(from "Report of the Scientific Committee", the version distributed at
2000 meeting)
The matter was discussed this year in the context of providing advice on the effect of the JARPA programme catches. The specific concerns are discussed under Item 16.3.1 below.
Some members considered that the history of these scientific permit catches has been that they are ongoing, and this year's documentation does not dispel the impression that they may be continued, revised and/or extended for the indefinite future. Accordingly the effect of such catches is most reasonably analysed by modelling long-term ongoing removals, and any such analysis is therefore usefully compared to other tools used by the Committee to formulate continuing management advice, such as the RMP and future AWMP.
Other members did not agree that it was necessary to assume that any research catch would continue for 100 years when assessing its effect on the stock. This would give a misleadingly large impression of the effects of much shorter programmes which could be justified for sound scientific reasons. They believed it might be wiser to consider the effects of catches over a variety of timeframes when programmes are initiated, but only sensibly on a case-by-case basis and in any event not more than 20 years.
Despite the above concerns, the Committee agreed a general principle that when addressing the question of the effect of scientific permits on catches, it would examine the effects of proposed catches assuming they were ongoing, as well as for a shorter period, even if the proposal was initially presented as a feasibility study.
16.2 Review of results from existing permits
16.2.1 Japan - Southern Hemisphere minke whales
SC/52/O20 summarised the thirteenth field season of
the JAJRPA programme. Research was conducted in
Area IV and the eastern part of Area III from 5
December 1999 to 10 March 2000.
The sightings vessels covered almost 5,000 n.miles and the three sighting and sampling vessels covered about 3,800 n.miles each. A total of 1,507 (6,581 individuals) sightings of minke whales were made, whilst 661 (1,269 individuals) primary sightings of humpback whales were observed.
In Area IV, minke whales were most abundant in the southern area, particularly in the East-south stratum where large schools were observed. Most of the primary sightings in Prydz Bay were minke whales.
Minke whales in Area IIIE were also concentrated near to the pack ice, mainly west of 56°E. Most of the minke whales were seen in the northern stratum at its southern edge and only a few minke whales were seen off the ice edge in Area IIIE. Humpback whales in Area IIIE were clearly separated from minke whales. They were concentrated in the western part of the northern stratum and southern stratum between 56°E and 62°E. In Area IV, similar apparent segregation between species was observed in the northern stratum, but in the south between 90°E and 112°E there were densities of both species. Humpback whales were seldom seen in the Prydz Bay.
Of 1,106 schools (4,810 individuals) sighted by the two sighting/sampling vessels, 468 individuals were targeted and 439 individuals were taken.
A total of 125 individuals were photographed and 49 skin samples were collected by biopsy from humpback, blue and right whales. Acoustic records were obtained for a total of 19 hours and 38 minutes from seven cetacean species. XCTD and CTD were conducted at 123 and 87 locations in the research area. Hydro-acoustic surveys with EPCS were also conducted.
Mature females were dominant in the East-south stratum and Prydz Bay, whereas mature males were dominant in the north strata , West-south stratum in Area IV and Area IIIE. The percentage of immature females was highest in all strata in Area IIIE and that of mature females was the lowest. The maximum length of the sampled animals was 9.45m for males and 9.92 for females. The minimum lengths were 4.71m and 5.23m respectively.
SC/52/O19 reported on the result of an experiment to try an alternative sampling strategy proposed by Schweder (IWC, 1998d). This attempted to take into account (a) over-sampling from small schools, (b) easier detection of larger schools (c) and under-surveying in areas of high density. The experiment revealed that a considerable amount of time was lost along the trackline in areas of high density. The authors concluded that these experiments should continue for a proper evaluation of the proposed method.
16.2.2 Japan - North Pacific minke whales
16.2.2.1 REPORT OF THE JARPN REVIEW MEETING
Bannister presented the report of the Workshop held in
Tokyo, 7-10 February 2000 (SC/52/Rep2). In addition
to Japanese participants, 11 others were present, of
which seven were Invited Participants. Sadly, the
Convenor, Smith, had been prevented from attending at
the last minute.
The Workshop's terms of reference, as agreed by the Scientific Committee last year (IWC, 2000f, p.57) were to:
(a) JARPN objectives
(b) other objectives;
The main objectives of JARPN were to determine:
The Committee had expected that the Workshop report would provide it with information on the plausibility of options being considered in the RMP Implementation Simulation Trials for North Pacific minke whales (IWC, 2000f, pp.8-10) when those results are considered at this Animal Meeting.
OUTLINE OF JARPN AND PAST COMMITTEE DISCUSSIONS
The JARPN surveys started in 1994 with the primary
objective of elucidating the stock structure of minke
whales in the northwestern North Pacific to assess the
plausibility of working hypotheses developed by the
Working Group on North Pacific Minke Whale
Management Trials (IWC, 1994a, pp.120-44).
Originally there were three sub-objectives:
In 1996, the Committee had agreed that the 'O' sub-stock structure scenario should be dropped from the Implementation Simulation Trials for North Pacific minke whales. Since then, that third sub-objective had not been considered. A second objective, 'the feasibility study on the feeding ecology of minke whales in the research ground', was added in 1996. In 1999, a sub-objective was added to the primary objective, viz. to estimate the mixing rate between the 'J' and 'O' stocks.
There had been substantial discussions of the programme by the Committee at the programme's inception, in 1994, when there was a detailed review (IWC, 1995b, pp.82-5), and in 1999 (IWC, 2000f, pp.54-57). Discussions in the intervening years largely referred to comments on the 1994 review.
At the 1994 Committee, meeting the proposal was reviewed in accordance with the Committee's agreed five sets of guidelines, A-E. For three, A (The Proposal), B (Objectives) and E (Research cooperation), the Committee had agreed that the relevant guidelines had been met. For C (Methodology) there was detailed discussion, particularly of genetic analyses. In addition, the importance of abundance estimates in the context of the RMP led to confirmation of the importance of sightings estimates as well as sampling. For D (The effect of catches on the stock), after some discussion the Committee had noted the difficulties experienced in the past in adequately providing advice on the matter, referring however to its previous advice that the effect of a small take for a short period would be negligible. It had agreed to consider the general question of how to provide such advice at its next meeting, but there was little subsequent progress in addressing the problem, despite, for example, extensive discussions at its 1997 meeting (IWC, 1998a, pp.95-106).
Last year, the Committee reviewed two options for the 1999 survey, one requiring permission from the Russian Federation for sampling in its waters. In the event, a majority of the Committee was unable to respond positively to a request for the Russian Federation to be urged to allow access to its waters for the proposed sampling.
In addition to those Committee discussions, initial results from the programme were discussed in some depth during the 1996 meeting of the Working Group on North Pacific Minke Whale Trials (IWC, 1997e, pp.203-26). Information from the research was used in revising the trials.
The Workshop reviewed the reasons for the selection of the boundaries for the sub-areas specified for North Pacific minke whales (SC/Rep2, Fig 1) as detailed in IWC (1994, p.122).
OVERVIEW OF SAMPLING METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
Sampling methods in the first two JARPN surveys,
which were considered to be feasibility surveys, were
similar to those in JARPA surveys. But methods were
modified in 1995, including sampling from secondary
sightings and restricting surveys to waters <15°C. A
total of 498 animals was collected in sub-areas 7, 8, 9
and 11. Samples were not taken in sub-area 12 because
it is in the Russian Federation EEZ and permission to
sample there was not given. Sampling efficiency
(animals sampled per animal sighted) in 1994 was
0.49, but, after the modification to the sampling
methods, it improved to 0.6-0.7. The Workshop was
informed that the distributions of minke whale
sightings roughly matched the distribution of minke
whale samples, thus indicating that the samples were
collected randomly from the areas sampled.
The Workshop reviewed the results of the 1999 JARPN cruise including sampling results for that year, as described in SC/52/Rep2, item 9, p4.
STOCK STRUCTURE
In this context the Workshop reviewed past discussions
of stock structure and methods of analysis, and
received detailed reports on investigations of DNA and
allozyme structure, biological (e.g. reproductive) data,
morphometric and morphological data, geographical
distribution, pollutant burdens, parasite loads and other
data; the latter included carbon and nitrogen stable
isotopes in baleen, muscle and liver, and condition
(fatness) factors (SC/52/Rep2, items 10.2.1-10.2.7).
THE EXISTENCE OF THE 'W' STOCK
In reaching its conclusions, the Workshop was greatly
helped by preliminary views summarised by Hatanaka
(SC/51/Rep2, Annex G) and Taylor (SC/52/Rep2,
Annex H). Its conclusions were:
The Workshop agreed that further analyses should be carried out to explore those findings further, as detailed in SC/52/Rep2 Annex I. In the light of the results the Workshop agreed that the possibility of the existence of some group of minke whales to the east of Japan that differed from the 'O' stock could not be ruled out, but that the data nevertheless provided a basis to restrict the number of 'W' stock hypotheses that need to be considered in the RMP trials.
In summary, the Workshop agreed that some of the difficulties experienced in discussing stock structure arises from lack of clarity in the Committee as to what constitutes a 'stock'. This needs to be expressed in terms of likely dispersal rates between 'stocks', where 'dispersal' refers to gene flow. In the context of trials, the Workshop recognised that 'dispersal' is modelled as permanent transfer from one breeding population to another. For example, established differences between the 'J' and 'O' stocks were sufficiently large that any such dispersal rate must be negligible on the time scale relevant to demographics and management. Three participants had expressed a minority view (SC/52/Rep2, item 1.3.1.6, p.12).
ESTIMATION OF MIXING RATES BETWEEN 'O' AND 'W' STOCKS
In the context of the hypothesised 'W' stock, 'mixing'
relates to the sub-areas (and times) where animals from
this stock might be present. The Workshop agreed that
it would be premature to draw conclusions on the
extent of the possible presence of 'W' stock animals
west of sub-area 9, prior to completion of further
analyses (detailed in SC/52/Rep2, Annex I). However,
it also agreed that if such analyses provided no
evidence to change the existing sub-area stratification
from a stock structure identification perspective, then
sub-areas 7 and 8 need not be distinguished for that
purpose. Furthermore, current hypotheses placing 'W'
stock animals in sub-area 7 and/or 8 could then be
rejected. The Workshop recommended that the results
of these further analyses be reported to the
Committee's 2000 meeting for consideration.
Regarding dispersal, the Workshop agreed that if there was a 'W' stock, there had also to be a non-negligible level of dispersal between this and the 'O' stock, for reasons already discussed. This in turn probably means that such dispersal effects should be included in the RMP trials. Based on the conclusions of a sub-group to advise on the further computations necessary to assist in determining ranges of dispersal rates appropriate for consideration in the trials, the Workshop recommended that a particular program (Taylor et al., 2000) should be used for that purpose and that the sub-group should monitor the progress of the associated computations and report accordingly to the next Committee meeting.
ESTIMATION OF MIXING RATES BETWEEN 'J' AND 'O' STOCKS
The Workshop reviewed estimates of the proportion of
'J' stock animals in sub-area 11, by month and sex,
based on data from JARPN surveys and past Korean
and Japanese coastal operations. Given that some of
the mixing rates reported were based on the assumption
that all samples from sub-area 9 were from the 'O'
stock, the Workshop recommended that the sensitivity
of these results to omission of the samples for the west
of sub-area 9 (i.e. west of 162°E) in 1995 be checked
as it may contain some 'W' stock animals. The results
should be reported to the Committee to take into
account further refinement of the Implementation
Simulation Trials.
IMPLICATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION SIMULATION TRIALS
The Workshop noted that its discussions and decisions
on mixing rates above are also relevant in this context.
However, a key aspect of the trials, to which those
discussions do not refer, is the variety of assumptions
about the proportion of animals in sub-area 12 (the
Okhotsk Sea) that may originate from the hypothesised
'W' stock. There are no data available from JARPN for
this sub-area (or portions of sub-areas 7, 8 and 9 in the
Russian EEZ). The Workshop recommended that
further genetic samples from, particularly, sub-areas 12
and 9, and possibly 8, be obtained to facilitate clearer
discrimination among alternative 'W' stock
hypotheses.
FEEDING ECOLOGY
Following consideration of the background, methods,
and results of feeding ecology studies, the Workshop
recognised that while two different methods had been
used to estimate daily and seasonal food consumption,
both need refinement. In method (1), the assumption of
an average passage time of eight hours for all food
items was made. Since no information is yet available
on food passage time for minke whale stomachs, the
assumption is subject to considerable uncertainty. The
Workshop agreed that if this method, originally
designed to calculate consumption rates in fish, is to be
used in future minke whale studies, some of the
assumptions should be refined using empirical data. It
noted that, with the logistics applied in the JARPN
surveys (including the use of a large mother vessel),
experiments addressing some of these questions might
well be carried out in the field. For method (2), it noted
that the energetic costs of blubber deposition and
visceral fat deposition had not been taken into
consideration in the calculations. It was suggested that
this be done, and that future calculations of food
consumption using method (2) follow the approach
described by Folkow et al. (2000) in their calculations
of minke whale food consumption in the northeast
Atlantic.
The Workshop noted that the consumption calculations were performed only for August and September. With the sampling design used in JARPN so far, a quantitative measure of temporal and geographical changes in minke whale diets can not be obtained. Thus, extrapolations to calculate the annual consumption of the entire population found in the research areas can not be performed. It agreed that if surveys are to be performed in the future, the sampling design should permit such calculations.
In conclusion, the Workshop noted that the feeding ecology investigations under JARPN were only a feasibility study. The primary objective was to obtain data necessary to address questions related to stock identity, implying a sampling design less than optimal for the ecological studies. The latter were conducted using well-established and appropriate methods, and the Workshop considered the study to be successful within those limitations.
The Workshop agreed that if ecological studies of minke whales are to be conducted in the area, the sampling regime must be designed to allow for a more quantitative estimation of temporal and geographical variation in diet. Given the migration patterns of minke whales in the area, it is also of the utmost importance for future ecological studies that access be obtained to the unsurveyed feeding grounds in the Russian EEZ, including the northern parts of sub-areas 8 and 9 and all of sub-area 12. The Workshop agreed that surveys in those areas would give a more complete picture of both the ecology and more general biology of the whole population, including, particularly, mature females.
The Workshop also agreed that it is necessary to obtain an improved understanding of the distribution and abundance of relevant prey species to better understand the dynamics of minke whale food choice and consumption. It therefore recommended that acoustic and trawl surveys, designed to address such questions, should be conducted concurrently with future whale surveys, if possible.
OTHER STUDIES (E.G. OCEANOGRAPHY)
The Workshop discussed an overview of
oceanographic conditions in the western North Atlantic
using information collected during JARPN (SC/52/Rep
2, item 12).
COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-2
The Workshop noted that under this Resolution the
Committee had been asked to advise the Commission
on whether the information sought in research
programmes under Special Permit was: (a) required for
management; and (b) could be obtained by non-lethal
means.
Bannister had conveyed the views of the Committee Chair, that while the item should be on the Workshop agenda, there should not be a long discussion of it. Full discussions should occur during the Annual Meeting.
In that context, the Workshop noted that it had not discussed matters relevant to item (b) above, but that in relation to item (a), information obtained during JARPN had been and will continue to be used in the refinement of Implementation Simulation Trials for North Pacific minke whales, and consequently was relevant to their management.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Two recommendations were identified in addition to
those already formulated:
All the Workshop's recommendations are listed in SC/52/Rep2, table 2.
In response to the suggestion that research be conducted in sub-area 13, the Workshop recommended that a full proposal be presented for consideration at of the Committee's next meeting.
Committee discussion
The Committee endorses the recommendations of the
Workshop. It noted that aspects of the report would be
considered by the sub-committee on the Revised
Management Procedure (Annex D). With respect to the
Commission's Resolution, it noted the Workshop's
comments above on whether the information obtained
was useful for management, i.e. information obtained
during JARPN had been and will continue to be used in
the refinement of Implementation Simulation Trials for
North Pacific minke whales, and consequently was
relevant to their management.
With respect to the question of non-lethal research methods, the Committee referred to its previous discussions on this subject (e.g. IWC, 1995b, pp.82), noting that no consensus view was reached.
16.3 Review of new or revised proposals
16.3.1 JARPN II
The Committee received an extensive new proposal by
the Government of Japan, 'Research Plan For Cetacean
Studies In The Western North Pacific Under Special
Permit (JARPN II) - Feasibility Study Plan For 2000
And 2001'. The priority for this programme, which is
intended to follow on from JARPN, is to be on feeding
ecology. It is envisioned that 100 minke whales
(effectively O Stock and putative W Stock), 50 Bryde's
whales (Western North Pacific Stock) and 10 sperm
whales (Western Division Stock) will be sampled in
each year. The proposal was circulated to the
Committee in advance of the meeting.
Morishita expressed regret and concern that despite the document clearly being marked as confidential, it had been leaked almost simultaneously in four countries. He also stressed that although the proposal had a strong cetacean component, it was much broader and aimed to provide information for the overall conservation, management and sustainable utilisation of marine resources (including cetaceans) in the western North Pacific, and especially within the EEZ of Japan. He noted that this was a feasibility study for a highly ambitious research programme involving multidisciplinary research and involving a wide number of Japanese research institutes.
The major discussion of the components related to the stock identity of minke and Bryde's whales took place in the sub-committee on the Revised Management Procedure (Annex D), whilst that related to pollutants took place in the Standing Working Group on Environmental Concerns (Annex J). Given the extent of the proposal and the overall workload of the Committee, the Chair had encouraged participants to submit working papers. These working papers, are included as an Annex to this report, as for convenience, are the discussions from Annex D and Annex J:
Annex P1 - comments by the sub-committee on the RMP;
Annex P2 - comments by the SWG on environmental concerns;
Annex P3 - Questions arising about JARPN II;
Annex P44 - Response to 'Questions arising about JARPN II';
Annex P5 - A comment on the usefulness of biopsy techniques;
Annex P6 - Response to 'A comment on the usefulness of biopsy techniques';
Annex P7 - Research design of JARPN II;
Annex P8 - Data and samples for feeding ecology studies in the past commercial whaling and scientific permit takes (JARPN).
In the general review of the Commission's Guidelines (Annex Y) given below, points made in these detailed Annexes are usually mentioned only in general terms unless illustrative examples are given. The proposers views are included immediately after the Guidelines. This is followed by Committee comments and discussion.
The Commission's attention is drawn to the fact that there was insufficient time to fully discuss each of the questions or comments made to the proposers of the proposal nor the responses they received. However, the authors of Annex P3, whilst appreciative of the effort made to answer their points, indicated that the replies given in Annex P4 did not fully satisfy all their concerns, even though considerable time was spent addressing some of the questions raised. The proposers indicated at the end of the discussion that they had tried to respond to the questions in detail and that they were willing to respond to further comments and questions after this meeting.
A. The Proposal
The relevant guidelines are as follows:
Proposal
The objectives of the programme are given in Section
III of SC/52/O1. The overall goal of the research is to
contribute to the conservation and sustainable use of
marine living resources including whales in the
western North Pacific, especially within Japan's EEZ.
For the overall goal, it is important to gather the
information on resources and to merge it as a whole
ecosystem. In this research special attention will be
paid to the ecosystem surrounding cetaceans, and the
data and materials related to cetaceans, prey species
and oceanographic conditions will be collected. The
subprojects are: feeding ecology (including prey
consumption and preferences of cetaceans and
ecosystem modelling); stock structure; environmental
effects on cetaceans and the marine ecosystem.
Numbers of animals and their management stocks are specified in the proposal. A total of 100 minke whales (effectively O Stock and putative W Stock), 50 Bryde's whales (Western North Pacific Stock) and 10 sperm whales (Western Division) will be sampled in each year. Random sampling will be carried out and thus the sex and length of the catch cannot be specified.
Comments and discussion
There were some questions raised about the more
detailed objectives of the sub-projects. In particular the
proponents clarified that the overall hypothesis to be
tested is 'Top predators influence the dynamics of prey
species which are the target of commercial fisheries
and competition exists between top predators and
fisheries'. However, they stressed that this is intended
to be a feasibility study and that more detailed
hypotheses corresponding to each component will be
developed later. Some members thought that the
proposal was too poorly developed and narrow to
distinguish among the effects of such factors as fishing,
predation and climate change such as the recent
'regime shift'.
Others stressed that the main purpose of a feasibility study is to improve methodology, and that from such a perspective, the proposal is reasonably balanced between detailed hypotheses and established methodology on one side and more open ideas on the other.
REFS: POINTS 1, 5, 24 IN ANNEXES P3 AND P4; ANNEX P1; ANNEX P2
B. Objectives
The relevant guidelines are as follows:
Proposal
The proposal states that the primary objective of the
programme is broader than the IWC's remit. It
considered this to be a critically important research
need. However it identifies some aspects of the
programme that address research needs identified by
the Committee, some which are directly relevant to
management. These include: (1) elucidations of minke
whale structure on whether the hypothesised 'W' stock
exists, and mixing rates for J and O stocks; (2)
elucidation of the stock structure Bryde's whales which
is important in the development of Implementation
Simulation Trials for those species - stock structure
information on sperm whales is relevant to the future
comprehensive assessment of that species; (3)
information relevant to some aspects of the possible
effects of environmental changes on whales (and their
prey); (4) studies on pollution; (5) information relevant
to the Committee's consideration of marine mammal -
fishery interactions; (6) elucidation of the role of
cetaceans in the ecosystem. Section V of the proposal
details the consideration of sample size.
Comments and discussion
There were some concerns expressed that the
estimation of sample sizes was inadequate in certain
cases, notably with respect to all aspects of the sperm
whale component and aspects of the pollution and
stock structure components. In response, the proposers
stated that this was intended to be a feasibility study,
particularly in the case of the sperm whale component.
Sample sizes for some aspects of the programme would
be modified in the light of the results obtained.
Some members expressed concern that most of the objectives of the programme did not address questions of high priority for the rationale management of the stocks concerned and would not contribute significantly to research needs identified by the Committee - the Bryde's whale samples do not relate to Implementation Simulation Trials. They particularly doubted the value of the sperm whale component which they believed would not provide any useful results for any of the three sub-objectives. In response the proposers stated that for all three objectives the study could obtain useful information to formulate a full scale study especially of feeding ecology as the sperm whale plays an important role in the ecosystem.
Some other members strongly believed that the proposal does not directly address any of the five guidelines above. They recognised that the primary objective of the proposal which pertained to top predators was scientific in nature, but believed that none of the objectives or sub-objectives were necessary for the management of any of the large whale species being killed.
Other members drew attention to the ambitious nature of the programme and drew parallels with the feeding ecology programme carried out by Norway, which also began with a feasibility study and has now made a valuable contribution towards multispecies modelling and management. They also noted the importance, to large-fishing nations as well as small island states, of the need to determine the impact of cetaceans on fish stocks as a matter of some urgency. Thus in addition to the information on North Pacific minke whale stock structure relevant to Implementation Simulation Trials, they believed that it represented an attempt to address a critically important research need.
REFS: POINTS 10, 25 IN ANNEXES P3 AND P4; ANNEX P1; ANNEX P2
C. Methodology
The relevant guidelines are as follows:
Proposal
Section IV of the proposal provides information on the
methods to be used for the various sub-projects.
Random sampling is to be employed for stock
structure. The feeding ecology project will follow the
protocols established in the Norwegian research
programme regarding number, weight and size of prey.
There will be concurrent prey surveys conducted in the
area using echo integrators, mid-water trawls, driftnets
and jigs. Prey consumption will be measured indirectly
(based on standard metabolism) and directly (temporal
changes in stomach contents per day). Prey preference
studies will mirror those used in the Norwegian
surveys.
The stock structure sub-project will employ a number of genetic and non-genetic techniques (as did JARPN). Final choice of sampling area will depend on whether permission is obtained to enter the Russian EEZ. Pollutant studies will be carried out by examining samples from each whale caught, from stomach contents and trawls and from lower trophic levels, air and sea water. A variety of chemicals will be measured, largely organochlorines and heavy metals. The health condition of the animals will be examined by external and internal examination and chemical tests/measures of sex hormones, enzyme induction, immune system etc.
Oceanographic observations will be made using XCTD, CTD, EPCS and echo sounders. This and satellite information will be used in the feeding ecology and environmental studies.
Section VIII of the proposal considers the question of the use of non-lethal methods. For the feeding ecology project, the existing commercial data are not appropriate because only some qualitative and rough quantitative records are available.
Comments and discussion
There was considerable discussion of methodological
issues. These can be roughly grouped under two
headings: is the methodology described likely to meet
the program's objectives; and can the research be
carried out using non-lethal methods. After the initial
presentation of the proposal, some concerns were
expressed that insufficient methodological detail was
given to allow proper evaluation of parts of the
proposal. Further details were provided in some of the
Annexes (see below).
Several members discussed the value of simultaneous prey sampling. As one example of the methodological problems, some members stressed that the methodology does not exist to sample quantitatively the range of cephalopod species consumed by sperm whales. Given this, they asserted that there was no scientific rationale for the inclusion of sperm whales in JARPN II. In response, the proposers noted that deep sea squid may be caught using driftnets at night or mid-water trawls for quantitative analysis. There was no time for further discussion of this and no agreement was reached.
Some members commented that with the sample size and methods proposed, it was unlikely that several of the objectives of the programme would be met. In particular they believed that the sperm whale component would provide little information and that at least should be dropped from the proposal. Concern was also expressed that the ecosystem modelling approach was poorly developed. They also noted that the likely precision of any fisheries information (both past data and future) was poor and that this would be a key component of any modelling exercise. Given their concerns they believed that the research programme was premature and that it be reconsidered by Japan following the FAO and IWC workshops on related matters. Until that time at least, they believed that the study should not proceed.
The proposers stated that Japan was willing to review the results of the meetings of FAO and others and incorporate useful information into JARPN II in order to improve the programme. However, Japan cannot agree with the view that these meetings are a prerequisite for initiating the research.
Other members stated that this was a feasibility study and that one of the aims was to investigate the methodology. They referred to the success of the earlier Norwegian programme. They felt that the sperm whale component was important in the context of trophic levels. Although there are not decades of abundance data for fish (the TAC management approach was only adopted in 1997) as is the case in Norway, there are substantial relative abundance data. Several Japanese Fisheries Agency research cruises would also be co-operating and providing abundance data for several fish species. Model development is at an early stage, but they believed that the combination of ECOSIM and MULTSPEC had the potential to address fundamentally important questions and the approach would be developed on a step-by-step basis. All aspects of the programme would improve as data became available.
With respect to the use of non-lethal means, some members believed that insufficient use had been made of presently existing samples and data, noting, for example the suitability of frozen samples for genetic analysis. They also noted that techniques now existed to address many questions related to feeding, stock structure and pollution through biopsy samples and such techniques were rapidly evolving (see Annex P5). Other members noted that detailed information on these items cannot be obtained from biopsy samples. They also commented on the difficulties in obtaining biopsy samples and thus the need for lethal sampling (see Annex P6). There was no time for further discussion of this item, and, as in previous discussions within the Committee on this (e.g. see IWC, 2000f), no consensus was reached.
REFS: POINTS 2, 3, 4, 8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23
IN ANNEXES P3 AND P4; ANNEXES P1, P2, P5, P6, P7, P8.
D. Effect of catches on the 'stock'
The relevant guidelines are:
Proposal
Section VI and Appendix 6 of the proposal address the
question of the effect of catches on the stock. This is
assessed by using the standard HITTER method
(Butterworth, 1996).
For minke whales, two O Stock scenarios are used: (1) sub-areas 7+8+9+11+12 are O Stock, and (2) sub-areas 7+8+11+12 (40% in sub-area 12) are O Stock. One W Stock scenario case is used: western part of sub-area 9 and sub-area 12 (60%) are W Stock. These scenarios are based on the results of the JARPN surveys. The effects of the catch on the stock are assessed from the stock trend in the case of catch number at 100. From the results of HITTER calculation, it was concluded that the effect on the minke whale stock is negligible.
Bryde's whales will be sampled from the Western North Pacific Stock. Because the proposed sampling area is far from the coastal region of southwest Japan, in which the East China Sea Stock extends (Yoshida et al., 1997; Pastene et al., 1997) and also far from oceanic islands, it is unlikely that Bryde's whales from other stocks will be taken. Two stock scenarios are used: whole area and sub-area 1 according to the recent Implementation Simulation Trials. The effects of the catch (50) on the stock are assessed in the same way as in the minke whale. From the results of HITTER calculation, it can be concluded that effect on the Bryde's whale stock is negligible.
Sperm whales will be sampled from the Western Division. While no calculation was made for the sperm whales, the sample size is so small that is clearly below the critical level to affect the stock.
Comments and discussion
Some members commented that the values chosen for
the HITTER method for the minke whale case were
insufficient to adequately address the effect of the
catches on the stock. They also questioned the criterion
used to define 'negligible.' Other members believed
that the approach taken used the best data available and
the conclusion was valid. The Committee noted that
the calculations were based on the assumption that
catches continue for only two years. Attention is drawn
to the Committee's discussion of this under Item 16.1.
REFS: POINT 7 IN ANNEXES P3 AND P4
E. Research co-operation
The relevant guideline is:
Thus the survey in the adjacent western half of Area VI
is being carried out in order to examine further the
temporal/spatial mtDNA analysis and possible inter-annual
variations in this area. In addition morphometric
and reproductive characteristic of the whales sampled
in Area VI West will be examined.
The progress of the JARPA tasks and other studies
using JARPA samples are presented partly in
documents SC/52/O6, O7, O19, O20, E4, E5, IA2 and
IA19, which were presented in various sub-committees.
The schedule for the 2000/2001 JARPA survey is as
follows:
In the 2000/2001 JARPA survey, in order to ensure
comparability of data, the survey period and the sample
size remain unchanged.
In response, Fujise noted that due to a fire on board the
base vessel, it was not possible to obtain 'early'
samples in Area VI last time and as a result, this was
only the second coverage of the area and is not
sufficient to address year to year fluctuation. Pastene
commented that other JARPA results have shown that
minke whale stock structure can be complex in the
region, with temporal, geographical and distance from
the ice-edge all seeming to play a role. Although the
estimated sample size is 160, this may differ by these
three factors, and the sample size of 100 may have to
be modified in the light of new information in future.
The question of whether the information could be
obtained by non-lethal means has been discussed at
several meetings. The Committee has reached no
consensus on this matter and the alternative views are
elaborated in Annex H to the Report of the JARPA
review meeting (IWC, 1998e, p.412).
As noted under Item 16.1, concerns were expressed
that the Committee has failed to give adequate advice
on the effect of the catches on the status of the stocks.
In particular, reference was made to the discussions
over the abundance of minke whales in the various
circumpolar surveys. Some members commented that
if the declines suggested by the third circumpolar
survey data prove to be real, then the need for the
Committee to provide advice on the effect of the
catches from JARPA was even more pressing. There
was some discussion as to whether it was appropriate
to use the RMP to examine this, and if so, how much
work this would require. Some members believed that
the Commission should be asked on how best to meet
its need for advice on the effect of JARPA catches on
the stocks. Others members believed that this was
purely a scientific matter.
Eventually, the Committee agreed to use the validated
Secretariat version of BALEEN II to examine the issue
of how the Committee can best address the task of
providing advice on the effect of scientific permit
catches on whale stocks in the intersessional period,
along with a variant of this coded by Punt that could
also examine questions of changing carrying capacity.
It was agreed to carry out this work intersessionally
and a steering group was established convened by Punt
(with Allison, Brown, Cooke, Walløe...) was
established to provide guidance to the Secretariat on
the precise details. Punt agreed to circulate his software
to the Intersessional Group.
_
Proposal
The proposal stated that participation of foreign
scientists, especially those from neighbouring
countries, is welcome, insofar as their qualifications
meet the requirements set by the Government of Japan.
These requirements are the same as those for JARPN.
Comments and discussion
As it had for JARPN (IWC, 1995b, p.84), the
Committee agreed that this guideline had been met.
16.3.2 JARPA
PROPOSAL
SC/52/O2 outlines the JARPA survey plan for the
2000/2001 season. The objectives, survey items and
methods are the same as the previous years. The survey
for the coming season will cover Area V and the
western half of Area VI to focus on the issue of the
distribution of the stocks. The reason to carry out
research on stock structure is as follows - mtDNA
analysis of available JARPA samples in Area IV and
Area V and Area III East, suggested that a Core Stock
is found in both Area IV and V while a different
Western Stock was found in Area IVW in the early
migration period. In order to examine the eastern
boundary of the Core Stock, two surveys have been
conducted in Area VIW (1996/97 and 1998/99).
Although the analyses of mtDNA from samples
collected in the previous two surveys (1996/97 and
1998/99) do not suggest the occurrence of additional
stock structure (i.e. an Eastern Stock), at this stage it is
premature to reach any conclusion. Genetic analyses
were presented in SC/52/IA3.
COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
As this is an ongoing research permit and the
Committee held a major review of this in 1997, the
Committee draws the attention of the Commission to
its previous considerations (IWC, 2000f). Smith noted
that his concerns expressed last year over the
investigation of the boundary to the east becoming a
longer term extension of the programme applied
equally to the exploration of the western boundary. In
particular he reiterated that the question of sample size
needed to be properly investigated and reviewed by the
Committee. He also noted that if a multi-year
programme is required to obtain a sufficient sample
size then this may mask inter-annual variability.
Donaghue noted that it would be helpful if a map of the
study area and a proposed cruise track could be added
to future proposals.