Report of a WorkshoR onArctic Marine Mammals

R.A. Davis

Western Region. Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Winnipeg ,Manitoba R3T 2N6

May 1981

Canadian Technical Report ofFisheries &Aquatic SciencesNo.1005

.+ Governme'110 Cana a Gouvernementdu CanadaF,shen sand Oce ns Pech s e Oceans

Canadian Technical Report of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences

These reports contain scientific and technical information that represents animportant contribution to existing knowledge but which for some reason may not beappropriate for primary scientific (i.e. Journal) publication. Technical Reports aredirected primarily towards a worldwide audience and have an internationaldistribution. No restriction is placed on subject matter and the series reflects the broadinterests and policies of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, namely, fisheriesmanagement, technology and development, ocean sciences, and aquatic environmentsrelevant to Canada.

Technical Reports may be cited as full publications. The correct citation appearsabove the abstract of each report. Each report will be abstracted in Aquatic Sciencesand Fisheries Abstracts and will be indexed annually in the Department's index toscientific and technical publications.

Numbers 1-456 in this series were issued as Technical Reports of the FisheriesResearch Board of Canada. Numbers 457-714 were issued as Department of theEnvironment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Research and Development DirectorateTechnical Reports. Numbers 715-924 were issued as Department of Fisheries and theEnvironment, Fisheries and Marine Service Technical Reports. The current seriesname was changed with report number 925.

Details on the availability of Technical Reports in hard copy may be obtainedfrom the issuing establishment indicated on the front cover.

Rapport technique canadien des

sciences halieutiques et aquatiques

Ces rapports contiennent des renseignements scientifiques et techniques quiconstituent une contribution importante aux connaissances actuelles mais qui, pourune raison ou pour une autre, ne semblent pas appropries pour la publication dans unjournal scientifique. II n'y a aucune restriction quant au sujet, de fait, la serie reflete lavaste gamme des interets et des politiques du Ministere des Peches et des Oceans,notamment gestion des peches, techniques et developpernent, sciences oceaniques etenvironnements aquatiques, au Canada.

Les Rapports techniques peuvent etre consideres comme des publicationscompletes. Le titre exact paraitra au haut du resume de chaque rapport, qui sera publiedans la revue Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts et qui figurera dans l'indexannuel des publications scientifiques et techniques du Ministere.

Les numeros 1-456de cette serie ont ete publies atitre de Rapports techniques deI'Office des recherches sur les pecheries du Canada. Les nurneros 457-714, a titre deRapports techniques de la Direction generale de la recherche et du developpernent,Service des peches et de la mer, ministere de I'Environnement. Les numeros 715-924ont ete publies a titre de Rapports techniques du Service des peches et de la mer,Ministere des Peches et de I'Environnement. Le nom de la serie a ete rnodifieapartir dunumero 925.

La page couvert ure porte Ie nom de l'eta blissement auteur OU I'on peut se procurerles rapports sous couverture cartonnee.

cr"

Canadian Technical Report of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 1005

May 1981

REPORT OF A WORKSHOP ON

ARCTIC MARINE MAMMALS

by

R.A. Davis

LGL Limited

~'MiTfimsnt In 0~librGry

JUN 221981

GO\;te!"";~ii' of N.W.V.Yeffowk"if~, N.W.T.

environmental research associates

44 Eglinton Ave West

Toronto, Ontario M4R lA1

This is the 135th Technical Report

from the Western Region, Winnipeg

ii

~ Minister of Supply and Services Canada 1981

Cat. no. Fs 97-6/1005

Correct citation for this publication is:

ISSN 0706-6457

Davis, R.A. 1981. Report of a workshop on arctic marine mammals. Can.Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1005: iv + 13 p.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION

PARTICIPANTS .

WORKSHOP RESULTSSession I -- Offshore Hydrocarbon Development

Discussion of Research InitiativesRelease of Contaminants.Release of Natural Gas .LNG Acciden ts .Release of Crude and Refined OilDredgingShock WavesUnderwater NoiseIce-BreakingGeneral Disturbance and Physical PresenceRecreation and Increased AccessCumulative Effects

Research PrioritiesPriority 1Priority 2 .Priority 3 .

Hydro-electric DevelopmentsSession II -- Marine Mammal Management

General Considerations .Increased Harvest LevelsInternational Aspects

Research Initiatives and PrioritiesWhite WhaleNarwhal .Bowhead .WalrusHarbour SealHarp SealHooded SealRinged SealBearded Seal

Discussion

SUMMARY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

iv

1

1

1

22233344555(,

66667788888999

1011111111111111

12

13

iv

ABSTRACT

Davis, R.A. 1981. Report of a workshop on arctic marine mammals. Can.Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1005: iv + 13 p.

A workshop of experienced biologists examined the potential effects ofoffshore hydrocarbon development and transportation on marine mammals in theCanadian Arctic. Important data gaps and research priorities to addressthese gaps are presented in this report. The workshop also examined thedata needed to effectively manage arctic marine mammals. This analysis andthe research needed to begin to establish the required data base arereported.

Key words: Canadian Arctic; marine mammals; offshore hydrocarbon development;management; research priorities.

RESUME

Davis, R.A. 1981. Report of a workshop on arctic marine mammals. Can.Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1005: iv + 13 p.

Un groupe de travail compose de biologistes experimentes a examineles effets possibles qu'auraient l'exploitation et Ie transport d'hydrocarburesdans les eaux cotieres sur les mammiferes marins de l'Arctique canadien. Cerapport fait part d'importantes lacunes dans les donnees et suggere despriorites de recherche pour combler ces lacunes. Le groupe de travail aegalement etudie quelles donnees seraient necessaires a une bonne gestion desmammiferes marins de l'Arctique. Le rapport porte sur cette etude et surles recherches necessaires a 1'etablissement de 1a base de donnees requises.

Mots-c1es: Arctique canadien; mammiferes marins, exploitation d'hydrocarburesdans les eaux c6tieres; gestion; priorites de recherche.

.'

INTRODUCTION

Recent hydrocarbon discoveries in theBeaufort Sea and the Arctic Islands have led todiscussion of methods of development andmethods of transportation to southern markets.In 1981, Dome Petroleum Ltd., Esso ResourcesCanada Ltd. and Gulf Canada Ltd. will be filingtheir development plans and environmentalimpac t statement for Beaufort Sea produc t ion.Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) willhave to evaluate the effects of this develop­ment on arctic marine mammals and it will haveto contribute to an evaluation of the relativeimpacts of tanker vs. pipeline modes of trans­portation. In addition, DFO recognizes theneed for long range planning to properly managethe arctic marine mammal resources in the faceof increased utilization by native hunters.Therefore, DFO sponsored a workshop on 'ArcticMarine Mammals I in Winnipeg, Manitoba, on 8-11December 1980.

The workshop brought together a smallgroup of knowledgeable and interested scien­t ists with research and management experiencewith arctic marine mammals. The objectives ofthe workshop were to review current knowledgeand ident ify research prior it ies with respectto the potential effects of offshore hydro­carbon developments on arctic marine mammals,and with respect to management of arctic marinemammals.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans retain­ed LGL Limited to organize the workshop and toproduce a report on its results. A draftreport was prepared and circulated to theworkshop participants in early January 1981.Comments from the participants were receivedand a final report prepared in March. Thereport attempts to reflect the consensus opin­ion of the workshop. Clearly, this is notalways possible given the variety of issuesdiscussed and participants involved. In caseswhere no clear consensus evolved at the work­shop, this report presents the majority viewwith a discussion of contrary opinions.

OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION

that are available to alleviatepotential problems.

-to ident ify biologically importantdata gaps,

-to identify species and areas thatare most at risk, and

-to identify and to establish aprio~ity ranking of key researchinitiatives that should be undertaken before, during and after 1n­dustrial activities,

-to recommend policies to DFO toprotect marine mammals frompotential industial impacts.

The last objective was not specifically addressedat the workshop. The topics 'Important DataGaps' and 'Critical Research Initiatives'constituted the main emphasis of the workshop andform the basis of the report of this session.

The objectives of the second session wereto review briefly the present biological database on arctic marine mammals and to identifypresent and future management problems. Theprincipal output of this session is a list ofpriorities for research initiatives needed toaddress the problems identified. The list ofresearch initiatives includes general recommen­dations on the types of biological studiesrequired, as well as the topics requiringstudy.

It is recognized that division of theworkshop into two sessions was arbitrary.There was much overlap between the sessions andit was c lear that informat ion required for man­agemen t would al so prov ide in format ion re quiredfor impact assessment. The division into twosessions was necessary to accommodate partici­pants who were unable to be present for thefull four days of the workshop.

PARTICIPANTS

Attendees at the workshop represented awide cross-section of workers interested i.narctic marine mammals, and the exchange ofviews among workers with different perspectiveswas a valuable if intangible benefit of theworkshop.

The four day workshop was divided into twotwo-day sessions. The first session addressedquestions relating to offshore hydrocarbon dev­elopment and the second session concentrated onquestions pertaining to the exploitation andmanagement of arctic marine mammals.

.'

The general objectives of thesession were

-to review what is known about thepotential effects of impendingoffshore hydrocarbon developments,

-to identify mitigative measures

first

Participants from DFO included workerswith research responsibilities (A.W. Mansfield,T.G. Smith), management and policy responsi­bilities (J.S. Loch, R.F. Peet, R.W. Moshenko,D.G. Wright, B.W. Fallis, L. de March, andA.M. Kristofferson--Winnipegj R. Paterson andD. Goodman-r-Ott awa ; B. Smiley--Sidney), andfield and enforcement responsibilities (D.Moshenko--Yellowknifej R.T. Barnes--Inuvikj andG. Williams--Frobisher Bay). The regulatoryDepartment of Indian Affairs and NorthernDeve lopment was represented by T. Langtry fromOttawa and D. Stone from Yellowknife. Particu­larly insightful contributions to the workshop

were made by H.W. Braham of the U.S. NationalMarine Hamma I Laboratory, Seattle, and by J.J.Burns of the Alaska Department of Fish andGame, Fairbanks. The oil industry wasrepresented by J.G. Ward of Dome PetroleumLtd. and N.B. Snow of Petro-Canada. Otherparticipants with research and impact assess­ment experience with arctic marine mallU11alsincluded J. Donaldson of Tundra Consultants,and R.A. Davis, K.J. Finley, M.A. Fraker andW.J. Richardson of LGL Ltd.

WORKSHOP RESULTS

SESSION I -- OFFSHORE HYDROCARBON DEVELOPMENT

The first part of this session consistedof a general review of the hydrocarbon develop­ments that have been proposed for Canadianarctic marine waters. These developments rangefrom the ongoing or planned exploratory dril­ling in the High Arctic, Lancaster Sound,Baffin Bay and Davis Strait to the massiveplans for production (offshore productionatolls, dredging, marine pipelines, workboats,dri llships, ports, aircraft, etc.) and trans­portation (Class 10 ice-breaking tankers, pipe­lines, etc.) of oil from the Beaufort Sea.Other proposals such as the Arctic Pilot Pro­ject and Polar Gas Project were also reviewed.The discussion of proposed developments wasfollowed by a review of the potential impactsto marine mamma l s of activities that would beassociated with the above developments. Thisincluded an evaluation of (1) the perceivedseverity of the impacts and (2) the data gapsthat need to be filled before a confidentprediction of the severity of the impacts canbe made. The discussion was organized underthe following headings:

Release of ContaminantsDrilling fluidsFormation cuttingsCement slurry/scrap steelBOP fluidsMethyl alcoholSewageHeated water

Release of Natural Gas

LNG Accidents

Release of Crude and Refined Oils

2

Source levelsTransmission lossAmbient noiseHearing thresholdsMaskingDirect effectsIndirect effects

Ice-breakingDirect effectsCreation of artificial leadsDisruption of ice-edgesDisruption of ice-sheets

General Disturbance and Physical PresenceDrilling rigsArtificial islandsIce-breakersWorkboatsAircraftPorts, harbours, dry docks, etc.Undersea oil storageUndersea pipelines

Recreation and Increased AccessWorkersInuitTourists

Cumulative EffectsCompensatory?Additive?Synergistic?Indirect?Food Chain?

The discussions of the above topics werewide-ranging and reflected a variety of view­points and approaches. These discussions arenot repeated or summari zed here except forthose issues that were considered to be mostimportant or those issues for which data wereconsidered insufficient to make a judgement onpotential effects. The terms of reference forthis project did not include provision of astate-of-the-art literature review of thepotential effects of industrial activity onmarine mannnals since it was assumed thatworkshop participants would be familiar withthe most recent information and would take itinto account when evaluating research recolllll1en­dations. A recent state-of-the-art review(Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin 1979, possibleeffects of offshore oil and gas development onmarine mammals. Rep. to U.S. Mar. MannnalCOIlU11.) was distributed to participants and usedas a background document.

Discussion of ~esea~ch initiatives

Dredging

Shock Waves--SeismicManagement

Underwater NoiseMa.ior sources

Exploration, Ice

This section of the report briefly reviewsthe principal data gaps identified during thediscussion of potential impacts from offshorehydrocarbon deve lopmen t s , The fo llowingsection discusses priorities--i.e. the relativeimportance of the research initiatives proposedfrom this discussion of data gaps.

'J

'0·

s- 000·

J

RO'

ATLANTIC

OCEAN

c::::::.:>l.':" , <,'

;:YJ"~~'rl;f rv~6O"

)

Release of contaminants (other than hydro­carbons): The workshop considered the follow­ing potential contaminants: drilling fluids,formation cuttings, cement slurry, scrap steel,BOP fluids, methyl alcohol, sewage and heatedwater. The principal concern was the potentialeffects of drilling fluids. The other conta­minants were considered to be less important oradequately covered by existing regulatorymechanisms.

The concern about drilling fluids centredon the release of heavy metals into the marinesystem. Large scale exploration and productionin the Beaufort Sea would require large amountsof drilling fluids and their constituent heavymetals. Because of uncertainties about thechemical makeup of drilling muds that will beused, the relative use of water- vs. oil-basedfluids, the amount of recycling that willoccur, and the biological availability of thereleased heavy metals, the participants couldnot make con fident pred ic t ions about theoverall level of contamination.

The workshop concluded that it was import­ant to establish predevelopment baseline levelsof selected heavy metals in selected species ofmarine mammals. It was also noted that studiesof the physiological significance of heavymetal loads would be necessary if there wereindications that heavy metals were accumulatingin mamma 1 t issue as i.ndus tr i a 1 deve lopmentproceeded.

Some additional points are important.Heavy metal monitoring is of more generalconcern than could be dealt with in a workshopon marine mammals. General ongoing monitoring'should concentrate on sedentary benthic animals.If problems with heavy metal contaminationdevelop, several measures can be implemented toreduce input of heavy metals into the sea viadrilling muds. Also, the most important sourcesof 'unnatural' heavy metal contamination arelikely to be the new mines (e vg. Black Angel,Nanisivik, Arv i k ) that have been or are beingdeveloped in certain coastal areas. Thesesources were considered to be potentiallyimportant chronic threats to marine mammals in atleast some areas.

Release of natural gas: The accidentalrelease of natural gas r.n t o the marine systemwas not considered to pose a significant threatto arctic marine mammals. Natural gas in openwater would escape to the atmosphere, whereaseven under complete sea ice only small areaswould be affected.

LNG accidents: Accidents associated withlique f i ed natural gas (LNG) could occur atcoastal liquefication plants or at sea from LNGcarriers. The probabilities of an accident arevery low and further, the probability of anaccident occurring in a concentration of marinemammals is even lower. By considering thed i s t r i bu t i on , migration and behaviour of marine

mammals when determining the locations ofplants and the routes of ships, it is possibleto further reduce the probability that anaccident will seriously affect arctic marinemammals. Therefore, the workshop did notconsider that LNG accidents pose a significantthreat to marine mammals.

Release of crude and I>efined oil: Theaccidental release of oil, whether it be amajor spill or blow-out or chronic smallreleases, is a major concern with respect toproposed offshore developments. The effects ofoil on marine mammals are generally poorlyknown although some of the potential effectsare currently being studied.

The workshop focussed attention on thefollowing questions: Can marine mammals detectthe presence of oil on the surface of thewat er? If they can detec t the oi 1, wi 11 theyavoid it? Answers to these questions arecrucial to an understanding of the probableeffects of oil slicks.

The question of oil detection can bepartially answered with controlled laboratoryexperiments, and tests of the abilities ofodontocetes to detect oil slicks visually andvia echolocation are underway. However, theseresul ts may not apply to other groups, espec­ially if echolocation proves to be the mode ofdetection by odontocetes.

The question of whether marine mammalswill actually avoid oil slicks in naturalsituations probably cannot be answered bylaboratory experiments. Two other approachesare available to address the question of avoid­ance. In some natural situations carefullyplanned, small scale, controlled spills couldbe conducted with minimal risk to the testanimals (e i g . narwhal in leads). A wide­ranging discussion of the acceptability of suchexperiments concluded that valuable data couldbe gathered if approval to conduct the studiescould be obtained. The second approachinvolves opportunistic studies at any spillsthat occur. The concept of a response team isdiscussed later in this section.

The effects of oil on the skin of mar i nemammals were discussed. It was concluded thateffects on pinnipeds were reasonably well knownbut that effects of oil on the biologicallyactive skin of whales were not known. This isa major data gap but it is currently beingaddressed in experiments with captive odonto­cetes by Dr. J. Geraci (University of Guelph)with funding from the U.S. Bureau of LandManagemen t .

The effects of ingestion of oil by marinemammals were addressed by the workshop. Somestudies have examined these effects and furtherwork was not considered a priority at thistime.

4

In VIew of political problpms associatedwith oil-related e x pe r i men t a t i ou on marinemammals, the workshop concluded that it wasimportant to obtain a maximum amount of usefulscientific information from any accidental oilspill in Canadian marine waters, includingAtlantic and Pacific coastal waters. A broadscientific response plan with a small marinemammal component has been developed for theBeaufort Sea and this plan is being expanded toother arctic waters; plans will also be devel­oped for the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.Plans will have two parts: provision of scien­tific assistance to the on-scene commander, andconduct of opportunistic scientific studies.

Participants stressed the importance ofthe scientific component of the responseplans. There was a general feeling that usefulinformation would only be obtained with carefulpre-planning and knowledge of normal mammaldistribution and behaviour patterns. A keyelement of such plans is the identification andon-going support of a scientific response teamqualified to conduct useful studies at aspill. This approach has been taken In theUnited States where a scientific response teamconsisting of several key personnel is backedby experts across the country on an as requiredbasis.

The general effects of oil on the marinesystem, particularly on important prey speciesof marine mammals, are of concern. Availableinformation on these system effects is inade­quate. It was felt that studies of theseeffects were of importance to general assess­ments of oil spills or blowouts and were notonly of concern regarding marine mammals.

Dredging: The discussion of the effects ofdredging was wide-ranging and many of thepoints made also applied to other industrialactivities as well. In general, although largeamounts of dredging are planned for theBeaufort Sea, only a relatively small portionof this area will be subject to dredging andnatural recolonization will occur. However,the benthic and epibenthic communItIes of theBeaufort Sea are not homogeneous, and at leastsome species of marine mammals probably rely onpatches of good habitat (e.g. bearded seals offsouthern Banks Island). The biological ocean­ography of the Beaufort Sea is not well knownand the locations of important habitat patchesare al so unknown. Another maj or prob lem is thelack of informat ion on the feed ing dependenc iesof marine mammals, particularly bowheads andwhite whales, in the Beaufort Sea.

The most efficient approach to evaluatingthe effects of industrial activities, such asdredging, is to determine areas and seasonswhere concentrations of the various species ofmarine mammals occur and then to determine whythe animals use the areas. Use may be r e la t ed

/'

to feeding, social behaviour or other factors.Definition of conceu t r a t i.ons i s a function ofspatial distribution patterns of the speciesand the proportion of the population that wouldbe affected by relatively site-specific indust­rial activities. Considerable informati.on isava i labLe abou t the general loca t ions of con­centration areas of various marine mammals inthe Arctic (although this knowledge is notcomplete for some places and seasons). Muchless is known about the reasons why variousspecies concentrate at specific locations.

Shock waves: Seismic: activity on fast-icealong the north c oa s t of Alaska may have led toreduced numbers of ringed seals. This has ledto imposltlon of regulations which prohibitseismic activity on fast-ice after 20 March.This stipulation is intended to protect puppingringed seals. Further work on this question isplanned by the Alaska Department of Fish andGame beginning in 1981. The e ffec ts of openwater seismic work on marine mammals areunknown.

Seismic exploration activity in Canadianwaters is regulated and seismic work in areaswith high concentrations of marine mammals canbe controlled. The principal concern revolvesaround the small proportion of offshore seismicstudies that utilize explosive techniques. TheDepartment of Fisheries and Oceans is currentlyreviewing its policy on marine explosives; newguidelines will be issued in the spring of1981.

Underwater noise: Because marine mammalsrely on underwater sounds for communication andfor information about their environment, theeffects of large increases in underwater noiselevels associated with industrial activitiesare a matter of concern. In most of theworld's oceans, low frequency ambient noiselevels are almost completely due to ship­induced underwater noise. Arc tic marinemammals have not been exposed to significantamounts of industrial noise. There is adefinite lack of data from arctic waters onsuch ques t ions as noise source leve Is, propa­gation loss characteristics, and existingambient noise levels. In addition, there aremajor gaps in knowledge of the hearingthresholds, frequency and intensity of calls,required signal-to-noise ratios, and functionsof communication signals of arctic marinemammals. The principal concerns are that arti­ficial underwater noise may disturb marinemammals and cause detrimental changes indistribution and behaviour, and that artificialnoise may mask mammal communication signals andthereby disrupt feeding or social behaviour.

Two types of studies were identified asimportant. First, studies of normal,undisturbed behaviour patterns and vocalbehaviour are needed to evaluate the functionsand importance of the vocalizations of selectedspecies throughout the year. These studies ar~

5

necessary for interpretation and pr ed i c t i on elfthe effects of increases in man-made' no is elevels. Second, experimental studi.es of theeffects of man-made noise on marine 'n'1l11111<119

should be conducted to determine beh a v io ur a lresponses to man-made noise. Such studies art>being con.luc t ed on bowheads i.n the Canad ianBeaufort Sea with funding from the U.S. Bureau ofLand Management. Similar studies on white whalesin the Beaufort Sea have been conducted for ESSe)

Resources Canada Ltd.

Underwater noise is perhaps the mostall-pervasive effect that will be associatedwith offshore hydrocarbon development. Largetanker3 will produce measurable increases inambient noise levels at distances of a fewhundred kilometres in certain conditions. Theconsequences of this noise are poorly under­stood and some questions may not be answerablebefore development proceeds. Rigorous monitor­ing programs will be necessary.

Ice-breaking: Large amounts of ice-breakingwill be associated with the proposed offshoredevelopments, including year-round tanker traf­fic through Parry Channel and Baffin Bay.Ice-breaking will affect ringed seals directly(crushing of pups) and indirectly (ship noiseand disturbance) although the severity of theeffects is not well known. It was argued atthe workshop that, by restricting tankers andLNG carriers to relatively narrow routes, thedirect effects on ringed seals can be kept to aminimum. However, these ships will be opera­ting at full power and generating their peaknoise levels when ice-breaking. The effects ofthis noise on ringed seals at substantialdistances from the ship's tracks have not beenstudied. Such studies are feasible and couldprovide useful predictive data.

Concern has been expressed about thepossible creation of artificial leads behindthe large ice-breaking ships and the potentialfor whales to move into t he so leads and becometrapped when the leads refreeze. Calculationsmade by the Arctic Pilot Project and observa­tions made from the MV Canmar Kigoriak and theMV Louis St. Laurent indicate that the tracksof ice-breakers r ema i n clogged with ice andprobably will not attract whales.

The effects of traffic by ice-breakingships on ice-edges and on the stability oflarge ice sheets could lead to major changes inthe habitat available to marine mammals. Suchchanges would not necessarily be detrimental toall species although they could severely affectharvest activities by Inuit hunters. Studiesof the potential for changes in ice-edges andsheets were considered important, but were notidentified as a research priority from themarine mammal point-of-view because similarstudies would be conducted as part of the tech­nical evaluation of the feasibility and econo­mics of year-round shipping in the Arctic.

General disturbance and phys'ical Pl'{!SPnc'p:

A great many activities will be associated withhydrocarbon development of the Beaufort Sea.These activiti~s will include drillships, arti­ficial islands, production atolls or platforms,ice-breakers, workboats, dredges, aircraft,ports, harbours, undersea oil storage, underseapipelines and so on. It is not possible toseparate the effects caused by the presence ofthese activities from the effect~ of noiseassociated with the activities. This sectionof the discussion concentrated on the combin­ation of activity and noise rather than under­

water noise ~ ~.

It was concluded that, although studies ofa few single activities have been done and haveprovided useful information, there is an over­all lack of information about the effects ofdisturbance by many of the activities. Thislack is particularly important when attemptsare made to pr ed ic t the combined e ffec t s, onmarine mammals, of several types of activitiesoccurring simultaneously at many places in anarea like the eastern Beaufort Sea.

The workshop concluded that studies of theeffects of these activities were important.Two re lated approaches were ident i fied ashaving provided useful results: (1) experi­mental disturbance studies such as are beingconduc ted on bowheads for the U. S. Bureau ofLand Management; and (2) the Esso white whalemonitoring program, which combines a long-terms t ud y of numbers, distribution and migrationpatterns with observations on the incrementaleffects of various industrial activities onthese patterns.

Recreat-ion and increased access: A br ie fgeneral discussion of peripheral implicationsof major hydrocarbon developments was held.tmplications include the recreational ac t i.v t>

ties of a large work force, changes in Inuithunting activities due to increased access andincreased money for equipment, and increasedtourist activities. It was concluded thatthese activities would lead to increased stresson marine mammal populations but the lack ofinformation on the extent and details of theseactivities precluded specific recommendationsabout research initiatives.

Cumulative effects: An elusive themethroughout discussions at the workshop was thedifficulty in coming to grips with the questionof cumulative effects of major offshoredevelopments. It is not known whether effectswill be additive or compensatory or syner­gistic, or whether there will be some variablecombination of the three for different speciesin different areas. Effects could be! direct,or indirect through the food webs supportingmarine mammals, or in some other indirectmanner.

6

It IS unlikely that an understanding o[these complex effects can be achieved beforefurther development begins. This is espec ia I lytrue given the economic factors that are forc­ing offshore hydrocarbon development in theNor th Arne r i c an Arc t ic. It is, there fore,critically important to institute prop~rly

funded long-term research programs on thebiology and ecology of key species of marinemammals, These programs should begin beforedevelopment proceeds further, and then shouldbe conducted concurrently with development sothe effect" of deve Lo pmen t can be determined onan on-going basis. The availability of thisinformation on a timely basis would a 110'" formodification of developments to protect mammalsshould serious effects occur. Without on-goingresearch and monitoring, it will not bepossible to document detrimental effects untilmajor changes in the populations have occurred;by then mitigative measures will be much moredifficult, if not impossible, to institute.

Research priorities

At the conclusion of this workshop ses­sion, the participants formulated a list ofgeneral research initiatives with respect tothe effects of offshore hydrocarbon developmenton arc t ic marine mannnal s. Pr i o r Lt i e s for eachidentified initiative were cs t ab l i shed using ageneral rating of 1 (high), 2 (medium) and 3(low). The purpose of the rating exercise wasto identify which research initiatives shouldbe followed up in the event that not all couldbe funded. It is emphasized that 'Priority 3'studies should not be considered unimportant.Unimportant studies do not appear at all, inthe following list of initiatives. This listis organized by the three priority levels. Itwill be noted that there is some unavoidableoverlap among studies on the list, and there isalso some overlap between studies recommendedhere and those reconnnended for management pur­poses in the second sess ion. For examp Ie, thelong-term biological/monitoring researchidentified as Priority 1 below is equallyimportant for management and impact assessment.

Priority 1: The most pressing type of studywas identified as long-term biological/moni-toring research on key species of marinemammals. In the Beaufort Sea, these studiesshould be conducted on bowheads, white whales,ringed seals and bearded seals. These studieswould provide the knowledge of the basichiology, distribution and numbers of animals,year-to-year variability, and habitat depen­dencies, that is necessary to predict anddocument behavioural changes in response toindustrial activity and to evaluate the signi­ficance of such changes. Examples of the typesof studies that most closely approach theseobjectives are the white whale studies in theMacken:>:ie estuary region and the long-term

r

.'

7

In addition to the above research ini­tiatives there was general agreement that aproperly prepared and adequately funded scien­tific response team could provide usefulinformation by studying any o il spill that

Studies to document the normal behaviourand vocal repertoire of marine mammals areconsidered important. Particular emphasisshould be placed on th~ functional significanceof the vocalizations. Since function andsignificance can change over the year, stud i e sshould be conducted during all seasons that thespec ies occurs in areas af fec ted by deve lop­ment.

surveys to d e t e rm i ne the locations, sizesand impor t anc e ot concentration areas used bymarine mammals are basic to ratlonal decisionsabout offshore industrial ac tiv it i e s . It wasnoted that several large surveys have beenconducted and many concentration areas havebeen iden t i fied. However, several impor tantdata gaps remain (e.g. distribution of bowheadsin the Beaufort Sea; winter d i s t r i bu t ion of'narwhals, bowheads, white whales and walrusesin Baffin Bay, Davis Strait and Hudson Strait).

Experimental studies of the effects ofnoise and of industrial ac t i v i t i e s on marinemammals were identified as important. Studiesusing a control/disturbance/control sequ~nce ofobservations, together wlth observatlons otund is turbed behaviour, can prov ide use fu 1information about the short-term ~ffects ofnoise and related activities on marinemammals. Several studies on white whaleslEsso) and a preliminary study on bowheads(U.S. B.L.M.) have been conducted already.Species of particular concern include bowheadsand white whales in the Beaufort Sea, andnarwhals, bowheads and ringed seals in thecentral and eastern Arctic.

Studies of the effects of oil on thebiologically active skin of whales wereconsidered to be priority 2. Again, thisranking was partially a function of the factthat some studies are already on-going andparticipants thought that results from thesestudies should be examined before assigning ahigher priority.

Studies of the direct effects of ice­b r e ak i ng on r ingcd seals were given a priority2 rat ing. Maj or year-round ice-break i ng wi 11be associated with offshore developments andassociated transportatiot1 and thus theseeffects undoubtedly will occur. In contrast,the probablllty ot major oil spills is thesubject of much r1ebate. Studies of underwaternoise from ships were discussed earlier andgiven a priority 1 rating.

Pri.or'i.ty 2: Research initiatives classer! asp r i.o r i t y 2 wI~re the most cout r ove r s ia l l~i.tlt

several participants a r gu i ng for a Pr i o r i t y Is r a t us for some of them. The best example ofthis problem was the priority to be assigned tostudies of the ability of marine mammals todetect a surface oil slick and whether theywill avoid such a slick. Six participantsconsidered these studies to be priority 1whereas seven considered them priority 2. Fourpar tic i pan t s cons idered th is type 0 f study tobe priority 3 but at least some of theseratings were low because laboratory research iscurrently being conducted on the ability oftoothed whales to detect oil slicks. Valuableapproaches to these ques t ions inc lude expans ionof on-going laboratory studies and initiationof field experiments. Studies at oil spillscould also, if well designed, provide usefulinformation.

Studies ot the e r t e c t s o t ottshore devel­opment and potential spills on the systemsupporting marine mammals were identified aspriority 2. The medium rating was partially afunction of the belief that the lower trophiclevels should be studied in their own right,and partially because many key plants andanimals in the food webs leading to marinemammals may be less vulnerable to the effectsof development than are the mammals themselves .

Priority,3; Four research i n i t i a t i ve s wereclassed as Priority 1 studies:

occurred in Canadian waters. The wor ksho p no t cdthat unless the response t eain was p r o ps- r l.vprepared (both logistically and s c i en t iLi.c a l l.y Jand independent of other on-scene ac t i v it i"s(e.g. oil clean-up), the concept would not rate ahigh priority. There is already a plethora ofanecdotal and semi-scientific observations at oi.lspills, and it C;Jn be a r gued that this'information' has done more to cloud anunderstanding of the effects of oil on mar i.nemammals than to clarify the situation.

beardedandstud i e s of ringed

Although it is important to know the loca­tions and timing of use of concentration areas,it is also important to know why and how theanima Is use these areas. Without th is infor­mation it will not be possible to predictthe probable effects of industrial activitiesin the concen t ra tion areas. An example thatwas discussed was the summer concentration ofwhite whales in parts of the Mackenzie estuary;it is not known with certainty why white whalesconcentrate there. Thus, the consequences ofthe possibility that white whales may be forcedout 0 f these a reas for several years duringhyd roc arbon development and produc t ion cannotbe eva luated. There fore, stud i e s of thereasons for use of concentration areas are ofhigh priority for areas that will be subject toindustrial activity.

governmentseals.

.j

concluded thatthat pressurewhale, walrus

increase most

Studies of the effects of ingestion of oilby marine mammals. These studies would alsoinclude studies of the potential for oil tofoul the baleen plates used for feeding bybaleen whales. Some studies on these questionshave been conducted, and others are underway.

Two types of studies of the effects ofheavy metals were identified: (1) documentationof baseline levels of the relevant metals invarious tissues of selected key mammal species,and (2) studies of the physiological signi­ficance of increased heavy metal loads. Thesestudies might have a higher priority if consid­eration were also being given to the inpnt ofheavy metals from mining operations.

Determination of present hydrocarbonlevels and on-going monitoring of baselinehydrocarbon levels in marine mammals wereidentified as Priority 3 studies. It was con­sidered more efficient to measure and monitorthese levels in the water column, sediments,and in animals at lower trophic levels.

Hydpo-electric developments

Although the workshop was convened toconsider the potential effects of offshorehydrocarbon developments, it was noted that themany major hydro projects planned and/or con­s truc ted on rivers flowing into arc t ic watersalso could have serious consequences for marinemammals. Proposed developments on the Liardand Slave rivers could affect flow regimes inthe Mackenzie River and these in turn couldaffect the dynamics of the Mackenzie estuaryand plume. This could affect the marine systemof the southeast Beaufort Sea and could havedirect effects on the white whale populationthat summers in the estuary.

The major developments in Manitoba on theNelson and Churchill rivers may affect theestuarine habitat of most of the west HudsonBay population of white whales. Similarly,planned and proposed developments in Quebeccould affect the estuarine habitat of whitewhales on the Great Whale, Nastapoka andMucalic rivers.

Many participants at the workshop expres­sed great concern about the potential effectsof these hydro developments on white whales andabout the lack of research to determine theseeffects.

SESSION II -- MARINE MAMMAL MANAGEMENT

Available information on the status andmanagement of arctic marine mammals wasrecent ly summari zed in a report prepared forthe N.W.T. Science Advisory Board (Davis, R.A.,K.J. Finley and W.J. Richardson 1980, Sci.Adv. Board of N.W.T. Report No.3. Yellow-

8

knife. 93 p.). A detailed review of thisinformation was not conducted at the workshop.The information was used as background anddiscussions focussed on new information andspecific research required to form the basisfor future management decisions. The followingreport of this session reviews briefly somegeneral considerations as background and thendiscusses the research priorities that wereidentified. This report does not present areview of the current status of arctic marinemarrnnals.

Increased hcU'U6D L- lcue le : The gene ra1 trendin the North American Arctic is for rapidlyincreasing popul.ations of Inuit (Hamelin, L.E.1979, Rep. to Sci. Adv, Board of N.W.T.,Yellowknife). This trend will undoubtedly leadto increased harvest levels. In some areas,Inuit population levels now clearly exceed thecarrying capacity of the marine system.Associated with population increases has been atrend toward wage employment. Wage employmentreduces time available for hunting but the cashearned allows use of faster and more sophisti­cated equipment. It was suggested that part­time hunters tended to be less experienced andto have less time to devote to hunting, andthat this resulted in higher loss rates ofanimals killed. Other factors such as theestablishment and support of outpost camps,hunter support programs and intersettlementtrade are also expected to increase harvestlevels and pressure on marine marrnnal popu­lations.

There was general agreement among partici­pants that changes in the species compositionof the harvest were occurring. Such changeswere most pronounced in Alaska and leastpronounced in the eastern Canadian Arctic. Thelarge increase in the number of hunters pursu­ing bowhead whales in Alaska was one example,and the increases in pressure on walruses andnarwhals because of the corrnnercial value oftheir ivory was another example.

Thus, in general, it washarvest levels will increase andon species such as narwhal, whiteand, perhaps, harp sea 1 wi 11rapidly.

lntePnational aspects: Many of the popu-lations of marine mammals in the Canadian Arcticare international and management decisions andresearch must recognize this. Theseconsiderations are particularly important withrespect to bowheads, white whales and ringedseals in the western Arctic and bowheads,narwhals, white whales (high arctic population),harp seals, ringed seals and probably walruses inthe eas tern Arc tic. Organi zat ions such as theInternational Whaling Commission (I.W.C.) andNorth At lantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO)

•

,

-,

J

are also involved with some of these situa­tions.

This s~ction reviews on a species-by­species basis the key research initiatives thatwere identified during the session. Prioritiesare assigned to each initiative on the follow­ing scale: 1 (high), 2 (medium) and 3 (lower).It should be emphasized again that all init i­atives that were assigned prior it i e s areconsidered to be important. Unimportantresearch initiatives were not assigned prior­it ies. Rankings re flec t the perceived urgencyof studies in the near future. Lower rankedstudies may become extremely important in themedium or longer term. Effective managementrequires that appropriate stud i e s be donebefore situations develop into problems ratherthan waiting tor a problem to develop so thatresearch funds can be justified.

White whale: The various populations ofwhite whales in the Canadian Arctic werereviewed. The harvest of the Beaufort Seapopulation was not considered to providemanagement prob I ems although several indus try­related studies were recommended in Session I.The High Arctic (= Lancaster Sound) populationof white whales winters off west Greenlandwhere they are pos si b ly being overharves ted.This is an important question but the workshopdid not make specific research recommendations.

The principal Mbort-term problems withrespect to white whales concern the size,status and interrelationships of groups inCumberland Sound, Frobisher Bay, Ungava Bay,Hudson Strait and Hudson Bay. Substantialharvests are taken by hunters from severalcommunities. In some cases, it is not evenknown which stocks are being harvested. Theworkshop identified studies of stock size,distribution and discreteness of white whalesin Hudson Bay, in Hudson Strait and off SEBaffin Island as an urgent (priority lJresearch need. Three approaches weresugges ted: weII-des igned ae r i a 1 surveys,tagging studies, and biochemical techniques.Kesults of the ongoing studies in Hudson Straitand eastern Hudson Bay (conducted by MakivikCorporation and LGL) will be necessary fordetailed design of an appropriate aer{al surveyprogram. LGL is currently testing biochemicaltechniques of assessing stock identity usingsamples from Hudson Strait and the Mackenzieestuary. No good technique for tagging whitewhales (and narwhals) has been d emons t r at ed .The workshop concluded that development ofmethods to mark and track white whales andnarwhals should be considered as a Priority 1research initiative.

Preliminary results from the recent stud­ies in Hudson Stn'lit i nd i ra t e that most of the

9

many white wha l e s ha r ve s t e.l along th,·· Q,Il'!W(

coast are an ima l.s t hat do not sunune r 1[1 /"\.

area. This implies that the animals belong tothe so-called West Hudson Bay population thatsummers in SW Hudson Bay. The only estimate Ill:the size of the West Hudson Bay population(10,000 animals) is based primarily on ~~ta

collected along the Manitob:·j c oa s t in Lq65 butalso includes data from other n r e a s in otheryears; the estimate has very wide confidencelimits. In addit ion, the substantial commer c i a lfishery at Churchill and Whale Cove wast e rm i na t ed in the La t e 1960' s and the populationhas had ten years to recuperate. The workshop':'·,c,)mrnended that detailed, systematic aerialsurveys be c on.Iuc t ed as a Priority 1 item todetermine the size of the white whale populat ionalong the west coast of Hudson Bay.

The workshop noted that no method ofunequivocally ageing white whales existed.Until such a method exists, several key aspectsof the life history of the animal cannot bedetermined, and reliable estimates of sustain­able yield will not be available. Developmentof an ageing technique for white whales wasidentifien as a Pri.ority 1 research objective.

In view of the high harvest levels of whitewhales and the uncertainties about stock size anddiscreteness, the workshop recommended that aprogram to biologically monitor the catch in theCumberland Sound, Hudson Strait and Hudson Bayareas be instituted as a Priority 2 item. Thisinitiative should include periodic censuses ofthe size of the Cumberland Sound population.

Two themes that recurred in discussions ofmost o f the species considered were the uncer­tainties about (lJ t h« reliability of availableharvest statistics, and (2) the number of ani­mals that are killed but not landed. Theworkshop noted that although there have beenrecent improvements in the reliability of theharvest statist i c s , further improvements arenecessary, particularly in the Hudson Bayarea. Also, estimates of hunting loss arerequired in the Hudson Bay, Hudson Strait andCumberland Sound area in order to determine thetotal removals from the po pu l a t i.on I s ) . Thesewere considered Priority 1 items.

Naxnohal.: The bas i c population dynamics ofthe narwhal are poorly known. Biologicalstudies to determine the su s t a i nab Le yield ofnarwhals are ex t r eme Ly important and were clas­sed as Priority 1. Related to these studies isthe need to develop a technique for reliablyageing narwhals. Development of an ageingtechnique was considered important enough towarrant a Priority I rating on its own. It wasnoted that methods using a racemization techni­que appear promising but that the relevantstudy has not been completed; this inexpensiveavenue should be pursued.

The question of the size of narwhal popu­lations in the eastern Arctic was the subjectof heated debate at the workshop. The questionis Lmportant because the population may now beoverexploited if the actual numbers are at thelow end of the range of estimates. The problemcentres on the fact that estimates (based onextrapolations) made during spring migrationsuggest that there are 20,000 to 30,000 ani­mals in the Baffin Bay-Davis Strait population,whereas a survey of summering areas found onlyabout 10,000 animals in 1979. However, badweather affected the summer survey. Surveysduring fall migration have also accounted foronly a portion of the spring population esti­mates. One group argued that high priorityshould be assigned to another survey of sunnner­ing areas to provide independent verificationof the spring estimates. Others suggest thatthe extrapolations used in the spring estimatesare valid and further verification is unneces­sary. This debate was not resolved at theworkshop. However, an arbitrary decision bythe sponsors of this report assigns a Priority2 rat ing to the need for a re-survey of thesunnnering areas. A successful summer surveycould provide an independent verification ofthe spring estimates and it would providevaluable information about the distribution ofvarious age and sex classes of the animal.

Most important, however, is the fact thatthe spring estimate of 20,000 to 30,000 isunacceptably vague. If the actual populationsize is 20,000, present quotas may be danger­ously high (allowing for hunting losses); incontrast, If. the population size is 30,000,present quotas may be unnecessarily low.

A narwhal population of unknown sizesummers in the NW Hudson Bay area. This popu­lation is hunted by residents of Repulse Bayand the harves t level is governed by a quota.The existing quota has no biological basis butwas determined on the basis of average annualharvests in recent years. It is expected thatthere will be demands for increases in quotalevels in the immediate future. The consensusof the workshop was that studies to determinethe size of the NW Hudson Bay population ofnarwhals were of immed i a t e high priority(Priority 1 status). An aerial survey approachwas reconnnended. It should be noted that someworkshop participants argued that the majorharvests and the bulk of the narwhal populationboth occur in the eastern and High Arctic;since so little is known about the biology ofthe species, they argued that research effortsshould be concentrated on the larger, moreheavily utilized population. The Priority 1rating Ear surveys of the NW Hudson Bay popu­lation is maintained here partly because thisstudy can be conduc ted in conjunc t ion wi th aPriority 1 survey r e commend ed in a latersection.

10

There 1S no information on the r e l a t i on­ships of the animals that surrnner r n NW HudsonBay to the Davis Strait--Baffin Bay animals.Similarly, there are no data on the relation­ships between narwhals that summer 11\ theCanad ian High Arc t ic anti t h ose that summer i nthe Thule District o f Greenland, although bothgroups presumably winter Ll1 Baffin Bay andDavis Strait where they are at least theore­t i c a lly in can tac t . Recent stud ies in the PondInlet area have found that a high proportion(20 to 40%) of the narwhals have scars from oldbullet wounds. It is possible (but not proven)that these h i gh percentages inti icate that sub­populations occur in certain areas. The workshopconcluded that a study of the sub-populationstructure of the narwhal was a Priority 1 item.Related to this question was the development oftagging methods for narwhals and white whales;this was identified as Priority 1 researchinitiative in the previous section.

Surveys of the numbers and distribution ofnarwhals in the Smith Sound and Kane Basin areabetween Thule District and Ellesmere Islandwere ident i fied as Priori ty 3 research. Thesestudies would provide data necessary to deter­mine overall population size and would providesome information useful for interpreting stockdiscreteness.

Some studies of hunting loss have beenconducted during the narwhal hunt at PondInlet. These studies showed that loss ratescan be very high but that they vary with typeof hunt, hunter experience, weather and iceconditions. Collection of additional infor­mation on loss rates was identified as aPriority 1 item. It was noted that some infor­mation was being collected on an on-going basisby fisheries officers. Studies of techniques toreduce losses in narwhal hunts were alsoconsidered to be Priority 1.

Bowhead: Although the bowhead is anendangered species, the current managementstrategy is that no studies are necessarybecause the species is, at least in theory,totally protected in Canada. There is anindication that some connnunities will demandthat a quota be established on bowheads inCanada, and the absence of management data maybe a problem at that time. The workshop didnot recommend any stud ies of bowheads from apurely management point-of-view; however, sev­eral studies related to the potential effectsof offshore hydrocarbon development on thisend ang e r e-I species were identified. Whilecurrent funds and manpower dictate that themanagement philosophy is most feasible withregard to bowheads, it is worth noting that theapproach is narrow in scope. In general, NorthAmerican management agencies are becoming moreconcerned with non-harvested species and aretaking a more ecologi cally oriented approach tomanagement..

•

,

..,

,j

11

Studies to refine estimates of huntingloss should be conducted. The principalharvest occurs in Cumberland Sound and thestudies should be conducted there. A Priority3 rating was given to these studies.

Studies of population organization,territorial and social systems, reactions todisturbance, and options available to disturbedanimals were identified as Priority 1 importancefrrnn an industrial point-of-view but were given aPriority 3 ranking from a strictly managementperspective.

Hooded eeal.: Only small numbers of hoodedseals are harvested in eastern arctic waters,and there is no evidence to suggest that thissmall harvest is affecting this species. Nospecific management research priorities wereidentified for hooded seals in the CanadianArctic.

Expansion of studies of the interspecificinteractions of ringed seals, polar bears, arcticfoxes and Inuit were considered important formanagement because of the complex interactionsinvo 1ved. The stud ies were given a Priori ty 3rating pending publication of the results ofstudies that are now being completed by Dr. T.G.Smith.

No specific recomm~n­

harbour seals in th~

by the workshop.

arctic coasts.for research onArctic were made

Ringed seal: The biology of the ubiquitousringed seal is relatively well known comparedto that of other arctic species of marinemammals. The workshop concluded that manage­ment priorities for this species were rel­atively less pressing than for some otherspecies. This conclusion is probably valid inthe short term but will need to be re-evaluated1n the longer term.

Harp seal: The principal concern ;.fb'''I/" ha r pseals in the Arctic is that the harvest levelsin the eastern Arctic and west Greenland areh i ghe r than previously thought. In addition,the few studies available indicate that huntinglosses can be substantial, especially in Julyand August. Thus, removals from the populationare substantially higher than is allowed for bythe models presently used to determine quotasfor the ha rvv s t in the Gulf of St. Lawrence andthe northwest Atlantic. This underallowancefor the arctic harvest is made more s i gn i ficantby the fac t tha t the harves t in the Can ad ianArctic is mainly of older seals. The workshoprecommended (Priority 1) that the availableinformat ion from arc t ic areas be used to updatethe current models used for management of harpseals. Cooperation with Danish scientists incollection of harvest statistics from Greenlandis necessary.

easterndationsCanadian

The workshop also recommended that studiesof the stock discreteness of the above animalsbe given Priority 3 status until the results ofthe above survey programs are avai lab l e .Studies of stock discreteness could use speci­ally designed aerial surveys, radio-tagging(techniques available), and measurements ofmorphological differences among groups.

Insufficient data on the reproductivebiology of eastern and central arctic walrusesare available to allow determination of thesustainable yield of these populations. It wasnot considered to be realistic to directlyapply the more complete data from the Pacificwalrus to Canadian populations. Studies todetermine sustainable yield levels were consid­ered important. The workshop recommended thatbiological sampling of the current harvest inFoxe Basin begin as soon as possible on aPriority 1 basis. A full-scale populationbiology study was given a Priority 2 rankingpending the results of the proposed aerialsurveys in Foxe Basin and northern Hudson Bay.

Information on harvest levels has not beenadequate and the gathering of reliable data,particularly in Foxe Basin, northern Hudson Bayand SE Baffin Island, was identified as aPriority 1 objective. Because of recent chan­ges in hunting techniques in Foxe Basin,studies of hunting loss in this area were alsoidentified as Priority 1.

Harbour seal: Participants noted thatessentially nothing is known about the presentstatus and distribution of the small numbers ofharbour. sea 1.8 that occ ur (or occ u r r ed ) along

The workshop noted that there are majorgaps in our knowledge of the numbers anddistribution of walruses in eastern and centralCanadian waters. Th~re has never been anestimate of the size of the apparently largewalrus population in Foxe Basin, where much ofthe presently increasing harvest occurs.Estimates of the numbers of walruses in north­ern Hudson Bay are restricted to a few aerialsurveys of some haul-out sites in NW HudsonBay. There are no estimates of the numbe r s inthe waters off SE Baffin Island. The workshoprecommended that a series of aerial surveys todetermine the size of the walrus populations inFoxe Basin, northern Hudson Bay (including NEHudson Bay) and SE Baffin Island be given aPriority 1 rating.

rv'alrus: In the recent past the harvests ofwa1ruses i n the Canad ian Arc t ic dec l inedbecause 0 f the changeover from dog teams tosnowmobiles by the Inuit. Walruses used toprovide a major source of dog food. Lnd ica­tions are that the harvest of walruses is nowincreasing and that the ec ononu.c return fromwalrus tusks is likely to lead to furtherincreases.

J

t

•

SUMMARY

The status of the populations of ringedseals and bearded seals that inhabit the BaffinBay pack ice requires further study to eluci­date thetr contribution to the numbers that areharvested in the coastal waters of BaffinIsland and Greenland. The workshop assignedthese studies a Priority 3 ranking althoughthere was some ,I iscu s s i on of a higher ranking.Studies of these offshore populations weregiven a higher priority in the sessionconsidering industry-related priorities.

12

responses to biologicalThis reflects a lackgoals and research anddiversion of managementimpact-related studies.patchwork of managementthat is often inadequateimpact assessment.

or political problems.of long-term managementis part ly caused by ther e searchers and funds to

This has led to aand impact information

for either management or

•t

The high priority studies are summarizedbelow.

Highest research priorities related to offshorehydrocarbon development

In response to the imminent large-scaledevelopment of offshore hydrocarbon resources andthe marine transportation of these resources, andin response to the need for rational managementof arctic marine mammals in a period when harvestlevels are increasing and species composition ischanging, the Department of Fisheries and Oceansconvened a workshop of biologists with expertisein research on and management of arctic marinemammals. The workshop, held in Winnipeg inDecember 1980, was divided into two phases:offshore hydrocarbon development, and managementof marine mammals. The workshop considered theprincipal areas and species of concern andidentified the major research initiatives thatare required. After identifying the principalresearch needs, the workshop then assignedpriorities based on a subjective scale of high(1), medium (2) and low (3) priority.

-determine

The general harvest statistics for ringedseals were not considered to provide adequateestimates of trends in the harvest levels. Amechanism for gathering reliable statistics wasconsidered to have a Priority I rating. Thisis true for marine mammal harvest statistics ingeneral, not just for ringed seals.

Bearded seal: Few specific recommendationsfor bearded seal research were made by theworkshop. Monitoring of harvest levels wasgiven a Priority 1 rating as part of a generalprogram to gather harvest statistics. Data onhunting losses were also considered to beimportant but can probably only be obtained onan opportunistic basis. Similarly, informationon numbers and population trends should becollected on an opportunistic basis. Therecommendations on population size and trendsshould be re-evaluated when the current reviewof eastern arctic data has been completed byDr. T.G. Smith at Ste. Anne de Bellevue.

Discussion

Some of the studies recommended above mayprovide important information of high priorityfor more than one species. For example,development of a tagging technique for smallwhales will be useful for studies of both whitewhales and narwhals. Similarly, an ageingtechnique for white whales might also be usefulfor narwhals and vice versa. Improvements inthe quality of harvest statist ics from arcticcommunities will provide important informationfor several species.

Aerial surveys of walrus and narwhalpopulations in Foxe Basin and northern HudsonBay were each given Priority 1 status. Both ofthese species could be surveyed at the sametime although design modifications would benecessary to provide adequate coverage of thehabitat of each species.

It should be noted that researchpriorities assigned by the workshop are subjectto change as more infonnat ion becomesavailable, as hunting patterns change, and aspolitical pressures change. The researchidentified is basically short-term andaddresses presently identifiable problems.Some of those problems are acute. Presentarctic marine mammal management in Canada iscrisis oriented and consists of ad hoc

Priority Required Research

-long-term bio log ical/moni tor ing s tud­ies of key species (e.g. bowheads,white whales, ringed seals, beardedseals in the Beaufort Sea). Thesestudies are necessary to evaluateresponses to development.

-determine the locations of marinemammal concentration areas (somestudies has been done but gapsexist--e.g. bowheads in Beaufort Sea;narwhals in Baffin Bay in winter).These studies will determine thepotential for interaction withdevelopment.

how and why concentrationareas are used so that effects ofdevelopment in these areas can bepredicted (e.g. white whales in theMackenzie estuary).

-document the normal behaviour andacoustic capabilities of marinemannnals so that responses todevelopment can be assessed and so

,

-determine the size and distribution ofwalrus and narwhal populations inhabit­ing northern Hudson ~ay and Foxe Basin,since no estimates exist and harvestlevels are increasing.

•t

that potential effects of industrialnois~ can be predicted.

-undertake experimental studies ofeffects of noise and industrialactivities on marine mammals.

Highest research priorities related to arcticmarine mammal management

13

-undertake biological sampling ofcurrent harvest of walruses inBasin to provide informationdynamics of this species.

theFoxe

on

Priority Required Research

•

I

-undertake long-term ecological studiesfor all species of arctic marine mam­mals. These studies are essential fortotal management in a multi-speciescontext. Until such studies areconducted, management will be rudi­mentary and subject to many unpleasantsurprises.

-determine the stock size, discrete­ness and distribution of white whalesin Hudson Bay, Hudson Strait and SEBaffin Island area. These animals arebeing overharvested, at least locally,and are threatened by hydro develop­ments that affect their summeringestuaries.

-establish methods for tagging ormarking white whales and narwhals.Many critical questions about stockdiscreteness can only be solved bytagging .

-determine the present size andseasonal distribution of the westHudson Bay stock of white whalesusing systematic aerial surveys.Hydro development and harvesting 1nQuebec may threaten this stock.

Other research priorities are identified i nthe text. Although not given a Priority 1 rating,these studies are important and will be necessaryin the near future.

The workshop concluded that the present data­base on arctic marine mamma l s was not sufficientto allow confident predictions o f the effects ofoffshore industrial activities. Similarly, thedatabase is not sufficient to allow adequatemanagement of arctic marine mammals.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank the participants at the workshop fortheir candid comments and ideas. I also thank thefollowing participants for comments on a draft ofthis report: H. Braham, J. Burns,B. Fallis, K.Finley, M. Fraker, T. Langtry, J. Loch, A.Mansfield, D. Moshenko, R. Moshenko, R. Paterson,R. Peet, J. Richardson, B. Smiley, N. Snow, D.Stone, J. Ward and D. Wright. Not all commentswere incorporated into the report but they wereall appreciated.

-establish methods forwhales and narwhalspopulation dynamics ofcan be determined.

ageing whiteso that thethese species

-establish a system to obtain accurateharvest statistics for all speices ofmarine mammals and conduct studies todetermine hunting loss rates forselected species (e.g. narwhal, whitewhale, walrus>' Without such infor­mation, reliable management is notpossible.

-determine the basic population dyna­mics of the narwhal. Currentestimates of sustainable yield areguesswork. Combined harvest levelsin Canada and Greenland are high.

,,"

,-refine estimates of the size ofBaffin Bay narwhal populationeva l uat-: sunnner distributionterns.

theand

pat-

•

Printed in Canada bySupply and Services CanadaPrinting Officefor exclusive distribution byFisheries and Oceans CanadaFreshwater InstituteWinnipeg, ManitobaCanada

imaging

Sticky Note

BACK COVER