Download MHI False Killer Whale - Endangered Species Coalition

Endangered Species Coalition 2016 Top 10 Report Nominating Form
General Information
1
2
Organization & Web address
Contact name for species info
3
4
5
6
Address
Email & phone
Communications staff contact name
Email & phone
Deadline: July 29, 2016
Nominating Organizations: Please use this Column to Provide the Requested Information
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) www.nrdc.org
Zak Smith (Senior Attorney, Land & Wildlife Program/Marine Mammals Protection
Project)
1314 2nd Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
[email protected] / (310) 434-2334
Kimiko Martinez
Office: (310) 434-2344 / Cell: (310) 500-9505
General Species Information
7
8
Common name, genus, and species
Geographic range
9
Conservation status
10
Remaining population size
Main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) insular false killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens)
The MHI insular false killer whale is resident to the MHI in waters both shallow (<50
m) and deep (>4000 m), up to 112 km from shore (Oleson et al. 2010).
The MHI insular false killer whale distinct population segment (DPS) is the single
whale or dolphin population most at risk in Hawaiian waters (Baird 2016). The DPS
was listed as an “Endangered” species under the Endangered Species Act on
December 28, 2012. The listing decision was made in direct response to a petition to
list submitted by NRDC on October 1, 2009. The DPS is also considered “Depleted” by
the Marine Mammal Protection Act and is listed under CITES Appendix II throughout
its range.
The estimated abundance is between 150 and 200 animals (Baird et al. 2012; Caretta
et al. 2012; Oleson et al. 2012; Baird 2016). The estimated effective population size is
estimated at 45.8 individuals (95% CI 32.4-69.4; Chivers et al. 2010), below the
threshold at which inbreeding depression is expected (N=50).
Report Questions
11
12
13
Can you provide high-resolution photos?
If your species is selected, will you use the
report to advocate for the species?
5 free reports provided; additional copies =
$2.60/each. If you’d like additional copies,
how many (bulk orders may be cheaper)?
Yes
Yes
TBD
Please cite any substantiating scientific studies
Public Engagement Questions (Please explain why the species is interesting, why it matters, why decision-makers + the public should care.)0
14
Provide background information, including
interesting facts, for the species profile.
False killer whales are large members of the dolphin family. Females reach lengths of
approximately 5 m, and males approximately 6 m. False killer whales don’t stop
growing until they are between 25- and 30-years of age (Baird 2016). The oldest
animal aged was 63 years old, but it is likely that individuals may live until their 70s or
80s (Baird 2016).
MHI false killer whales are highly genetically isolated from pelagic false killer whales,
including when compared at a broad scale with whales in the central North Pacific and
eastern North Pacific, and at a finer scale with pelagic whales in Hawaiian waters (all
comparisons to Hawaiian insular false killer whales have p-values <0.001) (Martien et
al. 2014). Little to no immigration from other areas into the Hawaiian insular
population is evident (Martien et al. 2014).
False killer whales form strong long-term social bonds (Baird et al. 2008) and are
usually found in social groups of 10 or 20 that, in Hawaii, belong to much larger
groups of up to 40 individuals that are often closely related (Wade & Gerrodette
1993; Baird 2009; Baird et al. 2010; Baird 2016). Some of the bonds between
individuals likely last for life, and females appear to remain within the social group in
which they were born (Baird 2016). These large aggregations can spread over tens of
kilometers yet appear to have coordinated movement directions (Baird et al. 2008).
This grouping behavior makes the species vulnerable to mass strandings, and mass
mortality events have been documented in many regions (Ross 1984).
They feed during the day and night on fish and cephalopods and exhibit interesting
feeding behaviors, including traveling in broad ‘bands’ that can be several miles wide
to increase success of finding prey and also sharing food between individuals. Food
sharing is one of the most unusual aspects of the behavior of false killer whales but
has been regularly documented, with members of a group often passing fish back and
forth amongst themselves without taking a bite before the fish is returned to the
individual that caught it. Then all share in feeding (Baird 2016). False killer whales
have also been documented to attempt to share food with humans, presenting fish to
divers and offering salmon to boaters (Baird 2016). Such behavior probably serves to
Please cite any substantiating scientific studies
reinforce strong bonds among individuals that may be constant and long-term
hunting companions in an environment where the benefits of cooperatively finding
and catching prey allow them to survive as top predators (Baird 2016).
15
What is your organization’s most important
lead message for the public about this
species’ decline to be included in the report?
16
Is your NGO saving the species? If yes, how?
17
How can individuals help? Please be specific.
18
What action should the new administration
take to save the species? How can they
accomplish this action?
False killer whales make rapid and regular movements throughout the MHIs; some
whales tagged off Hawaii have remained around that island for extended periods
(days to weeks), but individuals from all tagged groups eventually ranged widely
through the MHIs, including movements to the west of Kauai and Niihau (Baird 2009;
Forney et al. 2010). It is likely that movement patterns of the whales vary over time
depending on the density and movement patterns of their prey species (Baird 2009).
The MHI false killer whale has uniquely developed to take advantage of the oasis the
Hawaiian Islands represent in the Pacific. This fidelity puts the whales in peril as they
are susceptible to localized environmental stressors from overfishing, toxics, and
ocean noise.
NRDC filed a successful petition to have the MHI false killer whale listed under the
Endangered Species Act and we are actively working to obtain a meaningful critical
habitat designation. NRDC also serves on the take reduction team looking to eliminate
take associated with commercial and recreational fishery activities.
Individuals can push for a robust critical habitat designation; raise awareness about a
population that is unique to Hawaii (a national and state treasure); and advocate for
the population’s recovery by supporting better management of the threats to the
population.
The new administration should fully and vigorously enforce the MMPA and ESA to
protect the species. The new administration should develop an aggressive recovery
plan and use the power it has under the MMPA and ESA to manage the competing
interests (commercial and recreational fisheries; U.S. Navy activities) that threatn the
whales.
Criteria-specific Questions – Please feel free to answer N/A or “see above/below” as appropriate. Please cite scientific studies.
19
Detail the ecological importance of the
species. Does it play a critical function in its
ecosystem, e.g., as a foundational species or
keystone species? How does the ecosystem
depend on this species (e.g., keystone
Marine mammals are important indicator species for ecosystem health (according to
the Sea Mammal Research Unit at the University of St. Andrews, marine mammals are
useful indicator species as they are measurable, simple to interpret, relevant,
comparable, cost-effective to measure, and features of the environment that people
will value). Of the 11 resident species to the MHIs, false killer whales are at the top of
Please cite any substantiating scientific studies
predator, keystone pollinator, ecological
engineer, refugia provider, etc.)?
20
Detail information on any social or economic
benefits the species provides—e.g., its value
for clean water, recreation, medicine,
scientific research, etc.—if any. (Optional)
21
Can the species be an ambassador for its
habitat or taxonomic group? If yes, detail.
the food web. As top predators with long life spans and blubber that accumulates
lipophilic contaminants, MHI insular false killer whales are sentinels of change for the
marine environment (Foltz et al. 2014); changes in whale distribution, abundance and
behavior may indicate changes in other parts of the ecosystem.
As a small and isolated population, the MHI insular false killer whale provides
important benefits for marine mammal and ecosystem researchers. Their ecological
significant feeding behaviors (see #21, below) and long-term and complex social
structure provides the opportunity for scientists to learn more about the ecology of
related species found in inaccessible, offshore waters. The small size and genetic
isolation of the insular false killer whale population also affords important insights
into the conservation biology of small populations of marine mammals, an important
field of study.
Hawaiian insular false killer whales can be an ambassador for their habitat as they
persist in an ecological setting unique for the taxon. The whales sometimes consume
prey associated with island habitat, suggesting a specialized knowledge of locations
and seasonal conditions that aggregate prey or make them more vulnerable to
predation. In an insular habitat such foraging grounds may occur more regularly or in
more predictable locations than on the high seas (Oleson et al. 2010).
Hawaiian insular false killer whales can be an ambassador for their taxonomic group
as they exhibit an ecologically significant and unique feeding strategy. The relatively
high population density of Hawaiian insular false killer whales relative to other false
killer whale populations suggest they employ a unique, island associated foraging
strategy compared to other false killer whales (Oleson et al. 2010).
Judge’s Score for Importance of Species:
22
Describe the specific threat(s) to the species.
What are the greatest impacts?
According to the most recent NOAA OPR Status Review (Oleson et al. 2010) and the
ESA-listing Final Rule (Federal Register 2012), the most significant key limiting factors
for the MHI insular false killer whale are:
1. Reduced food quality and quantity. False killer whales in Hawaii feed on large
pelagic game fish, most of which are subject to high levels of both commercial and
recreational fishing pressure. There has been a large reduction in both the number
Please cite any substantiating scientific studies
and size of yellowfin tuna, one of their primary prey, around the main Hawaiian
Islands. This threat is considered to represent a medium risk factor in that it
encompasses an intermediate number of threats that are likely to contribute to
the decline of the MHI insular false killer whale population or contains some
individual threats identified as moderately likely to contribute to the decline of
the population at many locations within its range. These threats include: reduced
total prey biomass, reduced prey size, competition with commercial fisheries, and
competition with recreational fisheries.
2. Interactions with commercial fisheries (hooking and entanglement). False killer
whales have been taking fish off fisherman’s lines in Hawaiian waters for a long
time, likely related to sharing their prey being an integral part of their behavior
(Baird 2016). Such ‘depredation’ can put the whales at risk in a number of ways:
first, they can ingest fishing hooks that may indirectly increase the risk of mortality
– an individual that had stranded and died was found to have five fish hooks in its
stomach (Baird et al. 2014); second, false killer whales are the most frequently
hooked species in the pelagic longline fisheries – a rate of bycatch that exceed
their potential biological removal (Baird et al. 2014); and third, direct conflict with
fisherman due to fish stealing may lead to some individuals being intentionally
killed (Baird 2016). The intense and increased fishing activity within the known
range of the insular false killer whale since the 1970s suggests a high level of risk
with fisheries interactions; however, there is a lack of reporting and observing of
nearshore fisheries interactions. While interactions with commercial longline
fisheries have now been reduced (although are still present) due to its exclusion
from the known range of the insular false killer whale, interactions with
commercial troll, handline, shortline, and kaka line fisheries are projected to have
a high level of current and future risk based on their scale and distribution.
3. Disease. Insular false killer whales are at risk from accumulation of natural,
environmental, or anthropogenic contaminants, including persistent organic
pollutants (POPs) such as polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs). Concentrations of PCBs
in 84% of sampled false killer whales (36 individuals) exceeded proposed
threshold levels for health effects in marine mammals (including maternal failure
and thyroid and immune system dysfunction) (Foltz et al. 2014). Mechanistic
evidence is becoming available that supports the epidemiological suspicion that
Please cite any substantiating scientific studies
prevalent PCBs can induce endocrine disruption in a cancer cell line (Tremoen et
al. 2014). Furthermore, a recent review notes that, despite their discontinued
industrial use, there is little if any downward trend in overall PCB levels measured
in cetaceans since 2008 (Law 2014), confirming that the threat of toxicity from
persistent organics is not abating with time (Foltz et al. 2014). Harmful algal
blooms and discharge of raw or partially treated sewage effluent and
contaminated freshwater runoff into marine coastal waters also may increase the
risk of disease through transmission of novel pathogens or increasing pathogen
loads in the environment.
4. Small population size. This threat represents a high risk because the current
estimated number of breeding adults is approaching levels where reduced genetic
diversity, inbreeding depression and other Allee effects could have increasing
negative effects in population growth rate and because other social factors (such
as efficiency in group foraging and potential loss of knowledge needed to deal
with unusual environmental events) may further compromise recovery.
23
Detail the current and projected decline of
the species.
Other identified threats include short and long-term climate change and
anthropogenic noise.
There are several lines of evidence supporting a finding that the insular false killer
whale is in decline. An aerial survey in 1989 observed large group sizes (larger than
the current abundance estimate) of insular false killer whales (Reeves et al. 2009). The
results of five surveys from 1993 to 2003 show a downward trend in sighting rates of
false killer whales, further supporting a decline of the insular population (Mobley et
al. 2000; Baird 2009). Low resighting rates of individual false killer whales photoidentified in the 1980s and an unpublished analysis of mean annual survival rate
(Baird & Barlow) also suggests a low survival rate in the 1990s relative to other longlived cetacean species.
Based on the best scientific and commercial information, the ESA-listing Final Rule
(Federal Register 2012) concluded that the MHI insular false killer whale DPS is
presently in danger of extinction throughout all of its range. Most population viability
analysis (PVA) models for the species indicate a probability of greater-than-90 percent
likelihood of the DPS declining to fewer than 20 individuals within 75 years, which
Please cite any substantiating scientific studies
24
If not described above, detail the status of
the species’ habitat(s). What are the threats,
if any? Is there adequate connectivity?
25
Describe the timing of the species’ threat(s).
Is it a current, eminent, or future threat?
26
Indicate if there is an associated political
threat, e.g., does an industry group or
member of Congress threaten this species?
would result in functional extinction beyond the point where recovery is possible
(Federal Register 2012).
According to the ESA-listing Final Rule (Federal Register 2012), critical habitat was
indeterminable at the time of listing as sufficient information was not available i) to
assess impacts of designation, ii) on the geographical area occupied by the species,
and iii) regarding the physical and biological features essential to conservation.
Reduced food quality and quantity and interactions with commercial fisheries are
current threats that are expected to continue and likely worsen as fisheries continue
to expand and diversify. Threats from disease and small population size are currently
impacting the population, but are expected to do so increasingly in the imminent and
future timescales. Anthropogenic noise and climate change are impacting the DPS
currently and are projected to become more serious threats in the future.
Commercial and recreational fisheries and the U.S. Navy are a potential threat to
actions taken to protect the population.
Judge’s Score for Severity and Extent of Threat:
Judge’s Final Score
Please submit to [email protected] by July 29, 2016, and thank you for participating in the 2016 Top 10 Report.
Please cite any substantiating scientific studies