Population Assessment Update for Sakhalin Gray Whales
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WESTERN GRAY WHALE ADVSORY PANEL WGWAP-21/13 (updated) 21st meeting (virtual) 17-19 November 2020 PUBLIC WGWAP 21/13* Population Assessment Update for Sakhalin Gray Whales Justin G. Cooke1 (Panel member) ABSTRACT The population assessment of gray whales Eschrichtius robustus feeding off Sakhalin is updated. An individually based population model with two wintering areas (Baja California, Mexico, and a putative wintering area in east Asian waters), is fitted to: photo-id data collected off Sakhalin during 1995-2019 by the RGWP programme (Burdin et al. 2020); photo-id data collected off Sakhalin during 2003-2019 by the NSCMB programme (Yakovlev et al. 2020); photo-id matches between the two Sakhalin catalogues through 2011 (WGWAP, 2012); photo-id matches of gray whales between the Sakhalin and Mexico catalogues (Urbán et al. 2019); and tracking of whales from Sakhalin to the eastern North Pacific (Mate et al. 2015). The two Sakhalin catalogues were cross-matched only through 2011, but results were almost the same regardless of which catalogue is used from 2012. The Sakhalin feeding population is estimated to have increased at 4.5% (SE 0.2%) per year over the 20 years to 2019. The size of the Sakhalin feeding population in 2019, excluding calves of the year, is estimated at 231 (SE 10), of which 67 (SE 4) were reproductive females. The proportion of the population which migrates to the eastern North Pacific in winter is estimated to be 48% (SE 10%). The estimated median early calf mortality rate (prior to arrival at Sakhalin) is 34% (SE 4%) while the estimated median post-weaning calf mortality rate is 27% (SE 5%). There is strong evidence of inter-annual variation in the post-weaning calf mortality rate and weaker evidence of variation in the calving rate and early calf mortality rate. Despite evidence of declining feeding conditions in the inshore Sakhalin feeding ground, known to be important for nursing mothers, calves and other young whales, there is as yet no significant indication of a levelling off in population growth. 1 INTRODUCTION Gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) have been regularly reported during the summer months (June to October) off northeastern Sakhalin Island since the early 1980’s (Blokhin et al 1985; Brownell et al. 1997) and have been intensively studied there every year since 1995 (Burdin et al. 2020; Yakovlev et al. 2020). Initially the Sakhalin gray whales were assumed to be a remnant of the western gray whale population formerly hunted in Korean and southern Japanese waters until the 1960s. The timing of gray whales catches in the Korean grounds was suggestive of a migration to a wintering ground in Asian waters (Kato and Kasuya 2002). Later, photo-id and genetic matches and tagging results showed that at least some of the Sakhalin gray whales migrate to the Mexican waters in winter along with the bulk of the eastern North Pacific gray whale population (Weller et al. 2012; Mate et al. 2015; Urbán et al. 2019). However, sightings of Sakhalin-matched gray whales off the Pacific coast of Japan in spring are suggestive of the possibility that at least some of the gray whales seen off Sakhalin undertake a western North Pacific migration that may lead to a western North pacific or Asian nursing area whose location is unknown (Weller et al. 2016; Nakamura et al. 2020). Individuals have also been observed off SE Kamchatka during 2006-11 and 2018-19 some of which have been have been matched with whales seen those off Sakhalin and/or Mexico (Yakovlev et al. 2013, Burdin et al. 2020, Urbán et al. 2019) but these observations have not been used in this paper. 1Centre for Ecosystem Management Studies, Höllenbergstr. 7, 79312 Emmendingen, Germany. [email protected] *This document contains supporting information for the on-line presentation given at WGWAP 21 1 WESTERN GRAY WHALE ADVSORY PANEL WGWAP-21/13 (updated) 21st meeting (virtual) 17-19 November 2020 PUBLIC This paper updates the assessment in WGWAP 19/22 (Cooke 2019) with the addition of recent data from the two Sakhalin photo-id programmes up to and including the 2019 summer season (Yakovlev et al. 2020; Burdin et al. 2020) and new data on matches between the Sakhalin whales and whales photo-id off Mexico up to and including the 2018/2019 winter season (Urbán et al. 2019). The population model is developed further to distinguish between pre- and post-weaning calf mortality. Particularly for the purpose of analysing cumulative impacts on gray whales (New and Cooke, 2019), it is important to ascertain where and when significant mortality is occurring. Of the gray whale stranded along the west coast of the continental USA during 2007-16, 35% were calves, most of these during the northward migration in April and May (NOAA Fisheries, 2017); this is suggestive of significant pre-weaning calf mortality. Swartz and Jones (1983) estimated a calf loss rate of about 5% in and around the Mexican lagoons and 31% en route to central California on the northward migration but noted some uncertainties in this estimate. Recently, Labay et al. (2019) reported a much lower abundance of amphipoda, the main gray whale prey type, in the benthos of the Piltun feeding ground during 2013-16 compared with previous years (2002-2012), while the abundance of prey in the offshore feeding ground has remained high. There has also been a shift in distribution of gray whales such that the occurrence of whales in the Piltun ground has decreased, with a concomitant increase in whales in the offshore feeding ground, but calves, yearlings and nursing mothers continue to be observed exclusively on the Piltun feeding ground and not offshore (Yakovlev et al. 2020). Within the Piltun feeding ground, there has been a progressive southward shift of the distribution asway from the mouth of Piltun lagoon, that was especially marked in 2018 (Burdin et al. 2019). This paper uses the population model to test for a detectable demographic change associated with this phenomenon. In the context of managing the impact of industrial activities near the Piltun feeding ground, it is also of interest to examine whether there was a detectable demographic impact of the conduct of seismic surveys on or near the Piltun feeding ground in 2001, 2010, 1015 and 2018. Therefore, this paper uses the population model to test for a demographic impact of disturbance by seismic surveys.. 2 MATERIAL AND METHODS 2.1 Data The following data sets were used: (i) Photo-identification data collected off NE Sakhalin using Zodiacs launched from shore near the mouth of Piltun Bay by the Russian Gray Whale Project (RGWP, Pacific Geography Institute, Petropavlovsk, Kamchatka; continued from the former Russia-US project; Burdin et al. 2020) were available for each summer season (June to September) from the Piltun area of north-eastern Sakhalin from 1997 to 2019, with some data also collected in 1994 and 1995. A total of 301 distinct individual whales had been catalogued as of 2019. The catalogue has been published and annually updated since 2006 (Weller et al. 2006). These data are supplemented by sex determinations from biopsies (Lang 2010 and more recent unpublished data). Genetic sex determinations from biopsy were available for 156 whales (89 males and 67 females) for this analysis. A total of 171 calves were identified. Of these calves, 145 could be linked to an identified mother (in all but one case by observed association, the remaining case genetically). Of the 172 observed calves, 76 have been sexed genetically: 30 female and 46 male. (ii) Photo-identification data from the Joint Programme Sakhalin photo-ID project, run by the National Scientific Centre of Marine Biology (NSCMB,Vladivostok; formerly A.V. Zhirmunsky Institute of Marine Biology) obtained mainly from vessel-based surveys in the Piltun feeding ground and the offshore feeding ground, in addition to some long-range identifications from shore-based platforms and incidental identifications from other locations (Yakovlev et al. 2020). Data were collected during 2002-2019, but the 2002 data were not used, due to a different collection protocol. The data used includes 321 individuals, including 155 calves, of which 105 could be linked to an identified mother. 2 WESTERN GRAY WHALE ADVSORY PANEL WGWAP-21/13 (updated) 21st meeting (virtual) 17-19 November 2020 PUBLIC (iii) cross-matching of the above two photo-id data catalogues using data up to and including the 2011 season: this resulted in 187 matched individuals (WGWAP 2012); one further whale was matched via Mexico (urbán et al 2019). (iv) cross-matching of the Sakhalin and Mexican catalogues up to and including the 2016 summer season in Sakhalin and the 2019 winter season in Mexico. There were 54 annual matches, consisting of 36 distinct individuals. A further 4 individuals matched between Mexico and Kamchatka but not within Sakhalin were also not used. (v) The three records of known whales successfully satellite-tracked from Sakhalin to the eastern North Pacific (Mate et al. 2015) were used. Because the two Sakhalin catalogues have not been matched from 2012 onwards, it is necessary, for new whales first seen in 2012 or later, to use data from only one catalogue. Two alternative composite datasets were constructed. In the first dataset, all whales in the RGWP catalogue were included, but for unmatched NSMBC whales, only the pre-2012 part of the sighting history (if any) was included. In the second dataset, all whales in the NSMBC catalogue were included, but for unmatched RGWP whales, only the pre-2012 part of the sighting history (if any) was included. The two data sets coincide for the years prior to 2012.