Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis.  Permission is given for 
a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and 
private study only.  The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without 
the permission of the Author. 
 



A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE BEHAVIOUR OF 

CETACEANS AND VESSEL TRAFFIC USING TWO CASE STUDIES: 

KILLER WHALE (Orcinus orca) AND HUMPBACK WHALE (Megaptera 

novaeangliae). 

A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of 

Master of Science 

in 

Conservation Biology 

Massey University, Auckland, 

New Zealand. 

Jodi Christine Smith 

2009 



ABSTRACT 

ABSTRACT 

Two studies were carried out to describe the relationship between vessel 

presence on the behaviour of both whales and dolphins. Each study conducted 

focal follows on members of two endangered sub-populations using a land-based 

theodolite station in order to track and mark positions of opportunistic vessel 

traffic in relation to animal surfacings. 

Southern resident killer whales (Orcinus area) were theodolite tracked 

du ring the months of May-August for three field seasons ( 1999-2001 ), off San 

Juan Island, Washington State, U.S.A, in an independent study. Migrating 

humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) were theodolite tracked off Moreton 

Island, Queensland , Austral ia during 2005 from May-September in partial 

fulfilment for a Master of Science degree. For each study, four dependent whale 

variables were analysed in relation to two boat variables. Whale variables 

included mean time per dive (dive time) , swimming speed , directness of path 

traveled (directness index) and the number of surface behaviours per hour such 

as breaches or tail-slaps (surface active behaviour) . The two boat variables 

included a count of the number of boats with in the study area during each 

tracking session (boat count) and the point of closest approach (PCA) by a 

vessel to the focal animal during the tracking session . 

Southern res ident killer whales were found to decrease path directness 

with the point of closest approach of vessels . As whales adopted a more 

circuitious path , distance travelled increased by 9.5% when boats were within 

100 m. Humpback whales significantly decreased their rate of surface active 

behaviour by 50% when boats were present. This thesis presents data that show 

a snapshot of the levels to which both species are exposed to vessel traffic, as 

well as subtle short-term behavioural responses in relation to vessel presence. 

I compare the impacts of vessel traffic identified for the two species, and 

suggest possible long-term population consequences due to potential 

interruptions of foraging and/or social behaviours. I discuss limitations of small 

data sets such as these and discuss ways in which further research can be better 



ABSTRACT 11 

designed. Deliberate planning of vessel effect studies and their subsequent 

analyses can provide conservation managers useful information for determining 

recovery strategies of endangered whales and dolphins. 



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 111 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

This thesis research was supported by scholarship funding from Massey 

University (Institute of Natural Resources, Coastal Marine Resources Group), 

and the Tangalooma Wild Dolphin Resort in conjunction with Queensland Parks 

and Wildlife Service. I owe a great deal of gratitude to the above institutions and 

Dr. Russ Tillman for their financial support of the humpback research and of 

myself throughout my thesis write-up. 

Thanks goes to Dr. Mark Orams for offering this project to me and giving 

me the opportunity to venture out on this journey that it has become. Thank you 

to my supervisor Dr. Dianne Brunton and co-supervisor Dr. Rob Williams. 

Without their supervision and guidance the end product of this research would 

have been much less. Thank you also to Dr. Karen Stockin and Mr. Michael 

Anderson for being patient while I struggled on through stats and chapter edits. I 

thank you all for pushing me through to the end and teaching me how to 

persevere. 

I owe many thanks to all my volunteers during three trying years of 

fieldwork on San Juan Island. My killer whale data could have NEVER been 

collected without the aide and talents of: J.R. Veldink, Diane Underberg , Stacey 

ldrees, Alison Stimpert, Lizzie Fenton, Fiona Maxwell-Johnson , Sinead Watters , 

Penny Stone, Rebecca Wallach, Jen Ryan, Jenny Dreeson , Bethany Ryals, Vicki 

O'Keefe , Carol Cobb, Martin Kamm , Karen Ertel , Jennifer Johnson, Katrina 

Hochstein, Mark Grippo, Jessica Brady, Jennifer Marsh, Erin Ashe , Jeff and 

Amanda Hogan. Their effort and support is somehow immeasurable even with 

my newfound knowledge in statistics. 

Financial support, technical support, land-based sites, equipment and in­

kind donations for the killer whale research were generously supplied by John 

and Betsy Clover, Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Orea Conservancy, REI , David Bain , 

John and Betty Nord, Dale and Patty Pratt, Ray Schaffer, The Whale Watch 

Operators Association Northwest, The Whale Museum, Snug Harbor Resort, 

Killer Whale Tales, and The Center for Whale Research. 



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IV 

The humpback research could not have been achieved without the 

participation of Ms. Karen Libby and Ms. Emmanuelle Martinez, both of whom I 

owe a world of appreciation and thanks for not only keeping me sane during my 

stay on Moreton Island but also for their faith in me and friendship over the years. 

I'd like to thank the Moreton Island Park Rangers: Chris , Justin and Jason 

for their help and smiles along the way. Thanks go to Jane and Lily for their 

generous hospitality. I also owe heaps of thanks to the staff at Tangalooma 

Resort , in particular: Quad-bike folks Rebecca, Leon , Tom and especially James 

(of which I still owe a new helmet to). They provided not only expert quad 

tra ining but also a general interest and knowledge of the natural history 

surrounding Moreton Island tides and marine life. This information enhanced the 

study as well as our own personal experiences on Moreton Island. Other 

professional staff, such as John and Ron with the Tours Desk; Rebecca , Scotty 

and Phil at the Shop; Matt at the Cafe, Meg at the Dolphin Education Centre and 

Andrea at Reception were always offering their help no matter what task was 

asked of them. They were gracious and polite even through our most stressful 

moments. Lastly I'd like to thank Trevor Hassard for making us feel welcome as 

part of the resort team. 

I am eternally grateful and ofter a heartfelt thank you to the Koekemoer 

clan--Alan , Clyde and Glenda. My Southern hemisphere fam ily has shown me 

incredible generosity and kindness over the past year and a half, not to mention 

financial and emotional support during my entire thesis process. I will miss my 

time spent with them and feel very fortunate to have befriended them . Muchas 

gracias, via dankie and thanks for the memories. 

I would like to generously acknowledge my mother and father for all of 

their love, support and encouragement and for never holding back a dreamer, 

even though wanting to study killer whales may have seemed odd while growing 

up amidst dry Sierra Nevada pine forests and steep canyon walls . 

Lastly I would like to thank the whales for being so cool and continuing to 

do their own thing underneath the glare of the paparazzi. 

"You are the music, while the music lasts." -T.S. Eliot 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

ABSTRACT 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

LIST OF FIGURES 

LIST OF TABLES 

CHAPTERS 

1. INTRODUCTION 

1 .1. Overview 

1.2. Whale watch ing 

1.3. Sound pollution 

1.4. Population status 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1.5. Study rational and objectives 

1.6. Thesis structure 

1.7. Literature cited 

2. CASE STUDY--KILLER WHALE 

2.1 . Introduction 

2 .2. Materials and methods 

2.2.1. Study area 

2.2 .2. Data collection 

2.2 .3. Selection of focal animals 

2.2.4. Theodolite tracking 

V 

PAGE 

iii 

V 

vii 

viii 

ix 

1 

1 

2 

10 

12 

14 

15 

16 

25 

25 

26 

26 

26 

29 

30 



TABLE OF CONTENTS Vl 

2.2.5. Data compilation 32 

2.2.6. Data analysis 34 

2.3. Results 34 

2.3.1. Vessel effects 35 

2.4. Discussion 39 

2.5. Literature cited 43 

3. CASE STUDY--HUMPBACK WHALE 47 

3.1. Introduction 47 

3.2. Materials and methods 48 

3.2.1 . Study area 48 

3.2.2. Data collection 49 

3.2.3. Selection of focal an imals 51 

3.2.4. Theodol ite tracking 52 

3.2.5. Data compilation 54 

3.2.6. Data analysis 55 

3.3. Results 56 

3.3.1. Vessel effects 57 

3.4. Discussion 61 

3.5. Literature cited 65 

4. SYNTHESIS 71 

4.1. Vessel presence 71 

4.2 . Short-term effects 73 

4.3. Noise as a stressor 76 

4.4. Limitations of impact studies 77 

4.5. Recommendations 80 

4.6. Literature cited 84 



LIST OF APPENDICES Vll 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

PAGE 
APPENDIX A NATURAL HISTORY OF HUMPBACK AND 

KILLER WHALES 91 

APPENDIX B MORETON BAY MARINE PARK 157 

APPENDIX C BEAUFORT SEA STATE 158 

APPENDIX D KILLER WHALE BEHAVIOURS 159 

APPENDIX E SAN JUAN ISLAND "1/4 MILE NO-BOAT ZONE" 163 

APPENDIX F HUMPBACK WHALE BEHAVIOURS 165 



LIST OF FIGURES Vlll 

LIST OF FIGURES 

CHAPTER 1 

1-1 The killer whale. 

PAGE 

3 

1-2 Map of Haro Strait, Washington, U.S.A. 

1-3 Killer whale photo-identification chart. 

1-4 The humpback whale. 

1-5 Boundaries of six southern hemisphere whaling areas 

adopted in the 1930's. 

1-6 Tangalooma whaling station located on Moreton Island. 

CHAPTER 2 

4 

5 

7 

8 

9 

2-1 Study area on San Juan Island. 28 

2-2 Chart plot of marked positions of adult female 

killer whale J2 . 29 

2-3 Theodolite killer whale tracking study on San Juan Island. 31 

2-4 Mean directness indexes for killer whales in relation to point 

of closest approach by boats. 37 

CHAPTER 3 

3-1 Map of study area located on Moreton Island, Queensland , 

Australia. 

3-2 Theodolite humpback whale tracking study. 

3-3 Number of humpback whale surface active behaviour (SAB) 

49 

50 

events per boat count category bins. 61 



LIST OF TABLES IX 

LIST OF TABLES 

CHAPTER 2 PAGE 

2-1 Study dates and locations on San Juan Island. 27 

2-2 Definitions of boat codes used for identification of tracking 

vessels within the THEOPROG program. 32 

2-3 Definitions of the four dependent whale response variables 

used. 33 

2-4 Sample sizes of killer whale theodolite tracks . 35 

2-5 Descriptive statistics of Dive Time for each PCA bin . 36 

2-6 Descriptive statistics of Speed for each PCA bin . 36 

2-7 Descriptive statistics of Directness Index for each PCA bin. 36 

2-8 Descriptive statistics of Surface Active Behavior for each 

PCA bin. 36 

2-9 Kruskal-Wallis results for killer whale variables in relation to 

PCA. 37 

2-10 Descriptive statistics of Dive Time for each boat count bin. 38 

2-11 Descriptive statistics of Speed for each boat count bin. 38 

2-12 Descriptive statistics of Directness Index for each boat 

count bin. 38 

2-13 Descriptive statistics of Surface Active Behaviour for each 

boat count bin. 39 

2-14 Kruskal-Wallis results for killer whale variables in relation to 

boat count. 39 

CHAPTER 3 

3-1 Definition of body type categories used to classify focal 

humpbacks. 52 

3-2 Definitions of boat code categories used. 54 

3-3 Definitions of the four dependent whale response variables 

used. 55 



LIST OF TABLES X 

3-4 Sample size for humpback whale tracks broken down by 

various parameters. 57 

3-5 Descriptive statistics of Dive Time for each PCA bin. 57 

3-6 Descriptive statistics of Speed for each PCA bin . 58 

3-7 Descriptive statistics of Directness Index for each PCA bin . 58 

3-8 Descriptive statistics of Surface Active Behaviour for each 

PCA bin. 58 

3-9 Kruskal-Wallis results for humpback whale variables in 

relat ion to PCA. 58 

3-10 Descriptive statistics of Dive Time for each boat count bin . 59 

3-11 Descriptive statistics of Speed for each boat count bin. 59 

3-12 Descriptive statistics of Directness Index for each boat 

count bin. 59 

3-13 Descriptive statistics of Surface Active Behaviour for each 

boat count bin . 60 

3-14 Kruskal-Wallis results for humpback whale variables in 

relat ion to boat count. 60 

CHAPTER 4 

4-1 Number of vessel tracks per boat count category for each 

case study. 72 

4-2 Comparison between humpback and killer whale PCA. 73 



Chapter 1. Introduction 

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 

1.1. OVERVIEW 

Cetaceans have an alluring attraction for human beings. We have hunted them , 

collected them for entertainment, protected , studied , and watched them the world 

over. Increases in human populations surrounding coastal areas have 

revolutionised the tourist industry and spurned the growth in whale watching 

markets with 10 million people a year participating in commercial whale watching 

operations (Hoyt 2001 ). 

Though tourism impacts on cetacean populations continue to be debated , 

potential short-term consequences of human activity around cetaceans are 

becoming more defined for each species. Whale watching is one such behaviour 

that has reached high levels for accessible species such as the killer whale 

(Orcinus orca) and humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) . An increase in 

marine activity around marine mammals has led researchers and managers to 

investigate the measure of effects and/or significance of human disturbance on 

animals. Vessel traffic can have immediate direct impacts on cetaceans, such as 

collis ions (Laist et al. 2001 ), while commercial whale watching can have 

detrimental effects due to targeting of key species (Ollervides 2001 , Martinez 

2003 , Richter et al. 2006). Both non-migratory and migratory populations of 

cetaceans , such as killer and humpback whales , (refer to Appendix A for natural 

history of these species) , present unique management challenges as tourism 

moves from seasonal bursts to year-round activity. To mitigate these impacts 

and provide essential data for conservation management, it is important to 

assess short-term responses to vessel presence and if possible identify their 

long-term consequences. 



Chapter 1. Introduction 2 

1.2. WHALE WATCHING 

Killer whale 

Generally speaking, human relationships with killer whales (Orcinus area) have 

been tumultuous. Killer whales of Washington State, U.S.A. and British 

Columbia, Canada were the source of live captures for aquaria and marine parks 

in the 1960's and ?O's. Most animals came from the southern resident 

community, with a total of 36 whales collected and at least 11 deaths (Hoyt 1990, 

Olesiuk et al. 1990). Selective removal of younger animals and males produced 

a skewed age and sex composition in the population , which may have slowed a 

later recovery (Olesiuk et al. 1990a). Though captures ceased in Washington 

State waters in 1976, these removals substantially reduced the size of the 

population, which did not recover to estimated pre-capture numbers until 1993 

(Baird 2001 ). 

Whale pods that frequent these regional waters have become an icon of 

the area as attitudes have shifted away from captive viewing . Much of this 

change in public views towards killer whales has been due to the rise of whale 

watching tourism (Baird et al. 1998). The whale watching industry for coastal 

communities such as those found in Washington State and British Columbia is 

one of the fastest growing tourism sectors worth more than $1 billion in revenue 

(Hoyt 2001 ). Whale watching has increased public awareness of marine 

mammals and environmental issues, thus providing an economic incentive for 

preserving populations (Duffus & Dearden 1993, Lien 2000). However, the 

growth of whale watching during the past two decades has meant that whales in 

the region are experiencing increased exposure to vessel traffic and the 

accompanying sound pollution. 

Whale watching in Washington State is centred primarily on the southern 

resident population of killer whales (Figure 1-1 ). Viewing activity occurs 

predominantly in and around Haro Strait (Figure 1-2), the core summer area for 

the resident pods (Heimlich-Boran 1986, Bigg et al. 1987, Ford et al. 2000, 

Hauser 2006). Three killer whale pods, known as J, K and L, aggregate off San 



Chapter 1. Introduction 3 

Juan Island during this time, predominantly to mate and forage for salmon 

Oncorhynchus spp. (Ford et al. 2000). Each whale in the population is 

individually recognisable from identification photographs, and an annual 

photographic population census of resident pods has been conducted since 1973 

(Ford et al. 2000), thereby leading researchers to document each individual 

whales sex, age and genealogy. Animals are individually recognised from the 

shape and coloration of both left and right saddle patches, dorsal fin shape, and 

any unique nicks, cuts or scaring (Figure 1-1 ). 

- -~ ··. -Gf';~ r 

Figure 1-1. The killer whale. Lateral and ventral view of adult male killer whale with inset 
of female dorsal fin and genital pattern. Reprinted from Wiles (2004). 



Chapter 1. lntroduction

ra'r! Britisho Columbia

0

e

c

EalrErJill

Seattle
e
e Washington

orsiltr 3 0
Porfland (E nEttf i

c
gsseal

CorvllliO

c
f ,serre Oregon

.3oo! fl!y
3e'i, iis:

o g 
^^ 

J-tri'F
VFll0rd - tilh

o

rl.tro I

e
C:nrt:' Cd

sr.:!riD:J9 esaerarnento

_ S8n C gstockton
rranclsco c Calif orrria

sen.totP

RFddra!o-
;hroc

Nonh Paci{ic
Ocegn

Figure 1-2. Map of Haro Strait, Washington, USA. Reprinted from Google Maps -
http://maps.qoogle.com/maps (2009).

The waters of Haro Strait support a considerable tourism industry due to its
proximity to urban and easily accessible whale watching ports. lt is estimated

that upwards of 500,000 people annually go whale watching with 81 commercial

tour operators from the San Juan lslands and surrounding Canadian waters

(NMFS 2008)

. q8ld'on 6€8ch
Prevosi Cov*t? Eav Havst

Presdent
Sr'ad rr.liftd
g:irt. park :hannPr

Sdr J.ran rrt|r.oh:
.isn.1,;lr Chinne, chdfine

l(lirtl Nitr(rri H I



Chapter 1. Introduction 

r-------
L60 L52 

/t!mol, 
<'ti IIJ~: -](1(1: IWW - / CJ>/3 

ll11.1lw · up I'll I .i, 1,-: 

U,,.,.;, II I -I _'flll_' 

LSI 
malt' 

/YY/1- /Y'J-

.. -...... . . . 
L.l7 1.1 6 

/1' m11I, mo /,• 
,. ,, IY33 - /W1' .J ,·,1 IV.JY IV-8 . ---·-····----------­' 

5 

l.b6 
/,•m,,I, 

, •• , /'l_' J / <J1'1, 

L8 IA!' 
mu/,, f,,,,,.,,, 

•'ll JY9, -J11-- .-11 / <J 1., ., vv5 

Figure 1-3. Killer whale photo-identification chart. Individual age, sex and genealogies are 
shown. Solid lines linking photos represent known relationships. Dashed lines represent 
possible relationships. Reprinted from The Center for Whale Research (2004). 

Another 3000-8000 people watch whales annually from private recreational 

vessels, which make up over 30% of all vessels travelling with whales (Koski 

2006). Occasionally vessel counts have reached maximums of 120 vessels 

(Baird 2002). During summer months commercial whale watch operations run 

tours from 0900h to 21 00h and until sunset in spring and early autumn (Koski 

2004, 2006). Commercial vessels represent nearly 50% of all vessels travelling 



Chapter 1. Introduction 6 

with the whales (Koski 2006). Commercial whale watching boats range in size 

and configuration from small open vessels capable of holding 6-16 people to 

large passenger crafts that can carry up to 280 customers. Many of the smaller 

vessels routinely make two to three trips per day to view the whales. 

Commercial kayaking operations include up to 18 companies that occasionally 

go whale watching as well (Koski 2006). Whales may also encounter a variety of 

other types of vessel traffic such as scientific research vessels , Homeland 

Security enforcement vessels or Coast Guard , sport fishing vessels , ocean liners, 

commercial freight traffic (e.g. oil tankers), and commercial fish ing rigs (e.g. 

seiners and gillnetters). Additionally, private floatplanes , helicopters and small 

aircraft take advantage of viewing opportunities when available (Marine Mammal 

Monitoring 2002). 

High numbers of regional vessel traffic observing this small number of 

killer whales has led to whale watching disturbance to be implicated as a factor in 

the population 's endangered status. Killer whales continuing to use areas of high 

underwater noise has led some researchers to suggest that they have become 

habituated to the presence of boat noise (Jelinski et al. 2002). Older data sets , 

such as this case study may verify whether or not animals have habituated and 

also add to the small body of existing data on southern resident killer whales . 

Humpback whale 

The humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) (F igure 1-4) undertakes one of 

the world 's longest annual mammalian migrations (Rasmussen et al. 2007), 

between high-latitude summer feeding areas and low-latitude winter breeding 

areas (Chittleborough 1965, Dawbin 1966). Humpbacks passing along the 

eastern Australian coastline also likely inhabit the Antarctic feeding grounds 

known as Area V (Figure 1-5) (Dawbin 1966). The Area, (or Group V) stock (as 

they are labelled), of southern hemisphere humpbacks was severely depleted 

with the advent of mechanised commercial whaling operations in 1912 (Clapham 

2008). By the time the International Whaling Commission (IWC) initiated a ban 



Chapter 1. Introduction 7 

on humpback whaling in 1962, the population was considered to have little more 

than 5 percent of it's original stock remaining (Chittleborough 1965). 

Figure 1-4. The humpback whale. Reprinted from Clapham (1999) . 



Chapter 1. Introduction 8 

AAtAV 
AREA IV 

A.REA 111 

ARE.Al 

ARtA ll 

Figure 1-5. Boundaries of six southern hemisphere whaling areas adopted in the 1930's. 
Note Area V near eastern Australia. Reprinted from Jenner (2001 ). 

The tendency of humpback whales to linger close to populated shorelines and 

shallow bays while migrating between feeding and breeding grounds was a fact 

fully utilised by early whalers . East Australian shore stations at Tangalooma and 

Byron Bay are said to have processed 7,423 humpback whales of the 19,687 

reported captures between 1912 and 1963 (Paterson et al. 2001 ). The 

Tangalooma Whaling Station was located on Moreton Island (Figure 1-6) and 

operated from 1952 until 1962, processing 6,277 humpback whales (Orams & 

Forestell 1994 ). Despite severe stock depletion , the Group V humpbacks 

continue to maintain their pattern of annual migrations along the east coast of 

Australia (Rock et al. 2006). 



Chapter 1. Introduction 

\ 
.:-r•1• 1 

\ 
', 
\ ', 

'·· 

-: ._I'.: ! i i.•,l Li", 

... 
. i1 _I 

1~-
1' 

; 

o I 
I. 

.--· 

\ 
I 
I 

\ 

··•, 
.... 

. __ -,. 

,..,_:'i, 

f. . . 

I 1" :,:. 

l !• • t: 'J :'"·" ., ,.,. - --===----==--=" 

I 

I 

I_.· 

.-. . ' 

I 
.._ I 

I 

. I \ 1 __ , 

' 
' 

_.' 

·.i 
I 

/ 
I '~i 1· !: !c-r , ... :i-.. 

1.-· . 1 .. ,,· . 

9 

ir·1:,-

IL 

Figure 1-6. Tangalooma whaling station located on Moreton Island. Reprinted from Orams 

(2000). 



Chapter 1. Introduction 10 

Current population estimates show humpback whales numbering 7,090 

individuals (Noad et al. 2005). As their numbers have increased , the Australian 

government has discovered the economic and conservation benefits of tourism 

(Hoyt 2001 ). The same features that made Tangalooma an attractive location for 

a whaling station also make it a suitable location for whale watching . In just a 

few decades, the whaling factory at Tangalooma has transformed into a popular 

tourist resort , which has been conducting whale watch cruises since 1992. 

Regional commercial whale watch ing is only permitted within established marine 

park boundary waters . Moreton Bay Marine Park waters surround Moreton 

Island (refer to Appendix B for map of marine park area) and allows for permitted 

tourism that focuses on the various marine life such as sea turtles , dugongs, 

bottlenose dolphins and humpback whales . The industry operation around 

Moreton Bay Marine Park is relatively small and tightly regulated , with just 2 

operators currently permitted to run from 0900-1800 h each day. However, 

Moreton Bay borders Queensland , the fastest-growing reg ion in Austral ia of over 

1.6 million people (Ch ilvers et al. 2005), therefore potential exists for increased 

demand for humpback whale watch ing . 

1.3. SOUND POLLUTION 

Killer whale 

Killer whales like other dolphins, rely on their acoustic system for navigation , 

location of prey, and communicating with other pod members (Ford 1989). 

Increased anthropogenic sound can have the potential to mask echolocation and 

temporarily or permanently damage hearing sensitivity. Masking echolocation 

may impair foraging or other behaviours and be detrimental to survival (Bain & 

Dahlheim 1994, Erbe 2002 , Williams et al. 2006). 

Another auditory effect of sound exposure is hearing loss. Temporary 

hearing loss or temporary threshold shift (TTS) involves recovery of baseline 

hearing over a period of time (Holt 2008). The magnitude of the shift depends on 



Chapter 1. Introduction 11 

the energy content of the sound. The hearing threshold is the amplitude 

necessary for detection , and the threshold varies depending on frequency across 

the hearing range of an individual (Nowacek et al. 2007). Permanent hearing 

loss or permanent threshold shift (PTS) does not show recovery over time and is 

the manifestation of auditory injury (Holt 2008). 

Studies on killer whales have shown short-term responses to sound 

exposure such as changing swimming direction, dive duration , vocal behaviour 

(Williams et al. 2002, Foote et al. 2004 ), or long-term changes such as leaving 

once preferred habitat (Morton & Symonds 2002). 

Humpback whale 

The large size of baleen whales makes them unsuitable for many acoustic 

measurements on hearing thresholds . However, both vocalisations and 

anatomical studies suggest a low frequency hearing range (Richardson et al. 

1995, Parks et al. 2007, Lusseau 2008). Although low pitch calls produced by 

humpbacks are said not to overlap with the high frequency of fast outboard 

engines (Au & Green 2000) , vessel activities can still el icit behavioural responses 

from animals. Both horizontal (increased speed , alteration in swimming paths) 

and vertical (increased dive times) avoidance strategies have been documented 

for humpbacks in response to vessel approaches (Baker & Herman 1989, 

Scheidat et al. 2004 ). Animals have also shown increased surface active 

behaviours (breaching , pectoral or tail fluke slaps) (Baker & Herman 1989, 

Corkeron 1995, Peterson 2001 ), and abrupt course changes (Au & Green 2000). 

Sound pollution can also be generated by a variety of other human related 

activities such as dredging, drilling , seismic testing and sonar practices (Holt 

2008). McCauley et al. (2000) recorded course and speed changes to avoid 

close encounters with operating seismic arrays near Western Australia . Several 

of these observations showed whales approaching a seismic array to within 100 

m and then swimming quickly away by changing direction. This may have been 

due to the array's directionality of sound energy downwards. Likewise, studies 

near Hawaii examined behavioural responses of humpback whales exposed to 



Chapter 1. Introduction 12 

full-scale Acoustic Thermometry of the Ocean Climate (ATOC) signals and saw 

whales diving longer and covering more distance between surfacings during 

exposure (Frankel & Clark 2002). Social and mating behaviour such as singing 

can also be impacted . During playbacks of the U.S. Navy's Low Frequency 

Active sonar (LFA), humpback whale songs were significantly longer, but 

returned to pre-exposure levels after playbacks (Miller et al. 2000). High vessel 

noise was also associated with an increase in rate and repetitiveness of 

humpback feeding calls in southeast, Alaska , indicating a modification of call 

patterns (Doyle et al. 2008). 

1.4. POPULATION STATUS 

All species of cetaceans are listed by the Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) under Appendix I or II 

(Hilton-Taylor 2000). Append ix I includes species threatened with extinction 

while Append ix II includes species that may become threatened with extinction 

unless trade is regulated (Kl inowska 1991 ). The World Conservation Union 

(IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species identifies 62 species of cetaceans at 

various levels of risk of extinction (Hilton-Taylor 2000). 

Killer whale 

Killer whales worldwide are listed under Append ix II of CITES, wh ich proh ibits the 

international trade of killer whales (or killer whale parts) without appropriate 

permits. 

Annual population censuses indicated that southern res ident killer whale 

numbers experienced a population decline of 21 % (van Ginneken et al. 2000) 

after 1990s and was petitioned for listing under the United States Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) of 1973. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

determined the stock to be below its optimum sustainable population and they 

were therefore designated as Depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

in 2003 (Federal Register 2003). In 2005, this distinct population segment of 



Chapter 1. Introduction 13 

killer whales was listed as Endangered (Federal Register 2005) under the ESA. 

For Washington State, local killer whale pods are designated as the official 

marine mammal. The state Fish and Wildlife Commission protects all forms of 

killer whales and also listed the species as Endangered in 2004 (Wiles 2004 ). In 

September 2007, San Juan County, Washington State enacted a local ordinance 

designed to prevent boat harassment by making it unlawful to feed or knowingly 

approach southern resident killer whales within 100 metres in county waters 

(WAC 2007). 

Humpback whale 

Globally, humpback whales are listed as Least Concern , meaning it's at low risk 

of extinction , with the Arabian Sea and Oceania sub-populations still listed as 

Endangered (IUCN 2008). Most monitored stocks have shown evidence of 

recovery from whaling (i.e . some increasing to more than 50% of their levels 

three generations ago) (Reeves et al. 2003). The Oceania sub-population 

(including Group V humpback whales) have not yet attained 80% of those levels 

(Reeves et al. 2003). Importantly, the large illegal kills by Soviet factory ships in 

the southern hemisphere from the 1950s to the early 1970s may have delayed 

recovery of southern stocks (Clapham & Baker 2002). Due to the large numbers 

of animals taken and the subsequent population declines, humpback whales 

continue to be listed in Appendix I of CITES which does not allow trade for 

commercial purposes in products from protected species (Cetacean Specialist 

Group 1996). Thus all trade is banned between countries that are parties to 

CITES, and therefore limited room exists for a global whaling market. 

While there has been an observed increase in abundance in recent 

decades, the Queensland Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 1994, 

classify southern humpback whales as Vulnerable as a migratory and threatened 

species (Hilton-Taylor 2000 , Chilvers et al. 2005). Under Queensland legislation , 

the humpback is protected out to three nautical miles offshore and under 

Australian legislation within the Australian Exclusive Economic Zone, offshore to 

200 nautical miles (Vang 2002). 



Chapter 1. Introduction 14 

1.5. STUDY RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES 

All cetacean species are most likely affected to some degree by vessel traffic 

(Richardson et al. 1995). Vessel disturbance has the potential to interrupt 

cetacean social affiliations, weaken hunting efficiency, and cause physical harm 

(e.g. collisions, deafness). Repeated disturbance from boat traffic could also 

bring about long-term effects such as a drop in the rate of reproduction , higher 

mortality, habitat avoidance, and can threaten the survival of populations (David 

2002). Any type of on the water vessel has the potential to affect whales through 

the physical presence and activity of the vessel , increased underwater sound 

levels or a combination of these factors. Marine mammal tourism in particular 

has the potential to contribute to noise pollution to which animals are exposed , 

because this is not a transient disturbance that happens by a whale ; rather it is a 

source of disturbance that targets individuals and follows them. If animals are 

repeatedly disturbed during important behaviours (e.g. nursing , mating , feeding , 

resting) , then temporary behavioural responses may become biologically 

significant (Lusseau 2005, Bejder et al. 2006, Williams et al. 2006). For example, 

continual disruption of feeding could cause individuals to incur a reduced energy 

intake or to abandon habitat (Lusseau 2005, Will iams et al. 2006). 

Transient cetaceans may be less likely to encounter regular tourist traffic, 

while resident species, may be exposed to heavier traffic associated with port 

and marina areas. They are also more within reach of recreational and 

commercial whale watch traffic. Highly exposed animals could habituate to traffic 

or disperse, while animals that are not much disturbed can suffer greatly (Richter 

et al. 2006 , Nowacek et al. 2007). In some cases the advantages of the 

availability of resources such as food or opportunities to mate may outweigh the 

perceived disturbance (Gill et al. 2001 ). It is important for researchers to attempt 

to define these thresholds that are exclusive to each species, population, habitat, 

and situation to better mitigate potential effects. 

This thesis utilises two independent case studies to examine the effects of 

vessel traffic on the behaviour of two contrasting cetaceans, namely an 

odontocete, (the killer whale), and a mysticete, (the humpback whale). Killer 



Chapter 1. Introduction 15 

whale data were collected as an independent project of my own from San Juan 

Island. This three-year data set went for the most part unanalysed for nearly a 

decade after collection. Then, in 2005, I was invited by Dr. Mark Orams to 

conduct similar research on humpbacks after his Masters student dropped out 

leaving the position open. Shortly after I enrolled, Dr. Orams vacated his position 

as my supervisor and funding for this research was stunted to a single data 

collection season. In order to have the quantity of data for analyses Massey 

University was kind enough to allow the use of my previously collected data set 

in conjunction with this thesis research. Due to logistical constraints, explicit 

investigations such as Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) experiments (Stewart­

Oaten & Bence 2001) were not conducted . Both studies used theodolite 

surveyor instruments to measure behaviour of focal animals and vessel traffic. 

With each study we chose to use non-invasive land-based data collection 

platforms. This allowed researchers to be removed from any measurable vessel 

effects found . Each case recorded the same measurable whale variables in 

relation to vessel traffic conditions (no-boat and opportunistic traffic) . The 

method of recording data differed due to the types of theodolites available. Only 

the killer whale study had access to a theodolite with a serial data port available 

for laptop connection . Local whale watching guidelines were used to specify 

boat categories for each species. In each case , whale behaviour could be tested 

in relation to whether boaters were violating or following local guidelines. The 

objective of this thesis is to accurately define and describe the relationships 

between two marine mammals (an odontocete-toothed whale and mysticete­

baleen whale) and vessels. 

1.6. THESIS STRUCTURE 

Chapter 1 represents an overview of the whale watching literature relevant to this 

study, particularly in relation to sound pollution threats faced by both humpback 

and killer whales. This chapter concludes with the rationale, objectives, and 

structure for this thesis. 



Chapter 1. Introduction 16 

Chapter 2 presents a case study carried out on southern resident killer 

whales from San Juan Island , Washington State, U.S.A. Killer whale behaviour 

was measured using a theodolite to assess whether behavioural responses to 

boats could be detected. Results are given from three field seasons conducted 

for the years 1999 to 2001 inclusive. Discussion and conclusions relating this 

and similar impact studies on resident killer whales are also presented. 

Chapter 3 details a case study conducted on Group V humpback whales 

during their northern and southern migrations off Moreton Island , Queensland , 

Australia . Humpback whale behaviour was measured using a theodolite to 

assess whether behavioural responses to boats could be detected . Results from 

this study are presented and discussed from a single field season conducted in 

2005. This chapter concludes discussing humpback whale management 

considerations for Cape Moreton . 

Chapter 4 concludes this thesis with a synthesis of the results between 

both case studies. Impacts identified for both species are compared and 

contrasted , and overall conclusions drawn considering long-term population 

consequences due to potential (energetic) consequences of short-term 

behavioural responses. Limitations of impact studies such as this , as well as 

further research suggestions, are additionally presented in this chapter. 

1.7. LITERATURE CITED 

Au WWL, Green M (2000) Acoustic interaction of humpback whales and whale­

watching boats. Marine Environment Research 49:469-481. 

Bain DE, Dahlheim ME (1994) Effects of masking noise on detection thresholds 

of killer whales. In: Loughlin TR (ed) Marine mammals and the Exxon 

Valdez. Academic Press, San Diego, California. 

Baird RW (2002) Killer whales of the world: natural history and conservation . 

Voyageur Press, Stillwater, Minnesota 132pp. 



Chapter 1. Introduction 17 

Baird RW, Otis R, Osborne RW (1998) Killer whales and boats in the Haro Strait 

area: Biology, politics, esthetics and human attitudes (Abstract). Paper 

presented at the Whale Watching Research Workshop, January 18, 1998 

Monaco. 

Baker C, Herman L (1989) The behavioral responses of summering humpback 

whales to vessel traffic: Experimental and opportunistic observations. 

National Park Service Alaska Regional Office, Anchorage , AK., p 50pp. 

Bejder L, Samuels A, Whitehead H, Gales N (2006) Interpreting short-term 

behavioural responses to disturbance within a longitudinal perspective. 

Animal Behaviour 72 : 1149-1158. 

Bigg MA, Ellis GM, Ford JKB, Balcomb KC (1987) Killer whales: a study of their 

identification, genealogy and natural history in British Columbia and 

Washington State. Phantom Press Publishers , Nanaimo, British 

Columbia. 

Cetacean Specialist Group (1996) Megaptera novaeangliae. In: IUCN (ed) 2006 

Red List of Threatened Species. 

Chilvers BL, Lawler IR, Macknight F, Marsh H, Noad M, Paterson R (2005) 

Moreton Bay, Queensland , Australia: an example of the co-existence of 

significant marine mammal populations and large-scale coastal 

development. Biological Conservation 122:559-571. 

Chittleborough RG (1965) Dynamics of two populations of humpback whale , 

Megaptera nodosa (Bonnaterre ). Australian Journal of Marine and 

Freshwater Research 16:33-128. 

Clapham P (2008) Cetacean Assessment & Ecology Program. Report. National 

Marine Mammal Laboratory (NMML). 



Chapter 1. Introduction 18 

Clapham P, Baker CS (2002) Modern whaling. In: Perrin WF, WUrsig B, 

Thewissen JGM (eds) Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals. Academic 

Press, San Diego, p 1328-1332. 

Corkeron PJ (1995) Humpback Whales (Megaptera navaeangliae) in Hervey 

Bay, Queensland: Behaviour and responses to whale-watching vessels. 

Canadian Journal of Zoology 73:1290-1299. 

David L (2002) Disturbance to Mediterranean Cetaceans caused by vessel 

traffic. Report. ACCOBAMS, Monaco. 

Dawbin WH (1966) The seasonal migratory cycle of humpback whales . In : Norris 

KS (ed) Whales , dolphins and porpoises. University of California Press, 

Berkeley, CA. , p 145-171. 

Doyle LR, Mccowan B, Hanser SF, Chyba C, Bucci T, Blue JE (2008) 

Applicability of Information Theory to the Quantification of Responses to 

Anthropogenic Noise by Southeast Alaskan Humpback Whales. Entropy 

10:33-46. 

Duffus DA, Dearden P (1993) Recreational Use, Valuation , and Management, of 

Killer Whales (Orcinus area) on Canada's Pacific Coast. Environmental 

Conservation 20 :149-156. 

Erbe C (2002) Underwater noise of whale-watching boats and potential effects 

on killer whales (Orcinus area), based on an acoustic impact model. 

Marine Mammal Science 18:394-418. 

Federal Register (2003) Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of 

Marine Mammals; Eastern North Pacific Southern Resident Killer Whales. 

68-31980. 



Chapter 1. Introduction 19 

Federal Register (2005) Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 

Endangered Status for Southern Resident Killer Whales. 70:69903-

69912. 

Foote AD, Osborne RW, Hoelzel AR (2004) Whale-call response to masking boat 

noise. Nature 428: p910. 

Ford JKB (1989) Acoustic behavior of resident killer whales (Oreinus area) off 

Vancouver Island , British Columbia . Canadian Journal of Zoology 67:727-

745. 

Ford JKB, Ellis GM, Balcomb KC (2000) Killer whales : the natural history and 

genealogy of Oreinus area in British Columbia and Washington State . 2nd 

ed . UBC Press, Vancouver, British Columbia. 

Frankel AS , Clark CW (2002) ATOC and other factors affecting the distribution 

and abundance of humpback whales (Megaptera navaeangliae) off the 

north shore of Kauai. Marine Mammal Science 18:644-662. 

Gill JA, Norris K, Sutherland WJ (2001) Why behavioural responses may not 

reflect the population consequences of human disturbance. Biological 

Conservation 97:265-268. 

Hauser DOW (2006) Summer space use of southern resident killer whales 

(Oreinus area) within Washington and British Columbia inshore waters . 

M.S. thesis, University of Washington . 

Heimlich-Boran JR (1986) Fishery correlations with the occurrence of killer 

whales in Greater Puget Sound. In: Kirkevold BC, Lockard JS (eds) 

Behavioral biology of killer whales. Alan R. Liss, New York, New York, p 

113-131. 



Chapter 1. Introduction 20 

Hilton-Taylor C (2000) 2000 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN, Gland, 

Switzerland . 

Holt MM (2008) Sound exposure and Southern Resident killer whales (Orcinus 

orca): A review of current knowledge and data gaps. In: Commer. USO 

(ed). NOAA, p 59p. 

Hoyt E (1990) Orea: the whale called killer. 3rd edition. Camden House 

Publishing , North York , Ontario. 

Hoyt E (2001) Whale Watching 2001 : Worldwide tourism numbers, expenditures 

and expanding socioeconomic benefits. Report. International Fund for 

Animal Welfare , Yarmouth Port, MA. 

IUCN (2008) International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural 

Resources. Report. International Union for Conservation of Nature and 

Natural Resources. 

Jelinski DE, Krueger CC, Duffus DA (2002) Geostatistical analyses of 

interactions between killer whales (Orcinus area) and recreational whale­

watching boats. Applied Geography 22 :393-411. 

Klinowska M (1991) Dolphins , Porpoises and Whales of the World . Cambridge, 

UK, Gland , Switzerland . 

Koski K (2004) Final Program Report: Soundwatch Public Outreach/Boater 

Education Project. Friday Harbor, Washington. 

Koski K (2006) 2004-2005 Final Program Report: Soundwatch Public 

Outreach/Boater Education Project. Friday Harbor, Washington. 



Chapter 1 . Introduction 21 

Laist OW, Knowlton AR, Mead JG, Collet AS , Podesta M (2001) Collisions 

between ships and whales . Marine Mammal Science 17:35-75. 

Lien J (2000) The Conservation Basis for the Regulation of Whale Watching in 

Canada by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans: A Precautionary 

Approach. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada , p 1-38. 

Lusseau D (2005) Residency pattern of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops spp., in 

Milford Sounds, New Zealand , is related to boat traffic. Marine Ecology 

Progress Series 295:265-272 . 

Lusseau D (2008) Understanding the Impacts of Noise on Marine Mammals. In : 

Higham JES, Luck M (eds) Marine Wildlife and Tourism Management: 

Insights from the Natural and Social Sciences. CAB International , p 206-

218. 

Marine Mammal Monitoring (2002) Annual report, 2001-2002. Victoria , British 

Columbia. 

Martinez E (2003) A pre-disturbance study of Hector's Dolphins 

(Cephalorhynchus hectori) prior to a dolphin-watching operation at 

Motunau , New Zealand . Masters thesis , University of Otago . 

McCauley RD, Fewtrell J, Duncan AJ , Jenner C, Jenner MN, Penrose JD, Prince 

RIT, Adhitya A, Murdoch J, McCabe K (2000) Marine Seismic Surveys - A 

Study of Enviromental Impl ications. Appea Journal 40:692-708 . 

Miller PJO, Biassoni N, Samuels A, Tyack PL (2000) Whale songs lengthen in 

response to sonar. Nature 405:903. 



Chapter 1. Introduction 22 

Morton AB, Symonds HK (2002) Displacement of Orcinus area (L.) by high 

amplitude sound in British Columbia , Canada. ICES Journal of Marine 

Science 59:71-80. 

NMFS (2008) Recovery Plan for Southern Resident Killer Whales (Orcinus area) . 

Report. National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region , Seattle, 

Washington . 

Noad MJ , Cato DH , Paton DA (2005) Absolute and relative abundance estimates 

of Australian east coast humpback whale (Megaptera navaeangliae). IWC 

Scientific Committee SC/57 /SH. 

Nowacek DP, Thorne LH , Johnston DW, Tyack PL (2007) Responses of 

cetaceans to anthropogenic noise. Mammal Review 37 :81-115 . 

Olesiuk PF, Bigg MA, Ellis GM (1990) Life history and population dynamics of 

res ident killer whales (Orcinus area) in the coastal waters of British 

Columbia and Washington State . Report , IWC:209-244. 

Ollervides FJ (2001) Gray whales and boat traffic: movement, vocal , and 

behavioral responses in Bahia Magdalena, Mexico. Ph.D Thesis . Texas 

A&M University. 

Ora ms MB, Forestell PH (1994) From whale harvesting to whale watching : 

Tangalooma 30 years on. Report. 

Parks SE, Ketten DR, O'Malley JT, Arruda J (2007) Anatomical predictions of 

hearing in the North Atlantic right whale. The Anatomical Record: 

Advances in Integrative Anatomy and Evolutionary Biology 290:734-744. 



Chapter 1. Introduction 23 

Paterson RA, P.Paterson , D.H.Cato (2001) Status of humpback whales , 

Megaptera novaeangliae, in east Australia at the end of the 20th century. 

Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 47:579-586 . 

Peterson HA (2001) Whale Behavioral Responses and Human Perceptions: An 

Assessment of Humpback Whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and Vessel 

Activity near Juneau, Alaska . Masters thesis, Duke University. 

Rasmussen K, Palacios OM, Calambokidis J, Saborio MT, Rosa LO, Secchi ER, 

Steiger GH, Allen JM, Stone GS (2007) Southern Hemisphere humpback 

whales wintering off Central America: insights from water temperature into 

the longest mammalian migration. Biology Letters 3: 302-305. 

Reeves RR, Smith BO, Crespo EA, Notobartolo de Sciara G (2003) Dolphins, 

whales and porpoises: 2002-2010 conservation action plan for the world 's 

cetaceans . Report. Cetacean Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland , Switzerland 

and Cambridge , Unitied Kingdom. 

Richardson WJ , Greene CR, Malme Cl , Thomson DH (1995) Marine Mammals 

and Noise. Academic, San Diego . 

Richter C, Dawson S, Slooten E (2006) Impacts of commercial whale watching 

on male sperm whales at Kaikoura , New Zealand. Marine Mammal 

Science 22 :46-63. 

Rock J, Pastene LA, Kaufman G, Forestell P, Matsouka K, Allen J (2006) A note 

on East Australia Group V Stock humpback whale movement between 

feeding and breeding areas based on photo-identification . Journal of 

Cetacean Research and Management 8:301-305. 

Scheidat M, Castro C, Gonzalez J, Williams R (2004) Behavioural responses of 

humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) to whalewatching boats near 



Chapter 1. Introduction 24 

Isla de la Plata, Machalilla National Park, Ecuador. Journal of Cetacean 

Research Management 6: 1-6. 

Stewart-Oaten A, Bence JR (2001) Temporal and Spatial Variation in 

Environmental Impact Assessment. Ecological Monographs 71 :305-339. 

van Ginneken A, Ellifrit D, Balcomb KC (2000) Official orca survey field guide. 

Center for Whale Research, Friday Harbor, Washington. 

Vang L (2002) Distribution , abundance and biology of Group V humpback whales 

Megaptera novaeanglia: A review. 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

The State of Queensland , 

Wiles GJ (2004) Washington state status report for the killer whale . Report. 

Washington Department Fish and Wildlife, Olympia , Washington. 

Williams R, Bain DE , Ford JKB, Trites AW (2002) Behavioural responses of male 

killer whales to a "leapfrogging" vessel. Journal of Cetacean Research 

and Management 4:305-310 . 

Williams R, Lusseau D, Hammond PS (2006) Estimating relative energetic costs 

of human disturbance to killer whales (Orcinus area) . Biological 

Conservation133 :301-311.