Pygmy blue whale movement, distribution and important areas in the Eastern Indian Ocean

This study was conducted as part of AIMS’ North West Shoals to Shore Research Program (NWSSRP) and was supported by Santos as part of the company’s commitment to better understand Western Australia’s marine environment. Hydrophone pressure data from Ocean Bottom Seismometers (OBS) were provided by the CANPASS project, jointly funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC grants 91955210, 41625016), and the China Academy of Science (CAS program GJHZ1776). Instruments were provided by the Australian National instrument pool ANSIR (http://ansir.org.au/). ANSIR, OBS data was also made data available from the Geoscience Australia and Shell. Data was sourced from Australia’s Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS).Pygmy blue whales in the South-east Indian Ocean migrate from the southern coast of Australia to Indonesia, with a significant part of their migration route passing through areas subject to oil and gas production. This study aimed at improving our understanding of the spatial extent of the distribution, migration and foraging areas, to better inform impact assessment of anthropogenic activities in these regions. Using a combination of passive acoustic monitoring of the NW Australian coast (46 instruments from 2006 to 2019) and satellite telemetry data (22 tag deployments from 2009 to 2021) we quantified the pygmy blue whale distribution and important areas during their northern and southern migration. We show extensive use of slope habitat off Western Australia and only minimal use of shelf habitat, compared to southern Australia where use of the continental shelf and shelf break predominates. In addition, movement behaviour estimated by a state-space model on satellite tag data showed that in general pygmy blue whales off Western Australia were mostly engaged in migration, interspersed with mostly relatively short periods (median = 28hours, range = 2 – 1080hours) of low move persistence (slow movement with high turning angles), which is indicative of foraging. Using the spatial overlap of time and number of whales in area analysis of the satellite tracking data (top 50% of grid cells) with foraging movement behaviour, we quantified the spatial extent of pygmy blue whale high use areas for foraging and migration. We compared these areas to the previously described areas of importance to foraging and migrating whales (Biologically Important Areas; BIAs). In some cases these had good agreement with the most important areas we calculated from our data, but others had only low (5%) to moderate (13%) overlap. Month was the most important variable predicting the number of pygmy blue whale units and number of singers (acting as indices of pygmy blue whale density). Whale density was highest in the southern part of the NW Australian coast and whales were present there between April-June, and November-December, a pattern also confirmed by the satellite tracking data. Available data indicated pygmy blue whales spent up to 124 days in Indonesian waters (34% of annual cycle). Since this area may also be the calving ground for this population, inter-jurisdictional management is necessary to ensure their full protection.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Satellite derived offshore migratory movements of southern right whales (Eubalaena australis) from Australian and New Zealand wintering grounds

Funding: Australian Marine Mammal Center Grant 13/48 AIM, SDG, DH, AL http://www.marinemammals.gov.au/ The Australian Marine Mammal Center was involved in study design and anlaysis through the involvement in the project by AMMC staff, Dr Mike Double and Dr Virgina Andrews-Goff Princess Melikoff Trust Marine Mammal Conservation Program KC New Zealand Department of Conservation SC.Southern right whales (Eubalaena australis) migrate between Austral-winter calving and socialising grounds to offshore mid- to high latitude Austral-summer feeding grounds. In Australasia, winter calving grounds used by southern right whales extend from Western Australia across southern Australia to the New Zealand sub-Antarctic Islands. During the Austral-summer these whales are thought to migrate away from coastal waters to feed, but the location of these feeding grounds is only inferred from historical whaling data. We present new information on the satellite derived offshore migratory movements of six southern right whales from Australasian wintering grounds. Two whales were tagged at the Auckland Islands, New Zealand, and the remaining four at Australian wintering grounds, one at Pirates Bay, Tasmania, and three at Head of Bight, South Australia. The six whales were tracked for an average of 78.5 days (range: 29 to 150) with average individual distance of 38 km per day (range: 20 to 61 km). The length of individually derived tracks ranged from 645–6,381 km. Three likely foraging grounds were identified: south-west Western Australia, the Subtropical Front, and Antarctic waters, with the Subtropical Front appearing to be a feeding ground for both New Zealand and Australian southern right whales. In contrast, the individual tagged in Tasmania, from a sub-population that is not showing evidence of post-whaling recovery, displayed a distinct movement pattern to much higher latitude waters, potentially reflecting a different foraging strategy. Variable population growth rates between wintering grounds in Australasia could reflect fidelity to different quality feeding grounds. Unlike some species of baleen whale populations that show movement along migratory corridors, the new satellite tracking data presented here indicate variability in the migratory pathways taken by southern right whales from Australia and New Zealand, as well as differences in potential Austral summer foraging grounds.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Surfacing rates, swim speeds, and patterns of movement of Antarctic blue whales

During three surveys in the austral summers of 2013, 2015, 2019, data on Antarctic blue whale blow rates, dive times, swim speeds, and broadscale movements were collected using video photogrammetric tracking and intra-voyage photo-identification. A total of 24.4 hours of video observations were suitable for blow interval or movement analysis. Similar to other blue whale populations, Antarctic blue whale dive behaviour comprised a sequence of short dives followed by a long dive with a mean dive time for short dives of 17.6 s, and a mean long dive time of 189.3 s. Two separate methods were used to estimate the average blow rate for Antarctic blue whales, giving estimates of 59.7 and 63.2 blows per hour. The overall mean swim speed over the course of all suitable video track segments was 1.59 ms-1, but there were significant differences between years in the mean of the overall movement rate for each track; average movement rates were lower in 2015 compared to 2013 and 2019 (0.90 ms-1, 1.84 and 1.55 ms-1 respectively), with higher rates of turning in 2015. In 2019, there was faster overall movement through the study area in a consistent direction. The total number of photo-identified blue whales re-sighted intra-season in 2013 was nine (out of 50 identified individuals); in 2015 it was seven (out of 46); in 2019 two (out of 25). Whales remained for several days with little overall movement within the 2015 study area, whereas they were moving through the study area in 2019, which would explain the low number of intra-season resights. The predominant heading in 2019 was towards the area of Antarctic blue whale concentrations at the entrance to the Ross Sea observed in previous years. The photo-identification data also show a high proportion of resighted whales with coherent movements. This suggests that Antarctic blue whales might travel together, at least over periods of several days or sometimes up to a month. The differences between behaviours in 2015 and 2019 in particular may be related to differences in the characteristics of krill swarms between the study areas

Antarctic sonobuoy surveys for blue whales from 2006-2021 reveal contemporary distribution, changes over time, and paths to further our understanding of their distribution and biology

Seven passive acoustic surveys for marine mammal sounds were conducted by deploying sonobuoys along ship tracks during Antarctic voyages spanning years 2006-2021. These surveys included nearly 330° of longitude throughout Antarctic (south of 60°S) and sub-Antarctic (between 50-60°S) latitudes. Here, we summarise the presence of calls from critically endangered Antarctic blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus intermedia) detected on all seven of these surveys. We describe and compare the spatial distribution of detections of three different types of Antarctic blue whale calls: unit-A, Z-calls, and D-calls. Three sets of voyages partially overlapped spatially but in different years, providing three regions (Indian Sector, Dumont d’Urville Sea, Ross Sea) to investigate differences over time for these three different call types. The proportion of sonobuoys with calls present was significantly higher in the more recent years for seven of the 15 combinations of years, regions, and call type. The proportion of sonobuoys with calls present was significantly lower only for one of the 15 combinations (unit A in the Ross Sea between 2015 vs 2017), and not significantly different for the remaining seven pairwise comparisons. We discuss possible explanations for these observations including: differences in probability of detection, whale behaviour, whale distribution, and abundance. These explanations are not mutually exclusive and cannot yet be resolved without application of complex analytical methods and collection of additional data. Lastly, we discuss future work that could help clarify the contributions of each of these potential drivers of acoustic detection. We propose continued acoustic data collection, application of new analytical methods, and collection of other synergistic data from Antarctic blue whales on their feeding grounds as a basis for future work on this species. This could provide a cost effective and holistic means of monitoring their status after the effects of 20th century industrial whaling, as well as their responses to natural and anthropogenic changes to their main prey, Antarctic krill, and a changing climate

The retrospective analysis of Antarctic tracking data project

The Retrospective Analysis of Antarctic Tracking Data (RAATD) is a Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research project led jointly by the Expert Groups on Birds and Marine Mammals and Antarctic Biodiversity Informatics, and endorsed by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. RAATD consolidated tracking data for multiple species of Antarctic meso- and top-predators to identify Areas of Ecological Significance. These datasets and accompanying syntheses provide a greater understanding of fundamental ecosystem processes in the Southern Ocean, support modelling of predator distributions under future climate scenarios and create inputs that can be incorporated into decision making processes by management authorities. In this data paper, we present the compiled tracking data from research groups that have worked in the Antarctic since the 1990s. The data are publicly available through biodiversity.aq and the Ocean Biogeographic Information System. The archive includes tracking data from over 70 contributors across 12 national Antarctic programs, and includes data from 17 predator species, 4060 individual animals, and over 2.9 million observed locations

The retrospective analysis of Antarctic tracking data project

The Retrospective Analysis of Antarctic Tracking Data (RAATD) is a Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research project led jointly by the Expert Groups on Birds and Marine Mammals and Antarctic Biodiversity Informatics, and endorsed by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. RAATD consolidated tracking data for multiple species of Antarctic meso- and top-predators to identify Areas of Ecological Significance. These datasets and accompanying syntheses provide a greater understanding of fundamental ecosystem processes in the Southern Ocean, support modelling of predator distributions under future climate scenarios and create inputs that can be incorporated into decision making processes by management authorities. In this data paper, we present the compiled tracking data from research groups that have worked in the Antarctic since the 1990s. The data are publicly available through biodiversity.aq and the Ocean Biogeographic Information System. The archive includes tracking data from over 70 contributors across 12 national Antarctic programs, and includes data from 17 predator species, 4060 individual animals, and over 2.9 million observed locations.Supplementary Figure S1: Filtered location data (black) and tag deployment locations (red) for each species. Maps are Lambert Azimuthal projections extending from 90° S to 20° S.Supplementary Table S1: Names and coordinates of the major study sites in the Southern Ocean and on the Antarctic Continent where tracking devices were deployed on the selected species (indicated by their 4-letter codes in the last column).Online Table 1: Description of fields (column names) in the metadata and data files.Supranational committees and organisations including the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Life Science Group and BirdLife International. National institutions and foundations, including but not limited to Argentina (Dirección Nacional del Antártico), Australia (Australian Antarctic program; Australian Research Council; Sea World Research and Rescue Foundation Inc., IMOS is a national collaborative research infrastructure, supported by the Australian Government and operated by a consortium of institutions as an unincorporated joint venture, with the University of Tasmania as Lead Agent), Belgium (Belgian Science Policy Office, EU Lifewatch ERIC), Brazil (Brazilian Antarctic Programme; Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq/MCTI) and CAPES), France (Agence Nationale de la Recherche; Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB; www.fondationbiodiversite.fr) in the context of the CESAB project “RAATD”; Fondation Total; Institut Paul-Emile Victor; Programme Zone Atelier de Recherches sur l’Environnement Antarctique et Subantarctique; Terres Australes et Antarctiques Françaises), Germany (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Hanse-Wissenschaftskolleg - Institute for Advanced Study), Italy (Italian National Antarctic Research Program; Ministry for Education University and Research), Japan (Japanese Antarctic Research Expedition; JSPS Kakenhi grant), Monaco (Fondation Prince Albert II de Monaco), New Zealand (Ministry for Primary Industries - BRAG; Pew Charitable Trusts), Norway (Norwegian Antarctic Research Expeditions; Norwegian Research Council), Portugal (Foundation for Science and Technology), South Africa (Department of Environmental Affairs; National Research Foundation; South African National Antarctic Programme), UK (Darwin Plus; Ecosystems Programme at the British Antarctic Survey; Natural Environment Research Council; WWF), and USA (U.S. AMLR Program of NOAA Fisheries; US Office of Polar Programs).http://www.nature.com/sdataam2021Mammal Research Institut