Population Estimates of White Whale, Delphinapterus leucas, in James Bay, Eastern Hudson Bay, and Ungava Bay

1986 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 1982-1987 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. G. Smith ◽  
M. O. Hammill

Coastal reconnaissance and systematic aerial surveys of white whales, Delphinapterus leucas, were flown in James Bay, eastern Hudson Bay, and Ungava Bay. In Ungava Bay the numbers of belugas are so low that we are unable to derive population estimates. In James Bay, we estimate 1213 whales with 95% confidence limits of 740–1970 individuals. In eastern Hudson Bay our systematic survey estimates 968 whales (650–1430), with an additional 474 whales counted in traditional areas of coastal concentration. The age structure of whales inshore and offshore appears similar. Our estimates are conservative, since they do not include a correction for animals which might have been underwater as we passed. Since belugas continue to be hunted in Ungava Bay and eastern Hudson Bay, recommendations are made for a conservative management strategy which must soon be implemented.

1985 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 676-684 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. G. Smith ◽  
M. O. Hammsll ◽  
D. J. Burrage ◽  
G. A. Sleno

Opportunistic reconnaissance aerial surveys of Lancaster Sound, Barrow Strait, Peel Sound, and Prince Regent Inlet were conducted between 1974 and 1982 to determine the distribution and abundance of belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, and narwhals, Monodon monoceros. In 1981, two stratified strip-transect surveys were flown. From these we estimate that a total of 6300 – 18 600 belugas and approximately 13 200 –18 000 narwhals summer in Lancaster Sound and adjoining waterways. Improvement in the precision of these estimates would require a substantial increase in survey coverage and may not be justified considering the significant increase in costs. Our review of the results of surveys conducted since 1975 in the same study area, of which most of the information is not yet available in the scientific literature, shows much duplication of effort, little increase in information, and a lack of confidence limits for the estimated numbers.


2019 ◽  
Vol 100 (4) ◽  
pp. 1340-1349
Author(s):  
Jaime A Collazo ◽  
Matthew J Krachey ◽  
Kenneth H Pollock ◽  
Francisco J Pérez-Aguilo ◽  
Jan P Zegarra ◽  
...  

AbstractEffective management of the threatened Antillean manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus) in Puerto Rico requires reliable estimates of population size. Estimates are needed to assess population responses to management actions, and whether recovery objectives have been met. Aerial surveys have been conducted since 1976, but none adjusted for imperfect detection. We summarize surveys since 1976, report on current distribution, and provide population estimates after accounting for apparent detection probability for surveys between June 2010 and March 2014. Estimates in areas of high concentration (hotspots) averaged 317 ± 101, three times higher than unadjusted counts (104 ± 0.56). Adjusted estimates in three areas outside hotspots also differed markedly from counts (75 ± 9.89 versus 19.5 ± 3.5). Average minimum island-wide estimate was 386 ± 89, similar to the maximum estimate of 360 suggested in 2005, but fewer than the 700 recently suggested by the Puerto Rico Manatee Conservation Center. Manatees were more widespread than previously understood. Improving estimates, locally or island-wide, will require stratifying the island differently and greater knowledge about factors affecting detection probability. Sharing our protocol with partners in nearby islands (e.g., Cuba, Jamaica, Hispaniola), whose populations share genetic make-up, would contribute to enhanced regional conservation through better population estimates and tracking range expansion.El manejo efectivo del manatí antillano amenazado en Puerto Rico requiere estimados de tamaños de poblaciónes confiables. Dichas estimaciones poblacionales son necesarias para evaluar las respuestas a las acciones de manejo, y para determinar si los objetivos de recuperación han sido alcanzados. Se han realizado censos aéreos desde 1976, pero ninguno de ellos han sido ajustados para detecciones imperfectas. Aquí resumimos los censos desde 1976, actualizamos la distribución, y reportamos los primeros estimados poblacionales ajustados para la probabilidad de detección aparente en los censos de Junio 2010 a Marzo 2014. Las estimaciones poblacionales en áreas de mayor concentración del manatí promedió 317 ± 103, tres veces más abundante que los conteos sin ajuste (104 ± 0.56). Las estimaciones poblacionales en tres áreas fuera de las áreas de mayor concentración del manatí también fueron marcadamente diferentes (75 ± 9.89 vs 19.5 ± 3.5). El estimado mínimo poblacional en la isla entera fue de 386 ± 89, similar al estimado máximo de 360 sugerido en el año 2005, pero menor a los 700 sugeridos recientemente por el Centro de Conservación de Manatíes de Puerto Rico. Documentamos que el manatí tiene una distribución más amplia de lo que se sabía con anterioridad. El mejoramiento de los estimados poblacionales locales o a nivel de isla requerirá que se estratifique a la isla en forma diferente y que se investiguen los factores que influencian a la probabilidad de detección. Compartir protocolos como este con colaboradores de islas vecinas (por. ej., Cuba, Jamaica, Española), cuyas poblaciones de manatíes comparten material genético, contribuiría a la conservación regional mediante mejores estimaciones poblacionales y monitoreo de la expansión de su ámbito doméstico.


1987 ◽  
Vol 65 (7) ◽  
pp. 1410-1419 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. L. Wolff ◽  
R. L. Jefferies

Morphological and electrophoretic variation has been documented within and among populations of Salicornia europaea L. (s.l.) in northeastern North America. Univariate and multivariate analyses (discriminant analyses) of measurements of floral and vegetative characters delimited three morphologically distinct groups of populations: Atlantic coast tetraploids (2n = 36), Hudson Bay diploids, and Atlantic coast and James Bay diploids (2n = 18). The two diploid groups were morphologically distinct from the midwestern diploid, S. rubra Nels., based on anther length, width of the scarious border of the fertile segment, and the overall width of the fertile segment. Electrophoretic evidence supported the delimitation of the three distinct morphological groups of populations of S. europaea with the exception of the population from James Bay, which had electrophoretic patterns identical with those of plants from Hudson Bay but resembled the Atlantic coast diploids morphologically. Most enzyme systems assayed were monomorphic. Only homozygous banding patterns were detected in diploid plants and electrophoretic variation was not observed within populations of S. europaea or S. rubra but was detected between groups of populations. Four multilocus phenotypes were evident; these corresponded to the major groups recognized on the basis of ploidy level and morphology. Reasons that may account for the paucity of isozymic variation are discussed.


1932 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. B. HACHEY

The waters of Hudson bay differ markedly from the waters of Hudson strait and the waters of the open ocean. Intense stratification in the upper twenty-five metres, decreasing as the waters of the open ocean are approached, gives Hudson bay the character of a large estuary. Below fifty metres the waters are for all purposes dynamically dead, thus resulting in a cold saline body of water which probably undergoes very little change from season to season. The movements of the waters at various levels are dealt with to show that the inflow of waters from Fox channel and the many fresh-water drainage areas control the hydrographic conditions as found. The main water movement is from the James bay area to Hudson strait and thence to the open ocean.


2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. S. Fleming ◽  
John P. Tracey

Aerial surveys of wildlife involve a noisy platform carrying one or more observers moving over animals in order to quantify their abundance. This simple-sounding system encapsulates limits to human visual acuity and human concentration, visual attention, salience of target objects within the viewed scene, characteristics of survey platforms and facets of animal behaviours that affect the detection of animals by the airborne observers. These facets are too often ignored in aerial surveys, yet are inherent sources of counting error. Here we briefly review factors limiting the ability of observers to detect animals from aerial platforms in a range of sites, including characteristics of the aircraft, observers and target animals. Some of the previously uninvestigated limitations identified in the review were studied in central and western New South Wales, showing that inaccuracies of human memory and enumeration processes are sources of bias in aerial survey estimates. Standard protocols that minimise or account for the reviewed factors in aerial surveys of wildlife are recommended.


1997 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 616-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
S J Smith

Trawl surveys using stratified random designs are widely used on the east coast of North America to monitor groundfish populations. Statistical quantities estimated from these surveys are derived via a randomization basis and do not require that a probability model be postulated for the data. However, the large sample properties of these estimates may not be appropriate for the small sample sizes and skewed data characteristic of bottom trawl surveys. In this paper, three bootstrap resampling strategies that incorporate complex sampling designs are used to explore the properties of estimates for small sample situations. A new form for the bias-corrected and accelerated confidence intervals is introduced for stratified random surveys. Simulation results indicate that the bias-corrected and accelerated confidence limits may overcorrect for the trawl survey data and that percentile limits were closer to the expected values. Nonparametric density estimates were used to investigate the effects of unusually large catches of fish on the bootstrap estimates and confidence intervals. Bootstrap variance estimates decreased as increasingly smoother distributions were assumed for the observations in the stratum with the large catch. Lower confidence limits generally increased with increasing smoothness but the upper bound depended upon assumptions about the shape of the distribution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document