共 33 条
Biologically Important Areas II for cetaceans within US and adjacent waters - West Coast Region
被引:3
|作者:
Calambokidis, John
[1
]
Kratofil, Michaela A.
[1
,2
,3
]
Palacios, Daniel M.
[2
,3
]
Lagerquist, Barbara A.
[2
]
Schorr, Gregory S.
[4
]
Hanson, M. Bradley
[5
]
Baird, Robin W.
[1
]
Forney, Karin A.
[6
]
Becker, Elizabeth A.
[7
]
Rockwood, R. Cotton
[8
]
Hazen, Elliott L.
[9
]
机构:
[1] Cascadia Res Collect, Olympia, WA 98501 USA
[2] Oregon State Univ, Marine Mammal Inst, Newport, OR USA
[3] Oregon State Univ, Dept Fisheries Wildlife & Conservat Sci, Corvallis, OR USA
[4] Marine Ecol & Telemetry Res, Seabeck, WA USA
[5] NOAA, Natl Marine Fisheries Serv, Northwest Fisheries Sci Ctr, Seattle, WA USA
[6] NOAA, Natl Marine Fisheries Serv, Southwest Fisheries Sci Ctr, Moss Landing, CA USA
[7] NOAA, Ocean Associates Inc, Marine Mammal & Turtle Div, Southwest Fisheries Sci Ctr,Natl Marine Fisheries, La Jolla, CA USA
[8] Point Blue Conservat Sci, Petaluma, CA USA
[9] NOAA, Natl Marine Fisheries Serv, Southwest Fisheries Sci Ctr, Monterey, CA USA
关键词:
conservation;
cetaceans;
whales;
management;
habitat;
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC;
RESIDENT KILLER WHALES;
STATE-SPACE MODEL;
HUMPBACK WHALES;
GRAY WHALES;
HARBOR PORPOISE;
POPULATION-STRUCTURE;
MEGAPTERA-NOVAEANGLIAE;
MIGRATORY DESTINATIONS;
PHOCOENA-PHOCOENA;
D O I:
10.3389/fmars.2024.1283231
中图分类号:
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号:
08 ;
0830 ;
摘要:
Here we update U.S. West Coast Biologically Important Areas (BIAs) that were published in 2015 using new data and approaches. Additionally, BIAs were delineated for two species that were not delineated in the 2015 BIAs: fin whales and Southern Resident killer whales (SRKW). While harbor porpoise BIAs remained the same, substantial changes were made for other species including identifying both larger overall areas (parent BIAs) and smaller core areas (child BIAs). For blue, fin, and humpback whales we identified, delineated, and scored BIAs using the overlap between the distribution and relative density from three data sources, leveraging the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches: 1) habitat density models based on Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) line-transect data from systematic ship surveys conducted through 2018, 2) satellite tag data from deployments conducted by three research groups, and 3) sightings of feeding behavior from non-systematic effort mostly associated with small-boat surveys for photo-identification conducted by Cascadia Research Collective. While the previous BIAs were based solely on a more subjective assignment from only the small boat sightings, here we incorporate the other two data sources and use a more rigorous, quantitative approach to identify higher density areas and integrate the data types. This resulted in larger, better-supported, objective BIAs compared to the previous effort. Our methods are also more consistent with the delineation of BIAs in other regions. For SRKWs, the parent BIA was based on a modification of the Critical Habitat boundaries defined by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Canada; a core BIA highlighting areas of intensified use was identified using both NOAA's Critical Habitat and kernel density analyses of satellite tag data. Gray whale BIAs were re-evaluated for the migratory corridor of Eastern North Pacific gray whales, for Pacific Coast Feeding Group feeding areas, and for gray whales that feed regularly in Puget Sound.
引用
收藏
页数:31
相关论文