49
1249.5
226.9
2279.2
460.9
Table 14. Mean zpl/m3 per sample at the four reference stations and at whale-directed
sampling stations.
N
All Samples
Reference
Station
Whale Station
Mean
SD
177
74
417.8
2324.4
730.8
4996.4
Oblique Samples
Reference
Station
Whale Station
92
38
542.7
2498.8
907.1
6396.4
Surface Samples
Reference
Station
Whale Station
85
36
282.7
2140.3
438.2
2957.5
Table 15. Mean zpl/m3 per sample at the four reference stations for all cruises on which
right whales were seen.
N
All Samples
Station A
Station B
Station C
Station D
24
21
18
11
Mean
463
547
511.8
687.8
SD
492.4
632.8
767.3
766.3
36
Table 16. Mean zpl/m3 per sample in each year of the study.
N
Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007*
Mean
48
69
64
40
30
889.7
894.7
208
889.8
3087.2
SD
2000.6
1605.7
612.1
1897.8
6962.9
*2007 based on a portion of the year’s total samples; see text.
37
Table 17. Human use sightings per cruise, per year, and cumulative through the period.
Survey
#
2004
001RW
002RW
003RW
004RW
005RW
006RW
007RW
008RW
009RW
010RW
011RW
012RW
013RW
014RW
015RW
016RW
017RW
018RW
019RW
020RW
021RW
022RW
023RW
024RW
025RW
026RW
Sum
Mean
SD
2005
RW01
RW02
RW03
RW04
RW05
RW06
RW07
RW08
Fishing Gear
Commercial
Vessel
Fishing
Vessel
Other Vessel
Whale Watch
28
53
31
39
8
32
11
30
14
17
46
17
40
14
33
29
26
28
27
19
38
2
7
33
20
41
0
4
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
2
1
3
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
12
9
11
5
1
4
3
11
10
5
15
6
16
6
11
8
9
13
16
5
12
0
2
9
6
15
1
11
2
4
0
0
5
3
1
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
683
26.26923077
12.76732609
20
0.769230769
1.069866994
220
8.461538462
4.649565737
33
1.269230769
2.474796029
1
0.038461538
19
11
32
25
20
11
41
39
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
7
3
8
6
15
3
11
11
14
4
5
9
1
3
5
6
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
38
Survey
#
RW09
RW10
RW11
RW12
RW13
RW14
RW15
RW16
RW17
RW18
RW19
RW20
RW21
RW22
RW23
RW24
RW25
Fishing Gear
7
24
3
24
44
17
25
8
15
4
19
12
32
41
31
33
55
Sum
Mean
SD
2006
RW01
RW02
RW04
RW05
RW06
RW07
RW08
RW09
RW10
RW11
RW12
RW13
RW15
RW16
RW17
Sum
Mean
SD
2007
RW02
RW03
RW04
RW05
Commercial
Vessel
Fishing
Vessel
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
0
0
0
5
1
4
13
7
19
6
4
8
3
17
5
8
16
5
8
Other Vessel
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
Whale Watch
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
592
23.68
13.67089366
9
0.36
0.56862407
193
7.72
5.054041287
52
2.08
3.499047489
2
0.08
0.4
23
24
32
26
14
19
33
14
51
12
23
39
12
16
29
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
1
0
20
7
11
3
16
1
13
4
11
4
1
2
4
2
5
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
367
24.46666667
11.03155647
10
0.666666667
1.046536237
104
6.933333333
5.897537824
8
0.533333333
0.743223353
1
0.066666667
0.25819889
21
5
14
9
0
0
0
2
11
5
7
2
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
39
Survey
#
RW06
RW07
RW08
RW09
RW10
RW12
RW13
Fishing Gear
18
8
22
20
18
15
18
Sum
Mean
SD
Overall
Sum
Overall
Mean
Overall
SD
Commercial
Vessel
Fishing
Vessel
1
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
3
14
4
11
3
8
Other Vessel
1
1
0
3
0
0
0
Whale Watch
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
168
15.27272727
5.67610622
7
0.636363636
0.809039835
68
6.181818182
4.400413204
10
0.909090909
1.136181804
1
0.090909091
0.301511345
1810
46
585
103
5
23.50649351
0.597402597
7.597402597
1.337662338
0.064935065
12.32522379
0.892361448
4.976946169
2.547498203
0.296366698
40
41
Fig. 2. The survey vessel, the m/v Miss Cape Ann.
42
Fig 3. The study area broken into 10’ x 10’ grids, with each sector assigned an identifying letter
43
Fig. 4. Survey effort in Fall 2004. Each point represents the position of the vessel at 10-minute intervals regardless of activity.
44
Fig. 5. Survey effort in Fall 2005-January 2006. Each point represents the vessel at 10-minute intervals regardless of activity.
45
46
47
Fig. 8. Right whale sightings during Fall 2004.
48
Fig. 9. Right whale sightings during Fall 2005 – January 2006.
49
50
51
Fig. 12. Right whale sightings in all survey years, 2003-2007.
52
Fig. 13. Analysis of relative use of right whales in 10’ x 10’ squares in the study area, based on all right whale sightings 2003-2007.
Darker cells indicate higher use.
53
Fig. 14. Locations of bottom-mounted autonomous hydrophones, fall 2004-winter 2005.
54
Fig. 15. Locations of fixed fishing gear markers, fall 2004.
55
Fig. 16. Locations of vessels, fall 2004.
56
Fig. 17. Locations of fixed fishing gear markers, fall 2005 – January 2006.
57
Fig. 18. Locations of vessels, fall 2005 – January 2006.
58
Fig. 19. Locations of fixed fishing gear markers, fall 2006
59
Fig. 20. Locations of vessels, fall 2006
60
Fig. 21. Locations of fixed fishing gear markers, fall 2007
61
Fig. 22. Locations of vessels, fall 2007
62
Fig 23. Relative usage of the study area in 10’ x 10’ quadrants for fixed fishing gear markers, 2003-2007.
63
Fig 24. Relative usage of the study area in 10’ x 10’ quadrants for all vessels, 2003-2007.
64
Fig. 25. Overlay of fixed gear fishing vessels over buoy sightings, 2005-2007.
65
Fig 26. Relative use of the study area in 10’ x 10’ quadrants for fishing vessels, 2003-2007.
66
Fig 27. Relative use of the study area in 10’ x 10’ quadrants for large commercial vessels including tugs with tows, 2003-2007.
67
Fig. 28. Relative overlap between right whale sightings and fixed fishing gear markers in 10’ x 10’ quadrants, 2003-2007
68
Fig. 29. Relative degrees of risk between right whale sightings and fixed fishing gear markers in 10’ x 10’ quadrants, 2003-2007,
calculated by multiplication of sightings x markers
69
Fig. 30. Relative degrees of overlap between right whale sightings and commercial vessels in 10’ x 10’ quadrants, 2003-2007
70
Fig. 31. Relative degrees of risk between right whale sightings and commercial vessels in 10’ x 10’ quadrants, 2003-2007, calculated
by multiplication of sightings x vessels
71
Fig. 32. Mysticete sightings during fall 2004 surveys.
72
Fig. 33. Odontocete sightings during fall 2004 surveys.
73
Fig. 34. Mysticete sightings during fall 2005 – January 2006 surveys.
74
Fig. 35. Odontocete sightings during fall 2005 – January 2006 surveys.
75
76
77
78
79
Fig 40. Analysis of relative use of sei whales (Balaenoptera borealis) in 10’ x 10’ squares in the study area, based on all right whale
sightings 2003-2007. Darker cells indicate higher use.
80
Fig 41. Analysis of relative use of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in 10’ x 10’ squares in the study area, based on all
right whale sightings 2003-2007. Darker cells indicate higher use.
81
Fig 42. Analysis of relative use of fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) in 10’ x 10’ squares in the study area, based on all right whale
sightings 2003-2007. Darker cells indicate higher use.
82
Fig 43. Analysis of relative use of minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in 10’ x 10’ squares in the study area, based on all
right whale sightings 2003-2007. Darker cells indicate higher use.
83
Fig 44. Analysis of relative use of Atlantic white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus acutus) in 10’ x 10’ squares in the study area,
based on all right whale sightings 2003-2007. Darker cells indicate higher use.
84
Fig 45. Analysis of relative use of harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in 10’ x 10’ squares in the study area, based on all right
whale sightings 2003-2007. Darker cells indicate higher use.
85
Appendix 1
Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies Sub-Contract Report
Studies of the Zooplankton Resource Associated with the
North Atlantic Right Whale Habitat on Jeffreys Ledge, MA,
2003 to 2006
Charles A. Mayo, David J. Osterberg, and Moriah K. Bessinger
86
87

Fall Boat-Based Surveys on Jeffreys Ledge for North Atlantic Right

Transcription

Similar documents

File - THE BONGO BROTHERS

2015 Wag A Thon - Dana Point Festival of Whales

Report on blue whales sightings (Balaenoptera musculus Linnaeus

NADAIR 2 PROJECTS 82 AND 83 2005 TO 2008 FINAL REPORT

The Diamond - Celebrate Me Week

PrimeFilm 1800 AFL Low-Cost 35mm Slide/Film Scanning Through

Expedition travel aboard the schooner Passing Cloud

Статья

The Killers of Provincetown

2007-2008 Ducati Monster S4R/S

The Great Whales - Marine Mammal Institute

Killer Whale - Orca Network