2Surprise Whales

4A Whale of a Problem

5Luna Farewell

Orca Update

6Chinook to Go

The B.C. Wild Killer Whale Adoption Program, hosted by the Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre, is an ongoing research and conservation effort for the protection of wild killer whales and their habitat.

Visit our website!

www.killerwhale.org

Rod

Pa

lm /

StR

awbe

RRy

ISle

ReS

eaRc

h S

oc

Iety

n this year’s edition of the blackfish Sounder, we once again present breaking stories from the fascinating field of killer whale research.

one story details a study showing that female resident killer whales share almost every fish they catch. another suggests that the word is out among transient killer whales in southeast alaska about a tasty population of harbour seals 600 miles away in washington state. yet another describes evidence that killer whales take a surprisingly high proportion of gray whale calves as they transit to the bering Sea—and raises questions about how these preda-tors survived when gray whales were all but wiped out last century. and one story is not concerned with research at all, but rather with memories of luna, the playful young whale whose isolation in Nootka Sound captured the attention of the world.

the killer whale adoption program will help fund an international meeting this october on the grow-ing problem of depredation—removal of fish from

fishing gear—by killer and sperm whales. the event will focus on solutions that save both whales and the livelihoods of fishermen. other important projects supported by the adoption program that are not described in this edition include research into the evolutionary divergence of resident and transient killer whales (charissa Fung), the causes of a massive decline of sea otters in western alaska (Katie Kuker), and the effects of boat exhaust on whales and dol-phins (cara lachmuth).

I thank you very much for your support, and look forward to another busy year of killer whale research.

Dr. Lance Barrett-LennardSenior Marine Mammal Research Scientist

Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre

I

No.14 • 2006

The size and power of an adult male killer whale are evident in this photo of transient T7A, taken during an attack on a Steller sea lion this February near Tofino, on the west coast of Vancouver Island. It took T7A and his probable mother,T7, almost two hours to kill the sea lion, using repeated belly-flops and tail and pectoral slaps. The T7s are one of the most commonly seen transient groups in British Columbia.

See page two for more on transient diets.

I N S I D E

ReN

au

d d

e St

ePh

aN

IS /

cIR

ce

What's for Dinner?

2

P O D P O U R R I

That was TOO close!August 20, 2005 is one day Ellis Miller will never forget. The 12-year-old was splashing in chest-deep water near Ketchikan, Alaska when he heard a “boom” that sounded like a gun. When his nearby parents shouted out a warning, the boy turned to see a tall dorsal fin slicing through the water toward him. When he lowered his head underwater, he came face to face with a charging killer whale.

The whale bumped him on the left side of his chest and shoulder and then arched around him. At this point, his frantic mother grabbed him and the pressure wave created by the whale’s charge swept them both toward the beach. The whole incident lasted about five seconds. The whale returned to deeper water where it was joined by six companions. They swam back and forth several times, and then began slapping the water with their tails and pectoral fins. Ten minutes later they were gone.

It’s believed the incident was an aborted attack. “It was likely a tran-sient that thought, up until the last moment, that it had found a seal in the shallows,” Alaskan whale researcher Craig Matkin told the Ketchikan Daily News. There has never been a docu-mented fatal attack on a human by a wild killer whale, although a surfer was bitten (probably also by mistake) off California in the early 1970s.

ow much do transient killer whales need to eat every day?

the best way to find out would be to confine a group of whales to a specific area over a certain period of time. add a known amount of prey. then sit back and watch as nature takes it course.

In a way, that dream scenario came true—not once, but twice. In 2003 and 2005 transient killer whales came for an extended stay in hood canal, a narrow, 100-km fjord on the west side of Puget Sound, opposite Seattle.

at the time, Josh london, then a Phd student at the university of washington, was studying the foraging ecology of the canal’s harbour seals, estimated at slightly more than 1,000 in 2002.

In 2003, 11 transients entered the canal. Fifty-nine days and an estimated 950 seal meals later, the whales departed, leaving london to reconfigure his seal popula-tion estimates, and many whale biologists scratching their heads. transients rarely stay in one place longer than one or two days, and all but one of the whales are normally seen in southeastern alaska.

then it happened again. In January 2005, six differ-ent transients from southeastern alaska—two females each with two calves—came into the canal. over the next 172 days an estimated 950 seals were devoured.

based on his field observations of the foraging whales and bioenergetic modelling, london conclud-ed that, on average, seals were consumed at a rate of one per day per whale. yet oddly enough, aerial surveys conducted after each killer whale visit failed to show a decline in the seal population.

london says that seal movement in and out of the canal is likely not a factor. So what’s the expla-nation? “there are two other possibilities,” he says. “the whales only feed during daylight hours, and are therefore eating fewer seals than we calculated, or we underestimated the size of the seal population before the whales appeared.”

another curiosity is that, in both cases, the whales left the canal after eating just under 1,000 seals. london thinks it’s more than a coincidence and might suggest a ‘prey availability threshold’—the whales reach a point where they aren’t encounter-ing seals at a rate worth staying around for, so they leave.

For london—a self-described “seal guy” who is now studying seals in alaska with the Seattle-based National marine mammal lab—the surprise whale visits were a great opportunity to observe predation one level up on the food chain.

“It wasn’t always easy to watch, “ he says, “but it was amazing to see how well adapted these whales are. their ability to find and kill seals with such effi-ciency is pretty spectacular.”

H

JoSh

m. l

oN

do

N

JoSh

m. l

oN

do

N

Photos this page: Transients in Hood Canal, 2003

Surprise whales delight seal researcher

3

we humans are used to eating our meals on tables and putting any leftovers in the fridge for another day.

but what if your meal is in the ocean and has a tendency to sink? and what if you can’t eat it all and want to save some for another day?

that’s no problem for the False Pass transients. If they encounter their prey in deep water, they chase it toward shallow water before they kill it. Sunken carcasses at depths of about 90 feet or less are an easy dive away.

“the whales are like any of us; they don’t want to work hard if they don’t have to,” says barrett-lennard. “Killing the gray whale calves in shallow water means they can continue to feed on them for as long as they want.”

the shallow water also acts as a sort of larder, or cache, for the carcass. the whales may take up to a week to consume a carcass, leaving the area for short periods in between feedings.

“they leave and you wonder how they’re going to find their way back to it,” marvels barrett-lennard. “but they seem to have no trouble at all. they make a beeline to exactly the right spot. It’s uncanny how they seem to know exactly where the carcass is from day to day.”

Meals afloat

Joh

N d

uRb

aN

, dat

a c

ou

RteS

y o

F N

oRt

h G

ulF

oc

eaN

Ic S

oc

Iety

ransient killer whales consume about one-third of all gray whale calves born every year in the eastern Pacific.

this is one of the conclusions drawn from field work being conducted in western alaska by a research team headed by the Vancouver aquarium’s lance barrett-lennard and craig matkin of the North Gulf oceanic Society.

one of the study sites is in False Pass, the first connection between the Pacific ocean and the bering Sea as you go west along the alaskan pen-insula. It’s a prime hunting ground for transient killer whales, and at that time of year, gray whale calf appears to be the food of choice.

Gray whales breed in or near one of several lagoons off baja, mexico. In early spring they begin their northward migration, with most whales—including mothers and their new calves—making the full 8,000-km journey to the rich feeding grounds of the bering and chukchi Seas.

by combining their predation data from False Pass with those of colleagues along the coast, the researchers estimate that every year about 130 calves are killed by transients between baja and False Pass. up to 400 calves are born annually to

the population, which totals about 22,000.“It seems that almost all predation events

involve calves,” says barrett-lennard. “Females may get injured or on rare occasions killed defend-ing their calves, but the killer whales seem to be pretty single-minded. they want the calves.”

although this predation rate is high, it is sus-tainable as long as there’s no other significant threat to the gray whale population, says barrett-lennard. but it does make him wonder what the transients ate when gray whales were scarce in

the early 20th century. commercial whaling had reduced the population to as few as 2,000 before they were protected in 1946.

“did the transients switch to something else and come back to grays when their numbers came back up? or did killer whale numbers drop too? and did that cultural knowledge of how to hunt gray whales survive in the interim or was it re-learned?”

Food for thought, so to speak.

TTransients take their toll on gray whale calves

Transient killer whale faces off with a young gray whale.

Joh

N d

uRb

aN

, dat

a c

ou

RteS

y o

F N

oRt

h G

ulF

oc

eaN

Ic S

oc

Iety

4

The southern resident killer whales have full bilateral protection at last.

In November, the u.S. National marine Fisheries Service (Noaa Fisheries) listed the south-ern residents as “endangered” under the federal endangered Species act. the population has been listed as endangered in canada since 2001.

the southern resident population lives in canadian and u.S. waters off southern Vancouver Island. the population declined by about 20 per cent between the mid-1990s and 2001. there were 87 animals in the three pods at the end of 2005.

the u.S. designation ends years of dispute over how to legally protect the whales. Noaa Fisheries initially gave them “depleted stock” status under

the marine mammal Protection act and developed a conservation plan to address the factors causing their decline.

but environmental groups argued that this didn’t go far enough and filed a lawsuit against Noaa Fisheries to list the whales under the stron-ger endangered Species act (eSa). In december 2004, Noaa Fisheries proposed “threatened” sta-tus under the eSa, but after extensive public hear-ings and consultation with scientists the listing was upgraded to endangered.

among the contributing scientists were Fisheries and oceans canada’s John Ford and the aquarium’s lance barrett-lennard, whose work established the acoustic and genetic uniqueness of the southern resident population. the work was funded in part

by the Killer whale adoption Program.the listing—defined as “being in danger of

extinction”—requires all u.S. federal agencies ensure their actions are not likely to harm the whales. the conservation plan developed from the “depleted stock” listing will now be expanded, starting with an identification of critical habitat.

the canadian draft recovery strategy identi-fies the main threats to resident killer whales as: low population size and limited growth potential; reduced prey availability, environmental contami-nants and disturbance; and gaps in our knowledge of critical habitat.

because the southern resident population is so small, it is especially susceptible to catastrophic risks, such as disease or oil spills.

Southern residents join U.S. endangered species list

hale depredation—the removal of hooked fish from commercial fish-ing gear by killer whales and sperm

whales is a growing problem in many parts of the world.

the negative impacts of depredation can include economic losses to fishermen, increased pressure on fish stocks, and injury or death to the whales.

this fall, the Vancouver aquarium marine Science centre will host an international sympo-sium on the topic. It will bring together fishermen and scientists from around the world to get a better understanding of the problem and come up with some solutions.

dr. lance barrett-lennard got a first-hand look at the problem last year when he and his wife, Kathy heise (also a cetacean biologist), visited fellow sci-entists christophe Guinet and Renaud de Stephanis in the Strait of Gibraltar off Spain. the region is home to a small population of killer whales—and a summer and spring run of bluefin tuna.

“we were asked to come as observers and offer our opinions about what might be done, and in particular help them ask the right questions to the fishermen,” says barrett-lennard.

For hundred of years, the killer whales have peacefully co-existed with the “almadrabas,”an ancient communal fishery in which a wall-like net is set perpendicular to the coastline. the tuna hit the nets and are funneled into traps, which are lifted every three or four days. up to 6,000 tuna, each weighing between 200 and 400 kg, are cap-tured this way every year.

but in the last decade a new mid-water fishery has emerged that uses baited hooks. typically, it takes up to two hours to tire a hooked tuna and pull it to the surface, where it is gaffed and hauled on board the small boats. this is when the whales will grab the tuna and consume the entire fish or leave only the head. an estimated 20 per cent were lost this way to Spanish fishermen in 2004.

“depredation is very hard on the fishermen because they only catch two or three tuna a year

and each is worth a lot of money,” says barrett-lennard. “every time they lose one, it’s an eco-nomic disaster for them.”

the researchers have talked to many fishermen to find out how they catch the fish, what parts of the season they are most affected by depredation, and what, if any, techniques are helpful to keep killer whales away from their gear.

“one of the things we’re discovering when we talk to people around the world is that depreda-tion problems often arise when there is a change in gear type or the opening up of a new fishery,” says barrett-lennard. Solutions might include using specific types of gear that are killer whale-proof, such as traps, or fishing at times of the year or in places that killer whales aren’t present.

“as we’ve seen in alaska, once a problem is entrenched it’s very hard to do anything about it. we have to nip it in the bud. and you can’t trick the whales. those tricks may work for a day or a week, but not for long. the whales are too smart.”

Pho

toS

thIS

Pa

Ge:

Re

Na

ud

de

SteP

ha

NIS

/ c

IRc

e

Killer whales near a fishing boat off the Spanish coast.

W

A whale of a problem for fishermen

5

Thanks to the northern resident baby boom in 2004, we have seven new calves joining our adoption program this year.

Now available for adoption are: Current (A79), the third calf of Sonora (A42); Hope (A80), the fifth calf of Simoom (A34); Nalau (A81), the second calf of Kiltik (A52); Canoona (A82), first calf of Racey (A59); Arrow (B16), the first calf of Klaskish (B14);

Petrel (G72), the first calf of M.B. (G46); and Levy (I105), the third calf of Loquillilla (I12).

Three other 2004 calves (C25, D21 and D22) remain unnamed

because there were poor sightings of their family groups in 2005. Because calf mortality is high in the first year, we like to wait until there is a con-firmed sighting after their first win-ter, before naming them.

Some more new arrivals were spotted during the 2005 field season. Misty (A62) is a first-time mom with the birth of A83. Clio (A50) has a second calf, A84. Goletas (I13) welcomed her second calf, I108 (her first calf died at age four); and, at age 26, Kimsquit (R13) finally has a baby, R47.

There’s also a new youngster among our transient killer whales. Tasu (T2C) gave birth to her second calf, T2C2.

In other news, 13-year-old Fife (A60) is beginning to “sprout,” the term we use to describe the upward growth of a male’s dorsal fin as he approaches sexual maturity. It will take several years for Fife’s fin to reach its full height.

O R C A U P D A T E

hope (a80)

Petrel (G72)

arrow (b16)

World mourns loss of Luna

deb

Ra b

RaSh

/ V

icto

ria

tim

eS c

olo

NiS

t

At the Gold River dock in 2003; Luna demonstrates the insatiable curiosity and playfulness that captured hearts around the world.

ime and luck ran out on march 10 for luna, the playful six-year-old killer whale who had been living on his own in Nootka Sound on

the west coast of Vancouver Island.luna’s controversial life came to a grim end when

he was accidentally sucked into the large propel-lers of an ocean-going tugboat. It’s believed he died instantly.

the news saddened millions of admirers around the world, who had regularly checked on luna’s progress and listened in on his vocalizations via the Internet. the tragedy also dashed the hopes of some conser-vation groups, who had been lobbying for another attempt at reuniting luna with his family pod.

luna, or l98, was a member of l-pod, one of three pods within the endangered southern resident com-munity of killer whales. he was first sighted in Nootka Sound in July 2001 after becoming separated from his mother and pod earlier that year. although he was healthy, his natural yearning for social contact led him to seek out boats, docks and floatplanes for compan-ionship. he became a danger to himself and people.

In 2004, Fisheries and oceans canada (dFo) decid-ed to move the boisterous youngster to southern Vancouver Island, the summer core area for his family pod. but the capture was halted after protests by the mowachaht/muchalaht First Nations, who believed that the whale they called Tsu’xiit embodied the spirit of their late chief. they wanted him left alone until he chose to leave or he naturally reunited with his pod—a possibility that just about everyone agreed was unlikely.

So luna stayed, and dFo and the mowachaht/muchalaht set up a stewardship program to try and keep the whale away from boats and out of trouble. unfortunately, luna was especially attracted to the

movement of water and bubbles around propellers and would often come within inches of the spinning blades. this time, he miscalculated.

a spokesman for the tugboat company said the captain and crew of the vessel were heartbroken about the accident.

“wild animals that choose to interact with humans generally don’t fare well, but luna’s death was still a shock,” says the Vancouver aquarium’s lance barrett-lennard, who spent time with luna during the reloca-tion attempt in 2004.

“he was quite a character, and incredibly bright,”says barrett-lennard, who remembers floating next to the whale in a small boat, trying to get a blood sample from the his dorsal fin. after one unsuccessful attempt, luna would have none of it.

“he was as friendly as could be, but every time he saw the needle coming out—and he was very alert to it—he’d keep his head on the side of the boat but tilt his dorsal fin until it was just out of reach. when we sat down and put the needle away, he’d stick his dorsal fin inwards again. he was playing with us the whole time.”

the scientists tried sitting on the far side of the boat with their backs to luna. Frustrated, the whale swam to the other side of the boat, and they turned their backs on him again. Finally, he spyhopped and rested his chin on barrett-lennard’s shoulder, as if thinking. then he slid down, came up beside the boat and presented his dorsal fin.

“we quickly got out the needle… and luna pulled away again,”laughs barrett-lennard. “It was so neat. It was uncannily like dealing with a smart child. yeah, I enjoyed that little guy. we’re all going to miss him.”to read more tributes to luna visit the web site:www.reuniteluna.com

T

6

Chinook to go, pleaseHow did they do it? This study is based on field observa-tions and food fragments collected from resident killer whale “feeding events” observed between 1997 and 2004.

Sometimes fish pursuits and cap-ture were obvious from sudden high-speed chases and fast turns and rolls by the whales at the surface. More often, signs of feeding were very subtle and close attention to behav-ioural cues was needed.

Individuals or groups of whales suspected to have made a kill were carefully approached (under special permit) by the research boat to with-in 25 metres to observe prey handling and consumption. Leftover scales and fish bits were scooped up with a fine mesh net. Scale and DNA analysis later identified the species.

ma

RK m

all

eSo

N

F I E L D N O T E S

Mystery MarksWondering what this is? Turns out transient killer whales aren’t the only False Pass predators with an appetite for gray whale. This small chunk of gray whale calf recovered by scientists was chomped on at least twice by a sleeper shark, which feeds by grabbing on and twisting to cut the flesh, leaving bites that look like ice cream scoops. Most gray whale chunks found by the researchers were peppered with these peculiar pink divots. At first, the researchers were puzzled. Then local fishermen clued them in. “There have been a lot of sleeper sharks in the area in the last few years,” says Barrett-Lennard. “The fishermen get identical bites out of halibut that are caught on longlines.” Sleeper sharks can reach lengths of seven metres.

f you’re a hungry resident killer whale in british columbia you pretty much have one food item on your mind—a big fat chinook salmon.

you enjoy eating them so much that you’ll settle for any chinook salmon you can catch—big or small—even when other species are so abundant that they’re practically hitting you in the face. and once you’ve caught that juicy chinook, you’ll probably share it with your closest relatives.

these are some of the surprising discoveries made during a new study of resident killer whale diet in british columbia. Researchers dr. John Ford and Graeme ellis, both with Fisheries and oceans canada, published their findings late last year.

From their first diet study published eight years ago, Ford and ellis already knew that chinook were high on the menu for residents. but the data they’ve gathered since shows that it’s more than prefer-ence—it’s dependence.

In the early days of the study they worried that the data was skewed toward chinook because they’re bigger fish, the chases are usually more obvious, and the fish’s larger scales are more visible after a kill. but in recent years, they’ve refined their observation and collection techniques. they went from one or two samples per encounter to up to 20 samples a day.

“after following the whales constantly for hours on end and picking up every kill they made, sometimes

ten minutes apart, we were confident we were getting them all,” says Ford. “the samples kept coming back chinook, chinook, chinook. after a while, we realized the startling truth—these guys are chinookaholics.”

even in July and august in Johnstone Strait, when sockeye and pink salmon come roaring through in the millions, the whales are focused on chinook. “they don’t shift,” says Ford. “there are still enough chinook for their needs. the sockeye and pinks are just noise to them.”

chinook are the largest of the Pacific salmon, weighing up to 20 kgs. but size doesn’t seem to mat-ter. the whales still choose chinook, even if they’re the same size as sockeye and pinks. “they’re chinook specialists,” says Ford. “they’ve developed the forag-ing tactics for capturing solitary fish such as chinook rather than than the smaller, schooling fish such as sockeye.”

chinook are available year-round along the coast, except for late September and october. this is when the whales briefly switch to chum salmon, although they maintain their preference for chinook. “we still need to find out what they’re eating over the winter but it’s most likely chinook, and this is probably why they travel more widely over remote parts of the coast at that time of year.”

I

L57 surfaces with a salmon in his mouth.laNce baRRett-leNNaRd

7

Going with the floe

In last year’s newsletter we showed you a photo of hungry Antarctic killer

whales surrounding a Weddell seal on an ice floe. The whales work together to create waves strong enough to wash the seals off the ice. Want to see this for yourself? Go online to www.2muchmedia.com/Orcasfinal2.html where there’s some remarkable video footage taken by New Zealand whale researcher Ingrid Visser.

This January, she was working as a naturalist on board the Lindblad Expeditions ship National Geographic explorer when they encountered a group of killer whales repeatedly washing a seal off a piece of ice. At one point, the whales can be seen just under the surface, surging in uni-son toward the ice floe. The resulting wave tips the seal into the water. You can also see a young whale spyhop-ping as if it is watching and learning the behaviour. “The sighting is part of a larger discussion on an animal’s ability to pass learned behaviour, such as wave creation, to younger offspring in the group,” says Visser.

Care to share? F I E L D N O T E S

he fate of b.c.’s resident killer whales is tied to chinook salmon.

that’s the conclusion that can be drawn from the new diet study described above—and another new study on the link between chinook salmon and killer whales.

authored by dr. John Ford, Graeme ellis and dr. Peter olesiuk, all with Fisheries and oceans canada, the study compares the abundance of chinook and chum salmon with the rise and fall of killer whale populations on the b.c. coast over the last 25 years.

It finds that the survival patterns of resident killer whales were strongly related to fluctuations in the abundance of chinook salmon, but not chum salmon.

From the early 1970s to the mid-1990s northern and southern resident killer whale numbers grew by nearly 2.6 per cent a year. then, starting in the mid-1990s, both populations fell. by 2001 southern resi-dents had declined by 17 per cent and the northerns by 9 per cent.

the patterns of decline were similar in both popu-lations, suggesting a common cause. at the same time, there was a sharp drop in coast-wide chinook abundance due to poor ocean survival during several years of el Niño-like conditions.

chinook numbers started to rebound in 2000. Since 2001, northern and southern resident numbers have climbed by 8 and 6 per cent respectively.

It’s a “surprisingly strong” correlation which sug-gests that chinook play an important role in regulat-ing killer whale populations, says Ford. when chinook availability drops, as it did in the late 1990s, the whales may experience nutritional stress over the winter, leading to increased mortality.

“they’re sort of trapped in this specialization that they’ve evolved into over thousands of years,” he says. “they don’t seem to have the flexibility to shift to a different prey source, which seems odd for an animal that is theoretically capable of taking what-ever it wants in the ocean. that’s what makes this so intriguing.”

there’s another interesting trend. In most nutri-tionally stressed animal populations, it’s the younger animals that suffer. but not with resident killer whales. there’s no evidence that any one age class was affect-ed more than others during the decline.

“I think this ties back to our other study on food-sharing. the nutritional stress is shared throughout the group,” says Ford, adding: “It’s pretty exciting how all this stuff has come together.”

The chinook connection

T

INGRId N. VISSeR (aboVe); PhIl edGell (leFt)

equally surprising is what the whales do with their chinook once they’ve caught it.

we’ve known for years that marine mammal-eat-ing transients often share their food. but these whales eat large prey, such as seals, porpoises and other whales—often flamboyantly—so it wasn’t hard to figure out.

but how do you tell whether residents are sharing their salmon?

because Ford and ellis routinely identified the individual whales they were watching, they knew the family relationships. by closely observing individuals during and after a kill, they began to see patterns that strongly indicated sharing.

typically, a whale that made a kill was joined by others, and the group would swim together for two or three surfacings before splitting up again. Scales and tissue were invariably found where they met.

“while a mom was on a long dive we’d see young whales milling around on the surface waiting for her to come back up,” says Ford. when mom came up with a fish she’d carry it over to the waiting youngsters.

the study found evidence of sharing in 96 per cent of salmon kills by adult females, but in only 17 per cent of kills by adult males. Kills by young whales also tended to be shared.

most sharing was among close kin. adult females shared 60 per cent of their kills only with their off-spring. adult males shared their prey with their moth-ers or siblings.

Interestingly, the size of the fish had no effect on whether or not it was shared.

the results took Ford and ellis by surprise. “we knew they shared but we didn’t expect it was as widespread as this,” says Ford. “they share virtually everything. we’re thinking it’s fairly key to the whole way their societies work.”

understandably, the researchers knew they would encounter skeptics. they needed visible proof. So they attached a video camera to a pole and dangled it in the water near feeding whales. “we’ve got some amazing footage of sharing,” he says. “I don’t think we can provide any stronger evidence than we have now. It’s quite compelling.

8

Your Artworkthank you to all the talented young artists who contributed some great killer whale drawings. Sorry we can’t show them all, but here’s a sampling: Tom Ellard (left), age 8 (albany, western australia), and Ian Sheri (right), age 6 (Plano, texas, uSa).

is the annual newsletter of the B.C. Wild Killer Whale

Adoption Program, c/o Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre,

P.O. Box 3232, Vancouver, B.C., V6B 3X8

Tel: (604) 659-3430 Fax: (604) 659-3515

E-mail: adoption@vanaqua.org Web site: www.killerwhale.org

Program Supervisor Dr. Lance Barrett-Lennard

Program Coordinator Judy McVeigh

Editor and Writer Valerie Shore

Design and Layout Leah Commons

Bring Something Wild into the ClassroomThe B.C. Wild Killer Whale Adoption Program is continuing to support students learning about killer whale research and conservation with its new Class Adoption package. Each class that adopts a whale receives all issues of the Blackfish Sounder in support of their learning efforts. The class will also receive a CD of whale acoustics and a biography of the whale the class has chosen. What’s more each student will receive a per-sonalized adoption certificate with a copy of the whale’s ID photo.

The new Class Adoption pack-age is $79. For more information and to view a sample of the per-sonalized adoption certificate, visit us at www.killerwhale.org, give us a call at (604)659-3430 or e-mail adoption@vanaqua.org.

Thanks to all who've donated their time and energy to the adoption program throughout the years. A very special thank you to all whale adopters for continuing to make this program possible.

P O D P O U R R I

T H A N K Y O U

hen whale scientists aren’t in the field collecting data or

in their labs analysing what they collected, they’re at conferences talking about their discoveries to fellow researchers.

more than 2,600 marine mam-mal scientists from around the world gathered in San diego, california, last december for the biennial conference on the biology of marine mammals. Five presentations featured the results of research supported partially or fully by the adoption program.

the five researchers were senior marine mammal scientist lance barrett-lennard (killer whale pre-dation on gray whales) research associates harald yurk (structure of killer whale calls) and Kathy heise (culturally significant units —see below) and university of british columbia graduate stu-dents Valeria Vergara, (beluga whale calls) and Katie Kuker (sea otter behaviour).

In august 2005, barrett-lennard and yurk attended the Inter-national mammalogical congress in Sapporo, Japan, where they con-vened a symposium on cultur-ally distinct mammal populations. they presented the argument that culture should be a criterion for designating distinct population units for conservation purposes.

b.c.’s northern and southern resident killer whale populations, for example, each have cultural knowledge of their geographical areas and where the fish are at any given time of year. each population also has its own set of dialects.

“Killer whales have highly diverged, ancient, distinct cultures and if we lose them we’ll never get them back again in the same way,” says barrett-lennard. “culture is a concept we accept entirely for humans. we made the argu-ment that this same logic should be applied to killer whales, and other animals such as apes and elephants.”

In February, barrett-lennard was back in Japan, this time at a con-ference on killer whales of the western Pacific, sponsored by the National museum of Science in tokyo.

the event largely focused on what was learned from the February 2005 entrapment of 12 killer whales in pack ice off the Japanese island of hokkaido, near the Russian border. Nine of the whales died, and scientists collected a wealth of data from the carcasses. For example, in the stomachs of the adult whales, they found marine mammal remains and squid, but no fish, strongly suggesting they were transient-type whales.

to date, there have been no studies of killer whale populations off Japan. “Very little non-applied research has been done on marine mammals off Japan,” says barrett-lennard. “my hope is that a long-term collaboration comes out of this conference.”

Out and About

W