Slocum gliders provide accurate near real-time estimates of baleen whale presence from human-reviewed passive acoustic detection information

© The Author(s), 2020. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Baumgartner, M. F., Bonnell, J., Corkeron, P. J., Van Parijs, S. M., Hotchkin, C., Hodges, B. A., Thornton, J. B., Mensi, B. L., & Bruner, S. M. Slocum gliders provide accurate near real-time estimates of baleen whale presence from human-reviewed passive acoustic detection information. Frontiers in Marine Science, 7, (2020):100, doi:10.3389/fmars.2020.00100.Mitigating the effects of human activities on marine mammals often depends on monitoring animal occurrence over long time scales, large spatial scales, and in real time. Passive acoustics, particularly from autonomous vehicles, is a promising approach to meeting this need. We have previously developed the capability to record, detect, classify, and transmit to shore information about the tonal sounds of baleen whales in near real time from long-endurance ocean gliders. We have recently developed a protocol by which a human analyst reviews this information to determine the presence of marine mammals, and the results of this review are automatically posted to a publicly accessible website, sent directly to interested parties via email or text, and made available to stakeholders via a number of public and private digital applications. We evaluated the performance of this system during two 3.75-month Slocum glider deployments in the southwestern Gulf of Maine during the spring seasons of 2015 and 2016. Near real-time detections of humpback, fin, sei, and North Atlantic right whales were compared to detections of these species from simultaneously recorded audio. Data from another 2016 glider deployment in the same area were also used to compare results between three different analysts to determine repeatability of results both among and within analysts. False detection (occurrence) rates on daily time scales were 0% for all species. Daily missed detection rates ranged from 17 to 24%. Agreement between two trained novice analysts and an experienced analyst was greater than 95% for fin, sei, and right whales, while agreement was 83–89% for humpback whales owing to the more subjective process for detecting this species. Our results indicate that the presence of baleen whales can be accurately determined using information about tonal sounds transmitted in near real-time from Slocum gliders. The system is being used operationally to monitor baleen whales in United States, Canadian, and Chilean waters, and has been particularly useful for monitoring the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale throughout the northwestern Atlantic Ocean.Funding for this project was provided by the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program of the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Navy’s Living Marine Resources Program

Exploring movement patterns and changing distributions of baleen whales in the western North Atlantic using a decade of passive acoustic data

© The Author(s), 2020. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Davis, G. E., Baumgartner, M. F., Corkeron, P. J., Bell, J., Berchok, C., Bonnell, J. M., Thornton, J. B., Brault, S., Buchanan, G. A., Cholewiak, D. M., Clark, C. W., Delarue, J., Hatch, L. T., Klinck, H., Kraus, S. D., Martin, B., Mellinger, D. K., Moors-Murphy, H., Nieukirk, S., Nowacek, D. P., Parks, S. E., Parry, D., Pegg, N., Read, A. J., Rice, A. N., Risch, D., Scott, A., Soldevilla, M. S., Stafford, K. M., Stanistreet, J. E., Summers, E., Todd, S., & Van Parijs, S. M. Exploring movement patterns and changing distributions of baleen whales in the western North Atlantic using a decade of passive acoustic data. Global Change Biology, (2020): 1-30, doi:10.1111/gcb.15191.Six baleen whale species are found in the temperate western North Atlantic Ocean, with limited information existing on the distribution and movement patterns for most. There is mounting evidence of distributional shifts in many species, including marine mammals, likely because of climate‐driven changes in ocean temperature and circulation. Previous acoustic studies examined the occurrence of minke (Balaenoptera acutorostrata ) and North Atlantic right whales (NARW; Eubalaena glacialis ). This study assesses the acoustic presence of humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae ), sei (B. borealis ), fin (B. physalus ), and blue whales (B. musculus ) over a decade, based on daily detections of their vocalizations. Data collected from 2004 to 2014 on 281 bottom‐mounted recorders, totaling 35,033 days, were processed using automated detection software and screened for each species' presence. A published study on NARW acoustics revealed significant changes in occurrence patterns between the periods of 2004–2010 and 2011–2014; therefore, these same time periods were examined here. All four species were present from the Southeast United States to Greenland; humpback whales were also present in the Caribbean. All species occurred throughout all regions in the winter, suggesting that baleen whales are widely distributed during these months. Each of the species showed significant changes in acoustic occurrence after 2010. Similar to NARWs, sei whales had higher acoustic occurrence in mid‐Atlantic regions after 2010. Fin, blue, and sei whales were more frequently detected in the northern latitudes of the study area after 2010. Despite this general northward shift, all four species were detected less on the Scotian Shelf area after 2010, matching documented shifts in prey availability in this region. A decade of acoustic observations have shown important distributional changes over the range of baleen whales, mirroring known climatic shifts and identifying new habitats that will require further protection from anthropogenic threats like fixed fishing gear, shipping, and noise pollution.We thank Chris Pelkie, David Wiley, Michael Thompson, Chris Tessaglia‐Hymes, Eric Matzen, Chris Tremblay, Lance Garrison, Anurag Kumar, John Hildebrand, Lynne Hodge, Russell Charif, Kathleen Dudzinski, and Ann Warde for help with project planning, field work support, and data management. For all the support and advice, thanks to the NEFSC Protected Species Branch, especially the passive acoustics group, Josh Hatch, and Leah Crowe. We thank the field and crew teams on all the ships that helped in the numerous deployments and recoveries. This research was funded and supported by many organizations, specified by projects as follows: data recordings from region 1 were provided by K. Stafford (funding: National Science Foundation #NSF‐ARC 0532611). Region 2 data: D. K. Mellinger and S. Nieukirk, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) PMEL contribution #5055 (funding: NOAA and the Office of Naval Research #N00014–03–1–0099, NOAA #NA06OAR4600100, US Navy #N00244‐08‐1‐0029, N00244‐09‐1‐0079, and N00244‐10‐1‐0047). Region 3A data: D. Risch (funding: NOAA and Navy N45 programs). Region 3 data: H. Moors‐Murphy and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2005–2014 data), and the Whitehead Lab of Dalhousie University (eastern Scotian Shelf data; logistical support by A. Cogswell, J. Bartholette, A. Hartling, and vessel CCGS Hudson crew). Emerald Basin and Roseway Basin Guardbuoy data, deployment, and funding: Akoostix Inc. Region 3 Emerald Bank and Roseway Basin 2004 data: D. K. Mellinger and S. Nieukirk, NOAA PMEL contribution #5055 (funding: NOAA). Region 4 data: S. Parks (funding: NOAA and Cornell University) and E. Summers, S. Todd, J. Bort Thornton, A. N. Rice, and C. W. Clark (funding: Maine Department of Marine Resources, NOAA #NA09NMF4520418, and #NA10NMF4520291). Region 5 data: S. M. Van Parijs, D. Cholewiak, L. Hatch, C. W. Clark, D. Risch, and D. Wiley (funding: National Oceanic Partnership Program (NOPP), NOAA, and Navy N45). Region 6 data: S. M. Van Parijs and D. Cholewiak (funding: Navy N45 and Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management (BOEM) Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species [AMAPPS] program). Region 7 data: A. N. Rice, H. Klinck, A. Warde, B. Martin, J. Delarue, and S. Kraus (funding: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, and BOEM). Region 8 data: G. Buchanan, and K. Dudzinski (funding: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the New Jersey Clean Energy Fund) and A. N. Rice, C. W. Clark, and H. Klinck (funding: Center for Conservation Bioacoustics at Cornell University and BOEM). Region 9 data: J. E. Stanistreet, J. Bell, D. P. Nowacek, A. J. Read, and S. M. Van Parijs (funding: NOAA and US Fleet Forces Command). Region 10 data: L. Garrison, M. Soldevilla, C. W. Clark, R. A. Chariff, A. N. Rice, H. Klinck, J. Bell, D. P. Nowacek, A. J. Read, J. Hildebrand, A. Kumar, L. Hodge, and J. E. Stanistreet (funding: US Fleet Forces Command, BOEM, NOAA, and NOPP). Region 11 data: C. Berchok as part of a collaborative project led by the Fundacion Dominicana de Estudios Marinos, Inc. (Dr. Idelisa Bonnelly de Calventi; funding: The Nature Conservancy [Elianny Dominguez]) and D. Risch (funding: World Wildlife Fund, NOAA, and Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs)