Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 1
Satellite tracking of south-bound female humpback
whales in the Kimberley region of Western Australia
Final Report
M.C. Double1, N. Gales1, K.C.S. Jenner2, M.-N. Jenner2
1 Australian Marine Mammal Centre, Australian Antarctic Division,
203 Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7150.
2 Centre for Whale Research (Western Australia) Inc.,
PO Box 1622, Fremantle WA 6959.
September 2010
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 2
Satellite tracking of south-bound female humpback whales in the
Kimberley region of Western Australia
Summary
Thisstudy was the first large-scale (>20) deployment of satellite tags on Australian humpback whales
and aimed to describe the migratory distribution and behaviour of nursing humpback whales in the
Kimberley region of Western Australia. A total of 23 tags were deployed on female humpback whales
with young calves in Camden Sound (15.38S, 124.41E), the Buccaneer Archipelago (16.25S,
123.40E), Pender Bay (16.74S, 122.70E) and Beagle Bay (17.09S, 122.86E) between 25th August and
the 6th September 2009. Of the 23 tags deployed three failed to provide any location data, and a further
six failed to provide any location data after the first day of deployment. The remaining tagged whales
were tracked from one to 108 days (mean = 15.3 days; SD = 26.6). A total of 1,250 locations were
received from these whales and they were tracked for a total of 23,243 km (mean = 1,367 km; min:
5.75; max: 9,071) and the total net distance moved from the first to last location was 16,912 km (mean
= 994 km; min: 3.2; max: 7,328). One individual was tracked from its breeding ground in north-
western Western Australian to its feeding ground at the edge of the sea ice around Antarctic; a
migration distance of over 7000 km. Also two individuals deviated from the expected migratory route
close to the coast of Western Australia and were tracked 1,200km into the Indian Ocean; this
behaviour has not been described previously. The potential causes of the poor performance of many of
the tags are discussed.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 3
Introduction
The population of humpback whales that migrate along the west coast of Australia and calve in the
Kimberley region of Western Australia is increasing in size but has not yet recovered from industrial
whaling (Hedley et al., 2009). The latest abundance estimate suggests this west coast population is
now over 20,000 individuals and is probably increasing at a rate greater than 10% per year (Bannister
& Hedley, 2001; Hedley et al., 2009).
Although the general timing of the migration and approximate distribution of migrating whales has
been described for this population (Jenner et al., 2001), the specific migratory routes, habitat use,
resting areas, calving areas and the individual behaviours of the males, females and mothers with
calves are not well described. Therefore a greater understanding of the movement and migratory
behaviours of these whales is desirable to better inform the management of proposed and existing
industrial activities within or close to the calving and migratory areas and to maximise conservation
outcomes for whales.
Satellite telemetry has been used routinely in wildlife biology for nearly two decades and has been
applied successfully in studies of many marine organisms including penguins, albatrosses, seals and
even sharks e.g. (Bonadonna et al., 2000; Gifford et al., 2007; Jouventin et al., 1994; Weimerskirch et
al., 1993). The use of this technology in understanding the migration of large whales has, however,
lagged behind other taxa largely due to the inability to catch and attach tags to such large species. It is
only relatively recently that research groups developed reliable tags that can be implanted into free-
ranging whales (Gales et al., 2009; Heide-Jorgensen et al., 2001; Mate et al., 2007). Such tags have
now been used in studies of many large whales species such as blue (Heide-Jorgensen et al., 2001;
Mate et al., 1999), humpback (Dalla Rosa et al., 2008; Gales et al., 2009; Lagerquist et al., 2008), sei
(Olsen et al., 2009), right (Baumgartner & Mate, 2005), bowhead (Mate et al., 2000) and minke
whales (Heide-Jørgensen et al., 2001), although large scale deployments are still rare.
The aim of this project was to deploy satellite tags on female humpback whales with calves in or near
their known calving grounds in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. Females with calves were
preferentially tagged because it is the behaviour of these animals that are likely to be the most
sensitive to industrial activities and other anthropogenic disturbance and therefore are of most interest
to conservation managers and other stakeholders.
Methods
The satellite tags used in this study have a custom-designed, anchoring section joined to a housing
manufactured by Wildlife Computers (Redmond, Washington, USA) containing the Spot 5 transmitter
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 4
(Figure 1). The tags were designed to implant up to a maximum of 290mm into the skin, blubber,
interfacial layers and outer muscle mass of the whale (generally just forward and to the left or right
side of the dorsal fin) (Figures 1 & 2). The front 80mm of the tag disarticulates from back section of
the tag post-deployment; a flexible 5mm multi-braided stainless steel wire maintains a coupling
between the two parts. Retention of the tag is maintained through two actively sprung plates, and a
circle of passively deployed ‘petals’ (See Figure 1 for details). All external components of the tag
were built from stainless steel and the tags were surgically sterilised prior to deployment.
Each tag was deployed using a compressed air gun (modified ARTS, Restech) set at pressure of
between 7.5 and 10 bar (cf. Gales et al., 2009; Olsen et al., 2009). When fired from the air gun the tags
were attached to a purpose-designed projectile carrier. Retention teeth on the projectile carrier grip a
metal ring fitted to the end of the tag. When the tag makes contact with a whale, the rapid deceleration
of the tag and carrier withdraws the retention teeth and releases the projectile carrier (Figure 2). The
metal ring used to attach the carrier is designed to fall off in time to reduce the drag of the tag (see
Figure 1). Tags were deployed from the bow-sprit of a 5.8m rigid-hulled inflatable boat at a range of
3-8m.
Once deployed, the first dive of the whale will activate the tag. They then transmit upon each
surfacing if the tag has not transmitted during the previous 30 seconds. On the day of deployment the
tags were set to transmit until 00:00 hrs UTC; after that time they were set to transmit on a 6hr on,
18hr off duty cycle until the tag falls off the whale, malfunctions or the single AA lithium battery is
exhausted.
Only pods identified to include mothers with their calves were approached for tagging. To minimize
disturbance, no biopsies were taken for genetic sexing; all tagged animals were assumed to be female
because they were accompanied by a young calf. Following each deployment, we used a hand-held
receiver to check that the tag was transmitting. Whenever possible all the whales encountered during
the research period were photographed for photo-identification studies and detailed photographs were
taken of each tag deployment. On deployment we also recorded deployment time, deployment
location, tagging distance, gun pressure, percentage implantation of the tag, pod size, pod
composition, the whale’s reaction to the deployment and the weather and sea conditions.
During the transmission periods, locations were obtained via the Argos System of polar-orbiting
satellites (Argos, 1990). Each location was allocated a level of accuracy by the Argos System.
Categories 3, 2, 1 have associated error predictions of 250m, 500m and 1500m respectively whereas
categories 0, A, B have no associated error prediction. All Argos locations were filtered using the
Speed-Distance-Angle function in the R package (R Development Core Team, 2007) ‘Argosfilter’
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 5
(Freitas et al., 2008) which has been designed specifically for the tracking data from marine mammals
and is based on the algorithm developed by McConnell et al. (1992). This function will remove
locations from the data set based on unrealistic swimming speeds, distances between successive
locations and turning angles. The conservative default setting of a maximum swimming speed of 7.2
km/h was applied in this study.
Great circle distances between locations were calculated using an equation that assumes a spherical
Earth of radius 6371 km. Analyses based on distances from Camden Sound used the -15.38231
124.41327 (WGS 1984) as the 0km reference location.
To examine habitat use the R package TRIP (Sumner, 2006) was used to interpolate locations at one
hour intervals and ArcGIS (ESRI Software) with Hawth's Analysis Tools for ArcGIS (Beyer, 2004)
were used to generate a sampling grid and calculate the number of locations within each 0.5o quadrat.
Hawth's Analysis Tools for ArcGIS was also used to calculate the total distance traveled and the net
distance traveled from the first location.
Sea ice extent was mapped using data from the Institute of Environmental Physics, University of
Bremen, Germany (http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/amsre.html).
Results
Between 25th August and 6th September 2009 23 of the 30 available satellite-linked radio tags were
deployed on humpback whales in Camden Sound (15.38S, 124.41E), the Buccaneer Archipelago
(16.25S, 123.40E), Pender Bay (16.74S, 122.70E) and Beagle Bay (17.09S, 122.86E), Western
Australia (see Table 2 & Figure 3). All tags were deployed on female humpback whales accompanied
by a calf (Table 2). Due to logistical delays it is lily we arrived at Camden Sound after the peak of
whale activity in this region and generally sightings rates were greater further south (see Appendix
One). Also strong sea breezes, deliberately short contact periods per pod, and some whales avoiding
close approaches by the tagging vessel all reduced our opportunities to deploy tags.
Tag performance is summarised in Table 3 and the tracks provided by the tags are presented in Figures
4 & 5. Of the 23 tags deployed three failed to provide any location data, and a further six failed to
provide any location data after the first day of deployment (Table 3). Whales with functional tags were
tracked from one to 108 days (mean = 15.3 days; SD = 26.6). A total of 1,250 locations were received,
1007 of which were not removed by the filtering process (see Methods). Whales that provided more
than one location were tracked for a total of 23,243 km (mean = 1,367 km; min: 5.75; max: 9,071) and
the total net distance moved from the first to last location was 16,912 km (mean = 994 km; min: 3.2;
max: 7,328).
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 6
One whale (96382) was tracked to the Antarctic ice edge (Figure 4); the first time a Western
Australian humpback whale has been tracked from breeding to feeding grounds. Two whales (96389
& 96400) did not follow the expected migration path of southbound humpback whales. Instead of
closely following the coastline to south-western Australia these animals left the coast just south of
Exmouth and were tracked approximately 1,200km south west into the Indian Ocean. This behaviour
has not been described previously.
Two tags had long gaps in their location data (96382 & 96400) where there longevity was 108 and 74
days however the number of days of data were 69 and 30 respectively. The cause of the breaks in data
provision is currently under investigation with the transmitter’s manufacturers Wildlife Computers.
Generally the tag longevity in this study was shorter than previous AMMC deployments using a
similar tag design. Figure 6 shows the survival curves for the last three deployment bouts conducted
by the AMMC plus the longevity of tags during the development stage (pre-October 2008). The tags
deployed in the Kimberley suffered a severe early failure rate as shown by the steep survival curve in
the first week after deployment. Although not as severe, the Evans Head deployment did not provide
the longevity seen in the deployment based around Eden, NSW. We suspect that the tag performance
was lower for the Kimberley and the Evans Head (northern NSW) deployments because in these
locations whales are in shallow waters where it is possible for the whales to damage the tag on the sea
floor.
On the discovery of the early tag failure during the Kimberley deployment and after witnessing whales
covered in mud from the sea floor we attempted to protect the rear section of two tags (which houses
the water switch set in epoxy resin) by permanently fixing two stopping rings (see Figure 1 component
F & Figure 7a) to the rear of each tag. In place, these two rings stood proud of the epoxy section of the
tag and provided some protection to the water switch. The two tags (96383 & 96389) lasted 108 and
32 days and provided at total of 69 and 31 days of location data respectively (Figure 7b); they were the
first and third most productive tags (Table 3). The probability of this outcome occurring by chance
was estimated by Monte Carlo simulation to be approximately 0.02.
Camden Sound to Exmouth Gulf
Despite the high tag attrition the migration behaviour of eight female humpback whales was obtained
for the region between Pender Bay and Eighty Mile Beach, the section of greatest interest for this
particular study (Figures 8 & 9).
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 7
In the region between Camden Sound and Exmouth Gulf (approx. 1000 km from Camden Sound)
most median distances from whale locations to the coastline of WA were less than 25km (Figure 10)
therefore the whales were frequently in very shallow water (most medians <40 m; Figure 11). The
whales only deviated strongly from this pattern in the region west of the Dampier Peninsula (approx.
300 to 400 km from Camden Sound; see Figure 3) where the median distance off shore were over 50
km and some whales were as far as 200 km from the coastline of WA. This is reflected in the
bathymetry data for the region where the median location depth is nearly 50m with some whales in
nearly 300m of water (Figure 11).
We quantified linear travel distances from Camden Sound each day to assess the rate of progress on
their southern migration. These analyses showed that the linear distance traveled per day was highly
variable in all 100km distance classes within 1000 km of Camden Sound (Figures 12 & 13). In this
sector travel distances ranged from over 120km to less than 10 km per day. The median values were
also relatively low in this sector (approx. 30 to 50 km/day) whereas beyond this sector the travel
distances appear to be less variable (although the data are few) and the median travel distances were
between 70 to 80km per day.
The individual daily travel distances of the four whales that provided the most location data showed
highly variable migration behaviour. Some whales had cyclic bouts of resting separated by perhaps
two or three days of migration whereas others had longer periods of active migration followed by
more than one day of low travel distances (Figure 13).
Figure 14 shows the cumulative occupancy durations within 0.5o quadrats for the 17 humpback whales
that provided more than one location. Although influenced strongly by the deployment locations, the
data again show the inshore and relatively narrow nature of the migration corridor for female
humpbacks with calves except at the western side of the Dampier Peninsular where the corridor
appears to be broader and centered further offshore.
Discussion
The study involved the first large-scale (>20) deployment of satellite tags on Australian humpback
whales. The tracks provided by these tags totaled over 23,000 km (1,250 locations) and revealed
detailed migratory behaviour of several individual nursing female humpback whales. One individual
was tracked from its breeding ground in north-western Western Australian to its feeding ground at the
edge of sea ice around Antarctic; a migration distance of over 7000 km. Also two individuals deviated
from the expected migratory route close to the coast of Western Australia and were tracked 1,200km
into the Indian Ocean. These two whales represent 50% of the four whales that provided location data
south of Exmouth Gulf so this may represent a relatively common behaviour. It is possible that such
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 8
whales divert from the most direct route to their Antarctic feeding grounds, to exploit temperate
foraging areas (Stamation et al., 2007). Such behaviour was recently revealed by Gales et al. (2009)
who showed many Eastern Australian humpback whales visit productive waters off Fiordland, New
Zealand before continuing their migration to Antarctic waters.
Currently the recognised calving area for this population of humpback whales is the inshore region
from the Lacepede Islands to Camden Sound (Jenner et al., 2001), although calving has been recorded
further north and south (Jenner & Jenner unpublished data). In the calving area several of the tagged
whales showed inconsistent direction in their migratory behaviour with some heading north before
again turning south. Others looped out to sea before returning to shallower waters. Once south of
Pender Bay the whales displayed more consistent migratory behaviour with little or no meandering
(see Figures 9 & 13).
Generally, the tagged whales migrated close to the coastline of Western Australia, often within a few
tens of kilometers of the shore and the width of the migratory corridor revealed by the tagged whales
was frequently less than 100 km. In places, such as off Eighty Mile Beach, the migratory corridor
revealed by the tagged whales was less then 30 km wide and centered only ~15km offshore. North of
Exmouth Gulf the widest point of the migratory corridor revealed by the tagged whales was off the
north-west of Dampier Peninsular (Pt. Coulomb) where the distance between the inshore and offshore
tracked whales was nearly 200 km and seven of the eight tagged whales that passed this point where
greater than 40km offshore. Although the tagged whales generally stayed close to the coast this may
not reflect the behaviour of males or females without calves. It is thought that females with young
calves tend to stay close to shore in order to reduce the possibility of attacks by sharks and killer
whales. This behaviour was also revealed by the bathymetry data which showed that these migrating
whales were usually in less than 30 m of water.
The satellite tracking data showed that the tagged whales often showed very low linear travel distances
over a 24 hour period, but no regions were identified where all or most of the tagged females showed
low travel distances (possible resting areas). Also the migratory behaviour of the tagged whales was
highly variable; some consistently showed a pattern of two or three days of higher travel distances
followed by a day of slow progress (possible resting) whereas others migrated steadily for many days
followed by a multi-day period of low travel distances. North of Exmouth Gulf median travel
distances in 24-hour periods were usually between 40 and 60km per day although some whales
covered around 120km in 24 hours (measured as the linear distance from Camden Sound); further
south this figure rose to over 80 km per day and once south of Australia travels speeds often exceeded
100km per day. These travel speed are similar to those reported by Mate et al. (Mate et al., 1998) for
three humpback whales migrating north from Hawaii (average = 120km/day) and those reported by
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 9
Zerbini et al. (2006) for two humpback whales migrating southward in the South Atlantic (63 & 92
km/day).
Tag longevity was lower than on previous deployments (cf. Gales et al. 2009) and anecdotal evidence
suggests this may be due to the whales damaging the tags on the sea floor or through contact with
other whales. On several occasions untagged whales were seen rising to the surface with mud on their
tails and rostrums. Such behaviour has also been recorded in Exmouth Gulf (Jenner & Jenner
unpublished data). This mud-rolling behaviour or perhaps contact with other whales seems to be the
most likely explanation for ten tags providing two or fewer days of data. Previous deployments have
shown that the implanted tags would not have been expelled by the whales in such a short period of
time and that the electronic componentry of the tags is reliable. The improved performance of the two
tags that were modified to protect the base of the aerial and the water switch also suggests that tag
damage reduced tag longevity. When similar tags have been deployed on whales in or close to deep
water the tag longevity has been greater (Gales et al., 2009; Zerbini pers. comm.). Since this
deployment Wildlife Computers have redesigned the rear section of the tag so that the water switch is
no longer set in epoxy; instead it is embedded in a Delrin stopping plate. This design should make the
water switch and aerial less prone to damage.
The compromised performance of many of the deployed tags significantly reduced the size of this
study’s dataset so caution should be taken when generalising the migration behaviour of Western
Australian humpback whales based on information from this study alone. South of Eighty Mile Beach
only four whales provided any location data therefore any description of the variation in migratory
behaviour south of this region is largely anecdotal. Similarly, this study did not aim to describe the
migratory behaviour of males and females without calves. Further work is required to describe the
behaviour of these animals and also to investigate any inter-annual variation in the migratory
behaviours of females with calves.
Acknowledgements
The field-based research team for this project was Vanessa Boladeras, Mike Double, Curt Jenner,
Micheline Jenner, Rebecca McCauley and Dale Peterson. This project would not have been possible
without the skill, expertise and dedication of Eric King, our engineer at the AAD. We are also very
grateful to Dave Watts and David Smith of the Australian Antarctic Data Centre for their assistance
with data curation and GIS respectively. We thank the Western Australian Marine Science Institute
(WAMSI) for partly funding this project. WAMSI received financial support for this project from
Woodside Energy Ltd as the operator the Browse LNG Development.
References
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 10
Argos 1990 User's manual. Service Argos, Landover. 267.
Bannister, J.L. and Hedley, S.L. 2001. Southern Hemisphere Group IV humpback whales: their status
from recent aerial survey. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 47: 587-598.
Baumgartner, M.F. and Mate, B.R. 2005. Summer and fall habitat of North Atlantic right whales
(Eubalaena glacialis) inferred from satellite telemetry. Canadian Journal of Fisheries &
Aquatic Sciences, 62: 527-543.
Beyer, H.L. 2004. Hawth's Analysis Tools for ArcGIS.
Bonadonna, F., Lea, M.A. and Guinet, C. 2000. Foraging routes of Antarctic fur seals (Arctocephalus
gazella) investigated by the concurrent use of satellite tracking and time-depth recorders.
Polar Biology, 23: 149-159.
Dalla Rosa, L., Secchi, E.R., Maia, Y.G., Zerbini, A.N. and Heide-Jorgensen, M.P. 2008. Movements
of satellite-monitored humpback whales on their feeding ground along the Antarctic
Peninsula. Polar Biology, 31: 771-781.
Freitas, C., Lydersen, C., Fedak, M.A. and Kovacs, K.M. 2008. A simple new algorithm to filter
marine mammal Argos locations. Marine Mammal Science, 24: 315-325.
Gales, N., Double, M.C., Robinson, S., Jenner, C., Jenner, M., King, E., Gedamke, J., Paton, D. and
Raymond, B. 2009 Satellite tracking of southbound East Australian humpback whales
(Megaptera novaeangliae): challenging the feast or famine model for migrating whales. Paper
submitted for consideration by the IWC Scientific Committee. SC/61/SH17.
Gifford, A., Compagno, L.J.V., Levine, M. and Antoniou, A. 2007. Satellite tracking of whale sharks
using tethered tags. Fisheries Research, 84: 17-24.
Hedley, S.L., Bannister, J.L. and Dunlop, R.A. 2009 Group IV humpback whales: abundance
estimates from aerial and land-based surveys off Shark Bay, Western Australia, 2008 Paper
submitted for consideration by the IWC Scientific Committee. SC/61/SH23.
Heide-Jørgensen, M.P., E. Nordøy, Øien, N., Folkow, L.P., Kleivane, L., Blix, A.S., Jensen, M.V. and
Laidre, K.L. 2001. Satellite tracking of minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) off the
North Norwegian coast. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management Special Issue, 3:
175-178.
Heide-Jorgensen, M.P., Kleivane, L., Oien, N., Laidre, K.L. and Jensen, M.V. 2001. A new technique
for deploying satellite transmitters on baleen whales: Tracking a blue whale (Balaenoptera
musculus) in the North Atlantic. Marine Mammal Science, 17: 949-954.
Jenner, K.C.S., Jenner, M.-N.M. and McCabe, K.A. 2001. Geographical and temporal movements of
humpback whales in Western Australian waters. Australian Petroleum Production &
Exploration Association Journal, 41: 749 - 765.
Jouventin, P., Capdeville, D., Cuenotchaillet, F. and Boiteau, C. 1994. Exploitation of pelagic
resources by a non-flying seabird - satellite tracking of the king penguin throughout the
breeding cycle. Marine Ecology-Progress Series, 106: 11-19.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 11
Lagerquist, B.A., Mate, B.R., Ortega-Ortiz, J.G., Winsor, M. and Urbán-Ramirez, J. 2008. Migratory
movements and surfacing rates of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) satellite
tagged at Socorro Island, Mexico. Marine Mammal Science, 24: 815-830.
Mate, B., Mesecar, R. and Lagerquist, B. 2007. The evolution of satellite-monitored radio tags for
large whales: One laboratory's experience. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in
Oceanography, 54: 224-247.
Mate, B.R., Gisiner, R. and Mobley, J. 1998. Local and migratory movements of Hawaiian humpback
whales tracked by satellite telemetry. Canadian Journal of Zoology - Revue Canadienne de
Zoologie, 76: 863-868.
Mate, B.R., Krutzikowsky, G.K. and Winsor, M.H. 2000. Satellite-monitored movements of radio-
tagged bowhead whales in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas during the late-summer feeding
season and fall migration. Canadian Journal of Zoology - Revue Canadienne de Zoologie, 78:
1168-1181.
Mate, B.R., Lagerquist, B.A. and Calambokidis, J. 1999. Movements of North Pacific blue whales
during the feeding season off southern California and their southern fall migration. Marine
Mammal Science, 15: 1246-1257.
McConnell, B.J., Chambers, C. and Fedak, M.A. 1992. Foraging ecology of southern elephant seals in
relation to the bathymetry and productivity of the Southern Ocean. Antarctic Science, 4: 393-
398.
Olsen, E., Budgell, W.P., Head, E., Kleivane, L., Nøttestad, L., Prieto, R., Silva, M.A., Skov, H.,
Víkingsson, G.A., Waring, G. and Øien, N. 2009. First satellite-tracked long-distance
movement of a Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis) in the North Atlantic. Aquatic Mammals,
2009: 313-318.
R Development Core Team 2007 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Stamation, K.A., Croft, D.B., Shaughnessy, P.D. and Waples, K.A. 2007. Observations of humpback
whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) feeding during their southward migration along the coast of
southeastern New South Wales, Australia: identification of a possible supplemental feeding
ground. Aquatic Mammals, 33 165-174.
Sumner, M.D. 2006 Spatial analysis of animal track data. CRAN.
Weimerskirch, H., Salamolard, M., Sarrazin, F. and Jouventin, P. 1993. Foraging strategies of
wandering albatrosses through the breeding season - a study using satellite telemetry. Auk,
110: 325-342.
Zerbini, A.N., Andriolo, A., Heide-Jorgensen, M.P., Pizzorno, J.L., Maia, Y.G., VanBlaricom, G.R.,
DeMaster, D.P., Simoes-Lopes, P.C., Moreira, S. and Bethlem, C. 2006. Satellite-monitored
movements of humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae in the southwest Atlantic Ocean.
Marine Ecology-Progress Series, 313: 295-304.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 12
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 13
Table 1. Summary of field activities and the temporal distribution of tag deployments over the 14-day field project.
Day Date Activity
Number of tags
deployed
1 24/08/2009 Left Broome for Camden Sound 2 25/08/2009 Arrived Camden Sound 1 3 26/08/2009 Full day tagging 2 4 27/08/2009 Full day tagging 1 5 28/08/2009 Traveled to Buccaneer Archipelago 1 6 29/08/2009 Full day tagging 2 7 30/08/2009 Full day tagging 4 8 31/08/2009 Traveled to Pender Bay 0 9 1/09/2009 Full day tagging 2 10 2/09/2009 Full day tagging 3 11 3/09/2009 Full day tagging 1 12 4/09/2009 Full day tagging 3 13 5/09/2009 Full day tagging 2 14 6/09/2009 Returned to Broome 1
Total 23
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 14
Table 2. Deployment information for the 23 satellite tags deployed on female humpback whales between August 25th and September 6th 2009.
Number Tag number Date Time (local) Place Latitude Longitude Sex Age Pod
1 96396 25/08/2009 14:20 Camden Sound 15.6267 124.1333 Female Adult Cow/calf
2 96406 26/08/2009 9:15 Camden Sound 15.4450 124.3667 Female Adult Cow/calf
3 96381 26/08/2009 10:05 Camden Sound 15.4433 124.4000 Female Adult Cow/calf
4 96384 27/08/2009 15:22 Camden Sound 15.5175 124.3167 Female Adult Cow/calf
5 96392 28/08/2009 11:50 Camden Sound 15.4883 124.4500 Female Adult Cow/calf
6 96388 29/08/2009 10:12 Buccaneer 16.0847 123.3667 Female Adult Cow/calf
7 96379 29/08/2009 12:27 Buccaneer 16.0617 123.6333 Female Adult Cow/calf
8 96399 30/08/2009 8:44 Buccaneer 16.0733 123.6333 Female Adult Cow/calf
9 96408 30/08/2009 10:25 Buccaneer 16.0500 123.6500 Female Adult Cow/calf
10 96400 30/08/2009 15:15 Buccaneer 15.9250 123.7000 Female Adult Cow/calf
11 96397 30/08/2009 15:50 Buccaneer 15.9150 123.7000 Female Adult Cow/calf
12 96409 1/09/2009 11:57 Pender Bay 16.5300 122.7000 Female Adult Cow/calf
13 96402 1/09/2009 13:24 Pender Bay 16.5800 122.6833 Female Adult Cow/calf
14 96382 2/09/2009 9:39 Pender Bay 16.6833 122.6500 Female Adult Cow/calf
15 96410 2/09/2009 10:16 Pender Bay 16.6767 122.6500 Female Adult Cow/calf
16 96394 2/09/2009 14:01 Pender Bay 16.6200 122.6167 Female Adult Cow/calf
17 96389 3/09/2009 11:35 Pender Bay 16.6467 122.6667 Female Adult Cow/calf
18 96393 4/09/2009 8:33 Pender Bay 16.6850 122.7000 Female Adult Cow/calf
19 96411 4/09/2009 10:22 Pender Bay 16.6850 122.6667 Female Adult Cow/calf
20 96407 4/09/2009 11:32 Pender Bay 16.7150 122.6333 Female Adult Cow/calf
21 96383 5/09/2009 8:28 Pender Bay 16.6717 122.6667 Female Adult Cow/calf
22 96387 5/09/2009 8:46 Pender Bay 16.6800 122.6667 Female Adult Cow/calf
23 96391 6/09/2009 9:05 Beagle Bay 16.8433 122.4000 Female Adult Cow/calf
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 15
Table 3. Performance summary of the 23 satellite tags deployed on humpback whales in the Kimberley region, WA 2009. The number of locations for each
Argos accuracy category are given in the last six columns (see Methods). All dates and times are derived from Argos satellite data and so are reported in UTC.
Number Tag Start Date Last Date
Longevity
(days)
No. of
days of
locations
No. of
locations
Total distance
travelled (km)
Net distance
travelled
(km) 3 2 1 0 A B
7 96379 29/08/2009 29/08/2009 1 1 10 18.30 14.21 1 2 3 2 0 2
3 96381 26/08/2009 26/08/2009 2 2 22 39.43 3.20 4 2 7 4 1 4
14 96382 2/09/2009 22/09/2009 108 69 251 9,071.52 7,328.83 14 19 35 17 69 97
21 96383 5/09/2009 5/09/2009 1 1 4 - - 0 0 0 2 1 1
5 96384 27/08/2009 20/09/2009 25 25 141 1,557.02 762.68 13 47 32 13 16 20
22 96387 5/09/2009 5/09/2009 1 1 1 - - 0 0 0 1 0 0
6 96388 29/08/2009 2/09/2009 5 5 37 387.73 203.45 6 12 8 4 4 3
17 96389 3/09/2009 22/09/2009 34 31 91 2,863.33 2,408.63 5 9 21 8 20 28
23 96391 6/09/2009 22/09/2009 36 36 208 2,549.93 1,546.00 26 65 53 15 26 23
4 96392 26/08/2009 26/08/2009 0 - 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 96393 4/09/2009 9/09/2009 6 6 28 412.71 320.67 5 3 8 3 4 5
16 96394 2/09/2009 2/09/2009 0 - 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 96396 25/08/2009 29/08/2009 5 5 26 233.26 166.62 5 6 6 1 5 3
11 96397 30/08/2009 30/08/2009 1 1 12 16.02 12.65 5 3 1 2 1 0
8 96399 31/08/2009 9/09/2009 10 7 15 478.00 392.10 1 1 1 1 4 7
10 96400 30/08/2009 20/09/2009 74 30 167 3,438.04 2,696.13 16 50 36 17 23 25
13 96402 1/09/2009 1/09/2009 0 - 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 96406 26/08/2009 26/08/2009 1 1 1 - - 0 0 0 0 1 0
20 96407 4/09/2009 11/09/2009 8 8 44 339.51 147.30 5 7 18 7 5 2
9 96408 30/08/2009 17/09/2009 19 19 115 981.03 635.70 11 41 30 10 13 10
12 96409 1/09/2009 1/09/2009 1 1 7 5.75 6.44 1 3 2 0 0 1
15 96410 2/09/2009 7/09/2009 6 6 27 353.12 119.15 2 5 8 1 4 7
19 96411 4/09/2009 11/09/2009 8 8 43 498.78 148.62 2 17 14 2 6 2
Totals 352 263 1,250 23,243.48 16,912.38 122 292 283 110 203 240
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 16
Figure 1. The satellite tag in post (i) and pre-deployment modes (ii). Components are: A –
sharp, triangular arrow head; B – holding flaps in pre-deployment position; C- articulation
point of the head and body of the tag; D – holding ‘skirt’ of tag held down with dissolvable
tape; E – body of the tag holding electronics and battery; F – detachable stopping ring; G –
aerial.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 17
Figure 2. Left flank of a humpback whale showing a recently deployed tag and the released
deployment projectile. A – tag-holding projectile; B – projectile attachment mechanism; C –
aerial; D – implanted tag.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 18
Figure 3. Locations where 23 female humpback whales were satellite-tagged between the 25th August and 6th September 2009.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 19
Figure 4. The complete tracks obtained from the 17 satellite-tagged whales that provided more than one reliable location.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 20
Figure 5. The tracks obtained off Western Australia from the 17 satellite-tagged whales that provided more than one reliable location.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 21
Tag duration (days)
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Pro
port
ion o
f ta
gs t
ran
mittin
g loca
tio
ns
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Eden, NSW 2008 (N=16)
Pre- October 2008 (N=40)
Evans Head, NSW 2009 (N=15)
Kimberley, WA 2009 (N=23)
Figure 6. Survival curves for the last three satellite tag deployments on humpback whales conducted
by the AMMC. The survival curve for tags deployed during the development stage is also shown.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 22
a.
b.
Tag longevity (days)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 70 80 90 100 110
Nu
mbe
r o
f ta
gs
0
2
4
6
8Normal
Double ring
Figure 7. a) The two-ring configuration used on the two ‘double ring’ tags; and b) the longevity of the
‘double ring’ tags compared to the normal tag configuration (detachable ring; Figure 1).
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 23
Figure 8. The tracks obtained off northern Western Australia from the 17 satellite-tagged whales that provided more than one reliable location.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 24
Figure 9. The tracks obtained off the Kimberley region of Western Australia from the 17 satellite-tagged whales that provided more than one reliable location.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 25
Linear distance from Camden Sound (km)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000
Lin
ear
dis
tance b
etw
ee
n e
ach
locatio
na
nd
the
nea
rest
co
astlin
e (
km
)
0
50
100
150
200
Cam
den
Sound
Pende
r Bay
Eight
y M
ile B
each
Figure 10. Graph showing the distance between the locations provided by the 17 satellite tags that provided more that one reliable location and the main coastline of WA. Data are categorized relative to their linear (great circle) distance from Camden Sound. Indicative geographic locations are provided above the graph (cf. Figure 8). The box plot displays the median, the 10th, 90th (whiskers) and the 25th and 75th percentiles (box).
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 26
Linear distance from Camden Sound (km)
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000
De
pth
be
low
se
a le
ve
l a
t lo
cation
(m
)
-350
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
Cam
den
Sound
Pende
r Bay
Eight
y M
ile B
each
Figure 11. Graph showing the sea depth at the locations provided by the 17 satellite tags that provided more that one reliable location. Data are categorized relative to their linear (great circle) distance from Camden Sound. Indicative geographic locations are provided above the graph (cf. Figure 8). The box plot displays the median, the 10th, 90th (whiskers) and the 25th and 75th percentiles (box).
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 27
Linear distance from Camden Sound (km)
200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800
Lin
ea
r dis
tance t
rave
lled
fro
m
Cam
den S
ou
nd
in
24
hours
(km
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160Cam
den
Sound
Pende
r Bay
Eight
y M
ile B
each
Exmou
th G
ulf
Figure 12. Graph showing the linear (great circle) distance traveled in a 24-hour period by the 17 tagged whales that provided more that one reliable location. Data are categorized relative to their linear (great circle) distance from Camden Sound. Indicative geographic locations are provided above the graph (cf. Figure 8). The box plot displays the median, the 10th, 90th (whiskers) and the 25th and 75th percentiles (box) if sufficient data are available.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 28
Linear distance from Camden Sound (km)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Lin
ear
dis
tance t
ravelle
d
in 2
4 h
ours
(km
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Lin
ear
dis
tance tra
velle
d
in 2
4 h
ours
(km
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Lin
ear
dis
tance tra
velle
d
in 2
4 h
ours
(km
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Lin
ear
dis
tance t
ravelle
d
in 2
4 h
ours
(km
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
96384
96382
96389
96391
Cam
den
Sound
Pende
r Bay
Eight
y M
ile B
each
Figure 13. Graphs showing the linear (great circle) distance traveled in 24-hour periods by four tagged whales. Data are categorized relative to their linear (great circle) distance from Camden Sound. Indicative geographic locations are provided above the graph (cf. Figure 8).
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 29
Figure 14. The cumulative occupancy times of the 17 satellite-tagged whales within 0.5o sampling quadrats. Due to the generally short longevity of the tags these data are biased by the deployment locations.
Satellite tracking of Western Australian humpback whales
Page 30
Appendix One Sighting rates of humpback whale pods from the 25th August to the 6th September 2009; (Br=Broome; CS=Camden Sound, BA=Buccaneer Archipelago, PB=Pender Bay).