Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus) Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population Scotian Shelf population: COSEWIC assessment and status report 2024

Official title: COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus) Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population Scotian Shelf population in Canada

Committee on the status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC)

Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population - Special Concern

Scotian Shelf population – Endangered

2024

COSEWIC assessment summary

Assessment summary – November 2024

Common name: Northern Bottlenose Whale - Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population

Scientific name: Hyperoodon ampullatus

Status: Special Concern

Reason for designation: This northern population of long-lived, slow reproducing beaked whales was reduced by whaling in the late 1960s and early 1970s but the extent of this reduction is unknown. Trends in population size since then are uncertain and there is no abundance estimate, but survey sighting rates have been low. The population faces a variety of threats including underwater noise, entanglement in fishing gear, vessel strikes, ingestion of plastic debris, and contaminants. This population may become Threatened if these threats are not reversed or effectively managed.

Occurrence: Atlantic Ocean

Status history: The Northern Bottlenose Whale was given a single designation of Not at Risk in April 1993. Split into two populations in April 1996 to allow a separate designation of the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Scotian Shelf population). The Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population was not assessed in 1996; it retained the Not at Risk designation of the original Northern Bottlenose Whale. The population was designated Special Concern in May 2011. Status re-examined and confirmed in November 2024.

Assessment summary – November 2024

Common name: Northern Bottlenose Whale - Scotian Shelf population

Scientific name: Hyperoodon ampullatus

Status: Endangered

Reason for designation: This well-studied population of beaked whales appears to be slowly increasing as it continues to recover from historical whaling operations. It remains very small, with an estimated 210 individuals, of which approximately 95 are mature. The population is at risk from several threats, including underwater noise produced by military sonar exercises and seismic surveys for oil and gas, vessel strikes, entanglement in fishing gear, and exposure to contaminants and other marine pollutants and debris.

Occurrence: Atlantic Ocean

Status history: The Northern Bottlenose Whale was given a single designation of Not at Risk in April 1993. Split into two populations in April 1996 to allow a separate designation of the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Scotian Shelf population). Scotian Shelf population designated Special Concern in April 1996. Status re-examined and designated Endangered in November 2002, May 2011, and November 2024.

COSEWIC executive summary

Northern Bottlenose Whale

Hyperoodon ampullatus

Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population

Scotian Shelf population

Wildlife species description and significance

The Northern Bottlenose Whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus, is a beaked whale found only in the northern North Atlantic. It is a sturdy, medium-sized (7 to 9 m) whale, dolphin-like in appearance, with a beak and falcate dorsal fin. The species is among the deepest and most prolonged divers of all mammals and is known for its tendency to approach vessels. The individuals off the Scotian Shelf are the subjects of the most detailed research on any living species of beaked whale.

Aboriginal (Indigenous) knowledge

There is no species-specific ATK (Aboriginal traditional knowledge) in this report.

Distribution

Northern Bottlenose Whales are found in deep (>500 m) waters of the northern North Atlantic, north of about 40°N. There are five recognized historical areas of concentration, three in the eastern Atlantic (Iceland, Svalbard, and off mainland Norway), and two in Canadian waters (along the edge of the Scotian Shelf and off Labrador, including southern Baffin Bay).

Two populations, or designatable units, of the species are found in Canadian waters. The Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea (DS-BB-LS) population and the Scotian Shelf (SS) population are genetically distinct. The SS animals are generally smaller, may breed later in the year, and have higher pollutant loads than the whales in the DS-BB-LS population. Movement between the two populations seems to be very rare. A third concentration has recently been identified off the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, especially in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin region. This concentration is likely part of the DS-BB-LS designatable unit, as there are clear genetic differences and no photo-identification matches with the SS population.

Habitat

Northern Bottlenose Whales occur primarily in continental slope waters 800 to 1,500 m deep. The whales of the Scotian Shelf edge are strongly associated with three large submarine canyons (the Gully, Shortland Canyon, and Haldimand Canyon). The Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area east of Newfoundland is also characterized by high topographic relief but instead consists of a ridge projecting up from the seafloor. Further north, these whales are not associated with any clear topographic features; instead they are more widely distributed off the shelf break.

Biology

Males become sexually mature at 7 to 9 years old, and females at 8 to 13, thereafter giving birth to single offspring about every 3 to 5 years. The life span is about 48 years, and the generation time about 26 years. The Scotian Shelf population does not seem to migrate. Movements by whales in the DS-BB-LS population have not been well studied, although recent satellite tag data indicate that some individuals can travel long distances.

Although Northern Bottlenose Whales eat various deep-water fishes and squids, they are specialists compared with other deep-diving mammals, and particularly favour squids of the genus Gonatus. Off the Grand Banks and in the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea region, some individuals have been observed interacting with commercial fisheries for Greenland Halibut.

Population sizes and trends

The SS population is estimated to have contained approximately 95 mature animals in 2023. Recent analysis suggests that the population went through a decline from 1988 (when research on this population began) until about 2004, after which the population began to increase. There is no estimate of the size of the DS-BB-LS population. In 1962 to 1967, whaling operations took 87 animals from the SS population, and in 1969 to 1971 whalers took 818 animals from the DS-BB-LS population. This depletion is likely still affecting both the SS and DS-BB-LS populations.

Threats

There are several significant threats to the species. Underwater noise and interactions with fisheries and vessels pose a clear threat. There are also concerns about contaminant levels in whale tissues, possibly related to oil and gas development activities, as well as threats posed by plastic pollution, including ingestion and entanglement. The assigned level of overall threat impact is High for the SS designatable unit and Medium for the DS-BB-LS designatable unit.

Protection, status, and recovery activities

The Northern Bottlenose Whale is listed as a “Protected Species” by the International Whaling Commission with a catch limit of zero. The species is in Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, and it is considered Near Threatened by IUCN. There is currently no regular whaling operations that target Northern Bottlenose Whales. According to NatureServe, the species is listed as Apparently Secure globally although the SS population has a Critically Imperiled status.

In Canada, hunting and other activities deliberately harmful to Northern Bottlenose Whales are covered in the Marine Mammal Regulations of the Fisheries Act. The SS population was assessed as Endangered by COSEWIC in 2002 and 2011, and was listed under Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act in April 2006. The DS-BB-LS population was assessed by COSEWIC as Special Concern in 2011. A recovery strategy was finalized for the SS population in 2010 and revised in 2016, and an action plan was finalized in 2017. In 2024, COSEWIC reassessed the DS-BB-LS population as Special Concern and the SS population as Endangered.

The Gully was designated as a marine protected area (MPA) in 2004 under the Oceans Act, with the core area of the MPA coinciding with the principal habitat of the SS Northern Bottlenose Whales. The Gully, Shortland, and Haldimand Canyons have also been identified under SARA as Critical Habitat for the SS Northern Bottlenose Whales, and the intercanyon areas have been described as important habitat. The remaining habitat of Northern Bottlenose Whales in Canada has no special protection specifically for the species. Marine refuges, which are closed to bottom-contact fishing, may provide increased food resources and refuge from fishing gear entanglement.

Technical summary (Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador sea population)

Hyperoodon ampullatus

Northern Bottlenose Whale (Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population)

Baleine à Bec Commune (Population du détroit de Davis, de la baie de Baffin et de la mer du Labrador)

Inuktitut: ᐃᒃᑮᓇᖅᑐᒥ ᓯᒡᒍᑲᓪᓚᓖᑦ (translation: Ikkiinaqtumi Siggukallaliit)

Range of occurrence in Canada: Atlantic Ocean (off the coasts of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nunavut)

Demographic information

Generation time (usually average age of parents in the population)

Approximately 26 years

Estimated using IUCN generation length calculator.

Is there an [observed, estimated, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of mature individuals?

Unknown

[Observed, estimated, or projected] percent of continuing decline in total number of mature individuals within 3 years [or 1 generation; whichever is longer up to a maximum of 100 years]

Unknown

Unknown

[Observed, estimated, or projected] percent of continuing decline in total number of mature individuals within 5 years [or 2 generations; whichever is longer up to a maximum of 100 years]

Unknown

Unknown

[Observed, estimated, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the last 10 years [or 3 generations; whichever is longer]

Unknown

Insufficient data to assess population size or trends. Whaling in the late 1960s and early 1970s (within 3 generations) likely caused a rapid decrease in mature individuals but the extent of decline is unknown.

[Projected, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the next [10 years, or 3 generations, up to a maximum of 100 years]

Unknown

Unknown

[Observed, estimated, inferred, projected, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over any period of 10 years [or 3 generations; whichever is longer, up to a maximum of 100 years], including both the past and future (up to a maximum of 100 years in future)

Unknown

Unknown

Are the causes of the decline clearly reversible?

Unknown

Are the causes of the decline clearly understood?

Unknown

Are the causes of the decline clearly ceased?

Unknown

Are there extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals

Unknown

Long-lived species with slow reproductive rates, so unlikely to fluctuate widely.

Extent and occupancy information

Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO)

779,516 km²

Based on 2011 COSEWIC status report, no update available.

Index of area of occupancy (IAO), reported as 2x2 km grid value

208,756 km²

Based on 2011 COSEWIC status report, no update available.

Is the population “severely fragmented”, that is, is >50% of individuals or >50% of the total area “occupied” (as a proxy for number of individuals) in habitat patches that are both (a) smaller than required to support a viable subpopulation, and (b) separated from other habitat patches by a distance larger than the species can be expected to disperse?

1. No
2. No

Satellite tag data indicate long-range movements limiting likelihood of isolated habitat patches.

Number of “locations” (use plausible range to reflect uncertainty if appropriate)

Unknown

Very likely more than 10

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in extent of occurrence?

No

No observed change

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in area of occupancy?

No

No observed change

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of subpopulations?

N/A

No known subpopulations

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of “locations”?

Unknown

Number of locations is unknown

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in [area, extent and/or quality] of habitat?

Unknown

Insufficient data to assess decline in quality of habitat

Are there extreme fluctuations in number of subpopulations?

No

Are there extreme fluctuations in number of “locations”?

No

Are there extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence?

No

Are there extreme fluctuations in index of area of occupancy?

No

Number of mature individuals (by subpopulation)

Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea

Unknown

No known subpopulation structure

Total

Unknown

Quantitative analysis

Is the probability of extinction in the wild at least 20% within 20 years [or 5 generations], or 10% within 100 years]

Unknown

Analysis not conducted

Threats

Was a threats calculator completed for this species?

No

Recent threats assessment in Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) and Feyrer et al. (2024).

Key threats were identified as:

IUCN 9.6 – Disturbance from underwater noise (medium)

IUCN 5.4 – Entanglement in fishing gear (low)

IUCN 4.3 – Vessel strikes (low)

IUCN 9.2 – Oil spills and contaminants (low)

IUCN 9.4 – Ingestion of plastics (low)

IUCN 11 – Climate change and severe weather (unknown)

Overall assigned threat impact:

Medium

What limiting factors are relevant?

• Slow reproductive rate
• Low genetic diversity

Rescue effect (from outside Canada)

Status of outside population(s) most likely to provide immigrants to Canada.

Unknown

No population estimates from West Greenland; however, these individuals are likely part of the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea designatable units (DU). Recent estimates for the eastern North Atlantic (Rogan et al. 2017; NAMMCO 2019) may not be informative as it is unknown if they may migrate to this area.

Is immigration known or possible?

Unlikely

Possible but unlikely from Greenland and Iceland populations

Would immigrants be adapted to survive in Canada?

Likely

Likely as habitats appear similar

Is there sufficient habitat for immigrants in Canada?

Likely

Likely due to spatial extent of habitat

Are conditions deteriorating in Canada?

Unknown

No data

Are conditions for the source (that is, outside) population deteriorating?

Unknown

No data

Is the Canadian population considered to be a sink?

Unknown

No data

Is rescue from outside Canada likely, such that it could lead to a change in status?

Unknown

Abundance of potential immigrants outside Canadian waters is not known.

Wildlife species with sensitive occurrence data (general caution for consideration)

Could release of certain occurrence data result in increased harm to the Wildlife Species or its habitat?

No

Status history

COSEWIC: The Northern Bottlenose Whale was given a single designation of "Not at Risk" in April 1993. Split into two populations in April 1996 to allow a separate designation of the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Scotian Shelf population). The Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea population was not assessed in 1996; it retained the Not at Risk designation of the original Northern Bottlenose Whale. The population was designated Special Concern in May 2011. Status re-examined and confirmed in November 2024.

Status and reasons for designation

Status: Special concern

Alpha-numeric codes: Not applicable

Reason for change in status: Not applicable

Reasons for designation: This northern population of long-lived, slow reproducing beaked whales was reduced by whaling in the late 1960s and early 1970s but the extent of this reduction is unknown. Trends in population size since then are uncertain and there is no abundance estimate, but survey sighting rates have been low. The population faces a variety of threats including underwater noise, entanglement in fishing gear, vessel strikes, ingestion of plastic debris, and contaminants. This population may become Threatened if these threats are not reversed or effectively managed.

Applicability of criteria

A: Decline in total number of mature individuals:

Not applicable.

Insufficient data to reliably infer, project, or suspect population trends.

B: Small range and decline or fluctuation

Not applicable.

EOO of 779,516 km² and IAO of 208,756 km² exceed thresholds for Threatened.

C: Small and declining number of mature individuals

Not applicable.

Population abundance and trend unknown.

D: Very small or restricted population

Not applicable.

Number of mature individuals unknown.

E: Quantitative analysis

Not applicable.

Analysis not conducted.

Meets the following criterion for Special Concern:

(b) the Wildlife Species may become Threatened if factors suspected of negatively influencing its persistence are neither reversed nor managed with demonstrable effectiveness

Technical summary (Scotian Shelf population)

Hyperoodon ampullatus

Northern Bottlenose Whale (Scotian Shelf population)

Baleine à Bec Commune (Population du plateau néo-ecossais)

Inuktitut: ᐃᒃᑮᓇᖅᑐᒥ ᓯᒡᒍᑲᓪᓚᓖᑦ (translation: Ikkiinaqtumi Siggukallaliit)

Range of occurrence in Canada: Atlantic Ocean (off the coasts of Nova Scotia, maybe Newfoundland and Labrador)

Demographic information

Generation time (usually average age of parents in the population)

Approximately 26 years

Estimated using IUCN generation length calculator.

Is there an [observed, estimated, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of mature individuals?

No

Most recent estimate indicates an increasing population (Feyrer 2021; H. Whitehead pers. comm. 2024)

[Observed, estimated, or projected] percent of continuing decline in total number of mature individuals within 3 years [or 1 generation; whichever is longer up to a maximum of 100 years]

No decline over past generation

Previous decline was estimated at 2.5% per year from 1988 to 2004. Currently it is estimated that the population has increased by about 2.2% per year from 2004 to 2023 (using mark-recapture methods based on photo-identifications; H. Whitehead pers. comm. 2024).

[Observed, estimated, or projected] percent of continuing decline in total number of mature individuals within 5 years [or 2 generations; whichever is longer up to a maximum of 100 years]

Unknown

Two generations in past, approximately 1971, but no abundance data available prior to 1988.

[Observed, estimated, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the last 10 years [or 3 generations; whichever is longer]

Unknown

Three generations in past, approximately 1945, but no abundance data available prior to 1988. Historical whaling in the late 1960s and early 1970s likely caused a rapid decline of mature individuals but the extent of decline is unknown.

[Projected, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the next [10 years, or 3 generations, up to a maximum of 100 years]

Unknown

Abundance has been slowly increasing since 2004, but it is unknown whether this will continue into the future.

[Observed, estimated, inferred, projected, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over any period of 10 years [or 3 generations; whichever is longer, up to a maximum of 100 years], including both the past and future (up to a maximum of 100 years in future)

Unknown

Unknown, as above.

Are the causes of the decline clearly reversible?

Yes

Reversal of decline starting about 2004 is possibly linked to establishment of the Gully as a MPA in 2004.

Are the causes of the decline clearly understood?

Partly

Previous decline linked to oil and gas development and fisheries interaction. Establishment of the MPA has protected the population from these threats within its boundaries; however, these threats still exist in other portions of its habitat.

Are the causes of the decline clearly ceased?

Unknown

Reversal of trend is recent and it is unclear if it will continue in the face of future threats.

Are there extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals

No

Long lived species with slow reproductive rates, so unlikely to fluctuate widely.

Extent and occupancy information

Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO)

89,422 km²

Based on 2011 COSEWIC status report, no update available

Index of area of occupancy (IAO), reported as 2x2 km grid value

9,756 km²

Based on 2011 COSEWIC status report, no update available

Is the population “severely fragmented”, that is, is >50% of individuals or >50% of the total area “occupied” (as a proxy for number of individuals) in habitat patches that are both (a) smaller than required to support a viable subpopulation, and (b) separated from other habitat patches by a distance larger than the species can be expected to disperse?

1. No
2. No

Number of “locations” (use plausible range to reflect uncertainty if appropriate)

3

Large canyons on Scotian Shelf (Wimmer and Whitehead 2004), each of which could be subjected to military sonar exercises, seismic surveys, or other threats.

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in extent of occurrence?

No

No observed change

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in area of occupancy?

No

No observed change

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of subpopulations?

No

No subpopulations identified

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of “locations”?

No

No observed change

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in [area, extent and/or quality] of habitat?

Unknown

Insufficient data to assess decline in quality of habitat

Are there extreme fluctuations in number of subpopulations?

No

Are there extreme fluctuations in number of “locations”?

No

Are there extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence?

No

Are there extreme fluctuations in index of area of occupancy?

No

Number of mature individuals (by subpopulation)

Scotian Shelf population

Total: 95

Mark-recapture estimate from photo-identifications is 210 individuals in 2023 (H. Whitehead pers. comm. 2024). Adjusted for estimated proportion of individuals that are mature (45%).

Quantitative analysis

Is the probability of extinction in the wild at least 20% within 20 years [or 5 generations], or 10% within 100 years]

Unknown

Analysis not conducted.

Threats

Was a threats calculator completed for this species?

No

Recent threats assessment in Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) and Feyrer et al. (2024), converted to IUCN format.

Key threats were identified as:

IUCN 9.6 – Disturbance from underwater noise (high)

IUCN 5.4 – Entanglement in fishing gear (medium)

IUCN 4.3 – Vessel strikes (medium)

IUCN 9.2 – Oil spills and contaminants (medium)

IUCN 9.4 – Ingestion of plastics (low)

IUCN 11 – Climate Change and Severe Weather (unknown)

Overall assigned threat impact: High

What limiting factors are relevant?

• Slow reproductive rate
• Low genetic diversity
• Inbreeding

Rescue effect (from outside Canada)

Status of outside population(s) most likely to provide immigrants to Canada.

Unknown

No known subpopulations of this DU outside Canada.

Is immigration known or possible?

Unlikely

Unlikely. Genetic evidence suggests long-term isolation from other populations.

Would immigrants be adapted to survive in Canada?

Unknown

Possible, but recent work suggests genetic adaptations for warmer waters in the Scotian Shelf population.

Is there sufficient habitat for immigrants in Canada?

Unknown

Are conditions deteriorating in Canada?

Unknown

Are conditions for the source (that is, outside) population deteriorating?

Unknown

Is the Canadian population considered to be a sink?

Unknown

Is rescue from outside Canada likely, such that it could lead to a change in status?

Unlikely

Wildlife species with sensitive occurrence data (general caution for consideration)

Could release of certain occurrence data result in increased harm to the Wildlife Species or its habitat?

No

Status history

COSEWIC: The Northern Bottlenose Whale was given a single designation of Not at Risk in April 1993. Split into two populations in April 1996 to allow a separate designation of the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Scotian Shelf population). Scotian Shelf population designated Special Concern in April 1996. Status re-examined and designated Endangered in November 2002, May 2011, and November 2024.

Status and reasons for designation

Status: Endangered

Alpha-numeric codes: D1

Reason for change in status: Not applicable

Reasons for designation: This well-studied population of beaked whales appears to be slowly increasing as it continues to recover from historical whaling operations. It remains very small, with an estimated 210 individuals, of which approximately 95 are mature. The population is at risk from several threats, including underwater noise produced by military sonar exercises and seismic surveys for oil and gas, vessel strikes, entanglement in fishing gear, and exposure to contaminants and other marine pollutants and debris.

Applicability of criteria

A: Decline in total number of mature individuals

Not applicable.

No abundance estimates available prior to 1988 (3 generations ago, approximately 1945).

B: Small range and decline or fluctuation

Not applicable.

EOO of 89,422 km² and IAO of 9,756 km² exceed thresholds for Threatened.

C: Small and declining number of mature individuals

Not applicable.

Although the population is small, it has been slowly increasing since around 2004

D: Very small or restricted population

Meets Endangered, D1.

Current population estimated at 95 mature individuals.

E: Quantitative analysis

Not applicable.

Analysis not conducted.

Preface

In 2011, COSEWIC established two designatable units (DUs) for the species: the Scotian Shelf DU, first identified by COSEWIC in 1996, and the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea DU. The 2011 assessment confirmed the previous designation of Endangered for the Scotian Shelf DU, and designated the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea DU as Special Concern. The recovery strategy for the Scotian Shelf DU was amended in 2016. Since 2011, there have been concerted efforts to fill in distribution data using passive acoustic monitoring as well as additional visual sightings. Collection and analysis of additional biopsy samples has allowed for much greater resolution of the genetic, contaminant load and other differences between the two Canadian DUs as well as differences with Northern Bottlenose Whales from the rest of the Northwest Atlantic. Additional photo-identification data have improved population assessment and understanding of the threats posed by fisheries and vessel interactions.

Recent population assessments indicate that the Scotian Shelf population may be beginning to recover, although threats still remain for this DU. Fisheries interactions which may result in entanglement in fishing gear are being reported more frequently in the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea region, but no population assessment has been conducted there, so the potential impact of this threat cannot be quantified.

COSEWIC history

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) was created in 1977 as a result of a recommendation at the Federal-Provincial Wildlife Conference held in 1976. It arose from the need for a single, official, scientifically sound, national listing of wildlife species at risk. In 1978, COSEWIC designated its first species and produced its first list of Canadian species at risk. Species designated at meetings of the full committee are added to the list. On June 5, 2003, the Species at Risk Act (SARA) was proclaimed. SARA establishes COSEWIC as an advisory body ensuring that species will continue to be assessed under a rigorous and independent scientific process.

COSEWIC mandate

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) assesses the national status of wild species, subspecies, varieties, or other designatable units that are considered to be at risk in Canada. Designations are made on native species for the following taxonomic groups: mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fishes, arthropods, molluscs, vascular plants, mosses, and lichens.

COSEWIC membership

COSEWIC comprises members from each provincial and territorial government wildlife agency, four federal entities (Canadian Wildlife Service, Parks Canada Agency, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and the Federal Biodiversity Information Partnership, chaired by the Canadian Museum of Nature), three non-government science members and the co-chairs of the species specialist subcommittees and the Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge subcommittee. The Committee meets to consider status reports on candidate species.

Definitions (2024)

Wildlife Species

A species, subspecies, variety, or geographically or genetically distinct population of animal, plant or other organism, other than a bacterium or virus, that is wild by nature and is either native to Canada or has extended its range into Canada without human intervention and has been present in Canada for at least 50 years.

Extinct (X)

A wildlife species that no longer exists.

Extirpated (XT)

A wildlife species no longer existing in the wild in Canada, but occurring elsewhere.

Endangered (E)

A wildlife species facing imminent extirpation or extinction.

Threatened (T)

A wildlife species likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed.

Special Concern (SC)^*

A wildlife species that may become a threatened or an endangered species because of a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats.

Not at Risk (NAR)^**

A wildlife species that has been evaluated and found to be not at risk of extinction given the current circumstances.

Data Deficient (DD)^***

A category that applies when the available information is insufficient (a) to resolve a species’ eligibility for assessment or (b) to permit an assessment of the species’ risk of extinction.

*

Formerly described as “Vulnerable” from 1990 to 1999, or “Rare” prior to 1990

**

Formerly described as “Not In Any Category”, or “No Designation Required”

***

Formerly described as “Indeterminate” from 1994 to 1999 or “ISIBD” (insufficient scientific information on which to base a designation) prior to 1994. Definition of the (DD) category revised in 2006

The Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, provides full administrative and financial support to the COSEWIC Secretariat.

Wildlife species description and significance

Name and classification

Current classification:  Not applicable

Class: Mammalia

Order: Cetacea

Family: Ziphiidae

Genus: Hyperoodon

Species: Hyperoodon ampullatus

Subspecies in Canada: None

Taxonomic changes since previous report (for reassessments): None

Common names:

English: Northern Bottlenose Whale

French: Baleine à Bec Commune

Inuktitut: ᐃᒃᑮᓇᖅᑐᒥ ᓯᒡᒍᑲᓪᓚᓖᑦ (translation: Ikkiinaqtumi Siggukallaliit)

Synonyms and notes:

The Society for Marine Mammalogy’s Committee on Taxonomy recognizes 24 species in the family Ziphiidae, consisting of seven genera. Relationships among the different genera are poorly resolved, and three new species have been recognized since 2000. There are currently two recognized species in the genus Hyperoodon, the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), described in this report, and the Southern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon planifrons), found only in the southern hemisphere.

Description of wildlife species

The Northern Bottlenose Whale is a robust, medium-sized (7 to 9 m) whale (Figure 1). It is dolphin-like in appearance, with a beak and falcate dorsal fin, but it is much larger than most dolphins. It has a pronounced forehead, bulbous in the case of females and immatures, and squared off, and often white, in the case of mature males. Mature males are also larger than females (by approximately 1 m in length; Benjaminsen and Christensen 1979). Colour ranges from chocolate brown (possibly from diatom films; see Mead 1989) to light grey. Northern Bottlenose Whales have one pair of teeth, at the tip of the lower jaw, but these usually only erupt through the gums in older males.

Figure 1. Northern Bottlenose Whale: mature male (top), female (middle), and calf (bottom). Illustration courtesy of Uko Gorter.

Designatable units

Recognized subspecies or varieties in Canada

No named subspecies or varieties have been recognized for this species.

Designatable units (DUs)

COSEWIC (2011) described two DUs, the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea (DS-BB-LS) population and the Scotian Shelf (SS) population (Figure 2). The boundary drawn between these two DUs was based somewhat arbitrarily on a line drawn east from Newfoundland that separates habitat to the north and south, as the Grand Banks (too shallow for Northern Bottlenose Whales) extend beyond Canada’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ). This line also separates Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) fishing units. Continued investigation of the genetic, morphological, and ecological characteristics of Northern Bottlenose Whales found between the Scotian Shelf and Labrador Sea, as well as their movements, will be necessary to confidently delineate the DU boundaries.

Figure 2. Vessel and aircraft sightings of Northern Bottlenose Whales in Canadian and adjacent waters from 1963 to 2022. The solid line across the Grand Banks is the current arbitrary boundary between the two recognized DUs. Sightings data from the Whale Sightings Database, Team Whale, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, NS [20021207]. Other spatial data are from Flanders Marine Institute Marine Boundaries Geodatabase (EEZ) and ESRI (bathymetry and landforms). Some plotted sightings, especially those in shallower waters, may be misidentifications.

Evidence for discreteness

D1. Evidence of DU-wide heritable (culturally or genetically) traits or markers that clearly distinguish the possible DU from other DUs (for example, evidence from genetic markers or heritable morphology, behaviour, life history, phenology, migration routes, vocal dialects).

Recent genetic work on Northern Bottlenose Whales consists of a robust dataset, with samples collected from both live and stranded whales throughout the species’ range, including samples from the eastern Atlantic (Feyrer et al. 2019; Einfeldt et al. 2022; de Greef et al. 2022).

The most recent microsatellite analysis provided evidence supporting three distinct groups: Scotian Shelf, Western North Atlantic (predominantly samples collected within Canadian waters), and the Jan Mayen area north and east of Iceland (Einfeldt et al. 2022; this study adds to and includes samples from Feyrer et al. 2019). Genetic diversity was low overall, but private alleles were observed in some populations. The SS designatable unit contained three private alleles. Samples collected by whalers in the 1970s from Davis Strait contained an additional seven private alleles, but none of these alleles was present in the recent samples, suggesting a loss of genetic diversity through genetic drift or direct whaling reduction. One private allele was detected in the recent DS-BB-LS samples. Population structure analysis clearly identified the SS individuals as a distinct cluster separate from other Northern Bottlenose Whales. This work also suggests that individuals sampled from Southern Labrador and Newfoundland clustered within the DS-BB-LS designatable unit, although this conclusion should be considered tentative pending further research (Einfeldt et al. 2022). Population genomic analysis also provides direct genetic evidence for adaptive differentiation between the two DUs (de Greef et al. 2022; see Evidence of Evolutionary Significance, below).

In addition to genetic markers, there are differences in body size and colouration between individuals in the different DUs. The mean length of 451 photographically measured living animals (with some resampling of individuals) and 25 directly measured animals from the Scotian Shelf killed by whalers was 0.7 m shorter than the mean length of 127 animals taken by whalers off Labrador (Whitehead et al. 1997b). Such a size difference could reflect genetic variation (adaptive or neutral) or environmental differences, such as nutrition, or possibly both. Comparisons between Northern Bottlenose Whales from the Gully (Scotian Shelf DU) and off Jan Mayen suggest that the body composition of whales in the Gully is less dense, and they have fewer lipids than the animals found off Jan Mayen. Miller et al. (2016) relate this to temperature differences. If similar differences exist between southern and northern animals within Canadian waters, this would further support the designation of two DUs. Recently, aerial drone photography has revealed that some mature males in the DS-BB-LS designatable unit have a highly distinctive colouration/morphology pattern (very white squared melon with white sweeping back towards the blowhole) which has never been seen among mature males in the SS designatable unit (Figure 3)

Another line of evidence, proposed by Whitehead et al. (1997a), is a possible difference in the seasonality of reproduction. From an analysis of 251 fetuses from whales killed off Labrador, Benjaminsen (1972) inferred that births took place mainly in April, May, and June, with a peak in April. Observations of what appeared to be newborn calves on the Scotian Shelf in August led Whitehead et al. (1997a,b) to conclude that at least some parturition occurs in mid- to late summer.

D2. Natural (that is, not the product of human disturbance) geographic disjunction between possible DUs such that transmission of information (for example, individuals, seeds, gametes) between these "range portions" has been limited for sufficient time that discrete units are likely to have arisen (for example, via genetic or cultural drift) as defined in D1.

Several lines of evidence suggest that these DUs have been isolated from each other for a prolonged period, which extends beyond the time frame of intense human interactions. These include differences in habitat specialization which likely evolved over long time periods, and different population size trajectories and levels of inbreeding.

Northern Bottlenose Whales in the DS-BB-LS designatable unit and the SS designatable unit occur in different marine ecological zones and display clear habitat preferences and likely adaptations to suit these environments. The SS designatable unit primarily uses three large and prominent submarine canyons (Wimmer and Whitehead 2004), whereas the animals in the DS-BB-LS designatable unit are more widely distributed (Reeves et al. 1993; Davidson et al. 2023) in a region lacking bathymetric features as pronounced as the Scotian Shelf canyons. A concentration of sightings has been noted around the Sackville Spur, which exhibits a reverse topography to a canyon as it is a pronounced ridge with steep sides jutting up from the seafloor. The DU identity of these whales is unclear, but they are likely part of the DS-BB-LS population. In winter, sea ice cover is an important attribute of much of the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea habitat, whereas sea ice is rarely present off the Scotian Shelf. In summer, sea surface temperatures are about 5^oC in the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea habitat and 15 to 20^oC off the Scotian Shelf.

The ecological setting of the Scotian Shelf DU is unusual as this is the southernmost and warmest known area of concentration for this species, especially for year-round residence. Scotian Shelf Northern Bottlenose Whales use the Gully and other canyons throughout the year, with similar abundance levels in different seasons (Stanistreet et al. 2017). Those differences, together with their strongly canyon-based habitat use, have likely resulted in local adaptations, such as smaller body size, in the Scotian Shelf whales (Whitehead et al. 1997b). This DU also shows extremely strong site fidelity to the three submarine canyons in the Gully region, with over 60% of the reliably marked individuals being photographed in more than one year and a small subset (15 individuals) having resights throughout the majority of the 31-year study (Feyrer et al. 2021). Comparisons of photo-identification catalogues have not revealed any movement of individuals between the Scotian Shelf and the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea region, including the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area off northeastern Newfoundland (Stewart 2018; Feyrer 2021; Oyarbide et al. 2023).

A genomic analysis using data for individuals from across the North Atlantic indicates that the overall effective population size has increased since the last glacial period, followed by a more recent decline that began before commercial whaling. However, the SS designatable unit shows the steepest population decline in the last 500 years with a different trajectory than other bottlenose whale populations. This suggests that this DU has been largely isolated for at least 500 years (Feyrer et al. 2019), and likely far longer (de Greef et al. 2022). Mitogenome work also indicated a sharp demographic decline in the SS designatable unit coinciding with human activity, which was not detected in other populations of Northern Bottlenose Whales (Feyrer et al. 2019). Additionally, this DU has higher levels of inbreeding than the other sampled areas, although limited data were used to detect this difference (Dalebout et al. 2006; de Greef et al. 2022). This evidence supports the lack of connectivity between these DUs.

Evidence for evolutionary significance

S1. Direct evidence or strong inference that the possible DU has been on an evolutionary trajectory long enough to generate an evolutionary history not found elsewhere in Canada.

Evidence for phylogenetic divergence is strongest between the SS designatable unit and the rest of the Northern Bottlenose Whale populations throughout the North Atlantic. However, there is also some evidence for segregation between the DS-BB-LS designatable unit and populations in the eastern North Atlantic.

In addition to adaptive divergence, population genomics research indicates that the two DUs are evolving independently. For example, a study identified declines in effective population size in the Scotian Shelf DU that are estimated to date back at least 5,000 years but were not detectable in other groups, indicating independent evolutionary trajectories (de Greef et al. 2022).

S2. Direct evidence or strong inference that the possible DU possesses DU-wide (heritable) adaptive traits not found elsewhere in Canada.

There is mounting evidence that the Scotian Shelf designatable unit has particular adaptive traits that could not be reconstituted if lost. Genomic analysis shows evidence for genetic adaptations to regional environmental differences. In particular, the SS designatable unit displays differences near the GALNT2 gene on chromosome 16, which may be involved in metabolism, lipid regulation, and insulin sensitivity (de Greef et al. 2022). These adaptations may suggest different selective pressures related to the differences in diet and metabolism experienced by the SS designatable unit, which is the southernmost year-round population of the species (de Greef et al. 2022). Also, as noted earlier, there are morphological and colouration differences between the two DUs. Animals from the Scotian Shelf DU are shorter in total length than those found further north (Whitehead et al. 1997b), which may reflect an adaptation to warmer waters or poorer food resources. Mature males in the DS-BB-LS designatable unit often have head shape and colouration patterns that differ from those of males in the Scotian Shelf DU (Figure 3).

It is likely that the entire range of the Scotian Shelf DU is found within Canadian waters, with individuals only making brief forays into either U.S. waters to the south, the narrow (10.5 nautical miles wide) French EEZ south of Saint‑Pierre‑et‑Miquelon, or international waters further offshore. Therefore, if this DU became extirpated within Canada, it is unlikely that other individuals would migrate into the region to occupy this niche. In contrast, it is likely that the DS-BB-LS designatable unit habitat overlaps with both international waters and the Greenland EEZ.

Special significance

Northern Bottlenose Whales are exceptional divers, typically descending to depths greater than 800 m for periods lasting up to 70 minutes (Hooker and Baird 1999), with a maximum recorded dive depth of over 2,300 m (Miller et al. 2015). Northern Bottlenose Whales are known for their inquisitiveness and frequently approach vessels (Mead 1989). The animals off the Scotian Shelf are the focus of the most detailed long-term research on any population of live beaked whales (for example, Gowans et al. 2001; Hooker and Baird 2001; Hooker et al. 2001; Hooker and Whitehead 2002; Hooker et al. 2002a,b; Wimmer and Whitehead 2004; Moors 2012; Feyrer et al. 2021).

Aboriginal (Indigenous) knowledge

Aboriginal traditional knowledge (ATK) is relationship-based. It involves information on ecological relationships between humans and their environment, including characteristics of species, habitats, and locations. Laws and protocols for human relationships with the environment are passed on through teachings and stories, and Indigenous languages, and can be based on long-term observations. Place names provide information about harvesting areas, ecological processes, spiritual significance or the products of harvest. ATK can identify life history characteristics of a species or distinct differences between similar species.

Cultural significance to Indigenous Peoples

There was no species-specific ATK available for this report. However, Northern Bottlenose Whales are important to Indigenous Peoples who recognize the interrelationships of all species within the ecosystem. The Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and the Nunavik Marine Wildlife Board approved the proposed listing of the species as Special Concern, consistent with the DS-BB-LS designatable unit’s listing under the Species at Risk Act (SARA). The name for the species in Inuktitut is ᐃᒃᑮᓇᖅᑐᒥ ᓯᒡᒍᑲᓪᓚᓖᑦ (translation: Ikkiinaqtumi Siggukallaliit). Harvesters in Clyde River, Pangnirtung, and Qikiqtarjauq are familiar with Northern Bottlenose Whales, but they are not actively hunted.

Distribution

Global range

Northern Bottlenose Whales are found in deep waters of the northern North Atlantic (>500 m deep) north of about 40°N (Figure 4). Whaling for the species was concentrated in six general areas across the northern North Atlantic (Figure 4): (i) Scotian Shelf, Canada; (ii) Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea, Canada; (iii) northern Iceland; (iv) Andenes, Norway; (v) Møre, Norway; and (vi) Svalbard (Spitzbergen), Norway (Mead 1989). All of these areas of concentration potentially represent distinct populations, although Northern Bottlenose Whales are sometimes found in suitable habitat between them (Benjaminsen and Christensen 1979). Apart from the population found along the Scotian Shelf, and a potential seasonal presence in the Azores, they are rarely seen south of 55°N. A stranded animal was recorded in the Canary Islands at about 29°N (Simmonds and Lopez-Jurado 1991) and, more recently, a group of 5 to 7 individuals was spotted off Madeira, at about 32°N (Ferreira et al. 2017).

Canadian range

The Canadian range of Northern Bottlenose Whales comprises approximately 5% of the species’ overall range and includes the entire western distribution. It comprises approximately 20% of the known areas of concentration (preferred habitat shown in dark blue in Figure 4), as sightings are sparse through much of the global range. The range of the Northern Bottlenose Whale includes all waters off the Canadian East Coast deeper than 500 m (Figure 2). However, the animals are strongly concentrated along the continental slope (depths 800 to 1,500 m), with major concentrations off the eastern Scotian Shelf (Figure 5) as well as off northern Labrador and in Davis Strait and the southern part of Baffin Bay (Reeves et al. 1993; Davidson et al 2023). Additionally, a third concentration of Northern Bottlenose Whales has recently been identified in deep waters of the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area (Clarke et al. 2019; Oyarbide et al. 2023; Figure 6). This area, which is partly within Canadian jurisdiction and partly outside Canada’s EEZ, has recently been recognized as an “Important Marine Mammal Area” by the Marine Mammal Protected Areas Task Force (IUCN-MMPATF in prep.). Whales in this area are likely part of the DS-BB-LS designatable unit.

The Scotian Shelf DU is centred in the Gully, with additional areas of high concentration in the adjacent Haldimand and Shortland canyons, as well as regular occurrences between the canyons (for example, Wimmer and Whitehead 2004; Clarke et al. 2019; Stanistreet et al. 2021; Figure 5). While sporadic sightings occur southwest of the Gully, mainly along the shelf break (Figure 2), acoustic detections south of the Gully are rare. However the whales have been detected south of the Fundian Channel (see Figure 3 in Feyrer et al. 2024a). This further supports the conclusion that most of the key habitat for this species is located north and east of the border with the United States.

Figure 3. Drone images of mostly mature male Northern Bottlenose Whales of the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea DU, showing squared-off very white melons (A, top), and mostly mature male Northern Bottlenose Whales of the Scotian Shelf DU (B, bottom), which lack these features (images courtesy of David Gaspard, Dalhousie University).

Year-round passive acoustic monitoring along the southwest edge of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland revealed the sporadic and somewhat seasonal occurrence of Northern Bottlenose Whale clicks, with higher detection rates between March and July and low detection rates during fall and early winter (Delarue et al. 2024; Feyrer et al. 2024a). However, daily acoustic detections were recorded year-round in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area (Delarue et al. 2024), coinciding with high numbers of visual detections in this area (Clarke et al. 2019; Oyarbide et al. 2023; Figure 6).

Further north, passive acoustic detections of Northern Bottlenose Whales indicate their regular presence along the shelf edge off Newfoundland and Labrador. Note, however, that the northernmost deep-water station was located offshore of Hamilton Inlet (Delarue et al. 2024; Feyrer et al. 2024a). Outside of Canadian waters, Northern Bottlenose Whales have been acoustically detected north of 73°N (J. Delarue pers. comm. 2024) and visually observed north of 74°N (Frouin-Mouy et al. 2017), off northwest Greenland. Sightings data (Figure 2) indicate high concentrations of individuals along the shelf edge on both sides of the sill separating Davis Strait and Baffin Bay. Recent satellite tagging research has revealed movements throughout the deep-water regions of Baffin Bay and Davis Strait (see Figure 1b in Feyrer et al. 2024a). There was a reliable sighting of a mother and calf at latitude 70.45°N off the entrance of Clyde Inlet in Baffin Bay in mid-August 2007 (P. Richard pers. comm. 2010). Fisheries and Oceans Canada has received reports of Northern Bottlenose Whales “chasing squid in shallower nearshore waters on both the north and south coasts of Newfoundland on several occasions” (J. Lawson pers. comm. 2010a).

Off northern Labrador, Northern Bottlenose Whales seem to have a continuous distribution between the 1,000 m and 2,000 m depth contours (Figure 2), whereas off the Scotian Shelf they are concentrated in the three large submarine canyons described above (Figure 5), in waters 800 to 1,500 m deep (Wimmer and Whitehead 2004; Compton 2005; O’Brien and Whitehead 2013; Stanistreet et al. 2021).

Extensive search effort has been conducted in the Gully region (see summary in Feyrer 2021) and there have been several dedicated surveys along the shelf edge from the U.S. border to southern Labrador (Whitehead and Wimmer 2004; Clarke et al. 2019; Feyrer 2019). However, there has been much less extensive effort in the northern regions of the species’ range, although recent work in Baffin Bay suggests that much of this region may be suitable habitat (Davidson et al. 2023). Passive acoustic monitoring can help fill in additional gaps, but acoustic records from the deep-water basins in Davis Strait and Baffin Bay are limited. Additional effort is needed in this area to better delineate the boundary between the Scotian Shelf and DS-BB-LS designatable units (Gomez et al. 2017).

Strandings of Northern Bottlenose Whales are relatively rare but have occurred throughout Atlantic Canada, and into the Gulf of St. Lawrence (see McAlpine et al. 2023). Most of the recorded strandings have occurred in more southern waters and most likely consist of whales from the Scotian Shelf DU. However, strandings in more northern regions are much less likely to be discovered and reported.

Population structure

As described under Designatable units, there is growing evidence to further support COSEWIC’s (2011) designation of two DUs within Canada. There is no documented movement between the SS designatable unit and the DS-BB-LS designatable unit, which likely includes the concentration in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area. There is also clear evidence that the Scotian Shelf DU is genetically and spatially isolated from other populations of Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Atlantic Ocean. This genetic structuring largely reflects a pattern of isolation-by-distance, suggesting that dispersal of Northern Bottlenose Whales throughout the Atlantic Ocean is limited (de Greef et al. 2022).

There is little evidence to suggest that there may be further subdivision within the DS-BB-LS designatable unit (see de Greef et al. 2022 for details) as the small number of samples from this region prevent firm conclusions. There is also little evidence to suggest further subdivision within the SS designatable unit.

Extent of occurrence and area of occupancy

According to the distribution of sightings and catches (as shown in Figures 2, 4 to 6), the extent of occurrence for the species as a whole in Canada is estimated to be 2,823,276 km² (convex polygon around all waters >500 m deep off the Canadian East Coast south of 70°N; COSEWIC 2011). For the DS-BB-LS designatable unit, the extent of occurrence is estimated to be 779,516 km² (convex polygon around eastern Canadian waters between 54 and 70°N and >500 m deep). For the SS designatable unit, the extent of occurrence is estimated to be 89,422 km² (convex polygon around eastern Canadian waters between 57 and 60°W, south of 47°N and >500 m deep).

Figure 4 shows the general distribution of Northern Bottlenose Whales in the North Atlantic (light blue), in waters greater than 500 m deep and north of 37.5°N (note: the northern parts of Baffin Bay and the Mediterranean Sea do not seem to be usual habitat for this species). Preferred habitat (800−1,800 m deep) is shown in dark blue. The six centres of historical whaling operations are shown: (1) Scotian Shelf; (2) Labrador and southern Baffin Bay; (3) East Greenland, Iceland, Jan Mayen and the Faroe Islands; (4) Svalbard; (5) Andenes; and (6) Møre. Figure from Whitehead and Hooker (2012).

Figure 5. Vessel- and aircraft-based sightings of Northern Bottlenose Whales along the Scotian Shelf break from 1963 to 2022. Sightings data from the Whale Sightings Database, Team Whale, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, NS [20021207]. Other spatial data from Fisheries and Oceans Canada (bathymetry), Esri (landform).

Figure 6. Vessel- and aircraft-based sightings of Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area, east of Newfoundland, from 1963 to 2022. Sightings data from the Whale Sightings Database, Team Whale, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, NS [20021207]. Other spatial data from Flanders Marine Institute Marine Boundaries Geodatabase (EEZ), Esri (bathymetry).

The index of area of occupancy for the species as a whole is 313,996 km² (all waters off the Canadian East Coast south of 70^oN between 500 and 2,000 m deep; 78,499 2 km x 2 km grids; COSEWIC 2011). For the DS-BB-LS designatable unit, the index of area of occupancy is 208,756 km² (Canadian waters between 54 and 70^oN and between 500 and 2,000 m deep; 52,189 2x2 km grids). For the SS designatable unit, the index of area of occupancy is 9,756 km² (eastern Canadian waters between 57 and 60°W, south of 47°N and 500 and 2,000 m deep; 2,439 2x2 km grids).

Fluctuations and trends in distribution

There is no evidence at this time for changes in the species’ distribution.

Biology and habitat use

Much of the information on the life history of the Northern Bottlenose Whale comes from two sources: analyses of specimens killed by Norwegian whalers (for example, Benjaminsen 1972; Christensen 1973; Benjaminsen and Christensen 1979), and studies of living individually photo-identified animals off the Scotian Shelf and particularly in the Gully (for example, Gowans et al. 2001; Hooker et al. 2002b; Wimmer and Whitehead 2004; Feyrer 2021) and more recently off Newfoundland and Labrador (Stewart 2018; Oyarbide et al. 2023) and in Baffin Bay (Davidson et al. 2023).

Life cycle and reproduction

Females become sexually mature at 8 to 13 years old and males at 7 to 9 (Benjaminsen and Christensen 1979). Whaling data suggest that females give birth to single offspring about every two years after a gestation of about 12 months (Benjaminsen and Christensen 1979). However, a more recent analysis of dentine growth layer groups suggests much slower reproductive rates, with intervals of 3 to 5 years between calving (Feyrer et al. 2020). In an analysis of 50 Northern Bottlenose Whale teeth (42 samples from whales taken off Labrador and six from individuals taken off Iceland during the whaling era, plus two specimens from individuals that stranded off the northeast coast of Newfoundland), the authors detected age-based trends in δ¹⁵N and δ¹³C which suggest that the nursing period is prolonged and lasts until whales are 3 to 4 years old (Feyrer et al. 2020). This adjusted interbirth interval fits better with observations of calves in the Scotian Shelf DU, where only 6% of 3,113 sightings of individually identified Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Gully between 1988 and 1999 were recorded as first-year calves (H. Whitehead, unpublished data).

Using whaling data, the lifespan of Northern Bottlenose Whales was estimated to be at least 37 years (Christensen 1973), although this is very likely an underestimate. Photo-identification studies from the Scotian Shelf have documented one individual that has been resighted as a non-juvenile over a span of 34 years (S. Walmsley pers. comm. 2024). Taylor et al. (2007) provide a more plausible lifespan estimate of 48 years. On the basis of this lifespan and a birth interval of 3 years, the generation time is estimated at about 26 years, and 45% of individuals are estimated to be mature (Taylor et al. 2007; T. Doniol-Valcroze pers. comm. 2024).

Habitat requirements

Northern Bottlenose Whales occur in deep (>500 m), northern waters of the North Atlantic, generally at depths between 800 and 1,500 m, along the continental slope (Benjaminsen and Christensen 1979; Reeves et al. 1993; Wimmer and Whitehead 2004). These water depths seem to coincide with their dive depths (Hooker and Baird 1999), perhaps indicating that the whales often forage near the bottom. The preference for slope waters may reflect survey effort, rather than whale distribution, especially in light of recent satellite tagging work suggesting that at least some Northern Bottlenose Whales spend extensive time in deeper waters (Feyrer et al. 2024a).

The Northern Bottlenose Whales of the Scotian Shelf are most commonly sighted in three large canyons, the Gully, Shortland Canyon and Haldimand Canyon, where study effort has been focused (Figure 5). Year-round passive acoustic monitoring highlights the importance of these three canyons for foraging (Moors 2012; Stanistreet et al. 2017, 2021). Northern Bottlenose Whales clearly transit between these three canyons (Wimmer and Whitehead 2004; Stewart 2018; Stanistreet et al. 2021), and acoustic detections indicate that, at least along the slope edge, the whales are foraging while in transit between the Gully and Shortland Canyon (Stanistreet et al. 2021). To the southwest of the Gully, sightings and acoustic detections have been less frequent but they do suggest that Northern Bottlenose Whales forage along the shelf edge to the southwest of the Gully, especially in the summer (Moors 2012; Feyrer et al. 2024a). Acoustic detections near the Fundian Channel highlight this area as another possible foraging hotspot, although few Northern Bottlenose Whale vocalizations were detected at passive acoustic monitoring stations along Georges Bank, and none were detected further south in U.S. waters (Stanistreet et al. 2017; Feyrer et al. 2024a).

Both visual sightings and acoustic detections highlight the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area as a place where foraging Northern Bottlenose Whales concentrate (Clarke et al. 2019; Oyarbide et al. 2023; Delarue et al. 2024; Feyrer et al. 2024a). Note, however, that effort is lower in this area, especially for visual observations, than on the Scotian Shelf. The bathymetry of the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area is very different from that of the canyons favoured by the Scotian Shelf Northern Bottlenose Whales. It is close to the shallow Grand Banks and includes a prominent ridge (the Sackville Spur) with steep flanks on both sides. Further to the north, the DS-BB-LS sightings (Figure 2) appear to be less concentrated, and are spread along the shelf slope. Unlike the Scotian Shelf, this region has few prominent canyons, nor does it contain any features similar to the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area (Davidson et al. 2023).

Overall, the Northern Bottlenose Whale is, by cetacean standards, a habitat specialist, focusing on regions of high bathymetric relief. This habitat specialization is particularly pronounced in the Scotian Shelf DU.

Movements, migration, and dispersal

The available evidence suggests that the Scotian Shelf population does not make seasonal migrations. Rates of acoustic detection of the animals on passive acoustic monitoring instruments placed in the Gully are similar in all 12 months (Moors 2012; Stanistreet et al. 2017), and there are photo-identification matches of individuals between seasons (Whitehead et al. 1997b). Animals move between the three large canyons on the eastern Scotian Shelf (the Gully, Shortland Canyon, and Haldimand Canyon, which are arranged along the shelf edge at intervals of about 50 km, Figure 5) but may show individual preferences for particular canyons (Wimmer and Whitehead 2004; Feyrer 2021).

Although less is known about the movements of Northern Bottlenose Whales in the DS-BB-LS population, recent satellite tag data suggest that Northern Bottlenose Whales may remain in a relatively small area for extended time periods. However, two tagged individuals made extensive movements south, with one whale circumnavigating the Flemish Cap resulting in a 7,000 km trip in 67 days. Sightings data and acoustic records do not support clear seasonal migrations (Feyrer et al. 2024a).

There have been no documented movements of photo-identified individuals between the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea region and the Scotian Shelf (Stewart 2018; Feyrer 2021) or between the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area and either the Scotian Shelf or the Davis Strait-Baffin Bay-Labrador Sea region (Oyarbide et al. 2023). In contrast, satellite tags placed on Northern Bottlenose Whales near Jan Mayen in the summer, showed a clear directed movement south to the Azores, suggesting north-south movements may occur in other areas of the North Atlantic (Miller et al. 2016: Woo et al. 2023).

Interspecific interactions

Diet

Although Northern Bottlenose Whales are known to eat various deep-water fishes and squids, they particularly favour deep-water squids of the genus Gonatus (Mead 1989). Consequently, they have a very narrow ecological niche compared with other deep-diving mammals (Whitehead et al. 2003). Increased interactions with fishing vessels, in particular those targeting Greenland Halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides), may suggest different dietary preferences especially for some individual Northern Bottlenose Whales that have learned to catch easy prey during net retrieval (Johnson et al. 2020; Oyarbide et al. 2023). Despite this attraction to fishing vessels, squid biomass remains an important factor that explains the distribution of Northern Bottlenose Whales in Baffin Bay (Davidson et al. 2023).

Predators and competitors

Norwegian whalers observed Killer Whales (Orcinus orca) attacking Northern Bottlenose Whales, and noted scarring from previous attacks (Jonsgård 1968a, b). As with other beaked whales (Tyack et al. 2006), the deep-diving capabilities of Northern Bottlenose Whales may help them avoid predation by Killer Whales. However, playback experiments found that Northern Bottlenose Whales reacted strongly to Killer Whale vocalizations by staying close to the surface, and reducing foraging behaviour and echolocation activity (Miller et al. 2022). Foraging dives did not commence for almost 2 hours after the playback of Killer Whale vocalizations (Siegal 2020). This suggests that Northern Bottlenose Whales may avoid predation through acoustic crypsis.

Physiological, behavioural, and other adaptations

The Northern Bottlenose Whale is well adapted to its deep-diving lifestyle. The inquisitiveness of the species, as well as its social structure (a loose network of relationships among females, and stronger bonds between pairs of males), may be related to the consistent use of what are, by cetacean standards, small ocean areas (Gowans et al. 2001). Because of their tendency to approach vessels, Northern Bottlenose Whales were easily captured by whalers.

As described above, the Scotian Shelf DU animals appear to have a very narrow niche as they are dependent on a small number of submarine canyons, and prey mainly on a single squid genus (Gonatus). There is also increasing genetic evidence to suggest that this DU has developed regional adaptations to this habitat (de Greef et al. 2022), which will likely reduce its tolerance to a changing environment.

Limiting factors

The slow reproductive rate is the main limiting factor for the species as a whole. Generation time is about 26 years and interbirth intervals, previously thought to be 2 years, are likely 3 to 5 years (Feyrer et al. 2020). The species could also be limited by the availability of its preferred prey, squid of the genus Gonatus. In addition, the Scotian Shelf DU is dependent on a relatively small area of apparently suitable habitat.

Population sizes and trends

Data sources, methodologies, and uncertainties

Abundance calculations for this species have largely been carried out by using photo-identification data to conduct mark-recapture estimates. These estimates become more accurate with increasing numbers of high-quality photographs. It can be challenging to collect these photographs, particularly for deep-diving offshore cetaceans, and it is even more challenging in Arctic environments. Although Northern Bottlenose Whales have been photographed and identified throughout eastern Canadian waters, most of the effort has been focused near the Gully, with additional effort along the shelf break, especially along the Scotian Shelf (Feyrer et al. 2024a). Additional photographs have been obtained further north (Stewart 2018), especially in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area (Oyarbide et al. 2023); however, the data from these regions are insufficient for robust population estimates based on mark-recapture. Outside of the Gully, aerial or boat-based surveys focusing on sightings data may be more appropriate for abundance estimation, but relatively few data have been obtained this way. There are no acoustic estimates of abundance for Northern Bottlenose Whales; however, this may be an important technique in the future (Hooker et al. 2019).

Abundance

While population size estimates for the Scotian Shelf DU have fluctuated slightly over time with the addition of new photographs and additional areas covered, they remain small (Gowans et al. 2000; Whitehead and Wimmer 2005; O’Brien and Whitehead 2013; Stewart 2018; Feyrer 2021). The most recent analysis included high-quality photographs from 1988 to 2023 and incorporated open models with changes in population size over time as well as heterogeneity in sighting rates. This analysis suggests that the Northern Bottlenose Whale population on the Scotian Shelf declined from about 160 individuals in 1988 to about 120 in 2005 to 2010, but that numbers have been slowly increasing ever since, with a population of about 210 individuals in 2023 (95% confidence interval 150 to 287; H. Whitehead pers. comm. 2024). With mature individuals making up an estimated 45% of the total (T. Doniol-Valcroze pers. comm. 2024), this suggests a current population of about 95 mature animals.

A separate mark-recapture analysis was conducted using photographs taken in 2016 to 2017 in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin region off Newfoundland. This research was much less robust than the Scotian Shelf work as it included considerably fewer identified individuals and no resightings between 2016 and 2017. However, it suggests a minimum population of approximately 125 individuals (Stewart 2018). No mark-recapture analyses have been conducted using photo-identifications from the DS-BB-LS region.

The abundance of Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Gully, calculated using data from ship-based visual line transect surveys in 2005, was estimated at 44 (95% confidence interval 19 to 105) in April and 63 (95% confidence interval 20 to 230) in July (Gosselin and Lawson 2005). These estimates were not corrected to account for animals missed on the transect line because of submergence, which would lead to underestimation, or for animals attracted to the research vessel through curiosity, which would lead to overestimation. Because Northern Bottlenose Whales are both long divers and very curious, abundance estimates from ship-based line transect surveys are not very informative (Reeves et al. 1993).

The 2016 North Atlantic International Sighting Survey (NAISS) resulted in two sightings of the DS-BB-LS designatable unit (one sighting of four whales off Labrador and one sighting of seven whales on the south coast of Newfoundland) as well as 11 sightings consisting of 28 individuals on the Scotian Shelf. As expected, these sightings were more often near the continental shelf break; however, too few sightings were obtained to conduct population estimates (J. Lawson pers. comm. 2023).

The number of sightings of Northern Bottlenose Whales in the DS-BB-LS region (Reeves et al. 1993; Herfst 2004; MacDonald 2005; Davidson et al. 2023; Figure 2), including interactions with fishers working in the area (see below), indicate their regular presence in the area. Following initial British and Norwegian hunts for Northern Bottlenose Whales in Davis Strait and the Labrador Sea from about 1850 to 1890, little whaling occurred until Norwegian whalers took 818 animals between 1969 and 1971 (Christensen 1975; Reeves et al. 1993). British whaling apparently was driven primarily by markets for oil and spermaceti (see Reeves et al. 1993), whereas according to Christensen (1975), animal food was the main product of the recent Norwegian hunt. After the end of whaling in 1971, there was scientific debate as to whether or not the hunt had depleted the species substantially across its range (Christensen et al. 1977; Mitchell 1977). Given the much higher catch levels, the DS-BB-LS population must have been considerably larger than the SS population prior to the last phase of whaling in 1969. The scarcity of recent encounters could mean that the DS-BB-LS population remains considerably reduced; however, its current abundance will remain uncertain until more data are obtained through properly designed surveys.

Fluctuations and trends

Early estimates of population size for the Scotian Shelf DU using mark-recapture analysis did not show clear evidence for a trend in population size (Gowans et al. 2000; Whitehead and Wimmer 2005). However, newer estimates suggest that the SS population was declining in size from 1988 until approximately 2004. A recovery began about 2005 and the population is currently estimated to be increasing by 2.2% per year (H. Whitehead pers. comm. 2024). There is no information on population fluctuations or trends in the DS-BB-LS designatable unit.

Continuing decline^{Note de bas de page 1} in number of mature individuals

There are insufficient data to assess if there is a decline in the DS-BB-LS population. There is currently no continuing decline in the SS population.

Evidence for past decline (3 generations or 10 years, whichever is longer) that has either ceased or is continuing (specify): Three generations in the past would be about 1945, more than four decades before the earliest abundance estimate available for the SS designatable unit (1988). Recent mark-recapture analyses of the 1988 to 2023 photo-identification time series suggest that the SS population was declining at a rate of about 2.5% per year from 1988 to 2004 (sighting rates in the Gully also declined by about 3.7% [SE 2.3%] per year during this period). This decline ended around 2004, and has since reversed with an estimated increase of 2.2% per year (sightings in the Gully increased by about 3.8% [SE 1.3%]) per year during this period) (Feyrer 2021; H. Whitehead pers. comm. 2024). Abundance was estimated to be about 160 individuals in 1988 and 210 in 2023, an increase of approximately 30% within the past 2 generations.

Both the SS and DS-BB-LS designatable units experienced a rapid decline as a result of whaling during the late 1960s and early 1970s, which is within the past 3 generations. Between 1962 and 1967, 87 Northern Bottlenose Whales were taken in the Scotian Shelf area by whalers based in Blandford, Nova Scotia (Reeves et al. 1993). Following initial British and Norwegian hunts for Northern Bottlenose Whales in the DS-BB-LS area from about 1850 to 1890, little whaling occurred until Norwegian whalers took 818 animals between 1969 and 1971 (Christensen 1975; Reeves et al. 1993). Commercial whaling no longer represents a current threat for Northern Bottlenose Whales because it has ended. Aboriginal subsistence hunting of Northern Bottlenose Whales was never common in Canada and is not occurring at this time. It is likely that both DUs are still recovering from population reduction due to whaling operations in the past.

Evidence for projected or suspected future decline (next 3 generations or 10 years, whichever is longer, up to a maximum of 100 years)

It is unknown if the DS-BB-LS population is declining or may decline in the future. The recent reversal to an increasing population trend in the SS designatable unit has been linked to the protection provided by the establishment of the Gully Marine Protected Area (Feyrer 2021). This suggests that this protection is important for the recovery of this population, and that this population may be at risk from future changes in threats.

Long-term trends

Genomics research indicates that the global population of Northern Bottlenose Whales expanded following the last glacial period. However, the Scotian Shelf DU shows evidence of a population decline within the last 500 years. While the northern populations do not show this same decline in population size, the reliance on older genetic samples from the whaling era in this dataset complicates the interpretation of these results (Feyrer et al. 2019). Both populations were subjected to whaling in the last century, with over 800 whales caught off Labrador (Christensen 1975; Reeves et al. 1993) and 87 whales taken from the Scotian Shelf (Reeves et al. 1993). It is likely that the SS population was heavily impacted by this reduction in numbers, and whaling effort may have contributed to the existing low genetic diversity and increased levels of inbreeding (de Greef et al. 2022).

Both DUs are likely still recovering from commercial whaling which ended in the early 1970s, or about two generations (approximately 53 years) ago. While there is no information regarding the population trend between the end of whaling and 1988 when photo-identification studies began, the SS population has only recently begun to increase (Feyrer 2021). It is unknown if the DS-BB-LS population is currently increasing, decreasing, or stable.

Population fluctuations, including extreme fluctuations

Rapid increases in numbers are unlikely for this species given its slow reproductive rate.

Rescue effect

Given the isolation of the Scotian Shelf population from other areas of concentration (see above), the likelihood that dispersal from any adjacent areas could “rescue” the SS designatable unit appears low. Stock assessments conducted in U.S. waters indicate only three recent sightings and one stranding (Waring et al. 2014), suggesting that there is little rescue potential from U.S. waters. Northern Bottlenose Whales sighted in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin area (partly outside the Canadian EEZ) represent the nearest concentration. It is unlikely that these individuals are part of the Scotian Shelf DU and thus they would not be a source of rescue.

There is greater rescue potential for the DS-BB-LS population. Northern Bottlenose Whales are sighted along the eastern side of Davis Strait and Baffin Bay, both in Greenland and international waters (Figure 2). Little is known about the size of this population, but it is likely that these animals could move into Canadian waters. A recently identified concentration of whales in the Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin, which is both within and beyond Canada’s EEZ, are likely part of the DS-BB-LS designatable unit and thus could serve as a source of rescue. Further east, shipboard surveys have provided evidence of fairly large populations: approximately 19,000 individuals off the Faroes and Western Europe (Rogan et al. 2017), and about 18,000 off the Faroes and Iceland (NAMMCO 2019). However, these estimates are based on relatively few sightings and they have large coefficients of variance. Recently, studies have begun on a concentration of Northern Bottlenose Whales off Jan Mayen Island (for example, Miller et al. 2016; Siegal 2020; Woo et al. 2023), although genetic data show differentiation between animals from Jan Mayen, the western North Atlantic, and the Scotian Shelf (de Greef et al. 2022).

Threats

In 2022, Fisheries and Oceans Canada completed a threats assessment for Northern Bottlenose Whales in Eastern Canada based on input from a panel of experts. They assessed the SS designatable unit separately and conducted an assessment for the broader Northwest Atlantic range as well, which includes both Canadian DUs (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2022). For both the SS designatable unit and the Northwest Atlantic, the individual level of impact was assessed as High or Extreme for the following threats: historical whaling, military sonar, entanglement, risks of depredation, vessel strike and oil spills. The population level of impact was assessed as High or Extreme for the SS DU for climate change, historical whaling, military sonar, entanglement, vessel strikes and oil spills. For the Northwest Atlantic, historical whaling was assessed as having a High level of impact, climate change as Medium and vessel noise as Low, while several other threats were assessed as Unknown owing to the lack of data from the northern regions. Many of the population-level threats were assessed as Unknown, especially for the greater Northwest Atlantic, as relatively little information is available regarding the potential impact on these populations, especially in the more northern regions. However, it should be kept in mind that the lack of a population-level impact should not interpreted as a lack of effect (see Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2022 for details). The results of the Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) threats assessment have been converted to the IUCN-CMP unified threats classification system, shown in Appendices 1 and 2.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s assessment of recovery potential (Harris et al. 2013) estimated a maximum potential biological removal (PBR) of 0.3 individuals per year for the SS population, which indicates that a threat that affects just one animal per year could still be harmful to the population.

Historical, long-term, and continuing habitat trends

Threats related to habitat quality include underwater noise from various sources and marine pollution, including persistent organic pollutants, plastic debris, and toxic spills. As discussed in the following sections, these threats are generally considered to be increasing (Feyrer et al. 2024c).

Current and projected future threats

Northern Bottlenose Whales are vulnerable to the cumulative effects of various threats as described below (Feyrer et al. 2024c). The overall threat levels calculated using the IUCN-CMP unified threats classification system, derived from the Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) threats assessment, are High for both the Scotian Shelf and DS-BB-LS designatable units. However, given the lower threat levels for the DS-BB-LS designatable unit compared to the Scotian Shelf DU, the overall threat level for this DU has been adjusted to Medium. The key threats based on the IUCN-CMP threat categories are described below. Further details can be found in the threats calculator sheets appended to this report.

IUCN 3 – Energy production and mining: low impact for both DUs

Energy production and mining, mainly oil and gas development, could have a potential impact on Northern Bottlenose Whales. There is some potential for mining and renewable energy activities in the future. Threats associated with mining and renewable energy would likely be linked to increased vessel traffic (4.3), noise pollution (9.6), and production/resuspension of contaminants (9.3).

3.1 Oil and gas drilling

Oil and gas exploration and production have long been a concern in relation to Northern Bottlenose Whales. While existing oil and gas production sites are located in shallow waters outside of Northern Bottlenose Whale core habitats, exploration is taking place or is planned in offshore areas such as the Sackville Spur and southern slope of the Grand Banks. The recent threats assessment conducted by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) continues to highlight the potential threat this industry poses to the species. See also the impacts of vessel activity (4.3), oil spills and chemical pollution (9.2), and noise pollution (9.6).

Threats that could be linked to oil and gas drilling such as noise from seismic airgun surveys, chronic noise from oil and gas operations, persistent organic pollutants (POP), and toxic metals were found to pose a threat linked to injury or harm of individuals (Medium impact) in both the Scotian Shelf and greater Northwest Atlantic population. The potential population-level impacts for both the SS designatable unit and the larger population were assessed as Unknown for drilling operations, seismic airgun surveys, chronic noise, POP, and toxic metals (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2022).

IUCN 4 - Transportation and service corridors: medium impact for SS DU, Low for DS-BB-LS DU

In this threat category, shipping lanes pose the greatest potential threat to Northern Bottlenose Whales.

4.3 Shipping lanes

The impact of shipping activities on individuals was assessed as High for vessel strikes and Low for vessel noise and echosounders (see 9.6) (threat linked to harassment, disturbance, and increased stress) for both the SS designatable unit and the greater Northwest Atlantic population (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2022). At the population level, the impact of shipping activities is considered High for vessel strikes, Low for vessel noise and Unknown for echosounders for the SS designatable unit. For the greater Northwest Atlantic population, the impact of vessel noise was assessed as Low and the impact of vessel strikes, echosounders and chronic noise as Unknown.

Although reports of vessel strikes involving Northern Bottlenose Whales are rare, this is largely attributable to their offshore habitat. Strandings of Northern Bottlenose Whales in Canadian waters are uncommon, with only 32 confirmed strandings since 1940 (McAlpine et al. 2023). In many cases, the animals are in such an advanced stage of decomposition that the cause of death cannot be determined. Photo-identification catalogues are a valuable tool for detecting and tracking sublethal vessel strikes. Recently, Feyrer et al. (2021) analyzed the long-term photo-identification dataset from the Gully and identified a number of injuries that could have been caused by vessel strikes. Unfortunately, it was not possible to distinguish between vessel strike injuries and entanglement scars; however, it was estimated that 6.6% of the population displayed markings consistent with anthropogenic impacts including vessel strikes. As only the dorsal fin region was assessed using the photo-identification catalogue, it is possible that individuals with marks caused by anthropogenic impacts were not identified through this approach. Many of the individuals with vessel strike or entanglement markings were sighted in multiple years, indicating that they survived the anthropogenic impact. However, it is not possible to determine if these individuals suffered long-term physiological, behavioural, or reproductive impacts. The annual rate of gain of anthropogenic marks for the SS population was estimated at about 1.72 whales per year. This rate is concerning as it exceeds the potential biological removal (PBR) of 0.3 individuals per year estimated by Harris et al. (2013).

IUCN 5 – Biological resource use: medium impact for ss SU, low for DS-BB-LS DU

The fishing industry poses the clearest threat to Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Biological Resource Use category through both direct interactions and competition for resources.

5.4 Fishing and harvesting aquatic resources

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) assessed the level of impact on individuals as High for both entanglement and risks of depredation for both the SS designatable unit and the greater Northwest Atlantic. At the population level, the level of impact on the SS designatable unit was assessed as High for entanglement and Unknown for risks of depredation, while the level of impact on the greater Northwest Atlantic population was assessed as Unknown for both entanglement and risks of depredation. The fishing industry, especially large offshore vessels, also contribute to the risk of vessel strikes and to chronic noise as mentioned above. Additionally, fisheries vessels frequently use echosounders which can potentially impact Northern Bottlenose Whales as mentioned above.

Animals in the DS-BB-LS population frequently interact with offshore trawling and longlining operations (MacDonald 2005; Johnson et al. 2020; Davidson et al. 2023). Clear documentation of interactions, including likely depredation of gillnets by Northern Bottlenose Whales during fishing for Greenland Halibut is described in Johnson et al. (2020). These authors and Oyarbide et al. (2023) indicate that these interactions are frequent and have been occurring for several years. Similar interactions have been observed in the Sackville Spur region during fishing for Greenland Halibut, with Northern Bottlenose whales frequently interacting with the fishery during the retrieval of nets, including trawl nets. Over 50 separate days in 2007, 23 different individuals were observed interacting with fishing vessels and no resights were recorded, indicating that this behavior is widespread in the region and is not limited to a few individuals who have learned to forage in this way. Northern Bottlenose Whales do not appear to follow fishing vessels for extended time periods (Oyarbide et al. 2023). Interactions with trawlers may be less frequent on the Scotian Shelf, but they began to be documented as early as 1997 (Fertl and Leatherwood 1997).

Since 2001, Fisheries and Oceans Canada has documented 15 records from the At-Sea Observer program (five from the Scotian Shelf area and three from Newfoundland/Labrador) of entanglement of Northern Bottlenose Whales in longlines, gillnets, and otter trawls, both benthic and pelagic. Fisheries with documented interactions include Swordfish (Xiphius gladius), Silver Hake (Merluccius bilinearis), Greenland Halibut and squid (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2010; Feyrer et al. 2024b). Some of these animals were cut free and may have survived, but seven died as a result of entanglement. Additionally, a Northern Bottlenose Whale was observed severely entangled and injured in longline gear in the Gully in 1999 (Gowans et al. 2000). Some incidents of entanglement have gone unreported (Feyrer et al. 2021), and the frequency and severity of entanglement events are unknown. In an analysis of 100 photographs showing the markings on melons (foreheads) of Scotian Shelf animals, Mitchell (2008) found only one example of marks indicative of entanglement. However, a more recent analysis, which focused on the dorsal fin region, found that 6.6% of the Scotian Shelf DU whales possessed markings related to anthropogenic impact, many of which were likely caused by entanglement in fishing gear (Feyrer et al. 2021). This suggests that entanglement is a clear risk to the SS designatable unit, as one death per year caused directly or indirectly by entanglement would exceed the PBR (0.3) for the SS population. Photographic and written observer records from the DS-BB-LS population suggest a greater frequency of interaction than off the Scotian Shelf, at least for a portion of the Northern Bottlenose Whale population in the area (see also MacDonald 2005; Johnson et al. 2020; Davidson et al. 2023). Lawson (2010a) notes that some Northern Bottlenose Whales bear scars from fishing lines, and some have injuries that could have been caused by propellers or fishing gear.

Although there is currently no commercial fishery for Gonatus squids, the development of such a fishery in the future could have an impact on Northern Bottlenose Whales. Although it is not clear how dependent Northern Bottlenose Whales have become on Greenland Halibut, changes in this fishery could impact individuals who have come to rely on this fishery for at least a portion of their food intake.

IUCN 6 – Human intrusions and disturbance: negligible impact for both DUs

Recreational activities such as whale watching may lead to some level of disturbance to Northern Bottlenose Whales, but military exercises pose the greatest threat in this category.

6.1 Recreational activities

There has been some development of whale watching for Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Gully (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2017). Although this industry will be limited by the offshore habitat, Arctic cruise ship traffic is likely to increase with decreasing ice cover.

6.2 War, civil unrest and military exercises

Underwater military sonar used during naval training exercises poses a significant threat to Northern Bottlenose Whales. Because this is an acoustic threat, it is described in detail and the threat level is discussed under 9.6 Excess energy below along with other sources of anthropogenic noise.

IUCN 9 – Pollution: medium impact for both DUs

Pollution threats to Northern Bottlenose Whales include underwater noise, exposure to oil spills, the ingestion of plastic, including microplastics, and the accumulation of POPs or toxic metals. For POPs, plastics and toxic metals, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) assessed the individual level of impact as Medium for both the SS designatable unit and the greater Northwest Atlantic; the population-level impact was assessed as Unknown for both populations.

Chemical pollutants have been found in the tissues of individuals from both DUs, although the levels are similar those measured in other North Atlantic odontocetes. Overall, SS Northern Bottlenose Whales had higher concentrations of POPs than individuals sampled in Davis Strait (Desforges et al. 2021).

9.2 Industrial and military effluents

Oil spills pose a risk of acute impact. At the individual level, mortality of single individuals could occur (High impact) in both the Scotian Shelf DU and the greater Northwest Atlantic population. At the population level, an oil spill could jeopardize the survival or recovery of the Scotian Shelf DU (High impact); however, there was insufficient evidence to assess the potential population-level threat to the greater Northwest Atlantic population (Unknown impact; Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2022).

Biopsy samples from both Northern Bottlenose Whales DUs show that the whales have been exposed to a variety of POPs, including the top five contaminants (that is, ΣDDT, Σ18PCB, Σchlordane, dieldrin, and HCB, listed in rank order) some of which may be linked to oil and gas drilling (Hooker et al. 2008; Desforges et al. 2021). As is common for mammals, males were found to have higher pollutant concentrations than females for most of the sampled POPs, although due to sample size not all differences were significant. Additionally, SS animals had significantly higher concentrations of Σ18PCB, ΣDDT, HCH, Σchlordane, and dieldrin and marginally higher levels of heptachlor epoxide B than DS-BB-LS animals. The high ΣDDT:ΣPCB ratio suggests a local source of DDT (Desforges et al. 2021).

9.4 Garbage and solid waste

Recent studies investigating the concentrations of plastic debris in the surface waters of the three core canyon habitats of the SS population, as well as plastic (including microplastic particles) ingested by Northern Bottlenose Whales stranded in Newfoundland, suggest that plastic pollution poses a significant threat to the Scotian Shelf DU (Kelly et al. 2023). Benjaminsen and Christensen (1979) found pieces of plastic in the stomach contents of Northern Bottlenose Whales from whaling catches, indicating that Northern Bottlenose Whales have been consuming plastic for decades. Unusually high levels of floating microplastics have been documented in the Gully, Haldimand, and Shortland Canyons (Kelly et al. 2023). In addition, high levels of contamination have been documented in several species of myctophid fish off the Flemish Cap (Wieczorek et al. 2018), suggesting that Northern Bottlenose Whales frequently interact with plastic, especially microplastics. Although the potential effects of plastic ingestion in Northern Bottlenose Whales remain unknown, the potential risk is high.

9.6 Excess energy

Like many cetaceans (see Nowacek et al. 2007; Weilgart 2007; and Williams et al. 2020 for reviews), Northern Bottlenose Whales are sensitive to noise pollution. Among underwater acoustic sources, intense military-type sonar poses the most serious threat. This was assessed as an Extreme threat to individuals in the SS designatable unit as well as in the greater Northwest Atlantic, and a High threat at the population level (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2022). For the greater Northwest Atlantic, the impact of military sonar was assessed as Unknown, although there is increasing evidence that Arctic animals may be particularly susceptible to anthropogenic noise (for example, Williams et al. 2022).

Beaked whales are known to strand and die following exposure to military sonar (Weilgart 2007; Feyrer et al. 2024c). While Goose-beaked Whales (Ziphius cavirostris), formerly known as Cuvier's Beaked Whale, are most often involved in strandings linked to military sonar, one Northern Bottlenose Whale has been involved in a mass stranding that included three Goose-beaked Whales and two Pygmy Sperm Whales (Kogia breviceps) following naval exercises off the Canary Islands (Weilgart 2007). The habitat of Northern Bottlenose Whales is sufficiently far from populated coasts that most strandings are unlikely to be detected and reported. The mechanisms by which acute, high amplitude sound could lead to whale deaths are unknown (Weilgart 2007). Houser et al. (2001) and Hooker et al. (2009) speculated that, because of their long and deep dives, Northern Bottlenose Whales may be particularly susceptible to acoustically triggered physiological damage through nitrogen accumulation in the blood and tissues, although they may be less at risk of such damage than Goose-beaked Whales (Hooker et al. 2009).

Recent work has also focused on the sublethal responses of beaked whales, including Northern Bottlenose Whales, to military sonar. Research indicates that Northern Bottlenose Whales, especially those in pristine environments, may be especially vulnerable to anthropogenic noise, including military sonar. In a controlled exposure experiment conducted near Jan Mayen, Northern Bottlenose Whales responded to military sonar sounds over a wide range of distances (0.8 to 28 km). The exposed animals stopped producing echolocation clicks, which likely correlates with a cessation of foraging, and moved away from the sound source (Wensveen et al. 2019). This is similar to the response observed in cetaceans exposed to sounds emitted by predators, such as Killer Whales. The fact that Northern Bottlenose Whales cease foraging in response to Killer Whale sounds suggests that these whales may be particularly vulnerable to sublethal impacts from anthropogenic sounds, which lead to decreased foraging time (Miller et al. 2022).

Military exercises are regularly conducted in eastern Canadian waters. At a site 300 km to the southwest of the Gully, Sperm Whales (Physeter macrocephalus) and Mesoplodont beaked whales displayed a marked reduction in their production of foraging clicks during a military warfare exercise conducted along the Scotian Shelf in 2016, which included vessel, submarine, and aircraft activity. Active naval sonar signals were recorded at the hydrophone during the time frame when the whales were silent. Although sonar signals were recorded at a hydrophone in the Gully, the sound levels were much lower due to the distance from the exercise area, and Northern Bottlenose Whales continued to produce foraging clicks. Nonetheless, the reaction of ecologically similar cetaceans to this exercise, and the strong responses shown by Northern Bottlenose Whales to naval sonar in other areas, indicate that military exercises likely pose a serious threat to Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Scotian Shelf region (Stanistreet et al. 2022).

Loud pulsive noise resulting from airgun arrays used during seismic surveys have the potential to affect cetaceans (Gordon et al. 2003). Seismic surveys are common in the offshore waters of Atlantic Canada where licensing and prospecting for oil and gas is being pursued extensively (for example, see CNSOPB 2023 for the Scotian Shelf and CNLOPB 2023 for Newfoundland and Labrador). There has been an increase in such surveys over the deeper shelf edge and slope waters that comprise the habitat of Northern Bottlenose Whales and other beaked whales. The decommissioning of rigs in the future is likely to contribute to noise levels in Northern Bottlenose Whale habitat.

Cholewiak et al. (2017) suggested that beaked whales, including Northern Bottlenose Whales, likely detect commercial echosounders (similar to those found on many research vessels and commercial fishing vessels) and may respond by reducing their vocalizations. Because beaked whales likely rely on echolocation to find prey, this may result in reduced foraging opportunities (Feyrer et al. 2024c). While a single transit of a research vessel through an area is unlikely to cause long-term disruption to foraging, Cholewiak et al. (2017) also noted that shipboard echosounders were detected by a bottom-mounted hydrophone near Georges Bank on approximately 25% of the days on which it was deployed (44 days out of a six-month deployment).

IUCN 11 – Climate change and severe weather: unknown impact for both DUs

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (2022) assessed the impact of climate change at the individual level as Unknown for both the SS designatable unit and the greater Northwest Atlantic. The impact at the population-level was assessed as High for the SS designatable unit and Medium for the greater Northwest Atlantic.

11.1 Habitat shifting and alteration

Habitat shifting and alteration is the threat subcategory under climate change most likely to have impacts on Northern Bottlenose Whales as they appear to be confined to a relatively narrow ecological niche. Their dependence on a single genus of squid for the bulk of their diet leaves them vulnerable to shifts in prey distribution. Owing to this dependence on one type of prey, combined with their strong site fidelity to bathymetric features, the species is likely vulnerable to a variety of potential impacts from climate change. Melting sea ice may impact individuals in northern waters, although there are few data to indicate whether these impacts may be positive or negative. Davidson et al. (2023) suggest that suitable habitat for Northern Bottlenose Whales may expand in northern Baffin Bay in future years, but there are currently no data to assess whether a shift in habitat use is occurring.

Number of threat locations

For the SS designatable unit, each of the three canyons along the Scotian Shelf can be considered a location as defined by COSEWIC. A single threatening event, such as a major oil spill or naval exercise using military sonar, could rapidly affect all whales present in a given canyon. The number of threat locations for the DS-BB-LS designatable unit, which occupies a much larger range, is unknown but likely greater than 10.

Protection, status, and recovery activities

Legal protection and status

In Canada, hunting and other activities harmful to Northern Bottlenose Whales are covered in the Marine Mammal Regulations of the Fisheries Act. The SS population was assessed by COSEWIC in 2002 and subsequently listed as Endangered under Schedule 1 of SARA in April 2006. It was reassessed by COSEWIC and confirmed as Endangered in May 2011. In the most recent reassessment (2024) of the SS population, the Endangered status was reconfirmed. The DS-BB-LS population was assessed as Special Concern by COSEWIC in May 2011 and this status was reconfirmed when it was reassessed in 2024. A recovery strategy for the SS population was finalized in May 2010 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2010) and amended in 2016 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2016a), and an action plan for their recovery was finalized in 2017 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2017). Critical Habitat for the SS designatable unit was identified in the recovery strategy and subsequently protected by a federal Order in Council in July 2018 (SOR/2018-157).

The Northern Bottlenose Whale is listed as a “Protected Species” by the International Whaling Commission with a catch limit of zero. The species is also listed on Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). There is currently no regular hunt for this species, although stranded individuals that cannot be refloated are occasionally taken in the Faroe Islands (see Faroe Islands progress reports in annual reports of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission). The species is listed globally as Near Threatened by the IUCN (Whitehead et al. 2021).

Non-legal status and ranks

According to NatureServe (2016), the global status of the Northern Bottlenose Whale is Apparently Secure (G4). The Scotian Shelf population is listed as Critically Imperilled in Canada (N1) and Nova Scotia (S1), while the DS-BB-LS population is considered Unrankable in Canada (NU: Unrankable due to lack of information) and in Nunavut (SU: currently unrankable). The General Status of Species in Canada in 2020 lists the general status in Canada as Vulnerable ( N3 ), with an Atlantic Ocean listing of Vulnerable ( S3) and Eastern Arctic Ocean listing of Not applicable (SNA).

Land tenure and ownership

The Gully was designated as a marine protected area (MPA) under the Oceans Act in 2004. The core area of the MPA (Zone 1) constitutes the primary habitat of the Northern Bottlenose Whales (Hooker et al. 1999; MacNab 2005). No extractive activities, including fishing, are permitted in this zone. Although oil and gas exploration and development, including seismic exploration, are not explicitly prohibited by DFO regulations, current technologies used in this industry would not be permitted anywhere in the MPA under the regulations (MacNab 2005). The regulations also place restrictions on activities conducted outside the MPA which could have adverse effects within it, although it is not entirely clear how this will be implemented (MacNab 2005). Overall, the Gully MPA appears to provide substantial protection for the primary habitat of the SS population of Northern Bottlenose Whales (Feyrer 2021). The most significant potential impacts of human activity permitted within the MPA on Northern Bottlenose Whales are associated with commercial shipping (approximately one commercial passage per day), commercial fishing (concentrated along the shelf break and shallow feeder canyons) and scientific research (allowed but regulated within the MPA; McConney et al. 2023).

The Gully, Shortland and Haldimand canyons have also been identified as Critical Habitat for the SS Northern Bottlenose Whales in the recovery strategy (DFO 2010; 2016), and they are legally protected under SARA (Canada Gazette 2010, 2018). The areas between these canyons have been identified as important habitat (Stanistreet et al. 2021; Feyrer et al. 2024a). Fisheries and Oceans Canada has also established a number of marine refuges along the East Coast which may provide Northern Bottlenose Whales with some protection from fishing gear entanglement (DFO 2023).

Recovery activities

The following lists reports and publications, in reverse chronological order, that describe recovery activities focused on Northern Bottlenose Whales in Canada:

• Feyrer, L.J., A. Babin, H. Moors-Murphy, S. Corbett, E. Touchie, G. Croft, J. Lawson, C.A. Peters, T. Inkpen, M. Treble, and S. Ferguson. 2024b. Marine mammal records collected by the at-sea observer program in Arctic, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Maritimes regions: A summary of challenges and opportunities for future research. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 3573: vi + 55 pp
• Feyrer, L.J., J. E. Stanistreet, C. Gomez, M. Adams, J.W. Lawson, S.H. Ferguson, S.G. Heaslip, K.J. Lefort, E. Davidson, N.E. Hussey, H. Whitehead, and H. Moors-Murphy. 2024a. Identifying important habitat for northern bottlenose and Sowerby’s beaked whales in the western North Atlantic. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.4064
• Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2022. Threat assessment for Northern Bottlenose Whales off Eastern Canada. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. Science Advisory Report 2022/032
• Stanistreet, J.E., L.J. Feyrer, and H.B. Moors-Murphy. 2021. Assessment of the distribution, movements, and habitat use of Northern Bottlenose Whales on the Scotian Shelf to support the identification of important habitat. DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. Res. Doc. 2021/074. vi + 34 pp
• Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2017. Action Plan for the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), Scotian Shelf population, in Atlantic Canadian waters. Species at Risk Act Action Plan Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa. iv + 37 pp
• Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2016a. Recovery Strategy for the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), Scotian Shelf population, in Atlantic Canadian Waters [Final]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa. vii + 70 pp
• Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2016b. Report on the Progress of Recovery Strategy Implementation for the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), Scotian Shelf Population, in Atlantic Canadian Waters for the Period 2010-2015. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Report Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa. iii + 47 pp
• Harris, L.E., W.E. Gross, and P.E. Emery. 2013. Biology, Status, and Recovery Potential of Northern Bottlenose Whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2013/038. v + 35 pp
• Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2010. Recovery strategy for the Northern Bottlenose Whale, Scotian Shelf population, in Atlantic Canadian waters. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. vi + 61 pp

Information sources

Benjaminsen, T. 1972. On the biology of the bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus (Forster). Norwegian Journal of Zoology 20:233-241.

Benjaminsen, T., and I. Christensen. 1979. The natural history of the bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus (Forster). Pp. 143-164, in H.E. Winn, and B.L. Olla (eds.). Behavior of Marine Animals. Volume 3. Plenum, New York.

Canada Gazette. 2018. Canada Gazette Part II, 152, 15. https ://wildlife-species.Canada.ca/species-risk-registry/virtual_sara/files/g2-152158.pdf

Cholewiak, D., A.I. DeAngelis, D. Palka, P.J. Corkeron, and S.M. Van Parijs. 2017. Beaked whales demonstrate a marked acoustic response to the use of shipboard echosounders. Royal Society Open Science 4:170940.

Christensen, I. 1973. Age determination, age distribution and growth of bottlenose whales, Hyperoodon ampullatus (Forster), in the Labrador Sea. Norwegian Journal of Zoology 21:331-340.

Christensen, I. 1975. Preliminary report on the Norwegian fishery for small whales: expansion of Norwegian whaling to Arctic and northwest Atlantic waters, and Norwegian investigations of the biology of small whales. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 32:1083-1094.

Christensen, I., Å. Jonsgård, and C.J. Rorvik. 1977. Some notes concerning the bottlenose fishery in the North Atlantic after the Second World War, with particular reference to the westward expansion. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 27:226-227.

Clarke, E., L.J. Feyrer, H. Moors-Murphy, and J. Stanistreet. 2019. Click characteristics of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) and Sowerby’s beaked whales (Mesoplodon bidens) off eastern Canada. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 146, 307-315.

CNLOPB (Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board). 2023. Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Licence Information. Website: https://www.cnlopb.ca/information/maps/ [accessed January 2023].

CNSOPB (Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board). 2023. Call for Bids Forecast Areas (2018-2020). Website: https://callforbids.ca/ [accessed January 2023].

Compton, R. 2005. Predicting key habitat and potential distribution of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. MSc dissertation, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, U.K.

COSEWIC. 2011. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Northern Bottlenose Whale Hyperoodon ampulatus, in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xii + 31 pp.

Dalebout, M.L., D.E. Ruzzante, H. Whitehead, and N.I. Øien. 2006. Nuclear and mitochondrial markers reveal distinctiveness of a small population of bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in the western North Atlantic. Molecular Ecology 15:3115-3129.

Davidson, E.R., S.H. Ferguson, J.W. Higdon, and M.A. Treble. 2023. Opportunistic sightings from fisheries surveys inform habitat suitability for northern bottlenose whales Hyperoodon ampullatus and sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus in Baffin Bay and Davis Strait, Canadian Arctic. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 723:57-71.

Delarue, J.J.-Y., H.B. Moors-Murphy, K.A. Kowarski, E.E. Maxner, G.E. Davis, J.E. Stanistreet, and S.B. Martin. 2024. Acoustic occurrence of beaked whales off eastern Canada, 2015 to 2017. Endangered Species Research, 53:439-466.

Delarue, J. 2024. Email correspondence with K. Kowarsk, Marine Mammals SSCi. January 2024. Bioacoustician, JASCO Applied Sciences.

De Greef, E., A.L. Einfeldt, P.J. Miller, S.H. Ferguson, C.J. Garroway, K.J. Lefort, I.G. Patterson, P. Bentzen, and L.J. Feyrer. 2022. Genomics reveal population structure, evolutionary history, and signatures of selection in the northern bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus. Molecular Ecology, 4919-4931.

Desforges, J.P.W., S.K. Hooker, L. Feyrer, and S.H. Ferguson. 2021. Characterization of legacy persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in Northern Bottlenose Whales of the Western North-Atlantic. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3436.

DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada). 2023. List of marine refuges.

Doniol-Valcroze, T. pers. comm. 2024. E-mail correspondence with J. Ford. September 2024. Research Scientist, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Nanaimo, BC.

Einfeldt, A., L.J. Feyrer, I. Paterson, S. Ferguson, P. Miller, E. de Greef, and P. Bentzen. 2022. Characterization of population structure in northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in the North Atlantic from an analysis of microsatellite data. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3467: vii + 17 pp.

Ferreira, R., F. Alves, C. Gomes, D. Jardim, J. Kok, and A. Dinis. 2017. First confirmed record of Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in Madeira Archipelago, Northeast Atlantic. Aquatic Mammals, 43: 474-479.

Fertl, D., and S. Leatherwood. 1997. Cetacean interactions with trawls: a preliminary review. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science, 22:219-248.

Feyrer, L. 2021. Northern bottlenose whales in Canada: The story of exploitation, conservation and recovery. PhD dissertation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 285 pp.

Feyrer, L.J., A. Babin, H. Moors-Murphy, S. Corbett, E. Touchie, G. Croft, J. Lawson, C.A. Peters, T. Inkpen, M. Treble, and S. Ferguson. 2024b. Marine mammal records collected by the at-sea observer program in Arctic, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Maritimes regions: A summary of challenges and opportunities for future research. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 3573: vi + 55 pp.

Feyrer, L.J., P. Bentzen, H. Whitehead, I.G. Paterson, and E. Einfeldt. 2019. Evolutionary impacts differ between two exploited populations of northern bottlenose whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus). Ecology and Evolution, 9: 13567-13584.

Feyrer, L.J., S.T. Zhao, H. Whitehead, and C.J. Matthews. 2020. Prolonged maternal investment in northern bottlenose whales alters our understanding of beaked whale reproductive life history. PloS ONE 15 e0235114.

Feyrer, L.J., M. Stewart, J. Yeung, C. Soulier, and H. Whitehead. 2021. Origin and persistence of markings in a long-term photo-identification dataset reveal the threat of entanglement for endangered northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). Frontiers in Marine Science, 484.

Feyrer, L.J., J. E. Stanistreet, C. Gomez, M. Adams, J.W. Lawson, S.H. Ferguson, S.G. Heaslip, K.J. Lefort, E. Davidson, N.E. Hussey, H. Whitehead, and H. Moors-Murphy. 2024a. Identifying important habitat for northern bottlenose and Sowerby’s beaked whales in the western North Atlantic. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.4064

Feyrer, L.J., J.E. Stanistreet, and H.B. Moors-Murphy. 2024c. Navigating the unknown: assessing anthropogenic threats to beaked whales, family Ziphiidae. Royal Society Open Science, 11(4):240058.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2010. Recovery strategy for the Northern Bottlenose Whale, Scotian Shelf population, in Atlantic Canadian waters. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. vi + 61 pp.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2016a. Recovery Strategy for the Northern Bottlenose Whale, (Hyperoodon ampullatus), Scotian Shelf population, in Atlantic Canadian Waters [Final]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa. vii + 70 pp.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2016b. Report on the Progress of Recovery Strategy Implementation for the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), Scotian Shelf Population, in Atlantic Canadian Waters for the Period 2010-2015. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Report Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa. iii + 47 pp.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2017. Action Plan for the Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), Scotian Shelf population, in Atlantic Canadian waters. Species at Risk Act Action Plan Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa. iv + 37 pp.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2022. Threat assessment for northern bottlenose whales off Eastern Canada. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. Science Advisory Report 2022/032.

Frouin-Mouy, H., K. Kowarski, B. Martin, and K. Bröker. 2017. Seasonal trends in acoustic detection of marine mammals in Baffin Bay and Melville Bay, Northwest Greenland. Arctic, 70:59-76.

Gomez, C., J. Lawson, A.L. Kouwenberg, H. Moors-Murphy, A. Buren, C. Fuentes-Yaco, E. Marotte, Y.F. Wiersma, and T. Wimmer. 2017. Predicted distribution of whales at risk: identifying priority areas to enhance cetacean monitoring in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. Endangered Species Research, 32:437-458.

Gosselin, J.F., and J. Lawson. 2005. Distribution and abundance indices of marine mammals in the Gully and two adjacent canyons of the Scotian Shelf before and during nearby hydrocarbon seismic exploration programs in April and July, 2003. Pp. 117-138, in K. Lee, H. Bain, and G.V. Hurley (eds.). Acoustic Monitoring and Marine Mammal Surveys in the Gully and Outer Scotian Shelf before and during Active Seismic Programs. Environmental Studies Research Funds Report No. 151. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia.

Gordon, J., D. Gillespie, J. Potter, A. Frantzis, M.P. Simmonds, R. Swift, and D. Thompson. 2003. A review of the effects of seismic surveys on marine mammals. Marine Technology Society Journal 37:16-34.

Gowans, S., H. Whitehead, J.K. Arch, and S.K. Hooker. 2000. Population size and residency patterns of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) using the Gully, Nova Scotia. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 2:201-210.

Gowans, S., H. Whitehead, and S.K. Hooker. 2001. Social organization in northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus): not driven by deep water foraging? Animal Behaviour 62:369-377.

Harris, L.E., W.E. Gross, and P.E. Emery. 2013. Biology, status, and recovery potential of Northern Bottlenose Whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). DFO Canadian Science Advisory Res. Doc. 2013/038. v + 35 pp.

Herfst, D. 2004. Distribution of northern bottlenose whales, Hyperoodon ampullatus, along the coast of Labrador, Canada. Honours BSc thesis, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Hooker, S.K., N. Aguilar De Soto, R.W. Baird, E.L. Carroll, D. Claridge, L. Feyrer, P.J.O. Miller, A. Onoufriou, G. Schorr, E. Siegal, and H. Whitehead. 2019. Future directions in research on beaked whales. Frontiers in Marine Science 5: 514.

Hooker, S.K., T.L. Metcalfe, C.D. Metcalfe, C.M. Angell, J.Y. Wilson, M.J. Moore, and H. Whitehead. 2008. Changes in persistent contaminant concentration and CYP1A1 protein expression in biopsy samples from northern bottlenose whales, Hyperoodon ampullatus, following the onset of nearby oil and gas development. Environmental Pollution 152:205-216.

Hooker, S.K., R.W. Baird, and A. Fahlman. 2009. Could beaked whales get the bends? Effect of diving behaviour and physiology on modelled gas exchange for three species: Ziphius cavirostris, Mesoplodon densirostris and Hyperoodon ampullatus. Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology 167:235-246.

Hooker, S.K., and R.W. Baird. 1999. Deep-diving behaviour of the northern bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus (Cetacea: Ziphiidae). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B 266:671-676.

Hooker, S.K., and R.W. Baird. 2001. Diving and ranging behaviour of odontocetes: a methodological review and critique. Mammal Review 31:81-105.

Hooker, S.K., S.J. Iverson, P. Ostrom, and S.C. Smith. 2001. Diet of northern bottlenose whales as inferred from fatty acid and stable isotope analyses of biopsy samples. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79:1442-1454.

Hooker, S.K., and H. Whitehead. 2002. Click characteristics of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). Marine Mammal Science 18:69-80.

Hooker, S.K., H. Whitehead, and S. Gowans. 1999. Marine protected area design and the spatial and temporal distribution of cetaceans in a submarine canyon. Conservation Biology 13:592-602.

Hooker, S.K., H. Whitehead, and S. Gowans. 2002a. Ecosystem consideration in conservation planning: energy demand of foraging bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in a marine protected area. Biological Conservation 104:51-58.

Hooker, S.K., H. Whitehead, S. Gowans, and R.W. Baird. 2002b. Fluctuations in distribution and patterns of individual range use of northern bottlenose whales. Marine Ecology Progress Series 225:287-297.

Houser, D.S., R. Howard, and S. Ridgway. 2001. Can diving-induced tissue nitrogen supersaturation increase the chance of acoustically driven bubble growth in marine mammals? Journal of Theoretical Biology 213:183-195.

IUCN-MMPATF. In prep. #NWATLO013_Sackville Spur-Orphan Basin. To be available at Marine Mammal Protected Areas Task Force (MMPATF) Website, https://www.marinemammalhabitat.org/imma-eatlas

Johnson, K.F., N.E. Hussey, and S.H. Ferguson. 2020. Observation of marine mammal and bird interactions focused around a commercial fishing vessel in central Baffin Bay, Nunavut. Arctic Science, 7:567-574.

Jonsgård, Å. 1968a. Another note on the attacking behaviour of killer whale (Orcinus orca). Norsk Hvalfangst-Tidende 57:175-176.

Jonsgård, Å. 1968b. A note on the attacking behaviour of killer whale (Orcinus orca). Norsk Hvalfangst-Tidende 57:84.

Kennard, L., C. Schafer, and L. Carter. 1990. Late Cenozoic evolution of Sackville Spur: a sediment drift on the Newfoundland continental slope. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 27, 863-878.

Kelly, N.E., L. Feyrer, H. Gavel, O. Trela, W. Ledwell, H. Breeze, E.C. Marotte, L. McConney, and H. Whitehead. 2023. Long term trends in floating plastic pollution within a marine protected area identifies threats for Endangered northern bottlenose whales. Environmental Research, 115686.

Lawson, J., pers. comm. 2010a. Comments passed to H. Whitehead by G. Stenson. April 2010. Research Scientist, Marine Mammal Section, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador.

Lawson, J., pers. comm. 2010b. Email correspondence to T. Wimmer. January 2010. Research Scientist, Marine Mammal Section, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador

Lawson, J., pers. comm. 2023. Telephone discussion with J. Ford. November 2023. Research Scientist, Marine Mammal Section, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador.

Lawson, J.W., and J.F. Gosselin. 2009. Distribution and preliminary abundance estimates for cetaceans seen during Canada’s marine megafauna survey – a component of the 2007 TNASS. 2009/031 34 pp.

MacDonald, R.A. 2005. Distribution and fisheries interactions of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in Davis Strait/Baffin Bay. BSc Honours thesis, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 27 pp.

McAlpine D.F., T. Wimmer, W. Ledwell, P.-Y. Daoust, L. Bourque, J.W. Lawson, W. Bachara, Z.N. Lucas, G.A. Reid, S. Lair, A. Francis, and R. Michaud. 2023. A review of beaked whale (Ziphiidae) stranding incidents in eastern Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 135(3):201-231.

McConney L., J. Wingfield, K Rozalska, C, Schram, G. Pardy, W. Will, L. Feyrer, and H. Whitehead. 2023. The current state of pressure monitoring in the Gully Marine Protected Area. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 3563: xi + 113 pp.

MacNab, P. 2005. The Gully Marine Protected Area and Northern Bottlenose Whales on the Scotian Shelf. Pp. 1-14, in K. Lee, H. Bain, and G.V. Hurley (eds.). Acoustic Monitoring and Marine Mammal Surveys in The Gully and Outer Scotian Shelf before and during Active Seismic Programs. Environmental Studies Research Funds Report No. 151. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia.

Mead, J.G. 1989. Bottlenose whales Hyperoodon ampullatus (Forster, 1770) and Hyperoodon planifrons Flower, 1882. Pp. 321-348, in S.H. Ridgway, and R. Harrison (eds.). Handbook of Marine Mammals. Volume 4. Academic Press, London.

Miller, P.J., S. Isojunno, E. Siegal, F.P.A. Lam, P.H. Kvadsheim, and C. Curé. 2022. Behavioral responses to predatory sounds predict sensitivity of cetaceans to anthropogenic noise within a soundscape of fear. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119:e2114932119.

Miller, P., T. Narazaki, S. Isojunno, K. Aoki, S. Smout, and Sato, K. 2016. Body density and diving gas volume of the northern bottlenose whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus). Journal of Experimental Biology, 219: 2458-2468.

Miller, P.J., P.H. Kvadsheim, F.P.A. Lam, P.L. Tyack, C. Curé, S.L. DeRuiter, L. Kleivane, L.D. Sivle, S.P. van Ijsselmuide, F. Visser, and P.J. Wensveen. 2015. First indications that northern bottlenose whales are sensitive to behavioural disturbance from anthropogenic noise. Royal Society Open Science 2:140484.

Mitchell, E. 1977. Evidence that the northern bottlenose whale is depleted. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 27:195-203.

Mitchell, J.E. 2008. Prevalence and characteristics of melon markings on northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in the Gully and the effects of the Marine Protected Area on marks of anthropogenic origin. BSc Honours dissertation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 53 pp.

Moors, H. 2012. Acoustic monitoring of Scotian Shelf northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). PhD dissertation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 213 pp.

NAMMCO (North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission). 2019. Report of the Abundance Estimates Working Group, October 2019. Tromsø, Norway.

NatureServe 2016. https://explorer.natureserve.org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.105001/Hyperoodon_ampullatus

Nowacek, D.P., L.H. Thorne, D.W. Johnston, and P.L. Tyack. 2007. Responses of cetaceans to anthropogenic noise. Mammal Review, 37(2):81-115.

O’Brien, K., and H. Whitehead. 2013. Population analysis of endangered northern bottlenose whales on the Scotian Shelf seven years after the establishment of a Marine Protected Area. Endangered Species Research, 21:273-284.

Oyarbide, U., L. Feyrer, and J. Gordon. 2023. Sperm and northern bottlenose whale interactions with deep-water trawlers in the western North Atlantic. PloS One 18(8): e0289626

Reeves, R.R., E. Mitchell, and H. Whitehead. 1993. Status of the northern bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus. Canadian Field-Naturalist 107:490-508.

Richard, P., pers. comm. 2010. E-mail correspondence to H. Whitehead. September 2010. Research Scientist, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Rogan, E., A. Cañadas, K. Macleod, M.B. Santos, B. Mikkelsen, A. Uriarte, O. Van Canneyt, J.A. Vázquez, and P.S. Hammond. 2017. Distribution, abundance and habitat use of deep diving cetaceans in the North-East Atlantic. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 141:8-19.

Siegal, E. 2020. The foraging behaviour and body condition of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). Ph.D. dissertation. University of St. Andrews, Scotland.

Simmonds, M.P., and L.F. Lopez-Jurado. 1991. Whales and the military. Nature, 351:448-448.

Stanistreet, J.E., D.P. Nowacek, S. Baumann-Pickering, J.T. Bell, D.M. Cholewiak, J.A. Hildebrand, L.E. Hodge, H.B. Moors-Murphy, S.M. Van Parijs, and A.J. Read. 2017. Using passive acoustic monitoring to document the distribution of beaked whale species in the western North Atlantic Ocean. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 72:2098-2109.

Stanistreet, J.E., L.J. Feyrer, and H.B. Moors-Murphy. 2021. Assessment of the distribution, movements, and habitat use of Northern Bottlenose Whales on the Scotian Shelf to support the identification of important habitat. DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. Res. Doc. 2021/074. vi + 34 pp.

Stanistreet, J.E., W.A.M. Beslin, K. Kowarski, S.B. Martin, A. Westell, and H.B. Moors-Murphy. 2022. Changes in the acoustic activity of beaked whales and sperm whales recorded during a naval training exercise off eastern Canada. Scientific Reports, 12: 1973.

Stewart, M. 2018. Connectivity of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) along the eastern Canadian continental shelf. Honours BSc thesis, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 36 pp.

Taylor, B.L., S.J. Chivers, J. Larese, and W.F. Perrin. 2007. Generation length and percent mature estimates for IUCN assessments of cetaceans. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Administrative Report LJ-07-01, 1-24.

Tyack, P.L., M. Johnson, N.A. Soto, A. Sturlese, and P.T. Madsen. 2006. Extreme diving of beaked whales. Journal of Experimental Biology, 209:4238-4253.

Walmsley, S. pers. comm. 2024. Via e-mail correspondence between J. Ford and H. Whitehead. May 2024. Graduate student, Whitehead Lab, Dalhousie University, Halifax.

Waring, G.T., E. Josephson, K. Maze-Foley, and P.E. Rosel. 2014. Trends in selected US Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico marine mammals stock assessments. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-231.

Weilgart, L.S. 2007. The impacts of anthropogenic noise on cetaceans and implications for management. Canadian Journal of Zoology 85:1091-1116.

Wensveen, P.J., S. Isojunno, R.R. Hansen, A.M. von Benda-Beckmann, L. Kleivane, S. van IJsselmuide, F.P.A. Lam, P.H. Kvadsheim, S.L. DeRuiter, C. Curé, and T. Narazaki, P. Tyack, and P.J. Miller. 2019. Northern bottlenose whales in a pristine environment respond strongly to close and distant navy sonar signals. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 286:20182592.

Whitehead, H. pers. comm. 2024. E-mail correspondence with J. Ford. May 2024. Professor, Dalhousie University, Halifax.

Whitehead, H., A. Faucher, S. Gowans, and S. McCarrey. 1997a. Status of the northern bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus, in the Gully, Nova Scotia. Canadian Field Naturalist 111:287-292.

Whitehead, H., S. Gowans, A. Faucher, and S.W. McCarrey. 1997b. Population analysis of northern bottlenose whales in the Gully, Nova Scotia. Marine Mammal Science 13:173-185.

Whitehead, H., and K. Hooker. 2012. Uncertain status of the northern bottlenose whale Hyperoodon ampullatus: population fragmentation, legacy of whaling and current threats. Endangered Species Research 19:47-61.

Whitehead, H., C.D. MacLeod, and P. Rodhouse. 2003. Differences in niche breadth in some teuthivorous mesopelagic marine mammals. Marine Mammal Science 19:400-406.

Whitehead, H., R. Reeves, L. Feyrer, and R.L. Brownell Jr. 2021. Hyperoodon ampullatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2021:T10707A503577

Whitehead, H., and T. Wimmer. 2005. Heterogeneity and the mark-recapture assessment of the Scotian Shelf population of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 62:2573-2585.

Wieczorek, A.M., L. Morrison, P.L. Croot, A.L. Allcock, E. Macloughlin, O. Savard, H. Brownlow, and T.K. Doyle. 2018. Frequency of microplastics in mesopelagic fishes from the Northwest Atlantic. Frontiers in Marine Science 5:39.

Williams, R., D. Cholewiak, C.W. Clark, C. Erbe, C. George, R. Lacy, R. Leaper, S. Moore, L. New, E.C.M. Parsons, H.C. Rosenbaum, T.K. Rowles, M.P. Simmonds, R. Stimmelmayer, R.S. Suydam, and A.J. Wright. 2020. Chronic ocean noise and cetacean population models. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 21:85-94.

Williams, T.M., S.B. Blackwell, O. Tervo, E. Garde, M.H.S. Sinding, B. Richter, and M.P. Heide‐Jørgensen. 2022. Physiological responses of narwhals to anthropogenic noise: A case study with seismic airguns and vessel traffic in the Arctic. Functional Ecology, 36:2251-2266.

Wimmer, T., and H. Whitehead. 2004. Movements and distribution of northern bottlenose whales, Hyperoodon ampullatus, on the Scotian Slope and in adjacent waters. Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:1782-1794.

Woo, K.Y., S. Isojunno, and P.J.O. Miller. 2023. Habitat use of the northern bottlenose whale Hyperoodon ampullatus near Jan Mayen, North Atlantic. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 718:119-136.

Zantis, L.J., E.L. Carroll, S.E. Nelms, and T. Bosker. 2021. Marine mammals and microplastics: a systematic review and call for standardisation. Environmental Pollution, 269:116142.

Collections examined

No collections were examined for the preparation of this report.

Authorities contacted

COSEWIC

• Karen Timm, COSEWIC Secretariat, Gatineau, Quebec
• Sonia Schnobb, COSEWIC Secretariat, Gatineau, Quebec

Federal

• Picard, K. Head, Species at Risk Recovery, Canadian Wildlife Service, Quebec City, Quebec
• Bureau, S. Species at Risk Recovery Coordinator, Canadian Wildlife Service, Quebec City, Quebec
• Mailhiot, J. Head of Recovery Atlantic Region, Canadian Wildlife Service, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
• Gilroy, C. Biologist, Canadian Wildlife Service, Sackville, New Brunswick
• Grant, P. Research Scientist, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Sidney, British Columbia
• de Forest. L. Ecosystem Scientist, Parks Canada, Halifax, Nova Scotia
• McDonald R. Senior Environmental Advisor, Department of National Defence, British Columbia

Provinces/territories

• Sabine, M. Biologist, Species at Risk, Energy and Resource Development, Fredericton New Brunswick
• Humber, J. Ecosystem Management Ecologist, Endangered Species and Biodiversity Wildlife Division, Department of Environment and Conservation, Corner Brook, Newfoundland and Labrador
• Moores, S. Senior Manager, Biodiversity Wildlife Division, Department of Environment and Conservation, Corner Brook, Newfoundland and Labrador
• Hurlburt, D. Wildlife Division Nova Scotia Department of Lands and Forestry, Kentville, Nova Scotia
• Desrosiers, N, Biologist, Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs, Quebec City, Quebec
• Gauthier, I, Biologist, Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs, Quebec City, Quebec

Conservation data centres

• Anctil, A. Biologist, Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec, Quebec City, Quebec
• Blaney, S. Atlantic Canada Conservation Centre, Sackville, New Brunswick
• Klymko, J, Zoologist, Atlantic Canada Conservation Centre, Sackville, New Brunswick
• Durocher, A. Data Manager, Atlantic Canada Conservation Centre, Corner Brook, Newfoundland and Labrador

Wildlife management boards

• Snook, J., Executive Director, Torngat Joint Fisheries Board, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador
• Taylor, C. Fisheries Research Manager, Torngat Joint Fisheries Board, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador
• Dale, A. Research Program Manager, Torngat Wildlife and Plants Co-Management Board, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador
• Akearok, J. Executive Director, Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, Iqaluit, Nunavut
• Ritchie, K. Habitat and Species at Risk Biologist. Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, Iqaluit, Nunavut
• Sataa, T. Receptionist, Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, Iqaluit, Nunavut

Other

• Ilves, K. Research Scientist, Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa, Ontario

Acknowledgements

Funding for the preparation of this report was provided by Environment and Climate Change Canada. The following authorities provided valuable data and/or advice: Hal Whitehead, Hilary Moors-Murphy, Laura Feyrer, and Sasha Hooker. Members of the Marine Mammals SSC and COSEWIC provided helpful edits and suggestions. The report writers would also like to thank Hal Whitehead and Tonya Wimmer for their work on the previous COSEWIC report on Northern Bottlenose Whales.

Biographical summary of report writer(s)

Shannon Gowans has been researching cetaceans since 1993. She first worked on the distribution of small cetaceans in the offshore waters of Nova Scotia. Her Ph.D. focused on the social organization and population size of Northern Bottlenose Whales in the Gully. During this time she also established a non-profit research organization (Blind Bay Cetacean Studies, with Peter Simard) to conduct research on cetaceans off the coast of Halifax (active research 1997 to 2007). From 2002 to 2004 she conducted post-doc research at Texas A&M investigating the social and population structure of Atlantic white-sided and white-beaked dolphins. Since September 2004, she has been working at Eckerd College, where she is currently a Professor of Marine Science and Biology . Her current research focuses on local Bottlenose Dolphins and is associated with her coordination of the Eckerd College Dolphin Project (ECDP), the longest running undergraduate marine mammal research program. Shannon co-authored one of the previous COSEWIC reports on Northern Bottlenose Whales, and also co-authored, with Peter Simard, status reports on Sowerby’s Beaked Whales and Sei Whales.

Peter Simard began his research career in 1994, working on the distribution of Northern Bottlenose Whales in relation to the bathymetry and physical oceanography of the Gully submarine canyon. Along with Shannon Gowans, he established Blind Bay Cetacean Studies to investigate the distribution patterns and population structure of coastal cetaceans in Nova Scotia. His Ph.D. work at the University of South Florida investigated the distribution of dolphins along the West Florida Shelf. This work combined visual surveys and passive acoustic monitoring to investigate spatial and temporal patterns of dolphin distribution. His post-doctoral research investigated the impact of artificial reefs in the marine environment, with a focus on the relative abundance of dolphins and recreational boats in relation to artificial and natural reefs. He is currently studying an inshore population of Bottlenose Dolphins with the Eckerd College Dolphin Project.

Appendix 1. Threats assessment for Northern Bottlenose Whale, Davis Strait – Baffin Bay – Labrador Sea population

Species or ecosystem scientific name: Hyperoodon ampullatus - Davis Strait- Baffin Bay - Labrador Sea population

Assessor(s):Shannon Gowans and Peter Simard

Assigned overall threat impact: C = Medium

Impact adjustment reasons: Majority of significant threats are Low, only 1 is Medium. Level of threats lower than Scotian Shelf DU, which has High assigned overall threat impact.

Overall threat comments: Not applicable

Classification of Threats adopted from IUCN-CMP, Salafsky et al. (2008).

Appendix 2. Threats assessment for Northern Bottlenose Whale, Scotian Shelf population

Species or ecosystem scientific name: Hyperoodon ampullatus - Scotian Shelf population

Assessor(s): Shannon Gowans and Peter Simard

Assigned overall threat impact: B = High

Impact adjustment reasons: Potential threats from acoustic sources such as military sonar, which had High calculated impact, can be effectively mitigated.

Overall threat comments: Not applicable

Classification of Threats adopted from IUCN-CMP, Salafsky et al. (2008).