4. WHALE STOCKS (2005)

4. WHALE STOCKS

(from "Chair's Report of the 57th Annual Meeting")

4.1 Antarctic minke whales

4.1.1 Report of the Scientific Committee

The Committee has carried out annual surveys in the Antarctic (south of 60°S) since the late 1970s. The last agreed estimates for each of the six management Areas for minke whales were for the period 1982/83 to 1989/90. At the 2000 meeting, the Committee agreed that whilst these represented the best estimates for the years surveyed, they were no longer appropriate as estimates of current abundance. An initial analysis of available recent data had suggested that current estimates might be appreciably lower than the previous estimates.

Subsequently, considerable time has been spent considering Antarctic minke whales with a view to obtaining final estimates of abundance for the three circumpolar cruises and considering any trend in these. This has included a review of data collection methods and analytical methodology. After considering many of the factors affecting abundance estimates, there is still evidence of a decline in the abundance estimates, although it is not clear how this reflects any actual change in minke abundance. Three hypotheses that might explain these results have been identified:

(1): a real change in minke abundance;
(2): changes in the proportion of the population present in the survey region at the time of the survey;
(3): changes in the survey process over time that compromise the comparability of estimates across years.

A considerable amount of work has been undertaken and further work is ongoing. The final part of the Third Circumpolar Survey undertaken as part of the IWC's SOWER research programme has been completed and preliminary work suggests that the estimated abundance may be down to about 40% of the estimates from the Second Circumpolar Survey. Experimental work to examine possible causes was undertaken on the 2004/05 cruise and further work will be undertaken on the 2005/06 cruise. Work to finalise an assessment of Antarctic minke whale is continuing in a number of ways and will again be a priority item for discussion at the 2006 meeting.

4.1.2 Commission discussion and action arising

Australia expressed its continuing concern that there is still no agreed abundance estimate for Antarctic minke whales, particularly since the results of CPIII suggest a possible decline of 61% from that previously agreed. It considered that reaching agreement on an estimate is urgent. Germany and New Zealand made similar remarks. New Zealand suggested that results from SOWER cruises called into question those from JARPA that do not show any sign of decreasing abundance. Monaco noted the agreement within the Commission that there is uncertainty regarding Antarctic minke whale abundance, but suggested that there is some indication of a declining trend. Such circumstances, Monaco also suggested, would usually trigger a precautionary approach. Brazil agreed.

In response to these comments, Japan suggested that information is sometimes portrayed in a very simple but misleading way. It did not dispute that the previously-agreed abundance estimate is different from that currently suggested by recent SOWER cruises but suggested that the Scientific Committee should be left to investigate the reasons behind these differences rather than creating a political issue. Japan noted that under JARPA, non-lethal sighting surveys have been conducted for the past 18 years and have not indicated declines in minke whale abundance. Unlike SOWER surveys, the JARPA surveys have been conducted in almost the same area every year. Because of this, Japan has more confidence in JARPA abundance estimates. Iceland associated itself with Japan's comments, noting that the Scientific Committee has not yet concluded that there is a declining trend in minke whale abundance.

In response to a remark from the UK that only one scientific paper had been published on JARPA results despite the Japanese government spending some 50 million US$, Japan reported that in the past it has provided tables of information to the Commission on published documents (close to 200), including those subjected to peer review.

The Commission noted the Scientific Committee report and endorsed its recommendations.

4.2 In-depth assessment of western North Pacific common minke whales

4.2.1 Report of the Scientific Committee

The Committee reviewed the progress made by an intersessional steering group established last year to plan for the in-depth assessment of western North Pacific common minke whales, with a focus on 'J' stock. The Committee reviewed progress on a series of priority research items it had previously identified that needed to be accomplished before an assessment could be undertaken, including: analysis of survey data; further work on stock identity; examination of CPUE (catch per unit effort data) and bycatch information; and consideration of ways to elucidate the proportion of 'J' stock animals found in the Sea of Japan. Considerable progress was made this year. Work is continuing on these issues and a workplan and a further intersessional group was established. The Committee agreed that this work should proceed with some urgency but noted that a complete assessment may take several years. In addition to research recommendations the Committee also recommended that the Commission should request the relevant authorities in the Russian Federation to grant permission for survey vessels to enter EEZ and territorial (coastal) waters.

4.2.2 Commission discussion and action arising

The UK noted the continuing concern expressed by the Scientific Committee regarding this stock - a genetically distinct stock which appears to be low in numbers and not readily distinguishable from other stocks on the same whaling grounds. It also expressed concern regarding bycatch of these animals. The UK recalled that this stock was classified as a Protection Stock in 1983 when the population was believed to be at 37% of its level in 1962 and that in 2003, the Scientific Committee had agreed that the stock could become extinct within this century. This year, the Scientific Committee reported that further quantitative assessment might be some years away and that there are data suggesting that stock structure is complex, potentially containing distinct population sub-units, each of which may be endangered. The UK agreed that further research is need, including a study of the genetics of the bycaught animals, and that action needs to be taken to protect the stock, particularly with respect to bycatch. It asked for an explanation from the Scientific Committee Chair regarding the status and genetics of this stock and what needs to be done to clarify these. Mexico concurred with the UK.

The Scientific Committee Chair noted the complexity of the issue and stressed that it is premature to draw conclusions about the stock status or structure. He explained that the following priority items needed to be addressed prior to an assessment: (1) analysis of sighting survey data to provide estimates of abundance, their variances, and any estimates of g(0); (2) analysis of genetic and any other data to inform hypotheses of stock structure; (3) consideration of the link between points (1) and (2), particularly how to deal with the lack of information on the proportion of 'J' stock animals in the Sea of Okhotsk; (4) finalising the CPUE data and analysis; (5) obtaining information on fishing effort for historical extrapolation of bycatch based on current information; and (6) obtaining information on catches not already held by the Secretariat.

Japan thanked the Russian Federation and Republic of Korea for their co-operation with research on western North Pacific common minke whales. Japan believed that the credibility of the genetics work on stock structure using samples from products for sale on the Korean and Japan markets is low, due to the lack of data on the origin of the market purchase (i.e. the date and location of where and when the animal was bycaught). It agreed with the Scientific Committee Chair that it is premature to come to a conclusion on stock structure.

The Republic of Korea thanked the Scientific Committee for its work in this area and welcomed the in-depth assessment. It noted that bycatch data are only available from Korea and Japan.

The Commission noted the Scientific Committee report and endorsed its recommendations.

resolution on facilitating closer co-operation in sighting surveys

On behalf of the other co-sponsors (Japan, the Russian Federation and China), the Republic of Korea introduced a draft Resolution on facilitating closer co-operation among the range states to expedite the sighting survey of minke whales off the Korean peninsula. Specifically, the draft Resolution: (1) welcomed a workshop on collaboration of non-lethal research on this stock to be hosted by the Republic of Korea and held in Ulsan in early 2006 and encouraged all range states and other interested parties to participate; (2) requested relevant countries that have unsurveyed waters under their jurisdictions to conduct co-operative non-lethal scientific research for the 2006 surveys; and (3) recommended that scientists from range states and other countries collaborate and harmonise efforts to develop a research programme and conduct analyses of data.

Noting that it was the first time all range states had come to a common understanding of the research needs, the Republic of Korea asked that the Resolution be adopted by consensus. While the UK, welcomed the proposed Resolution, it would have preferred the Resolution to include something on the collection of data on bycatch. The Netherlands agreed and suggested that the Resolution be amended accordingly. The Republic of Korea indicated that there were difficulties in including this aspect in the Resolution, but noted that the workshop would seek a way forward with respect to collecting bycatch data. The USA reported that it had hoped to be a co-sponsor of the Resolution, but could only have done this if there had been a stronger commitment with respect to bycatch. However, noting the Republic of Korea's verbal commitment on this issue, it was prepared to support the draft Resolution as submitted. Monaco suggested that the third operative paragraph be amended to include co-operation with the Scientific Committee. Japan thanked the Republic of Korea for its initiative. Noting that it and the Republic of Korea already collect extensive data on bycatch, Japan suggested that Monaco's amendment was sufficient. The Resolution, modified as proposed by Monaco, was then adopted by consensus (Resolution 2005-2, Annex C). The Republic of Korea expressed its appreciation for the support of the co-sponsors and the Commission.

4.3 Southern Hemisphere whales other than minke whales

4.3.1 Report of the Scientific Committee

4.3.1.1 humpback whales

Considerable progress has been made in recent years in working towards an assessment of humpback whales. Attention has focussed both on data from historic whaling operations and on newly acquired photo-identification, biopsy and sightings data. The Committee noted reports of increasing numbers of humpback whales in several parts of the Southern Hemisphere including Australia. It made a number of research recommendations to further progress towards an assessment. Considerable progress has been made in this work and the Committee has agreed that it should give high priority to completing the assessment at the 2006 meeting. To this end, an intersessional workshop will be held in Hobart, Australia in early 2006.

4.3.1.2 blue whales

The Committee is beginning the process of reviewing the status of Southern Hemisphere blue whales. An important part of this work is to try to develop methods to identify pygmy blue whales from 'true' blue whales at sea and progress is being made on this. Work on genetic and acoustic differentiation techniques is continuing and there is considerable progress with morphological methods. Last year, the Committee agreed that: (1) on average, the Antarctic blue whale population is increasing at a mean rate of 7.3% per annum (95% CI 1.4-11.6%); (2) had an estimated circumpolar population size of 1,700 (95% CI 860-2,900) in 1996; and (3) that this population is still severely depleted with the 1996 population estimate estimated to be at 0.7% (95% CI 0.3-1.3%) of the estimated pre-exploitation level. The Committee has agreed on a number of issues that need to be resolved before it is in a position to carry out an assessment, and progress was made at the 2005 meeting with a view to beginning the assessment process in 2006.

4.3.2 Commission discussion and action arising

Discussions focused on Southern Hemisphere humpback whales. New Zealand welcomed the reported increase in their abundance. However, it drew attention to discrepancies between abundance estimates derived from SOWER cruises and those from JARPA, suggesting that further work is needed before the true situation can be known. It therefore welcomed the Committee's recommendations for further work, including an intersessional workshop designed to facilitate the completion of the Comprehensive Assessment by the end of the next annual meeting in 2006. Finally it expressed its view that the JARPA II proposals, if put into effect, could have a significant impact on the small recovering South Pacific population of humpbacks, including those whose migration routes take them through New Zealand's waters.

Australia also welcomed the strong recovery in humpbacks in this area, but noted that it is still early days. It formally announced its offer to host and provide funding for the intersessional workshop in Hobart in the spring of 2006 to complete the Comprehensive Assessment. It commented that it would be regrettable if the increase in abundance resulted in proposals to slaughter humpback whales.

Japan too welcomed the recovery of the humpbacks, also indicated by its own research activities, and hoped this trend would continue. In response to New Zealand, it suggested that the rapid recovery of this stock may explain the differences between SOWER and JARPA abundance estimates and noted that there appear to be rapid changes occurring to the ecosystem in this area. It supported further work and hoped that discussions could be carried out on the basis of data and science rather than emotion.

The Commission noted the Scientific Committee report and endorsed its recommendations.

4.4 Other small stocks - bowhead, right and gray whales

4.4.1 Report of the Scientific Committee

4.4.1.1 small stocks of bowhead whales

The Committee received information of a number of analyses on the stock identity, movements and abundance of bowhead whales from the Davis Strait/Baffin Bay and Hudson Bay/Foxe basin regions. There were no reports of any catches in 2004.

4.4.1.2 north atlantic right whales

The Committee has paid particular attention to the status of the North Atlantic right whale in the western North Atlantic in recent years (e.g. see Special Issue 2 of the Journal - Right whales: worldwide status). The Committee is extremely concerned about this population, which, whilst probably the only potentially viable population of this species, is in serious danger (ca 300 animals). By any management criteria applied by the IWC in terms of either commercial whaling or aboriginal subsistence whaling, there should be no direct anthropogenic removals from this stock.

This year, the Committee once again noted that individuals from this stock are continuing to die or become seriously injured as a result of becoming entangled in fishing gear or being struck by ships. It repeated that it is a matter of absolute urgency that every effort be made to reduce anthropogenic mortality in this population to zero. This is perhaps the only way in which its chances of survival can be directly improved. There is no need to wait for further research before implementing any currently available management actions that can reduce anthropogenic mortalities.

The Committee reviewed progress on a number of research and management recommendations concerning this stock.

4.4.1.3 north pacific right whales

The Committee received reports of sightings of the endangered North Pacific right whales.

4.4.1.4 southern hemisphere right whales

The Committee received reports of continuing increases in Southern right whale numbers off South Africa and updates on information on biological parameters. The Committee again recommended that the 30+ year monitoring programme be continued, noting its value to conservation and management.

The Committee also received reports of right whales off Australia suggesting increasing numbers of cow/calf pairs of South Australia. The Committee also recommended that the long term monitoring programme in this area be continued.

4.4.1.5 western north pacific gray whales

This is one of the most endangered populations of great whales in the world. It numbers less than 100 animals and there are a number of proposed oil and gas-related projects in and near its only known feeding ground. The Committee held a Workshop in October 2002 to review this further. Overall, the Workshop agreed with the conclusions of previous reviews on western gray whales. Specifically, that the population is very small, and suffers from a low number of reproductive females, low calf survival, male-biased sex ratio, dependence upon a restricted feeding area and apparent nutritional stress (as reflected in a large number of skinny whales). Other major potential concerns include behavioural reactions to noise (notably in light of increasing industrial activity in the area) and the threat of an oil spill off Sakhalin which could cover all or part of the Piltun area and thus potentially exclude animals from this feeding ground. The Workshop had noted that assessments of the potential impact of any single threat to the survival and reproduction of western gray whales were insufficient and had strongly recommended that risk assessments consider cumulative impact of multiple threats (from both natural and anthropogenic sources).

This year, the Committee welcomed and supported the report and recommendations of the independent scientific review panel (ISRP) that had included five members of the IWC Scientific Committee (Brownell, Cooke, Donovan, Moore and Reeves). It commended SEIC (the Sakhalin Energy Investment Corporation) for requesting this review and IUCN for facilitating the process. Despite some difficulties, it believes that this process represented an important step forward for western gray whale conservation.

The Committee strongly supported efforts to build upon this in the future and to develop a framework for collaborative research, monitoring and mitigation efforts between oil companies, independent experts, national programmes and authorities and the IWC and other intergovernmental organisations. It particularly urged that other companies in the area co-operate with this process.

The Committee also concurred with need identified by the ISRP for a comprehensive strategy to save western gray whales. In addition to time spent in the Sakhalin region, gray whales spend approximately half their time in other waters in eastern Asia (Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and China) and there is a need for mitigation measures for the many potential threats to the western gray whale throughout its range.

In addition to the report from the Scientific Committee, Greg Donovan, Head of Science at the IWC Secretariat, reported on his activities with respect to western North Pacific gray whales since the last Annual Meeting. He noted that Resolution 2004-1 adopted last year had inter alia, requested that the Secretariat: (1) 'urgently offers its services and scientific expertise to the organisations concerned with oil and gas development projects and potential exploration projects in the Sakhalin area, and provides them with the findings of any relevant research and Scientific Committee reports; and (2) 'makes every effort to actively participate and provide advice and expertise at any international expert panels convened to consider the impacts on the western gray whale of oil and gas development projects in and around Sakhalin Island'. He reported that he had been invited to join the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP), established under the auspices of IUCN and convened in summer 2004. The Panel's primary objective was to examine plans for Phase 2 of the Sakhalin II development and review the plans of Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd (SEIC³) and their proposed mitigation measures in the context of the conservation of the western gray whale. The ISRP met four times (a total of some 17 days) between September 2004 and January 2005 and the final report was released on 16 February 2005. The full report can be obtained from IUCN's website. Subsequently, IUCN convened a two-day workshop in May 2005 that involved a wide range of stakeholders and specialists. The report of this workshop can also be downloaded from the IUCN website.

He noted that the report represents a huge amount of work and, in his opinion, is a significant step towards trying to ensure the recovery of this critically endangered population for two reasons: (1) it provided a fair and objective view of the development in the context of potential threats to the gray whale and the mitigation measures proposed by SEIC; and (2) it represented a major change in attitude of at least one company in terms of seeking independent outside review of its proposed development. He was pleased to report that following the publication of the ISRP report, SEIC chose the most 'conservationist' pipeline route. Finally, He reported that an important addendum to the ISRP report is the section dealing with the need for a comprehensive strategy for conservation of the western gray whale given that the Sakhalin developments are not the only threats to this stock. He stressed that collaboration and co-operation will be the key to success and he hoped that the IWC could play a facilitating role and set an example in which all member governments, (range states and non-range states alike) work by consensus to help this critically endangered population.

4.4.2 Commission discussion and action arising

Discussions within the Commission focused on western North Pacific gray whales. The Republic of Korea thanked the Scientific Committee for its work and the new information on this endangered population and welcomed the recommendations for additional research and co-operation. It was ready to do this, thus building on the gray whale workshop held in Ulsan in 2002.

The UK noted its continued grave concern regarding the status of this stock and indicated that it would be submitting a draft Resolution to the Commission for consideration.

The Commission noted the Scientific Committee report and endorsed its recommendations.

resolution on western north pacific gray whale

On behalf of the other co-sponsors (Austria, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand), the UK introduced a draft Resolution that: (1) calls upon range states to take all practical measures to avoid all anthropogenic mortality, and in particular to develop and implement strategies to prevent accidental deaths; (2) calls upon all organisations concerned with oil and gas projects to take all practicable measures to ensure that received noise levels in the Piltun feeding ground are reduced to a minimum and are in accordance with any future recommendations of the IWC Scientific Committee; (3) supports the ISRP proposal for a comprehensive strategy to save western gray whales and their habitat; (4) further calls upon all organisations, range states, authorities, scientists and other stakeholders concerned with developments in the waters around Sakhalin Island to support the efforts to develop a framework for collaborative research, monitoring and mitigation efforts between oil companies, independent experts, national programmes and authorities and the IWC and other intergovernmental organisations, and that they share all relevant data collected; and (5) requests the Secretariat to continue to offer its services and scientific expertise to appropriate collaborative efforts to develop a comprehensive strategy and ensure continued effective monitoring of the population.

The observer from IUCN welcomed the proposed Resolution. He noted that the oil company Exxon also has operations in the Sakhalin area and that it is important that they be encouraged to participate in the work on gray whales and to submit the results from their own activities to the Scientific Committee. The Republic of Korea and the Russian Federation also welcomed the proposed Resolution. The latter was particularly pleased to see the UK as one of the co-sponsors given that BP is also involved in oil and gas exploration around Sakhalin. It hoped that the UK government will co-operate with BP to minimise the potential effects of BP's activities on the gray whales.

The Resolution was adopted by consensus (see Resolution 2005-3, Annex C).

4.5 Other

4.5.1 Report of the Scientific Committee

4.5.1.1 historic estimates of abundance

In 2004, in the light of a genetic modelling paper published in 2003 (Roman, J. and Palumbi, S.R. 2003. Whales before whaling in the North Atlantic. Science 301:508-10), the Committee had considered the general methodological issue of estimating carrying capacity and/or pre-exploitation population size in the context of the Committee's assessment work. As a result of its discussions, the Committee agreed that such genetic methods have the potential to be one of a suite of tools that can be used to examine pre-exploitation abundance but that there are a number of limitations and uncertainties that must be considered when examining such data in a present-day management context. The Committee had agreed that the estimates of historic abundance provided in the Roman and Palumbi paper for the initial pre-whaling population sizes of humpback, fin and common minke whales in the North Atlantic have considerably more uncertainty than reported, and can not be considered reliable estimates of immediate pre-whaling population size. Particularly important in this regard is the mismatch between the time-period to which genetic estimates apply (i.e. the time period is difficult to determine and extremely wide) and the population sizes of whales immediately prior to exploitation. It also agreed that the paper provides no information to suggest that changes are required in either the RMP or AWMP approaches to management.

The Committee had identified further work necessary to assess whether genetically-based estimates of 'initial' abundance can provide useful information for the management of cetaceans and received a progress report on this work at the 2005 meeting. This work is continuing and will be presented at the 2006 meeting.

4.5.1.2 sperm whales

The Committee welcomed the summary report of a workshop held in the USA in March 2005. The workshop was not sponsored by the IWC but its terms of reference had been developed by a steering group within the IWC Scientific Committee. These were to:

(1): identify and evaluate new methods, identify critical tests of such methods, and describe how these might be conducted, especially using combinations of new methods simultaneously;
(2): identify relevant spatial scales and formulate plans for regional field studies to address key uncertainties relevant to an eventual in-depth assessment;
(3): develop a research programme that would be necessary and sufficient as the basis for an in-depth assessment of sperm whales, including research coordination and funding mechanisms.

The Committee agreed that it should consider sponsoring a second workshop proposed to be held in two years' time.

4.5.2 Commission discussion and action arising

There were no comments on the report from the Scientific Committee. The Commission therefore noted the Scientific Committee report and endorsed its recommendations.

³ Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited (SEIC) is a consortium of companies developing oil and gas reserves in the Sea of Okhotsk off the northeast coast of Sakhalin Island in the Russian Far East. The shareholders in SEIC are: Shell Sakhalin Holdings B.V. (Shell) 55% (operator); Mitsui Sakhalin Holdings B.V. (Mitsui) 25%; Diamond Gas Sakhalin, a Mitsubishi company 20%.