Connect with us

Alaska

Beluga whales’ calls may get drowned out by shipping noise in Alaska’s Cook Inlet – Alaska Native News

Published

on

Beluga whales’ calls may get drowned out by shipping noise in Alaska’s Cook Inlet – Alaska Native News


Beluga whales are highly social and vocal marine mammals. They use acoustics to navigate, find prey, avoid predators and maintain group cohesion. For Alaska’s critically endangered Cook Inlet beluga population, these crucial communications may compete with a cacophony of noise from human activities.

New research from the University of Washington, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Alaska Fisheries Science Center and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game is the first to document the complex vocal repertoire of the Cook Inlet beluga whale population. It is also the first to quantify how ship noise may be masking specific beluga calls in this region.

The study, published Nov. 30 in the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, finds 41 distinct types of calls, of which 18 are unique to this population. It also finds that commercial ship noise completely masks these whales’ most commonly used calls.

Advertisement

“The core critical habitat for these whales is a very noisy area. Commercial shipping, an international airport, military operations and gas and oil exploration are all concentrated there,” said lead author Arial Brewer, a doctoral student in the School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences at the UW who did the work in collaboration with NOAA Fisheries’ Alaska Fisheries Science Center.

“A fundamental knowledge gap for the Cook Inlet beluga population is how they communicate important information. The first step is to describe their vocal repertoire,” she added. “With that information, we can begin to understand if their communication is impacted by human-caused noise.”

Twenty-one populations of belugas are recognized worldwide, including five distinct populations in Alaska. The geographically and genetically isolated Cook Inlet beluga population is the smallest, recently estimated at just 331 individuals. Cook Inlet beluga whales live exclusively in their namesake waters alongside Anchorage, the state’s largest city and busiest port.

Map of Cook Inlet, Alaska, with red pins where underwater recordings used for this study. Stripes show Cook Inlet beluga whale critical habitat, and the blue line shows designated Port of Alaska commercial shipping lanes.Kim Shelden/NOAA Fisheries
Map of Cook Inlet, Alaska, with red pins where underwater recordings used for this study. Stripes show Cook Inlet beluga whale critical habitat, and the blue line shows designated Port of Alaska commercial shipping lanes.Kim Shelden/NOAA Fisheries

The Cook Inlet beluga whale population was listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 2008. A 2016 recovery plan ranked three threats as the highest level of concern, one being human-caused noise. Commercial shipping is the most prominent noise source within Cook Inlet, particularly in the upper inlet where most of the federally-designated critical habitat is located.

”All of that human-caused noise means the belugas may not hear critical communications from each other, such as predator alarm calls or a mother calling to her calf,” Brewer said.

While all whales are affected by noise, Cook Inlet belugas may be particularly vulnerable to noise as a stressor.

Advertisement

“Cook Inlet is extremely turbid year-round from glacial runoff. It looks like chocolate milk,” Brewer said. “Acoustic communication is extremely important for this population since visibility is so poor. And, unlike other, higher-Arctic beluga populations, this population is non-migratory, so they are exposed to this noise year-round.”

Cook Inlet’s extreme turbidity, dramatic tides, rapid currents and seasonal ice cover make it an extremely challenging place to study belugas. One way scientists can monitor these highly vocal whales is through sound.

The Cook Inlet Beluga Acoustics Program has been deploying bottom-mounted passive acoustic recorders to monitor belugas and human-caused noise since 2008. The study focused on recordings of beluga whale calls from 2018 to 2019.

“Until now, we did not have a quantified measure of masking by ship noise on Cook Inlet beluga communication. We knew this was a potential disturbance mechanism to focus our research efforts, but we were lacking a good understanding of what vocalizations are most important for beluga,” said co-author Manuel Castellote, a research scientist at the UW-based Cooperative Institute for Climate, Ocean and Ecosystem Studies who manages the acoustics monitoring program. “This study provides the first two steps into this direction: We now have a solid understanding of key vocalizations for this population, and how each ship transit is affecting beluga vocal exchange in the core area of their critical habitat.”

For the new study, scientists analyzed recordings at two critical habitat locations: Susitna River, just outside of Anchorage, and Trading Bay, farther out in the inlet.

Advertisement

They classified beluga vocalizations into three broad categories — whistles, pulsed calls and combined calls — and then further into 41 unique call types.

Cook Inlet beluga mother and calf in turbid, or cloudy, waters.Paul Wade/NOAA Fisheries
Cook Inlet beluga mother and calf in turbid, or cloudy, waters.Paul Wade/NOAA Fisheries

“I’ve spent thousands of hours listening to this population. Anytime I find a new call type, it’s really exciting,” Brewer said, “Eavesdropping on their world is really fascinating.”

The study found that the Cook Inlet beluga population, like other beluga populations, has a rich and complex repertoire. Vocal repertoire has been documented for eight of the 21 populations of belugas worldwide. Results from this study support the hypothesis that some call types are shared across populations, while others are unique.

Of the 41 types of calls the authors documented in the Cook Inlet population, 18 were not documented in any other population; 16 were documented in some but not all of the previously studied populations; and seven were common to all populations studied so far.

“Differences in vocal repertoire among different beluga populations may be driven by unique evolutionary, environmental or cultural influences,” Brewer said. “The divergence of the Cook Inlet vocal repertoire may be in part due to the population’s long-term geographic and genetic isolation.”

The researchers next looked at how the most commonly-used call types may be masked by human-caused noise. They focused on commercial ship noise, which is the most prominent noise type in Cook Inlet.

Advertisement

Analysis found that all seven of the most commonly-used call types in the Cook Inlet beluga vocal repertoire were partially masked by the time a commercial ship was within about 10 miles (17 kilometers) of the study site. Calls were completely masked when the vessel was closest to the site during the transit through the designated shipping lanes.

Roughly 486 commercial ships use the Port of Alaska annually, with an average of 8-10 ships coming and going per week. It is estimated that each ship passage will mask beluga communication at the study site for 1 hour and 50 minutes on average.

“Our results suggest that every time a commercial vessel transits through the Port of Alaska shipping lanes, Cook Inlet beluga communication could be heavily impacted within their core habitat,” Brewer said.

“Humans are such a visual species. It’s hard for us to comprehend how noisy it is under the surface of the ocean and how much noise impacts marine mammals such as belugas. We hope our findings will lead to further studies to better inform management about these types of human-caused impacts.”

The research was funded by NOAA Fisheries, Hilcorp Alaska LLC, Georgia Aquarium, Shedd Aquarium, the SeaWorld-Busch Gardens Conservation Fund and the H. Mason Keeler Endowed Professorship in Sports Fisheries Management at the UW.

Advertisement

Other co-authors are faculty members Amy van Cise and Andrew Berdahl in the UW School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences; and Tom Gage at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

For more information, contact Brewer at arialb@uw.edu or Castellote at manuelcm@uw.edu.

Adapted from a NOAA feature story.

U of W

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Alaska

OPINION: CDQ program and pollock fishery are essential to Western Alaska

Published

on

OPINION: CDQ program and pollock fishery are essential to Western Alaska


By Eric Deakin, Ragnar Alstrom and Michael Link

Updated: 1 hour ago Published: 1 hour ago

We work every day to support Alaska’s rural communities through the Community Development Quota (CDQ) program and have seen firsthand the lifeline the program provides to our state’s most isolated and economically vulnerable areas.

Advertisement

This program is one of the most successful social justice programs in the United States, giving rural, coastal communities a stake in the success of the Bering Sea fisheries, and transferring these benefits into community investments. Our fisheries participation provides $80 million to $100 million of programs, wages and benefits into Western Alaska annually, and the full economic reach of the CDQ program is substantially larger when accounting for jobs and support services statewide.

In some communities, CDQs are the largest and only private-sector employer; the only market for small-boat fishermen; the only nonfederal funding available for critical infrastructure projects; and an essential program provider for local subsistence and commercial fishing access. There is no replacement for the CDQ program, and harm to it would come at a severe cost. As one resident framed it, CDQ is to Western Alaska communities, what oil is to Alaska.

Consistent with their statutory mandate, CDQ groups have increased their fisheries investments, and their 65 member communities are now major players in the Bering Sea. The foundation of the program is the Bering Sea pollock fishery, 30% of which is owned by CDQ groups. We invest in pollock because it remains one of the most sustainably managed fisheries in the world, backed by rigorous science, with independent observers on every vessel, ensuring that bycatch is carefully monitored and minimized.

We also invest in pollock because the industry is committed to constantly improving and responding to new challenges. We understand the impact that salmon collapses are having on culture and food security in Western Alaska communities. Working with industry partners, we have reduced chinook bycatch to historically low levels and achieved more than an 80% reduction in chum bycatch over the past three years. This is a clear demonstration that CDQ groups and industry are taking the dire salmon situation seriously, despite science that shows bycatch reductions will have very minimal, if any, positive impact on subsistence access.

The effects of recent warm summers on the Bering Sea ecosystem have been well documented by science. This has caused some species to prosper, like sablefish and Bristol Bay sockeye salmon, while others have been negatively impacted, including several species of crab and salmon. Adding to these challenges is the unregulated and growing hatchery production of chum salmon in Russia and Asia, which is competing for limited resources in the Bering Sea, and increasing management challenges.

Advertisement

Attributing the current salmon crises to this fishery is misguided and could cause unnecessary harm to CDQ communities. Without the pollock fishery, we would see dramatic increases in the cost of food, fuel and other goods that are shipped to rural Alaska. We would also see the collapse of the CDQ program and all that it provides, including a wide array of projects and jobs that help keep families fed and children in school.

The challenges Alaska faces are significant, and to address them we need to collectively work together to mitigate the impacts of warming oceans on our fisheries, build resiliency in our communities and fishery management, and continue to improve practices to minimize fishing impacts. We must also recognize the vital need for the types of community investments and job opportunities that the CDQ program creates for Western Alaska and ensure these benefits are considered when talking about the Bering Sea pollock fishery.

Eric Deakin is chief executive officer of the Coastal Villages Region Fund.

Ragnar Alstrom is executive director of the Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association.

Michael Link is president and CEO of Bristol Bay Economic Development Corp.

Advertisement

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.





Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

‘Drag racing for dogs:’ Anchorage canines gather for the ‘Great Alaska Barkout’

Published

on

‘Drag racing for dogs:’ Anchorage canines gather for the ‘Great Alaska Barkout’


ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTUU) – Alaska’s first “flyball” league held its annual “Great Alaska Barkout Flyball Tournament” on Saturday in midtown at Alyeska Canine Trainers.

Flyball is a fast-paced sport in which relay teams of four dogs and their handlers compete to cross the finish line first while carrying a tennis ball launched from a spring loaded box. Saturday’s tournament was one of several throughout the year held by “Dogs Gone Wild,” which started in 2004 as Alaska’s first flyball league.

“We have here in Alaska, we’ve got, I think it’s about 6 tournaments per year,” said competitor and handler Maija Doggett. “So you know every other month or so there will be a tournament hosted. Most of them are hosted right here at Alyeska Canine Trainers.”

See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

State of Alaska will defend its right to facilitate oil and gas development

Published

on

State of Alaska will defend its right to facilitate oil and gas development


Last week, Superior Court Judge Andrew Guidi indicated he will rule that Alaska does not have authority to permit access across its lands to facilitate oil and gas development on the North Slope.

The Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources plans to fight and appeal any final adverse ruling that undermines the state’s constitutional interests in resource development.

The Department of Natural Resources has issued a permit allowing Oil Search Alaska (OSA) to cross the Kuparuk River Unit, operated by Conoco Phillips Alaska, to develop the Pikka Unit. As described in the State’s brief to the court, “the denial of such access implicates the delay of development of millions of barrels of oil and billions of dollars of public revenues.”

Advertisement

“The State of Alaska has a constitutional obligation to maximize the development of our resources,” DNR Commissioner John Boyle said on Nov. 22. “We have to confirm with the Supreme Court that we have the authority to permit access for all developers to ensure we can meet this obligation.”

Once the Superior Court issues the final judgement, Alaska will be able to file its appeal. This is expected to occur in the coming weeks.

Click here to support the Alaska Watchman.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending