Blount, D.,Minton, G.,Khan, Christin B.,Levenson, Jacob,Dulau, Violaine,Gero, S.,Parham, J.,Holmberg, Jason
Document presented to the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission no. 330, 2020.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, Artificial intelligence, Flukebook, humpback dolphin, Humpback Whale, Indian Ocean, matching, megaptera novaeangliae, methodology, Oman, photo identification, Sousa chinensis
@techreport{,
title = {Flukebook – Continuing growth and technical advancement for cetacean photo identification and data archiving, including automated fin, fluke, and body matching},
author = {Blount, D.,Minton, G.,Khan, Christin B.,Levenson, Jacob,Dulau, Violaine,Gero, S.,Parham, J.,Holmberg, Jason},
url = {https://arabianseawhalenetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/sc_68b_ph_06_flukebook-developments-incl-aswn-and-indocet-1.pdf},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
journal = {Paper presented to the meeting of the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission},
number = {330},
pages = {13},
publisher = {IWC},
institution = {Document presented to the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission},
abstract = {Flukebook (flukebook.org) is a non-profit, open source cetacean data archiving and
photo-identification tool developed under the larger Wildbook platform (wildbook.org) that uses
computer vision and machine learning to facilitate automated identification of individual animals
in the wild. In 2016, the IWC approved funding for the development of a regional data platform
for the Arabian Sea Whale Network (ASWN) to be implemented in collaboration with Wild Me
(wildme.org), the software and machine learning developers of Flukebook. This foundational
collaboration expanded the capabilities of Flukebook and served as the springboard for
subsequent years of growth in data and usage (e.g., by regional consortiums), as well as
significant technical improvements in 2019-2020 in the application of computer vision and
machine learning, specifically for North Atlantic and Southern right whales, humpback whales,
sperm whales, and multiple species of dolphins. Ongoing improvements in our community
support model and technical advances are bringing together industry, governmental, and NGO
collaborators in a global-scale platform for cetacean research.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, Artificial intelligence, Flukebook, humpback dolphin, Humpback Whale, Indian Ocean, matching, megaptera novaeangliae, methodology, Oman, photo identification, Sousa chinensis},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
Flukebook (flukebook.org) is a non-profit, open source cetacean data archiving and
photo-identification tool developed under the larger Wildbook platform (wildbook.org) that uses
computer vision and machine learning to facilitate automated identification of individual animals
in the wild. In 2016, the IWC approved funding for the development of a regional data platform
for the Arabian Sea Whale Network (ASWN) to be implemented in collaboration with Wild Me
(wildme.org), the software and machine learning developers of Flukebook. This foundational
collaboration expanded the capabilities of Flukebook and served as the springboard for
subsequent years of growth in data and usage (e.g., by regional consortiums), as well as
significant technical improvements in 2019-2020 in the application of computer vision and
machine learning, specifically for North Atlantic and Southern right whales, humpback whales,
sperm whales, and multiple species of dolphins. Ongoing improvements in our community
support model and technical advances are bringing together industry, governmental, and NGO
collaborators in a global-scale platform for cetacean research.
photo-identification tool developed under the larger Wildbook platform (wildbook.org) that uses
computer vision and machine learning to facilitate automated identification of individual animals
in the wild. In 2016, the IWC approved funding for the development of a regional data platform
for the Arabian Sea Whale Network (ASWN) to be implemented in collaboration with Wild Me
(wildme.org), the software and machine learning developers of Flukebook. This foundational
collaboration expanded the capabilities of Flukebook and served as the springboard for
subsequent years of growth in data and usage (e.g., by regional consortiums), as well as
significant technical improvements in 2019-2020 in the application of computer vision and
machine learning, specifically for North Atlantic and Southern right whales, humpback whales,
sperm whales, and multiple species of dolphins. Ongoing improvements in our community
support model and technical advances are bringing together industry, governmental, and NGO
collaborators in a global-scale platform for cetacean research.
Bopardikar, Isha,Sutaria, Dipani,Sule, Mihir,Jog, Ketki,Patankar, Vardhan,Klinck, Holger
Description and classification of Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea) whistles recorded off the Sindhudurg coast of Maharashtra, India Journal Article
In: Marine Mammal Science, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 755-776, 2018, ISSN: 1748-7692.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, humpback dolphin, India, passive acoustic monitoring, sousa, Sousa plumbea, vocalization, Whistle, whistles
@article{,
title = {Description and classification of Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea) whistles recorded off the Sindhudurg coast of Maharashtra, India},
author = {Bopardikar, Isha,Sutaria, Dipani,Sule, Mihir,Jog, Ketki,Patankar, Vardhan,Klinck, Holger},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/mms.12479},
issn = {1748-7692},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-01-01},
journal = {Marine Mammal Science},
volume = {34},
number = {3},
pages = {755-776},
abstract = {The Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea), a common cetacean species in India, has a diverse vocal repertoire, which to date has not been described in detail. This study focused on analyzing their whistle vocalizations. Humpback dolphins were recorded off the Sindhudurg coast of Maharashtra, India, and 2,260 whistles were analyzed for their acoustic characteristics. Whistles spanned a wide frequency range between 2.3 kHz and 33.0 kHz, with durations ranging from 0.01 s to 1.60 s. Whistles were categorized into seven contour classes based on their qualitative properties. A classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was used to quantify variability between the seven contour classes using the measured acoustic features. Based on the CART analysis, frequency gradient, minimum slope, maximum slope, beginning and ending slope accounted for most variability between whistle types. CART resulted in an overall classification accuracy of 89.5%. This study provides a detailed description of acoustic features and qualitative properties of humpback dolphin whistles from the northwestern coast of India. Further comparisons of acoustic data from Sousa populations along the Indian coast are necessary to determine possible geographic variations in whistle characteristics and whether the variations are driven by environmental or genetic factors or a combination of both.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, humpback dolphin, India, passive acoustic monitoring, sousa, Sousa plumbea, vocalization, Whistle, whistles},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea), a common cetacean species in India, has a diverse vocal repertoire, which to date has not been described in detail. This study focused on analyzing their whistle vocalizations. Humpback dolphins were recorded off the Sindhudurg coast of Maharashtra, India, and 2,260 whistles were analyzed for their acoustic characteristics. Whistles spanned a wide frequency range between 2.3 kHz and 33.0 kHz, with durations ranging from 0.01 s to 1.60 s. Whistles were categorized into seven contour classes based on their qualitative properties. A classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was used to quantify variability between the seven contour classes using the measured acoustic features. Based on the CART analysis, frequency gradient, minimum slope, maximum slope, beginning and ending slope accounted for most variability between whistle types. CART resulted in an overall classification accuracy of 89.5%. This study provides a detailed description of acoustic features and qualitative properties of humpback dolphin whistles from the northwestern coast of India. Further comparisons of acoustic data from Sousa populations along the Indian coast are necessary to determine possible geographic variations in whistle characteristics and whether the variations are driven by environmental or genetic factors or a combination of both.
Braulik, G.,Findlay, K,Cerchio, S,Baldwin, R,Perrin, W.
Sousa plumbea Book
e.T82031633A82031644. Downloaded on 10 December 2017., 2017.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, Bycatch, conservation status, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, Sousa plumbea, Threat assessment
@book{,
title = {Sousa plumbea},
author = {Braulik, G.,Findlay, K,Cerchio, S,Baldwin, R,Perrin, W.},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species},
number = {49},
publisher = {e.T82031633A82031644. Downloaded on 10 December 2017.},
abstract = {Endangered: Justification:
In the places where studies have occurred, Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin subpopulations were found to be small: always fewer than 500 and generally fewer than 100 individuals in discrete, or semi-isolated areas. Humpback dolphins have one of the most specific habitat preferences and restricted distributions of any marine megafauna, and both of these characteristics are well known to reduce the resilience of species to environmental change and anthropogenic threats and to increase their extinction risk (Davidson et al. 2011, Dulvy et al. 2014, Purvis et al. 2000). Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphins are concentrated in coastal waters within 2 km of shore and they are often sighted only a few hundred meters from land. This distribution places them in exactly the same location as the majority of small-scale fishing effort prevalent throughout their range in the same nearshore habitat. As a result, humpback dolphins encounter large numbers of coastal gillnets and are at high risk of entanglement. High and clearly unsustainable mortality rates have been reported from several areas and frequent encounters with fishing gear can be inferred from the high degree of scarring and injury—for example, 41% of individuals in Pemba, Tanzania bore gear-related scars (Braulik unpub. data). Although information on population size, threats and mortality is available only for portions of the species range, there are strong reasons to suspect and infer that the threats will be similar or possibly even more intense elsewhere.
The deaths of only 4.2 individuals per year from a population of 100 would result in a 50% decline (Moore 2015). The available evidence on the studied subpopulations in South Africa and all indications from elsewhere in the range suggest that mortality rates are consistently at or above the rate that would result in a 50% decline in 75 years (three generations). The species’ preferred habitat and small populations overlap in both space and time with several ubiquitous and pervasive threats that are increasing in severity, leaving no refuges for these dolphins. The threats are serious enough in a large enough proportion of the total species range that a range-wide decline of at least 50% over three generations spanning both the past and the future (about 75 years, from 1960 (the start of intensive mono-filament gillnetting in this region) to 2035) is suspected and inferred and the causes of the decline (bycatch and hunting [both considered here to constitute ‘exploitation’], decline in habitat quality and possibly pollution) have not ceased. Therefore, the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin qualifies for Endangered A4cd.
The factor primarily responsible for the decline is incidental mortality in small-scale coastal fisheries, but the loss, degradation and pollution of habitat in numerous coastal areas is a contributing and increasing factor. The threats have not been mitigated anywhere in the species’ range, even though threat levels are increasing virtually everywhere. All evidence suggests that threats and declines will continue and are likely to increase in the future and worldwide there are almost no examples where cetacean bycatch in small-scale artisanal fisheries has been successfully addressed. Alternative methods for small-scale fisheries to replace gillnets are not generally available. Therefore, the species also qualifies for Endangered 3cd as a decline of over 50% can be projected to occur over the next three generations (75 years from 2016 to 2091). It also qualifies for Endangered A2cd as a decline of over 50% is suspected over the last 75 years beginning with the expansion of the use of gillnets in global marine fisheries from around the end of the Second World War up to the present day.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, Bycatch, conservation status, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, Sousa plumbea, Threat assessment},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {book}
}
Endangered: Justification:
In the places where studies have occurred, Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin subpopulations were found to be small: always fewer than 500 and generally fewer than 100 individuals in discrete, or semi-isolated areas. Humpback dolphins have one of the most specific habitat preferences and restricted distributions of any marine megafauna, and both of these characteristics are well known to reduce the resilience of species to environmental change and anthropogenic threats and to increase their extinction risk (Davidson et al. 2011, Dulvy et al. 2014, Purvis et al. 2000). Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphins are concentrated in coastal waters within 2 km of shore and they are often sighted only a few hundred meters from land. This distribution places them in exactly the same location as the majority of small-scale fishing effort prevalent throughout their range in the same nearshore habitat. As a result, humpback dolphins encounter large numbers of coastal gillnets and are at high risk of entanglement. High and clearly unsustainable mortality rates have been reported from several areas and frequent encounters with fishing gear can be inferred from the high degree of scarring and injury—for example, 41% of individuals in Pemba, Tanzania bore gear-related scars (Braulik unpub. data). Although information on population size, threats and mortality is available only for portions of the species range, there are strong reasons to suspect and infer that the threats will be similar or possibly even more intense elsewhere.
The deaths of only 4.2 individuals per year from a population of 100 would result in a 50% decline (Moore 2015). The available evidence on the studied subpopulations in South Africa and all indications from elsewhere in the range suggest that mortality rates are consistently at or above the rate that would result in a 50% decline in 75 years (three generations). The species’ preferred habitat and small populations overlap in both space and time with several ubiquitous and pervasive threats that are increasing in severity, leaving no refuges for these dolphins. The threats are serious enough in a large enough proportion of the total species range that a range-wide decline of at least 50% over three generations spanning both the past and the future (about 75 years, from 1960 (the start of intensive mono-filament gillnetting in this region) to 2035) is suspected and inferred and the causes of the decline (bycatch and hunting [both considered here to constitute ‘exploitation’], decline in habitat quality and possibly pollution) have not ceased. Therefore, the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin qualifies for Endangered A4cd.
The factor primarily responsible for the decline is incidental mortality in small-scale coastal fisheries, but the loss, degradation and pollution of habitat in numerous coastal areas is a contributing and increasing factor. The threats have not been mitigated anywhere in the species’ range, even though threat levels are increasing virtually everywhere. All evidence suggests that threats and declines will continue and are likely to increase in the future and worldwide there are almost no examples where cetacean bycatch in small-scale artisanal fisheries has been successfully addressed. Alternative methods for small-scale fisheries to replace gillnets are not generally available. Therefore, the species also qualifies for Endangered 3cd as a decline of over 50% can be projected to occur over the next three generations (75 years from 2016 to 2091). It also qualifies for Endangered A2cd as a decline of over 50% is suspected over the last 75 years beginning with the expansion of the use of gillnets in global marine fisheries from around the end of the Second World War up to the present day.
In the places where studies have occurred, Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin subpopulations were found to be small: always fewer than 500 and generally fewer than 100 individuals in discrete, or semi-isolated areas. Humpback dolphins have one of the most specific habitat preferences and restricted distributions of any marine megafauna, and both of these characteristics are well known to reduce the resilience of species to environmental change and anthropogenic threats and to increase their extinction risk (Davidson et al. 2011, Dulvy et al. 2014, Purvis et al. 2000). Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphins are concentrated in coastal waters within 2 km of shore and they are often sighted only a few hundred meters from land. This distribution places them in exactly the same location as the majority of small-scale fishing effort prevalent throughout their range in the same nearshore habitat. As a result, humpback dolphins encounter large numbers of coastal gillnets and are at high risk of entanglement. High and clearly unsustainable mortality rates have been reported from several areas and frequent encounters with fishing gear can be inferred from the high degree of scarring and injury—for example, 41% of individuals in Pemba, Tanzania bore gear-related scars (Braulik unpub. data). Although information on population size, threats and mortality is available only for portions of the species range, there are strong reasons to suspect and infer that the threats will be similar or possibly even more intense elsewhere.
The deaths of only 4.2 individuals per year from a population of 100 would result in a 50% decline (Moore 2015). The available evidence on the studied subpopulations in South Africa and all indications from elsewhere in the range suggest that mortality rates are consistently at or above the rate that would result in a 50% decline in 75 years (three generations). The species’ preferred habitat and small populations overlap in both space and time with several ubiquitous and pervasive threats that are increasing in severity, leaving no refuges for these dolphins. The threats are serious enough in a large enough proportion of the total species range that a range-wide decline of at least 50% over three generations spanning both the past and the future (about 75 years, from 1960 (the start of intensive mono-filament gillnetting in this region) to 2035) is suspected and inferred and the causes of the decline (bycatch and hunting [both considered here to constitute ‘exploitation’], decline in habitat quality and possibly pollution) have not ceased. Therefore, the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin qualifies for Endangered A4cd.
The factor primarily responsible for the decline is incidental mortality in small-scale coastal fisheries, but the loss, degradation and pollution of habitat in numerous coastal areas is a contributing and increasing factor. The threats have not been mitigated anywhere in the species’ range, even though threat levels are increasing virtually everywhere. All evidence suggests that threats and declines will continue and are likely to increase in the future and worldwide there are almost no examples where cetacean bycatch in small-scale artisanal fisheries has been successfully addressed. Alternative methods for small-scale fisheries to replace gillnets are not generally available. Therefore, the species also qualifies for Endangered 3cd as a decline of over 50% can be projected to occur over the next three generations (75 years from 2016 to 2091). It also qualifies for Endangered A2cd as a decline of over 50% is suspected over the last 75 years beginning with the expansion of the use of gillnets in global marine fisheries from around the end of the Second World War up to the present day.
Jefferson, T.,Smith, B.D.,Braulik, G.,Perrin, W.
Sousa chinensis Book
e.T82031633A82031644. Downloaded on 10 December 2017., 2017.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, Bycatch, conservation status, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, Sousa plumbea, Threat assessment
@book{,
title = {Sousa chinensis},
author = {Jefferson, T.,Smith, B.D.,Braulik, G.,Perrin, W.},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species},
number = {126},
publisher = {e.T82031633A82031644. Downloaded on 10 December 2017.},
abstract = {Vulnerable: Justification:
The only available population trend estimate for S. chinensis is an estimated 2.46% annual decline in the size of the subpopulation in HK/PRE (Huang et al. 2012), where there are a number of marine parks and reserves in place for dolphin protection, and where the Hong Kong authorities have put more effort into impact assessment and management than in any other part of the species’ range (see Jefferson et al. 2009). The situation elsewhere appears to be more dire, with fisheries bycatch being a nearly-universal threat. Population reductions of at least 3.7% per annum (see below for information that human-caused mortality rates of 3.7% would lead to a 30% decline in abundance over three generations) can therefore be inferred over most of the species’ range, due to known incidental mortality from intensive fishing effort using entangling gears, and ongoing habitat loss and degradation due to coastal development. Vessel collisions and environmental contamination appear to be factors as well, in at least some parts of the range. The above inference is supported in several areas by direct and/or indirect evidence, including documentation of bycatch, the intensive use of gillnets and other fishing gears known to entangle small cetaceans, interviews with fishermen who use entangling gears, and the abandonment of areas of previous occupancy (see Xu et al. 2015).
The Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin therefore qualifies for Vulnerable A3cd+4cd, based on an inferred population size reduction, where subcriterion c is interpreted as quality of habitat, and subcriterion d (actual or potential levels of exploitation) includes fisheries bycatch. We can infer a population reduction of greater than or equal to 30% over three generations (75 years), from approximately 1960 in the past to 2035 in the future. This takes into account that the main causes of the suspected/inferred decline in population size, bycatch and habitat destruction/degradation, have not ceased and are not well understood throughout most of the species’ range. Other than in Hong Kong (and to a lesser extent Taiwan), there have been virtually no conservation actions taken to address these threats, and available evidence suggests that they will continue and may even escalate in the future. The assessment of S. chinensis as Vulnerable based on criterion A3cd+4cd applies, regardless of whether or not the Bangladesh/eastern India animals are included, because it is based on population trends, rather than absolute numbers or a declining range.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, Bycatch, conservation status, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, Sousa plumbea, Threat assessment},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {book}
}
Vulnerable: Justification:
The only available population trend estimate for S. chinensis is an estimated 2.46% annual decline in the size of the subpopulation in HK/PRE (Huang et al. 2012), where there are a number of marine parks and reserves in place for dolphin protection, and where the Hong Kong authorities have put more effort into impact assessment and management than in any other part of the species’ range (see Jefferson et al. 2009). The situation elsewhere appears to be more dire, with fisheries bycatch being a nearly-universal threat. Population reductions of at least 3.7% per annum (see below for information that human-caused mortality rates of 3.7% would lead to a 30% decline in abundance over three generations) can therefore be inferred over most of the species’ range, due to known incidental mortality from intensive fishing effort using entangling gears, and ongoing habitat loss and degradation due to coastal development. Vessel collisions and environmental contamination appear to be factors as well, in at least some parts of the range. The above inference is supported in several areas by direct and/or indirect evidence, including documentation of bycatch, the intensive use of gillnets and other fishing gears known to entangle small cetaceans, interviews with fishermen who use entangling gears, and the abandonment of areas of previous occupancy (see Xu et al. 2015).
The Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin therefore qualifies for Vulnerable A3cd+4cd, based on an inferred population size reduction, where subcriterion c is interpreted as quality of habitat, and subcriterion d (actual or potential levels of exploitation) includes fisheries bycatch. We can infer a population reduction of greater than or equal to 30% over three generations (75 years), from approximately 1960 in the past to 2035 in the future. This takes into account that the main causes of the suspected/inferred decline in population size, bycatch and habitat destruction/degradation, have not ceased and are not well understood throughout most of the species’ range. Other than in Hong Kong (and to a lesser extent Taiwan), there have been virtually no conservation actions taken to address these threats, and available evidence suggests that they will continue and may even escalate in the future. The assessment of S. chinensis as Vulnerable based on criterion A3cd+4cd applies, regardless of whether or not the Bangladesh/eastern India animals are included, because it is based on population trends, rather than absolute numbers or a declining range.
The only available population trend estimate for S. chinensis is an estimated 2.46% annual decline in the size of the subpopulation in HK/PRE (Huang et al. 2012), where there are a number of marine parks and reserves in place for dolphin protection, and where the Hong Kong authorities have put more effort into impact assessment and management than in any other part of the species’ range (see Jefferson et al. 2009). The situation elsewhere appears to be more dire, with fisheries bycatch being a nearly-universal threat. Population reductions of at least 3.7% per annum (see below for information that human-caused mortality rates of 3.7% would lead to a 30% decline in abundance over three generations) can therefore be inferred over most of the species’ range, due to known incidental mortality from intensive fishing effort using entangling gears, and ongoing habitat loss and degradation due to coastal development. Vessel collisions and environmental contamination appear to be factors as well, in at least some parts of the range. The above inference is supported in several areas by direct and/or indirect evidence, including documentation of bycatch, the intensive use of gillnets and other fishing gears known to entangle small cetaceans, interviews with fishermen who use entangling gears, and the abandonment of areas of previous occupancy (see Xu et al. 2015).
The Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin therefore qualifies for Vulnerable A3cd+4cd, based on an inferred population size reduction, where subcriterion c is interpreted as quality of habitat, and subcriterion d (actual or potential levels of exploitation) includes fisheries bycatch. We can infer a population reduction of greater than or equal to 30% over three generations (75 years), from approximately 1960 in the past to 2035 in the future. This takes into account that the main causes of the suspected/inferred decline in population size, bycatch and habitat destruction/degradation, have not ceased and are not well understood throughout most of the species’ range. Other than in Hong Kong (and to a lesser extent Taiwan), there have been virtually no conservation actions taken to address these threats, and available evidence suggests that they will continue and may even escalate in the future. The assessment of S. chinensis as Vulnerable based on criterion A3cd+4cd applies, regardless of whether or not the Bangladesh/eastern India animals are included, because it is based on population trends, rather than absolute numbers or a declining range.
Jog, Ketki,Sule, Mihir,Bopardikar, Isha,Patankar, Vardhan,Sutaria, Dipani
Living with dolphins: Local ecological knowledge and perceptions of small cetaceans along the Sindhudurg coastline of Maharashtra, India Journal Article
In: Marine Mammal Science, vol. 34, no. 128, pp. 488-498, 2017, ISBN: 1748-7692.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, Bycatch, cetacean-fisheries interactions, competition, Finless Porpoise, humpback dolphin, India, local ecological knowledge, Marine mammals, Neophocaena phocaenoides, perceptions, Sousa plumbea
@article{,
title = {Living with dolphins: Local ecological knowledge and perceptions of small cetaceans along the Sindhudurg coastline of Maharashtra, India},
author = {Jog, Ketki,Sule, Mihir,Bopardikar, Isha,Patankar, Vardhan,Sutaria, Dipani},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/mms.12466},
issn = {1748-7692},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Marine Mammal Science},
volume = {34},
number = {128},
pages = {488-498},
abstract = {Two near shore small cetaceans occur commonly along the Maharashtra coast, the Indian Ocean humpback dolphin and Indo Pacific finless porpoise. These cetaceans frequently interact with fisheries in this region due to overlap in space and resource use. Besides stranding records, little ecological information is available about these species from Maharashtra. We conducted 143 semistructured interviews to document local ecological knowledge and community perceptions of small cetaceans in 30 coastal fishing villages in Sindhudurg. Perceptions of finless porpoises were largely neutral, whereas humpback dolphins were negative. A classification regression tree (CART) analysis (root node error: 60%) showed that the annual cost of gear damage was an important predictor variable of humpback dolphin perceptions, followed by occupation (gear type) and age. Entanglements were reported for both species in large and small gill nets, and shore seines. Perceived net damage and catch loss due to humpback dolphins was six times greater than that of finless porpoises. However, finless porpoises were reportedly more frequently entangled in gear than humpback dolphins. We provide an insight into the perceptions of cetaceans in the local community and the fisheries-cetacean interactions that shape them.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, Bycatch, cetacean-fisheries interactions, competition, Finless Porpoise, humpback dolphin, India, local ecological knowledge, Marine mammals, Neophocaena phocaenoides, perceptions, Sousa plumbea},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Two near shore small cetaceans occur commonly along the Maharashtra coast, the Indian Ocean humpback dolphin and Indo Pacific finless porpoise. These cetaceans frequently interact with fisheries in this region due to overlap in space and resource use. Besides stranding records, little ecological information is available about these species from Maharashtra. We conducted 143 semistructured interviews to document local ecological knowledge and community perceptions of small cetaceans in 30 coastal fishing villages in Sindhudurg. Perceptions of finless porpoises were largely neutral, whereas humpback dolphins were negative. A classification regression tree (CART) analysis (root node error: 60%) showed that the annual cost of gear damage was an important predictor variable of humpback dolphin perceptions, followed by occupation (gear type) and age. Entanglements were reported for both species in large and small gill nets, and shore seines. Perceived net damage and catch loss due to humpback dolphins was six times greater than that of finless porpoises. However, finless porpoises were reportedly more frequently entangled in gear than humpback dolphins. We provide an insight into the perceptions of cetaceans in the local community and the fisheries-cetacean interactions that shape them.
Nanayakkara, Ranil,Kusuminda, Tharaka,Jefferson, Thomas
Can the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin ( Journal Article
In: Aquatic Mammals, vol. 40, no. 178, pp. 398-406, 2014.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, Distribution, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, Indian Ocean humpback dolphin, Individual identification, photo identification, population, Sousa plumbea, Sri Lanka
@article{,
title = {Can the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin (},
author = {Nanayakkara, Ranil,Kusuminda, Tharaka,Jefferson, Thomas},
year = {2014},
date = {2014-01-01},
journal = {Aquatic Mammals},
volume = {40},
number = {178},
pages = {398-406},
abstract = {Until the last few years, the only records of Indian Ocean humpback dolphins (Sousa plumbea) in Sri Lanka were a small number of older stranding records and one unconfirmed sighting, but repeated verified sightings have been made since the early 2000s in the Puttalam Lagoon area of northwestern Sri Lanka. To determine dolphin status and distribution patterns, we conducted monthly surveys of the lagoon from July 2010 to June 2011 and sighted humpback dolphins in the lagoon in every month of the year. Repeated sightings of the same six individuals were made; and in March 2011, one of these humpback dolphins was killed by dynamite fishing. It appears that the population is very small, possibly now consisting only of these five individuals, and is resident in the lagoon. Although it is likely the species was more widespread and abundant in the past, it appears that Puttalam Lagoon may be the only location where this species persists in Sri Lanka at present. Additional research is needed to investigate possible mixing with populations in India, and urgent conservation measures are recommended to ensure the long-term survival of this enigmatic species in Sri Lanka.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, Distribution, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, Indian Ocean humpback dolphin, Individual identification, photo identification, population, Sousa plumbea, Sri Lanka},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Until the last few years, the only records of Indian Ocean humpback dolphins (Sousa plumbea) in Sri Lanka were a small number of older stranding records and one unconfirmed sighting, but repeated verified sightings have been made since the early 2000s in the Puttalam Lagoon area of northwestern Sri Lanka. To determine dolphin status and distribution patterns, we conducted monthly surveys of the lagoon from July 2010 to June 2011 and sighted humpback dolphins in the lagoon in every month of the year. Repeated sightings of the same six individuals were made; and in March 2011, one of these humpback dolphins was killed by dynamite fishing. It appears that the population is very small, possibly now consisting only of these five individuals, and is resident in the lagoon. Although it is likely the species was more widespread and abundant in the past, it appears that Puttalam Lagoon may be the only location where this species persists in Sri Lanka at present. Additional research is needed to investigate possible mixing with populations in India, and urgent conservation measures are recommended to ensure the long-term survival of this enigmatic species in Sri Lanka.
Nanayakkara, Ranil P,Kusuminda, Tharaka,Jefferson, Thomas A
Can the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin ( Journal Article
In: Aquatic Mammals, vol. 40, no. 182, pp. 398, 2014, ISBN: 0167-5427.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, photo identification, population status, sousa, Sousa plumbea, Sri Lanka, Threat assessment
@article{,
title = {Can the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin (},
author = {Nanayakkara, Ranil P,Kusuminda, Tharaka,Jefferson, Thomas A},
issn = {0167-5427},
year = {2014},
date = {2014-01-01},
journal = {Aquatic Mammals},
volume = {40},
number = {182},
pages = {398},
abstract = { Until the last few years, the only records of Indian Ocean humpback dolphins (Sousa plumbea) in Sri Lanka were a small number of older stranding records and one unconfirmed sighting, but repeated verified sightings have been made since the early 2000s in the Puttalam Lagoon area of northwestern Sri Lanka. To determine dolphin status and distribution patterns, we conducted monthly surveys of the lagoon from July 2010 to June 2011 and sighted humpback dolphins in the lagoon in every month of the year. Repeated sightings of the same six individuals were made; and in March 2011, one of these humpback dolphins was killed by dynamite fishing. It appears that the population is very small, possibly now consisting only of these five individuals, and is resident in the lagoon. Although it is likely the species was more widespread and abundant in the past, it appears that Puttalam Lagoon may be the only location where this species persists in Sri Lanka at present. Additional research is needed to investigate possible mixing with populations in India, and urgent conservation measures are recommended to ensure the long-term survival of this enigmatic species in Sri Lanka.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, humpback dolphin, Indian Ocean, photo identification, population status, sousa, Sousa plumbea, Sri Lanka, Threat assessment},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Until the last few years, the only records of Indian Ocean humpback dolphins (Sousa plumbea) in Sri Lanka were a small number of older stranding records and one unconfirmed sighting, but repeated verified sightings have been made since the early 2000s in the Puttalam Lagoon area of northwestern Sri Lanka. To determine dolphin status and distribution patterns, we conducted monthly surveys of the lagoon from July 2010 to June 2011 and sighted humpback dolphins in the lagoon in every month of the year. Repeated sightings of the same six individuals were made; and in March 2011, one of these humpback dolphins was killed by dynamite fishing. It appears that the population is very small, possibly now consisting only of these five individuals, and is resident in the lagoon. Although it is likely the species was more widespread and abundant in the past, it appears that Puttalam Lagoon may be the only location where this species persists in Sri Lanka at present. Additional research is needed to investigate possible mixing with populations in India, and urgent conservation measures are recommended to ensure the long-term survival of this enigmatic species in Sri Lanka.