DOCSLIB.ORG

22629 Application

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
22629 Application Project Information File Number #22629 *Project Title Health-related Research on beluga whales conducted at Mystic Aquarium to contribute knowledge and inform management and recovery of wild beluga populations, including the ESA-endangered Cook Inlet and MMPA-depleted Sakhalin Bay-Nikolaya Bay-Amur River beluga populations. *Project Status New Previous Federal or State Permit # NMFS Parts Permit #21966 (Issued 3/30/2018) Scientific Research/Enhancement Permit #42-1642 (Expired 10/15/2007) Scientific Research/Enhancement Permit #42-1908 (Expired 1/31/2014) *Permits Requested MMPA Research permit *Where Will the Activities Occur? Transport of animals will occur from Marineland, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada to Mystic Aquarium, Mystic, CT USA. Research activities will occur at Mystic Aquarium, 55 Coogan Boulevard, Mystic, CT 06355 USA. Mystic Aquarium has a formal partnership agreement with Georgia Aquarium that includes research, animal exchanges, education and PR initiatives (See Appendix 1 Georgia_Mystic_Partnership). If deemed in the best interest of an individual beluga or the US beluga population for social, health, or welfare reasons, animals may be moved to Georgia Aquarium (Georgia Aquarium, 225 Baker Street NW, Atlanta, GA USA) which has agreed to participate in the described research studies and sample collections that can be conducted as part of the routine health monitoring of the belugas housed at the aquarium. Georgia Aquarium is an accredited facility with experience in the care of belugas. *Research Timeframe The requested duration of the permit is for a 5-year period: January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2025. *Sampling Season/Project Duration Import is proposed to occur in January 2020. This permit is for continuous marine mammal health related research conducted on a daily basis at Mystic Aquarium. Research will occur continuously; there is no specific season or duration of the research. To gain the maximum knowledge that can be applied for beluga conservation, we are requesting the 5-year maximum for the permit. Training 1 for research activities is already part of the Mystic Aquarium husbandry protocol and will occur on a daily basis during regular scheduled training sessions. *Abstract We request to import 5 aquarium-born belugas (Delphinapterus leucas) from Marineland Canada to Mystic Aquarium for the purpose of conducting scientific health-related research over a 5 year period that will contribute knowledge and inform management and recovery of beluga populations in the wild, including the ESA-endangered Cook Inlet and MMPA-depleted Sakhalin Bay- Nikolaya Bay-Amur River beluga populations. Given the escalating pace of environmental and anthropogenic changes in the Arctic, it is critical to act as soon as possible. We are prepared to identify causes, measure impacts, and gather important data to help with the recovery of Cook Inlet, Sakhalin Bay-Nikolaya Bay-Amur River and other beluga populations. Certain information can only be gained from studying belugas under controlled conditions. It is essential for Aquarium scientists to collaborate with wildlife biologists and managers in order to utilize our collective expertise and resources. Through this type of collaborative research we can further our understanding of beluga biology and make strides in population recovery and conservation. The research includes investigations on 1) the neuroimmunological response to environmental and anthropogenic stressors, 2) the development of novel non-invasive techniques to assess health in free-ranging, stranded and endangered belugas, 3) the hearing and physiological response to anthropogenic sound, 4) morphometrics to inform photogrammetry studies, 5) diving physiology, 6) microbiome, 7) behavior and reproduction, and 8) testing of prototype telemetry and imaging devices before deployment on wild whales. Project Description Page *Project Purpose: Hypothesis/Objectives and Justification Study 1 (Neuroimmunological Response to Environmental and Anthropogenic Stressors) Specific Purpose: To continue to develop and ground truth biomarkers, reagents and diagnostics in belugas under controlled conditions in an aquarium setting in order to assess and monitor health and interpret findings in wild whales Hypothesis: Anthropogenic and environmental stressors elicit physiological responses, which may affect the immune system or health in marine mammals. Objectives: • To characterize and investigate the beluga nervous and immune systems • To continue to develop and evaluate hormone, immune system assays and reagents, and diagnostics for health assessments in belugas • To investigate the effects of anthropogenic and environmental stressors on the nervous and immune systems (i.e. health) of belugas under controlled conditions to better interpret findings in wild belugas 2 Justification and Summary of published findings related to the objectives: Anthropogenic and environmental stressors continue to increase and pose significant threats to marine mammals. These stressors include but aren’t limited to emerging pollutants, changes in climate resulting in shifts in prey availability, changes in predator/prey relationships, emerging pathogens, and increases in noise due to dredging and construction, shipping, oil and gas exploration and drilling, sonars, geophysical surveys and oceanographic research (Bossart, 2011; Letcher et al., 2010; Moore and Huntington, 2008; Van Bressem et al., 2009; Kyhn et al., 2014). Our laboratory was the first to characterize an anatomical link between the nervous and immune system in cetaceans and specifically the beluga (Romano et al., 1994; 2002) whereby hormones and neurotransmitters released during stress could have an effect on the immune system and an animal’s ability to fight off infection and disease. In order to characterize the nervous and immune system in cetaceans, specific reagents and assays were developed, adapted and standardized in our laboratory utilizing the beluga and bottlenose dolphin as representative cetaceans (Romano et al., 1992, 1999; Mancia et al., 2007; Keogh et al., 2011; Peden-Adams et al., 2012; Spoon and Romano, 2012; Levin et al., 2014). We now have a ‘tool box” to help assess health in belugas but continued development of reagents and assays are needed (e.g. additional markers for lymphocyte subsets, natural killer cell functional assays, etc.). Moreover, our laboratory developed marine specific diagnostic assays to detect disease and pathogens such as Brucella (bacteria that cause reproductive failure) in marine mammals (Meegan et al., 2010, 2012). These tests have been useful in the management of marine mammals under professional care as well as investigating the prevalence in wild counterparts. In order to study the physiological response to stressors and impact on the immune system in marine mammals, we have studied and are continuing to conduct controlled studies on belugas under professional care as well as live capture released cetaceans and subsistence hunted belugas (Spoon and Romano, 2012; Romano et al., 2004; Bossart et al., 2008; Reif et al., 2009; St. Aubin et al., 2013; Fair et al., 2014; Thompson et al., 2014). Additional studies similar to the above are needed to increase the number of whales being investigated as well as further provide information on the health impacts of anthropogenic and environmental stressors on belugas. The continued development of reagents and assays, including diagnostic assays, to detect disease and pathogens will enable us to monitor the health of wild beluga populations. Importantly, through application of developed reagents and assays, the health of different beluga populations can be compared with the ESA-endangered Cook Inlet (CI) and the MMPA-depleted Skahalin Bay-Nikolaya Bay-Amur River beluga populations i.e. in the event of live-capture release studies, strandings (live and dead), and/or the application of non-invasive techniques (see Study 2) to collect samples from free-ranging whales. Moreover, continued research and development and validation of these “tools” will help with interpretation of health measurements obtained from other tissues such as skin and breath. Overall, these studies will contribute to the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Recovery Plan including Action #s 4 (“Increase efforts to identify and monitor individual CI belugas, coordinating photo-identification, stranding data, genetic studies, and body condition assessments via biopsy samples of skin and blubber”); #6 (“Conduct regular biopsy surveys of CI belugas to monitor changes in condition and reproductive success in relation to environmental changes”); #25 (“Using currently available information, compare data on diseases from CI belugas 3 with other beluga populations to determine if there are abnormal levels or atypical types of disease agents present in Cook Inlet affecting CI belugas”) and #26 (“Determine types and sources of disease agents identified to be of concern specifically to CI belugas and assess management actions targeted at mitigating the disease agents”) identified in the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Recovery Plan. The health information gained through the development and validation of health-related reagents and assays and monitoring the physiological response to challenges in a controlled setting will help enable interpretation of health measurements/biomarkers in wild whales. Moreover, these reagents and assays will contribute to information and interpretation of data from individual Cook Inlet belugas through skin biopsy studies (Action
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Captive Orcas
    Captive Orcas ‘Dying to Entertain You’ The Full Story A report for Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) Chippenham, UK Produced by Vanessa Williams Contents Introduction Section 1 The showbiz orca Section 2 Life in the wild FINgerprinting techniques. Community living. Social behaviour. Intelligence. Communication. Orca studies in other parts of the world. Fact file. Latest news on northern/southern residents. Section 3 The world orca trade Capture sites and methods. Legislation. Holding areas [USA/Canada /Iceland/Japan]. Effects of capture upon remaining animals. Potential future capture sites. Transport from the wild. Transport from tank to tank. “Orca laundering”. Breeding loan. Special deals. Section 4 Life in the tank Standards and regulations for captive display [USA/Canada/UK/Japan]. Conditions in captivity: Pool size. Pool design and water quality. Feeding. Acoustics and ambient noise. Social composition and companionship. Solitary confinement. Health of captive orcas: Survival rates and longevity. Causes of death. Stress. Aggressive behaviour towards other orcas. Aggression towards trainers. Section 5 Marine park myths Education. Conservation. Captive breeding. Research. Section 6 The display industry makes a killing Marketing the image. Lobbying. Dubious bedfellows. Drive fisheries. Over-capturing. Section 7 The times they are a-changing The future of marine parks. Changing climate of public opinion. Ethics. Alternatives to display. Whale watching. Cetacean-free facilities. Future of current captives. Release programmes. Section 8 Conclusions and recommendations Appendix: Location of current captives, and details of wild-caught orcas References The information contained in this report is believed to be correct at the time of last publication: 30th April 2001. Some information is inevitably date-sensitive: please notify the author with any comments or updated information.
    [Show full text]
  • Killer Whale (Aka Orca) Orcinus Orca
    PGAV Zoo Design SDT Animal of the Month Killer Whale (aka Orca) Orcinus orca 1. Animal Type: Mammal 2. Conservation Status: Endangered (Southern resident population only—Others: Status unknown) a. Range/Habitat i. From the open sea to coasts, from equator to polar areas. ii. The most distributed of all cetaceans, it occurs in all oceans and seas. 3. Size a. Male: 10 tons and 19’ long b. Female: 7.5 tons and 16’ long c. At birth: 6 ½ feet to 8 feet 4. Social Structure a. Killer whales are a social species living in pods of 3-25 b. Killer whales use their calls to coordinate hunting behavior and to maintain contact with other members of their pod. Clicks are used by all toothed whales for echolocation, and they may also be used to communicate. i. With orcas, several resident pods may join to form a community. Each pod has a unique dialect, similar to other pods in its community. It is quite different from the dialects of other pods with which they are not in contact. ii. Studies of the orca show the subtlety and variety of whale language. They use discrete calls – distinct sounds separated into characteristic types that can be heard 5 miles away. Those in the northwest use between 7-17 calls each. They make different noises when playing or socializing. 5. Reproduction a. Gestation period is thought to be 12-16 months, with most calves born between October and March. b. Orcas have long childhoods, reaching maturity about 15 years old. c. A female can produce as many as 5 calves over a 25 year period.
    [Show full text]
  • While Rome Burns…A Report Into Conditions in the Zoos of Ontario
    While Rome Burns … A Report into Conditions in the Zoos of Ontario Prepared by: Samantha Lindley, BVSc, MRCVS September 1998 Published by: Zoocheck Canada Inc. 2646 St. Clair Avenue East Toronto, Ontario M4B 3M1 (Canada) Ph (416) 285-1744 Fax (416) 285-4670 Email: [email protected] Web Site: www.zoocheck.com World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) Canada 90 Eglinton Avenue East, Ste. 960 Toronto, Ontario M4P 1Y3(Canada) Ph (416) 369-0044 Fax (416) 369-0147 Email: [email protected] Web Site: www.wspa.ca While Rome Burns…A Report into Conditions in the Zoos of Ontario Table of Contents Foreword …………………………………………………………………………. i About the Author ………………………………………………………………… iii While Rome Burns . Introduction ……………………..……..……………….. 1 Zoos in Ontario: A Discussion ………………………………………………….. 3 The “Ideal” Zoo? ………………………………………………………………… 3 Get-aways ……………………………………………………………………….. 3 Safety and Security ……………………………………………………………… 3 Education ………………………………………………………………………… 4 Behaviour ………………………………………………………………………… 5 Stereotypic Behaviour ……………………………………………………………. 5 Stereotypic Behaviour vs. Displacement Behaviour …………………………….. 6 The Conservation Argument …………………………………………………….. 7 The Welfare Issue ……………………………………………………………….. 8 Zoos in Ontario Bergeron’s Exotic Animal Sanctuary …………………………………………… 11 Greenview Aviaries, Park and Zoo ……………………………………………… 15 The Killman Zoo ………………………………………………………………… 19 Lazy Acre Farm …………………………………………………………………. 25 Marineland of Canada …………………………………………………………… 29 Northwoods Buffalo and Exotic Animal Ranch ………………………………… 35 Pineridge
    [Show full text]
  • Stopping the Use, Sale and Trade of Whales and Dolphins in Canada How Protection Is Consistent with WTO Obligations
    Stopping the use, sale and trade of whales and dolphins in Canada How protection is consistent with WTO obligations Prepared by Leesteffy Jenkins, Attorney at Law 219 West Main St., P.O. Box 634 Hillsborough, NH 03244-0634 Phone (603) 464-4395 For ZOOCHECK CANADA INC. 3266 Yonge Street, Suite 1417 Toronto, Ontario M4N 3P6 (416) 285-1744 (p) (416) 285-4670 (f ) [email protected] www.zoocheck.com This legal analysis was commissioned by Zoocheck Canada as part of a research initiative looking into how trade laws impact the trade and use of whales and dolphins in Canada, and to educate the public about the same. Page 1 April 25, 2003 QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a Canadian ban on the import and export of live cetaceans, wild-caught, captive born or those caught earlier in the wild and now considered captive, would violate Canada's obligations pursuant to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreements. CONCLUSION It is my understanding that there is currently no specific Canadian legislation banning the import/export of live cetaceans. Based on the facts* presented to me, however, it is my opinion that such legislation could be enacted consistent with WTO rules. This memorandum attempts to outline both the conditions under which Canadian regulation of trade in live cetaceans may be consistent with the WTO Agreements, as well as provide some guidance in the crafting of future legislation. PEER REVIEW & COMMENTS Chris Wold, Steve Shrybman, Esq Clinical Professor of Law and Director Sack, Goldblatt, Mitchell International Environmental Law Project 20 Dundas Street West, Ste 1130 Northwestern School of Law Toronto, Ontario M5G 2G8 Lewis and Clark College Tel.: (416) 979-2235 10015 SW Terwilliger Blvd Email: [email protected] Portland, Oregon, U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommendations for the Care and Maintenance of Marine Mammals © Canadian Council on Animal Care, 2014
    Recommendations for the care and maintenance of marine mammals © Canadian Council on Animal Care, 2014 ISBN: 978-0-919087-57-6 Canadian Council on Animal Care 190 O’Connor St., Suite 800 Ottawa ON K2P 2R3 http://www.ccac.ca Acknowledgements The development of the Recommendations for the care and maintenance of marine mammals was com- missioned to the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). To complete this task, the CCAC Standards Committee created the ad hoc subcommittee on marine mammals. We acknowledge and thank all the members of the subcommittee who worked together to develop, review, and guide this document through to publication: Dr. Pierre-Yves Daoust, University of Prince Edward Island Mr. John Ford, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Mr. Henrik Kreiberg, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Dr. Clément Lanthier, Calgary Zoo Dr. Kay Mehren, Veterinarian Emeritus, Toronto Zoo Ms. Tracy Stewart, Marineland of Canada Mr. Clint Wright, Vancouver Aquarium Dr. Gilly Griffin, Canadian Council on Animal Care We would also like to take this opportunity to recognize the dedication and vision of Dr. Jon Lien (Memo- rial University, deceased 2010), the Committee’s first Chair. Jon played a pivotal role in the creation of this document. It was the Lien Report: A review of live- capture and captivity of marine mammals in Canada that inspired DFO to request that CCAC develop recommendations for the care and maintenance of marine mammals. His vision became a collective goal - to improve the quality of life for all marine mammals held in captivity.
    [Show full text]
  • A Summary of the Effects of Captivity on Orcas
    A Summary of the Effects of Captivity on Orcas PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS Contents The Eff ects of Captivity on Tilikum and Orcas Generally at SeaWorld…………..................................…………......3 I. Orcas Are Extremely Intelligent Mammals Whose Brains Are Highly Developed in Areas Responsible for Complex Cognitive Functions, Including Self-Awareness, Social Cognition, Culture, and Language …………………………………………...............................................................................................…...4 II. Tilikum Is Deprived of Every Facet of His Culture and the Opportunity to Engage in Natural Behavior, Causing Extreme Stress and Suff ering….…………….….......................................................5 A. The Tanks at SeaWorld Provide Inadequate Space and Result in Stress……….…...........................5 B. SeaWorld’s Constant Manipulation of Tilikum’s Social Structure Results in Stress.................7 C. The Tanks at SeaWorld Create a Distressing Acoustic Environment…….………..….........................9 III. The Stressors of the Captive Environment at SeaWorld Result in Aggressiveness, Self- Injury, and Other Physical and Behavioral Abnormalities………………….……..............................................10 A. Aggression Between Orcas and Between Orcas and Humans……..……………..............................……10 B. Stereotypic Behavior………………….……………………………………….......................................................................….…..13 1. Painful Dental Problems Caused by Chewing Metal Gates and Concrete Tanks.....14 2.
    [Show full text]
  • AWI Comments on Permit Application
    October 29, 2012 BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Submitted via http://www.regulations.gov NOAA-NMFS-2012-0158 Michael Payne, Chief National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA Conservation and Education Division Office of Protected Resources 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 Dear Mr. Payne: RE: 77 FR 52694, File No. 17324 Proposed Import of Beluga Whales from Russia I am writing on behalf of the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) to strongly oppose the request by Georgia Aquarium Inc. (GAI) for a public display permit to authorize the import of 18 wild-captured beluga whales from the Russian Federation to the United States pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of marine mammals (50 CFR 216). AWI supports the arguments against the import submitted by other NGOS including The Humane Society of the United States, and Whale and Dolphin Conservation and endorses the statement signed by 60 international organizations. This letter provides several reasons why AWI believes GAI’s request does not conform to the issuance conditions of 50 CFR 216.34. Specifically, we will focus on the fact that GAI cannot adequately demonstrate any of the following three points: · The proposed transport methods, which include a complicated transfer between containers and planes in Belgium, are humane and do not present unnecessary risks to the health and welfare of the belugas (50 CFR 216.34 (a) (1)); · Its qualifications, facilities, and resources are adequate for the proper care and maintenance of the live belugas being transported (50 CFR 216.34 (a) (6)); and · The removal of the belugas from the wild will not likely have a significant adverse impact on the species or stock (50 CFR 216.34 (a) (4)).
    [Show full text]
  • Nature's Newsletter
    D V E A NATURE’S NEWSLETTER O N L I N E E D I T I O N Volume 13, Issue 2 2W www.dveaglealliance.org W I L D L I F E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T Nature’s Newsletter 1 www.dveaglealliance.org Photograph provided by The Elephant Project Tilikum performing during a show at SeaWorld Orlando. © Photo from Shutterstock via Whale Sanctuary Project THE WHALE SANCTUARY PROJECT T U R N I N G T H E T I D E F O R C A P T I V E W H A L E S by Lori Marino, Ph.D. President, The Whale Sanctuary Project In 2010, a horrified world heard the news that a about these whales, captive facilities would eventually 12,500-pound male orca named Tilikum had killed trainer “get it right.” And while there was some improvement in Dawn Brancheau during a show at SeaWorld Orlando. Like survivorship of orcas taken into captivity over the first couple everyone else, I was heartbroken for the loss of Dawn’s life of decades, that same metric has been at a standstill for the but also because I knew that for Tilikum to commit such an past few recent decades. The scientific evidence of poor extreme violent act he must have been driven to the limits welfare, short lifespans, and psychological and physical of his ability to cope with years of captivity. He snapped. ailments continues to pile up, all pointing to the same conclusion: that the nature of orcas and other cetaceans is Those of us who study the wellbeing of captive orcas and entirely incompatible with life in the tanks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Orca Project Database 54 Orcas Living in Captivity Sorted by Location - As of December 07, 2013
    The Orca Project Database 54 Orcas Living in Captivity Sorted by Location - as of December 07, 2013 Birth Date Time in A=Actual Begin Orca Name Sex Origin Captivity Age (years) E=Estimate Captivity (days) U=Unknown Acuario Mundo Marino, Argentina Kshamenk M 01/01/1989 -E W 09/19/1992 7,749 24 Kamogawa SeaWorld, Japan Earth M 10/13/2008 -A C 10/13/2008 1,881 5 Lara F 02/08/2001 -A C 02/08/2001 4,685 12 Lovey F 01/11/1998 -A C 01/11/1998 5,809 15 Luna F 07/19/2012 -A C 07/19/2012 506 1 Loro Parque, Spain Adan M 10/12/2010 -A C 10/12/2010 1,152 3 Keto M 06/17/1995 -A C 06/17/1995 6,748 18 Kohana (Makea) F 05/03/2002 -A C 05/03/2002 4,236 11 Morgan F 01/01/2009 -E B 06/23/2010 1,263 4 Skyla F 02/09/2004 -A C 02/09/2004 3,589 9 Tekoa M 11/08/2000 -A C 11/08/2000 4,777 13 Marineland Antibes, France Freya F 01/01/1975 -E W 10/01/1982 11,390 38 Inouk M 02/23/1999 -A C 02/23/1999 5,401 14 Moana F 03/16/2011 -A C 03/16/2011 997 2 No Name ? Unknown -E C 11/20/2013 17 17 days Valentin M 02/13/1996 -A C 02/13/1996 6,507 17 Wikie F 06/01/2001 -A C 06/01/2001 4,572 12 © 2013 The Orca Project Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • DOLPHIN EXPLOITATION and SUFFERING at SEAWORLD PARKS Heather D
    © dreamstime.com/Paul Brewster © dreamstime.com/Paul DOLPHIN EXPLOITATION AND SUFFERING AT SEAWORLD PARKS Heather D. Rally, D.V.M. Supervising Veterinarian, PETA Foundation Toni Frohoff, Ph.D. Behavioral Biologist and Research Director, TerraMar Research JUNE 5, 2019 INTRODUCTION In 2016, SeaWorld announced that it would end its orca-breeding program after facing mounting criticism from scientists and the public over its poor treatment of captive orcas (Howard, 2016). Since this announcement, however, the company has continued to breed bottlenose and Pacific white-sided dolphins—the orca’s smaller cousins—and house them in small, concrete tanks, as well as exploiting them in archaic, circus-style performances and interactive programs in which they’re touched, grabbed, and stood on by trainers. In November 2018, a veterinarian observed the captive dolphins held at the SeaWorld parks in San Diego, San Antonio, and Orlando. Evidence obtained from those observations revealed that the well-being of captive dolphins at the parks is severely compromised by the conditions in which they’re forced to live. This includes an astonishing number of dolphins—140—confined to just seven tanks at four SeaWorld–owned theme parks in the Unites States.i This report provides a glimpse into the miserable lives of these exploited animals, who endure routine physical, psychological, and social stress and at times sustain painful injuries as a result. PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS | 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS Captive dolphins at SeaWorld are housed in severely crowded, extremely shallow, small enclosures that are spatially, acoustically, and visually unnatural to the species. Most have barren concrete walls with bright, reflective surfaces that prioritize maximum visibility and accessibility of dolphins for park visitors over consideration of the animals’ health and welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Consistent Motor Laterality in California Sea Lions
    CONSISTENT MOTOR LATERALITY IN CALIFORNIA SEA LIONS Society for Marine Mammalogy Anne Janas, Paige McGrory, Dawn Oscvirk-Parliament and Michael Noonan Vancouver, British Columbia, Canisius College (Buffalo, New York) and Marineland of Canada (Niagara Falls, Ontario) November, 2001 Results Introduction High within measure reliability. In humans, such traits as left- and right-handedness are enduring characteristics of individuals, and Both measures were characterized by very high reliability across observations-both within and it is precisely their stability that accounts for their central place in theories pertaining to lateral across days (r = 0.7+, p < .0001). That is, individual Sea Lions had distinct preferences to favor cerebral dominance. Similar stability of left-right behaviors in marine mammals would likewise carry their left or right flipper leads and to prefer left or right circling in a way that was very consistent implications about cerebral asymmetry in these species. For this reason, we tested for consistent within animals over time. left/right motor biases in captive California Sea Lions. We assessed lateral bias in two settings—in foot-fall patterns when running and in direction of circling when swimming. Lack of population bias. Across the sample, there was no significant directional bias on either task—that is, on both measures there were approximately equal numbers of right- and left-biased animals. Neither were there reliable differences between the sexes on overall direction of bias. Low between measure correspondence. Across all subjects, the correlation between the two forms of locomotion (mean lateral bias across observations on each measure) was 0.24 (ns). Procedure Sex differences.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding of No Significant Impact for Issuance of A
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FOR ISSUANCE OF A SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PERMIT TO MYSTIC AQUARIUM FOR THE IMPORTATION AND TAKE OF CAPTIVE BELUGA WHALES (DELPHINAPTERUS LEUCAS) I. INTRODUCTION The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) received an application (File No. 22629) from Mystic Aquarium requesting a permit to import five captive-born beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) from Marineland of Canada, Inc. (hereafter Marineland), located in Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, to Mystic Aquarium located in Mystic, Connecticut, for the purpose of conducting scientific research. NMFS is required to review applications and, if appropriate, may issue permits pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA) 1. In addition, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (CEQ)2 and NOAA policy and procedures3 require all proposals for major federal actions be reviewed with respect to environmental consequences on the human environment. The purpose of this document is to present the evaluation that issuance of a scientific research permit to Mystic Aquarium will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment. This Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and the Final Environmental Assessment (EA) titled “Issuance of Marine Mammal Protection Act Scientific Research Permit to Mystic Aquarium for the Importation and Take of Captive Beluga Whales (Delphinapterus leucas)” were prepared in accordance with CEQ Regulations and NOAA policy and procedures. II. BACKGROUND As described in the permit application and EA, Mystic Aquarium requested to import five captive-born beluga whales4 from Marineland to Mystic Aquarium for the purposes of conducting scientific research.
    [Show full text]