DOCSLIB.ORG

Feeding Habits, Food Requirements, and Status of Bering Sea Marine Mammals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feeding Habits, Food Requirements, and Status of Bering Sea Marine Mammals FEEDING HABITS, FOOD REQUIREMENTS, AND STATUS OF BERING SEA MARINE MAMMALS NORTH PACIFIC FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL P. 0. Box 103136 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99510 November 1, 1982 Cotmcil Document 1119 Prepared By Alaska Department of Fish and Game Fairbanks, Alaska Alaska Department of Fish and Gaine Anchorage, Alaska and University of Washington Seattle, Washington Ftmded by NOAA/NMFS 1.0 TITLE PAGE FINAL REPORT TO; North Pacific Fishery Management Co1mcil P.O. Box 3136 DT Anchorage, Alaska 99510 CONTRACT NO.: 81-4 TITLE: FEEDING HABITS, FOOD REQUIREMENTS, AND STATUS OF BERING SEA MARINE MAMMALS PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: Lloyd F. Lowryl, Kathryn J. Frostl, Donald G. Calkins2i Gordon L. Swartzman3, and Susan Hills 1 November 1982 1 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 1300 College Road, Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 2 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 333 Raspberry Road, Anchorage Alaska 99502 3 University of Washington, Center for Quantitative Science, Seattle, Washington 98195 2 2 .O PREFACE The history of human interaction with marine resources shows a consistent pattern of discovery and overexploitation, usually followed by programs of conservation or protection which often result in recovery of depleted stocks. This pattern applies equally well to populations of fishes, shellfishes, and marine mammals. Although many aspects of population ecology of exploited species are poorly known, there is little doubt that human intervention has been a major factor in most population declines. Observations made during exploitation and subsequent recovery of stocks have provided a considerable body of empirical information which has formed the basis for management programs applied to commercial marine resources. Such single-species management, although preferable to unregulated exploitation, has limited utility since each species obviously interacts with many other organisms and environmental factors. This has led to the widespread adoption of ecosystem-based management as the framework on which to base present and future resource exploitation decisions. Unfortunately, although intellectually appealing and already incorporated into management philosophies, ecosystem-based management has yet to become a practical reality. However, that has not reduced the desire of concerned individuals and agencies to consider ecological interactions among animals and their environment when planning for conservation and management of resources. In the United States, two relatively recent pieces of federal legislation, the Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA) of 1976 and the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, have had a marked effect on management of marine fisheries and mammals. Although both endorse and encourage ecosystem-based management, the former stresses development of programs for utilization of fishery resources, while the latter emphasizes protection of marine mammal species, a difference which generally reflects prevailing public opinion in this nation. Since many marine mammals feed on commercially exploitable fishes and shellfishes, they obviously may affect and be affected by commercial fisheries and fishery management plans. Although such biological interactions between marine mammals and fisheries undoubtedly occur throughout the waters regulated under the FCMA, much attention has been focused on the situation in the Bering Sea. The Bering Sea, which supports what is probably the most diverse marine mammal fauna of any of the world's oceans, has long been exploited for its rich fishery resources. As management plans, mandated by the FCMA, began to be developed for those fisheries, attempts were made to incorporate ecosystem-level consideration of interactions between marine mammals and fishery resources. Those considerations were only partially successful due principally to the lack of an organized data base on marine mammals and the absence of a functional framework with which to consider the magnitude and implications of possible interactions. In 3 response, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, in conjunction with the Marine Mammal Commission, issued a contract to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to compile, summarize, and evaluate available marine mammal data; examine and evaluate existing Bering Sea ecosystem models; and provide suggestions for directing future research on marine mammal-fishery interactions in the Bering Sea. Our attempts to attain these objectives have resulted in the lengthy report which follows. For a number of reasons our task has been far from simple. The short time allotted to this project, approximately 9 months, has precluded an orderly consideration of much of the information we have located. For example, in some instances we have had to discover references, request them from foreigrt scientists, and have them translated before they could be included in species summaries, evaluated, and considered in the development of a research plan. The number of marine mammal species included in this review (26) is largely responsible for the sheer bulk of the report and the intensive effort required for its preparation. Lastly, this is the first review of its type dealing with biological interactions among marine mammals and fisheries in the Bering Sea. The subjects of marine mammal-fishery interactions in general and density-dependent responses of marine mammals have only recently begun to receive significant attention. Available reports on these subjects, although in some instances useful summaries of existing information, fall far short of providing a comprehensive framework with which to evaluate the Bering Sea situation. We therefore consider this report as a working document rather than a definitive statement which adequately describes or resolves the question of interactions between marine mammals and fisheries in the Bering Sea. Certainly we have missed some existing relevant information and more is being produced virtually daily. Users of the report will undoubtedly differ as to their opinion regarding its usefulness. We have of necessity resorted to generalizations when summarizing available data and assume that those requiring more detailed information can and will access the referenced literature. We hope that our considerations and assessments will serve to focus attention and future research in such a way that concrete progress can be made in the consideration of how marine mammals and fisheries may affect one another. It is disappointing to be able to say at present little more than that marine mammals eat fishes that fishermen would like to catch and that fishermen catch fish that marine mammals otherwise might eat. 4 3 .O EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is a compilation, summary, and evaluation of available data on feeding habits, food requirements, and status of Bering Sea marine mammals. Included are an annotated bibliography, a research plan designed to fill major data gaps, and a discussion of the utility of data for assessing interactions among marine mammals and commercial fisheries in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands region. Considered in the report are 26 species of marine mammals, including eight species of baleen whales, eight toothed whales, eight pinnipeds, and two carnivores. Although for most species it is possible to generally describe the foods eaten in the Bering Sea, with the exception of the northern fur seal, data are not adequate for determining the quantitative composition of the diet. Estimates of food requirements generated by one of several methods are also usually available but are of unknown reliability in most instances. Measurements of indicators of population status are accompanied by natural and sampling variability, the magnitude of which is often large or unknown. Although there can be little doubt that some marine mammals compete with commercial fisheries, there is no conclusive evidence to show how marine mammals may affect and be affected by fisheries in the Bering Sea. A variety of techniques can be used for assessing interactions among marine mammals and commercial fisheries. Estimates of quantities of fishes consumed by marine mammals are useful for comparison with fishery harvests and are required as inputs for the NMFS Bering Sea ecosystem model DYNUMES/PROBUB. However, such estimates are not presently reliable due to the usual lack of necessary data and possible variability associated with available information. Attempts to correlate changes in marine mammal population status with activities of fisheries have not to date been successful. Correlations of this type are unlikely to be conclusive due to the difficulty of obtaining needed information with adequate accuracy. Ecosystem models and simulations, while appealing since they could allow predictions of interactions and effects, are not yet adequately developed and tested. Available data are adequate to produce a conceptual assessment of the likelihood of significant interactions with present and potential fisheries based on general considerations of feeding habits and population status of marine mammals. This assessment produced the following categories: high probability of interaction--northern fur seal, Steller sea lion, harbor seal, spotted seal, belukha, harbor porpoise, and sea otter; moderate probability of interaction--gray whale, walrus, Dall's porpoise, ribbon seal, and bearded seal; and low probability of interaction--killer whale, minke whale, beaked whales, polar bear, fin whale, blue whale, sei whale, humpback whale, bowhead whale, right whale, and sperm whale. The research
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A · ·Strati on of the Marine Marmnal Protection Act of 1972
    A · ·stration of the Marine Marmnal Protection Act of 1972 Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Biological Service Marine Mammal Protection Act Report of the Department of the Interior The Marine Mammal Protection Act ofl972 (16 U.S. C. 1361-1407, 86 Stat. 1027 (1972)), as amended (95 Stat. 979 (1981), 98 Stat. 440 (1984), 100 Stat. 3741 (1986), 102 Stat. 4755 (1988), and 108 Stat. 532 (1994)), states in Section 103(f) that: "Within six months after the effective date of this Act [December 21, 1972] and every twelve months thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the public through publication in the Federal Register and to the Congress on the current status of all marine mammal species and population stocks subject to the provisions of d1e Act. His report shall describe d1ose actions taken and those measures believed necessary, including where appropriate, the issuance of permits pursuant to mis title to assure me well-being of such marine mammals." The responsibility ofd1e Department ofd1e Interior is limited by Section 3(ll)(B) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act to mose marine mammals that are members of the Orders Carnivora (polar bear, sea otter, and marine otter), Pinnipedia (walrus), and Sirenia (manatee and dugong). Accordingly, published herewim is the report ofd1e Department of tl1e Interior for d1e period ofJanuary 1, 1994, to December 31, 1994, on the administration of the Marine Mammal Protection Act with regard to those man1mals. Issued at Washington, D .C. Acting Director Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Biological Service Dated July 24, 1996 Dated July 30, 1996 A · ·stration ofthe Marine Marmnal Protection Act of 1972 January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A Synopsis of the Marine Prosobranch Gastropod and Bivalve Mollusks in Alaskan Waters
    A synopsis of the marine prosobranch gastropod and bivalve mollusks in Alaskan waters Item Type Thesis Authors Foster, Nora Rakestraw Download date 10/10/2021 02:40:37 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/5221 A SYNOPSIS OF THE MARINE PROSOBRANCH GASTROPOD AND BIVALVE MOLLUSKS IN ALAbRAN ’-.ArLRS RECOMMENDED: Chairman, Advisory Committee Program Head Director of Division of Marine Science APPROVED: Dean of the College of Environmental Sciences Date Vice Chancellor for Research and Advanced Stud A SYNOPSIS OF THE NARINE PROSOBRANCH GASTROPOD AND BIVALVE MOLLUSKS IN ALASKAN WATERS A THESIS Presented to the Faculty University of Alaska in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Decree of MASTER OF SCIENCE By Nora Rakestraw Foster, B.S. V- > • Fairbanks, Alaska December, 197 9 Abstract This studv presents information on the tnxonomv and distribution of the marine prosobranch gastropod and bivalve mollusks from the waters surrounding Alaska. Three hundred fifty-two species of prosobranch gastropods and 202 species of bivalves are reported from these waters. Over 3,000 lots of specimens, representing 330 species and literature sources form the basis of this study. References, synonymy, geographic and bathymetric ranges are provided for each species. Characteristics used to identify the species of 66 genera are presented in tabular form. The greatest number of species is reported from the southern Bering Sea, <-ite fewest from the Beaufort Sea. Most of the species have wide ranges in the eastern or western Pacific. New collecting records reported here extend the known ranges of 27 species. Eight species were previously unknown from Alaskan waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Walrus Coastal Haulout Database, 1852–2016—Background Report
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chukot-TINRO, and Institute of Biological Problems of the North Far East Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences Pacific Walrus Coastal Haulout Database, 1852–2016—Background Report Open-File Report 2016–1108 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Images of walrus haulouts. A ground level view of an autumn haulout with adult females and young (Point Lay, Alaska, September, 25, 2013) is shown in the top panel. An aerial composite image of a large haulout with more than 1,000 male walruses is shown in the middle panel (Cape Greig, Alaska, May 3, 2016). A composite image of a very large haulout with tens of thousands of adult female walruses and their young is shown in the bottom panel in which the outlines of the haulout is highlighted in yellow (Point Lay, Alaska, August 26, 2011). Photo credits (top panel: Ryan Kingsbery, USGS; middle panel: Sarah Schoen, USGS; bottom panel: USGS). Pacific Walrus Coastal Haulout Database, 1852–2016—Background Report By Anthony S. Fischbach, Anatoly A. Kochnev, Joel L. Garlich-Miller, and Chadwick V. Jay Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Chukot-TINRO and Institute of Biological Problems of the North Far East Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences Open-File Report 2016–1108 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2016 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov/ or call 1–888–ASK–USGS (1–888–275–8747).
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Marine Mammals in the Coastal Zone of the Bering Sea During Summer and Autumn
    DISTRIBUTION OF MARINE MAMMALS IN THE COASTAL ZONE OF THE BERING SEA DURING SUMMER AND AUTUMN by Kathryn J. Frost, Lloyd F. Lowry, and John J. Burns Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1300 College Road Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 Assisted by Susan Hills and Kathleen Pearse Final Report Outer Continental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program Research Unit 613, Contract Number NA 81 RAC 000 50 1 September 1982 365 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Summary •. 373 I I. Introduction . ·" . 374 III. Current State of Knowledge . 375 IV. Study Area 387 V. Methods 388 VI. Results 395 A. North Aleutian Basin . ..... 395 B. St. George Basin .......•. 445 C. St. Matthew-Hall Basin ..... 452 D. Norton Basin . ....•. 471 VII. Discussion ..... 499 A. Steller Sea Lion 499 B. Harbor Seal .. 503 C. Spotted Seal . 506 D. Pacific Walrus . 507 E. Belukha Whale . 511 F. Harbor Porpoise 513 G. Killer Whale 513 H. Minke Whale 516 I. Gray Whale . 516 J. Sea Otter 519 VII I. Conclusions 521 A. Adequacy of Sighting Data . 521 B. Importance of Coastal Regions to Marine Mammals . 522 C. Potential Effects of OCS Activities . 524 IX. Needs for Further Study 526 x. Literature Cited .... 527 Appendix I. Geographical Coordinates of Locations Referred to in the Text . • . ........ 539 Appendix II. Source Names Index ... 551 367 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Map of the study area showing Outer Continental Shelf planning areas ......•.....•. 389 2. Map of the North Aleutian Basin planning area showing subdivisions used in data compilation 396 3. Map of the North Aleutian Basin, region NAB 1 397 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Mass Natural Mortality of Walruses (Odobenus Rosrnarus) at St
    Mass Natural Mortality of Walruses (Odobenus rosrnarus) at St. Lawrence Island, Bering Sea, Autumn 1978 FRANCIS H. FAY’ and BRENDAN P. KELLY ABSTRACT. In October-November 1978, several thousand living walruses came ashore in at least four localities on St. Lawrence Island where they had not been present before in this century. They hauled out also at two other siteswhich they have occupied annually but in much smaller numbers. At least 537 animals died on the haulout areas at that time, and approximately 400 other carcasses washed ashorefrom various sources. This was by far the greatest mortality of walruses ever recordedin an event of this kind. At least 15% of the carcasses on the haulouts were aborted fetuses, 24% were 5-6-month-old calves; the others were older animals ranging in age from 1 to 37 years old. About three-fourths of the latter on the haulouts were females; in the non-haulouts areas, the sex ratio was about 1:l. Forty of the best preserved carcasses were examined by necropsy. The principal cause of death was identified as extreme torsion of the cervical spine, with resultant cerebrospinal hemorrhage, apparently due to traumatization by other walruses. Nearly all of the dead were extremely lean, having less thanhalf as much subcutaneous fat ashealthy animals examined in previous years. RfiSUMfi. En Octobre-Novembre 1978, quelques milliers de morses vivants echouaient dans au moins quatre IocaIitCs de I’ile St. Laurent, qu’ils ne frequentaient jamais avant, depuis le debut du sitcle. 11s se trainaient aussi jusqu’B deux autres sites qu’ils frequentaient chaque annte mais en nombre bien moins important.
    [Show full text]
  • (VNIRO) Scientific Research Work on Marine Mammals of the Nort
    Scientific research work on marine mammals of the northern Pacific Ocean in 1984/85 [translated from Russian] Item Type monograph Authors Popov, L.A.; Berzin, A.A.; Vladimirov, V.A.; Doroshenko, N.V.; Blokhin, S.A.; Klevezal, G.A.; Phillips, K.D.; Mina, M.V.; Burkanov, V.N.; Bukhtiyarov, Y.A.; Kibal'chich, A.A.; Dzhamanov, G.K.; Kosygin, G.M.; Trukhin, A.M.; Makhnyr, A.N.; Sadovov, V.N.; Fedoseev, G.A.; Mineev, V.N.; Razlivalov, E.V.; Zorin, A.V.; Sevost'yanov, V.F.; Lipilina, I.A.; Sidorov, K.S.; Burdin, A.M. Publisher All-Union Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO) Download date 04/10/2021 16:35:46 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/30841 QL. 713.35 .535 1984·85 All-Union Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO) Scientific Research Work on Marine Mammals of the Northern Pacific Ocean in 1984/85 Project 02.05-61 ''Marine Mammals", US-USSR Agreement of Protection of the Environment Moscow, 1986 Translated by S. Pearson and F.H. Fay Scientific Research Work on Marine Mammals in the North Pacific Ocean in 1984/85 Project 02.05-61 "Marine Mammals", US-USSR Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of the Environmental Protection Moscow 1986 translated by S. Pearson and F.H. Fay INTRODUCTION (3) This report contains materials on scientific investigations of marine mammals of the North Pacific Ocean completed in 1984- 1985 in accordance with the US-USSR Agreement on cooperation in the field of Environmental Protection, Project 02.51-61 "Marine Mammals".
    [Show full text]
  • Bering Sea Ecoregion Strategic Action Plan
    Bering Sea Ecoregion Strategic Action Plan Part I Map by Shane T. Feirer The Nature Conservancy in Alaska First Iteration September 2005 Part 1. Bering Sea Ecoregion: Strategic Action Plan - First Iteration Table of Contents- First Iteration___ Page Introduction to the Plan iii Part I: Strategic Action Plan- First Iteration 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Description of the Bering Sea Ecoregion 1 1.2 Biological Significance 1 1.3 Changes in the Bering Sea 2 1.4 The Playing Field 3 1.5 Ecoregion-Based Conservation in the Bering Sea (1999) 4 1.6 Current Staffing, Resources, and Programs 6 2. Planning Method 7 2.1 Planning Team 8 2.2 Adaptive Management/ Open Standards 9 2.3 TNC Enhanced 5-S Methodology 10 2.4 TNC and WWF Terminology 11 3. Situation analysis 12 3.1 Conceptual Model 12 4. Biological Features Summary 15 4.1 Biological Features 15 5. Viability Summary 19 6. Threats Summary 26 6.1 Threats Summary Tables 26 6.2 Threats by Area (Threats Maps) 30 6.3 Threats to Select Biological Features 34 7. Goals, Objectives and Strategic Actions 41 7.1 Vision for the Bering Sea 41 7.3 Objectives, Strategic Actions and Action Steps 41 8. Monitoring Plan 69 9. Recommendations for Subsequent Planning Efforts (Next Steps) 88 9.1 Engaging Other Partners 88 Bering Sea Plan, First Iteration, September 2005 Pt I p.i 9.2 Next Iterations 88 9.3 Next Steps 88 10. Acknowledgements 90 11. References 93 12. End Note 109 List of Tables and Figures for Part I Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Mammal Commission Annual Report -1994
    , MARINE MAMMAL COMMISSION Annual Report to Congress 1994 Marine Mammal Commission 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 31 January 1995 Table of Contents List of Tables iv List of Figures iv Executive Summary ............................................... .. v I. Introduction. .............................................. .. 1 Personnel ................ .. ......... .. ................ .... 1 Funding. ............................................... .. 1 II. Reauthorization of the Marine Mammal Protection Act and Related Legislation ... ..................................... .. 3 Marine Mammal Protection Act ................. .. 3 Endangered Species Act ...................................... .. 8 Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act ................... .. 9 III. Principles for Wildlife Conservation ............................... .. 11 Workshop on Principles for the Conservation of Wild Living Resources .......... 11 Analysis of Fishery Conservation Agreements 14 IV. Species of Special Concern ..................................... .. 17 West Indian Manatee ....................................... .. 17 Dugong. .. .. 26 Hawaiian Monk Seal ....................................... .. 27 Steller Sea Lion .......................................... .. 37 Harbor Seal in Alaska ...................................... .. 44 Northern Fur Seal. ........................................ .. 47 Pacific Walrus ........................................... .. 52 Northern Right Whale ...................................... .. 59 Humpback
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Cultural Heritage Monuments and Sites in the Arctic
    Assessment of Cultural Heritage Monuments and Sites in the Arctic Arctic Council (SDWG) Project #P114 Assessment of Cultural Heritage Monuments and Sites in the Arctic: Project # P114 CONTENTS Foreword Background Aim of the project Project group Cultural heritage in the Arctic Recommendations from the project group “Exceptional international significance” Statement of Best Practice for Site Management List of internationally significant cultural heritage sites in the Arctic Site descriptions Norway - Svalbard Greenland Canada USA - Alaska Sápmi Russia Finland Front cover photo: Trapper`s cabin in Svalbard reverting back to nature. (Susan Barr) 1 Assessment of Cultural Heritage Monuments and Sites in the Arctic: Project # P114 Assessment of Cultural Heritage Monuments and Sites in the Arctic: Project # P 114 Foreword The Arctic is full of history, stretching over thousands of years and leaving behind a wealth of cultural heritage sites that are current witnesses to the stories of the past. For decades or centuries many of them have seemed to have been frozen in time – protected from human impact by the sea ice surrounding them and preserved from natural degradation by the cold, dry climate. In actual fact nature has both protected and degraded the heritage at the same time, but the changing climate of our time is rapidly tipping the balance towards greater and more rapid degradation. Therefore, given the knowledge that the cultural heritage sites of the Arctic are essential to the understanding of our past and therefore our present and future in the region, together with the increasing and negative effects of climate change, it is of the utmost importance that we do our best to ensure optimal protection and management of the sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Literature in the National Marine Mammals Laboratory Library
    RUSSIAN LITERATURE IN THE NATIONAL MARINE MAMMAL LABORATORY LIBRARY t....J ." ---_1...r."a..._--- Submitted to the National Marine Mammal Laboratory in fulfillment ofContract No. 43ABNF601962 Marinka International S. Pearson (Smrstik), compiler Seattle, Washington February 1997 INTRODUCTION This bibliography of Russian literature represents the collection of works, either published or unpublished, for individual Russian scientists who have done research on marine mammals. The information for the compilation of this list came from entries in the NMML Library card catalog and the on-line Papyrus data base of current NMML holdings. The Russian materials in the library were gathered from various sources: journal articles, reports from VNIRO (All-Union Scientific Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography) and TINRO (Pacific Scientific Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography). The annual reports from the Russian side in connection with Project 02.06-61 “Marine Mammals”, US-USSR (Russia) Agreement of Protection of the Environment are valuable data which document the ongoing cooperative research between the United States and the Russian Federation of States. The author’s names are alphabetized according to the English spelling of the name. There are variations in spellings for the same name because there are different transliteration systems. In order to facilitate the usefulness of the citations the language is indicated or the presence of an English abstract where ever it was possible to verify that information. Standard abbreviations were used in journal citations. The translator’s name or affiliation is also included when available. Approximately one-fourth of the citations were actually verified as to being available in the reprint file or on the book shelves.
    [Show full text]