Special Status Species
Humpback whale
Photo: Protected Resources Division,
Southwest Fisheries Science Center.
Common name: Humpback whale
Scientific name: Megaptera novaeangliae
Stock: Eastern North Pacific
Jump To
Range Habitat Movements
Abundance Natural History Threats
Conservation Research Gaps Recommended Actions
References Resources

Listing Status
Endangered Species Act (?)
Status: Endangered (all stocks)
Critical Habitat: Not designated
Recovery Plan: Released in 19911
Five Year Status Review: None

California Endangered Species Act (?)
Status: Not listed

Marine Mammal Protection Act (?)
Status: Depleted; strategic stock
Stock Assessment: Updated annually2

The World Conservation Union (IUCN) (?)
Status: Least Concern

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) (?)
Appendix I

Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) (?)
Appendix I
North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC):
North American Conservation Action Plan: Released in 20053

Geographic Range

Found worldwide in all major oceans (Figure 1). The International Whaling Commission (IWC) considers all the humpbacks in the North Pacific to be one stock. For management purposes, the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) considers there to be three relatively separate populations that migrate between their respective feeding and calving areas, even though there is interchange among these regions. Those three populations are: 1) Eastern North Pacific stock, which calves in coastal Central America and Mexico and feeds between California and southern British Columbia; 2) Central North Pacific stock, which calves around the Hawaiian Islands and feeds off the coast of northern British Columbia/Southeast Alaska and Prince William Sound west to Kodiak Island; and 3) Western North Pacific stock, which calves off Japan and probably feeds in waters west of the Kodiak Archipelago.2


This species is sighted throughout the latitudinal extent of the MBNMS, but it is most commonly observed in the northern portion of the MBNMS (including Monterey Bay) and in the Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries (Figure 2).4 This species is often sighted off Half Moon Bay.5

Figure 1. The world-wide geographic distribution of humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae.24
Download full-size figures (536 KB PDF).

Figure 2. (Maps a-c) The density (animals/km2) of humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae in the Upwelling, Oceanic, and Davidson Current seasons in central and northern California. (Map d) Seasonal high use areas based on the synthesis of data from all seasons. Densities are displayed in 10’x10’ cells; cell that were surveyed, but had no humpback whales sightings, have a density of zero; unsurveyed areas appear white. Blue lines indicate the national marine sanctuary boundaries of Cordell Bank, Gulf of the Farallones, and Monterey Bay; the 200m and 2,000m isobaths are also shown in blue.
Download full-size figures (536 KB PDF).

Top of page ]


Found primarily in coastal and continental shelf waters (Figure 3). Also known to feed around offshore islands (e.g., Channel Islands, Farallon Islands) and seamounts (e.g., Pioneer Seamount). In some areas they must pass through deep waters during migration.


In the MBNMS, this species is usually observed fairly close to shore over the continental shelf and in the vicinity of the continental shelf break (Figure 2).4 This species is sighted most frequently at the shelf break edge.6

Figure 3. Sightings of humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae based on shipboard surveys off California, Oregon, and Washington between 1991-2001. Dashed line represents the U.S. EEZ (exclusive economic zone), thick line indicates the outer boundary of all surveys combined (reprinted from Carretta et al. 2005; see Appendix 2 of that report for actual transect lines surveyed).2
Download full-size figures (536 KB PDF).

Top of page ]

Migration and Movements

Studies tracking the movement of members of the NE Pacific stock show that most individuals move seasonally between mating/calving areas off Baja California, mainland Mexico, and Central America and feeding habitats in California, Oregon, and Washington.7 Humpbacks seen off Central America tend to be re-sighted off southern California while those seen off Mexico tend to be re-sighted off northern California, Oregon and Washington.7 Photo-identification and genetics studies verify a high degree of site fidelity to feeding areas and some intermixing between the wintering areas.8,9 These stocks are most clearly identified (and managed) based on summer feeding location.


Humpback whales usually start to arrive in the MBNMS in April or May (Figure 2). Foraging whales do not remain in Sanctuary waters over the entire feeding season, but instead move frequently between prime feeding locations along the California coast and sometimes travel as far as Oregon and Washington.10 Although most humpback whales have left to return to calving areas by late November (Figure 2), some individuals are found in California waters, including the MBNMS, through the winter months.6

Top of page ]


Humpback whales in the entire North Pacific may have numbered approximately 15,000 individuals prior to exploitation.11 This number was probably reduced to fewer than 1,200 before commercial whaling was prohibited by the IWC in 1966. Since 1986, sight/re-sight data have been used to estimate population size for the NE Pacific stock.12 These estimates indicate that the stock was growing at a steady rate of 8% between 1991 (569 individuals) and 1998 (1,008 individuals) (Figure 4). Then in 1999 and 2000, the estimates dropped to 706 and 765 individuals, respectively. In 2001, the population rebounded to 987, which was similar to the estimate for 1998. The most recent estimate, based on data collected in 2003, of 1,391 humpback whales is about 400 animals higher than any previous estimate for this stock.12

The reasons for the decreased population estimates in the two years following the 1998 El Niño are not well understood. The most likely explanation is that a drop in prey availability, due to the severe El Niño, led to either increased over-winter mortality rates, increased emigration from the study area, or both. The subsequent population rebound to levels exceeding previous population estimates appears to be due to increased levels of immigration into the study period during the 2002 and 2003 feeding seasons. Calambokidis and colleagues found that the percentage of previously unidentified whales increased substantially in 2001, 2002 and 2003 (Figure 4) and that the animals appear to be entering the area from the north.12 The population increase does not appear to be due to increased reproductive rates – the percentage of calves in the population in 2003 (4.4%) is similar to past years.12


Humpback whales are often the most frequently sighted baleen whales in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.4 This species can be sighted between April and November, but abundance usually peaks in the summer and early fall (Figure 2). During upwelling season (mid-March to mid-August) this species is most frequently sighted in and around the northern portion of the MBNMS.4 The maximum percent of the NE Pacific stock that may be present in the MBNMS at any one time is estimated to be =20-30%.6

Figure 4. Trends in humpback whale abundance for California to southern Washington. The trend line is based on regression of log values (slope reflects 6% annual increase). Also shown is the number of individuals identified each year and the percentage of those individuals that have only been seen in one year.12
Download full-size figures (536 KB PDF).

Top of page ]

Natural History
Click here to view the natural history information of this species.


Entanglement in fishing gear: No mortalities or serious injuries have been observed from the CA/OR offshore drift gillnet fishery since the Take Reduction Plan began in 1997. Incidental take may be occurring in the drift gillnet fisheries for swordfish and sharks along the Pacific coast of Baja California. One humpback whale stranded in 2000 near Moss Landing (in Monterey Bay) with synthetic line wrapped around its flukes.2 In 2003, there were five separate reports of humpback whales entangled in fishing gear along the California coast, but the final status of these individuals is unknown.15

Collisions with ships: Off the U.S. west coast between 1993 and 2000, ship strikes caused the deaths of at least four humpback whales.2 Several humpback whales have been observed off California with large gashes that may be caused by ship strikes.2 These numbers are likely to be underestimates of injury and mortality as not all whale strikes will be reported and some dead whales may sink instead of washing ashore.

Disturbance from whale watching activity: Whale watching boats target humpback whales in many locations along the California coast, including the Channel Islands, Monterey Bay and Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuaries. There is some evidence that closely approaching boats elicit reactions from humpback whales, though some reactions are positive (e.g., approaching and circling the boat) and some are negative (e.g., rapid diving, tail slap).12 The presence of multiple boats at close proximity to the whales or traveling at high speed through areas with a high density of whales could be a cause of stress or injury.

Acoustic disturbance: There is concern about the potential negative impacts to marine mammals (especially baleen whales that use low frequency sound for communication) from a variety of acoustic disturbances (e.g., noise from ships, aircraft, research boats, and military and industrial activities).16 Noise can cause direct physiological damage, mask communication, or disrupt important migration, feeding or breeding behaviors. Active-sonar, specifically low frequency (100-500 Hz) and mid-frequency (2.8-3.3 kHz) active sonar used in military activities by the U.S. and other nations, is one sound source of particular concern.16 The impacts of seismic testing for geological mapping and oil and gas exploration are also unknown.

Habitat degradation: (e.g., chemical pollution, oil pollution, coastal development): Any increase in offshore oil and gas development would increase both the potential of an oil or chemical spill and the amount of shipping traffic through humpback whale habitat.

Declining prey resources: Could result from either natural prey population fluctuations or commercial harvest of prey species. Schooling fishes are often used for human consumption, as bait, or as feed in mariculture facilities.


No threats are unique to the MBNMS

Top of page ]

Conservation and Research

In 1966 humpback whales in the North Pacific were given complete protection under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. Humpback whales are listed as "endangered" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and as "depleted" and a "strategic stock" under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Under the ESA and MMPA, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is responsible for management and recovery of humpback whales in U.S. waters.

As required under the MMPA, NMFS annually updates the Stock Assessment Reports for all strategic stocks. Current Stock Assessment Reports are available on the NOAA Office of Protected Resources website. The MMPA also requires the formation of Take Reduction Plans to reduce the incidental serious injury and mortality of marine mammals from commercial fishing operations. In 1997 NMFS implemented a Take Reduction Plan for Pacific Offshore Cetaceans to address incidental takes of cetaceans, including humpback whales, in the California/Oregon swordfish drift gillnet fishery. The plan included skipper education workshops and required the use of pingers and minimum 36 feet extenders. Since implementation, overall cetacean entanglement rates in the California/Oregon swordfish drift gillnet have been substantially reduced.17

As required under the ESA, NMFS assembled a recovery team to write a recovery plan for this species. A recovery plan for the North Atlantic and North Pacific populations was released in 1991.1 The key recommended actions were to:

  1. identify essential habitat,
  2. identify and minimize possible adverse impacts of human activities and pollution on important habitat,
  3. measure and monitor key population parameters,
  4. monitor levels of prey abundance and evaluate fisheries competition,
  5. monitor parasite load, biotoxins and anthropogenic contaminant level in whale tissues and prey,
  6. identify and reduce direct human-related mortality, injury and disturbance,
  7. encourage multinational cooperation to protect humpback whale habitats, and
  8. improve administration and coordination of recovery program.

NMFS is responsible for implementing the actions recommended in the recovery plan. NMFS scientists will complete some of the recommended research while some research is completed by other groups, sometimes with NMFS funding (see "Other" section below for a summary of research projects completed by non-federal researchers). On-going research projects by federal scientists include:

SPLASH - Structure of Populations, Levels of Abundance, and Status of Humpbacks: (Jay Barlow, SPLASH Steering Committee representative, NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center). SPLASH is an international collaborative research effort to study humpback whales throughout their geographic range in the North Pacific. SPLASH began in 2004 and will run through summer 2006. The projects primary objectives are to:

  1. provide a current estimate of overall abundance for the North Pacific,
  2. provide a better understanding of population structure and migratory interchange using genetic markers and photo-identification,
  3. determine abundances for specific wintering and feeding areas,
  4. provide information on trends in abundance,
  5. improve understanding of population parameters (e.g., reproductive rates and age/sex structure),
  6. identify habitat and characterize habitat use, and
  7. identify human impacts.

SPLASH Collaborators: NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center and the National Marine Mammal Laboratory; National Marine Sanctuary Program, National Parks Service, Cascadia Research; Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans; University of Alaska; North Gulf Oceanic Society; and North Pacific Wildlife Consulting. Funding sources: the Marine Mammal Commission, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Marine Sanctuary Program, National Park Service, Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and Mexico National Institute of Ecology. The National Marine Sanctuary Program funds the US West Coast sampling effort.

Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program Network (Joe Cordaro, Southwest Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS-SWFSC). The network consists of volunteer groups that respond to marine mammal strandings in different parts of the southwest region. Samples from stranded animals provide information on biological parameters, including age, length, reproductive condition, contaminant loads, stock discreteness, types of parasites or diseases, and cause of death. In addition to collecting data from stranded animals, this program assesses health trends, correlates health with available data on physical, chemical, environmental, and biological parameters, and coordinates effective responses to unusual mortality events.

The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) is one of eight regional fishery management councils established by the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 for the purpose of managing fisheries 3-200 miles offshore of the United States of America coastline. The Pacific Council is responsible for fisheries off the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington. In March 2006, the PFMC adopted Amendment 12 to the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan (CPSFMP). This amendment adds krill to the species managed under the (CPSFMP), and prohibits harvesting krill in the Economic Exclusive Zone off the west coast of the U.S. The amendment makes no provision for future or experimental fisheries. The ban on krill fishing protects humpback whales from competition with commercial fisheries for krill resources in federal waters.


CSCAPE – Collaborative Survey of Cetacean Abundance and the Pelagic Ecosystem (Principal Investigator: Karin Forney, NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center). CSCAPE is a collaboration between the National Marine Fisheries Service and the National Marine Sanctuary Program to assess the abundance and distribution of marine mammals and to characterize the pelagic ecosystem off the U.S. West Coast. The primary objective is to conduct a marine mammal assessment survey out to a distance of approximately 300 nautical miles, with additional fine-scale surveys within the NMS boundaries. A secondary objective is to characterize the pelagic ecosystem within the study area, through the collection of underway and station-based oceanographic and biological data, seabird studies, and acoustic sampling. A final objective is to conduct biopsy sampling and photo-identification studies of marine mammal species of special interest. The first surveys began in June 2005 and the program is scheduled to end in December 2007.

Beach COMBERS - Coastal Ocean Mammal and Bird Education and Research Surveys (Project Leader: Hannah Nevins, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories). In 1997 the MBNMS began a beach survey program using trained volunteers to survey beached marine birds and mammals monthly at selected sections of beaches throughout the Monterey Bay area. Currently, the program monitors 45 km of beaches in the MBNMS. The program is a collaborative project between MLML, MBNMS, and other state and research institutions, with the specific goal of using deposition of beach cast carcasses as an index of the health of the sanctuary. The Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program Network is notified of all stranded or dead cetaceans so that data can be collected and the cause of the stranding event determined.


The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is not required to have research and monitoring programs for humpback whales because this species is not listed as threatened or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. However, under the ESA, CDFG is required to decrease or eliminate negative impacts of state managed fisheries on humpback whales. Based on strandings and gillnet observations, annual humpback whale mortality and serious injury in California's drift gillnet fishery is probably greater than 10% of the Potential Biological Removal level.2 Take above 10% of the PBR is not allowed under the MMPA and efforts should be made to reduce entanglement rates.

In 2000, the California state legislature passed the Strom-Martin bill (A.B. 2482), which modified the California Fish and Game Code to make it unlawful to take krill for commercial purposes from state waters or land krill at any state port until January 1, 2011. In 2003, A.B. 1296 amended the Fish and Game Code (Section 8510) to remove the sunset provision, thus making the prohibition on krill fishing in state waters indefinite. This law protects humpback whales from competition with commercial fisheries for krill resources in state waters.


The World Conservation Union (IUCN) lists the humpback whale as “Vulnerable” worldwide. The humpback is listed under Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), which includes species threatened with extinction and allows trade of Appendix I species only in exceptional circumstances. In addition, this species is listed under Appendix I of the North American Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species (CMS), which includes migratory species that have been categorized as being in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of their range.

Through the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), the governments of Mexico, the U.S., and Canada are working to implement some integrated conservation actions and management plans for species of common concern that could benefit substantially from cooperative efforts. In 2005, the CEC released the “North American Conservation Action Plan” for humpback whale, which identifies key tri-national collaborative conservation actions.3

The IWC was set up under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, which was signed in Washington D.C. on December 2, 1946. The purpose of the Convention is to provide for the conservation of whale stocks and the development of the whaling industry. The IWC has prohibited the taking of humpback whales in the North Pacific since 1966. Currently, the IWC has 57 member nations and all members have agreed to uphold the prohibition on take of humpback whales.

TOPP - Tagging of Pacific Pelagics (Cetacean working group leader: Bruce Mate, Oregon State University). The goal of TOPP is to understand the migration patterns of large, open ocean animals in the North Pacific. Satellite tags attached to humpback whales off California are helping researchers determine diving patterns, migration routes, and the location of feeding and breeding habitats. Collaborators in the cetacean group include scientists from NMFS, UC Santa Cruz, Cascadia Research, and Moss Landing Marine Laboratories. Source of funding: U.S. Office of Naval Research, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Cascadia Research Collective (Principle Investigator: John Calambokidis):

  1. Abundance, movement, and genetic population structure of humpback whales off the U.S. west coast. Cascadia is the lead group conducting photo-identification surveys and skin sampling for SPLASH in wintering areas in Asia, the Mexican Pacific and the Central American coast and summer feeding areas along the US west coast (California, Oregon, Washington).
  2. Observation of diving, feeding and vocal behavior of humpback whales underwater using acoustic tags and crittercams. Collaborators: Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Greeneridge Scientific Services, National Geographic, and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. Funding sources: Office of Naval Research and Scripps Institution of Oceanography.


CIMT - Center for Integrated Marine Technologies: Wind to Whales (Contact: Andrew DeVogelaere, MBNMS). The Monterey Bay - from Pt. Año Nuevo to Pt. Lobos and out to 122°05' west longitude - is the focal region of the CIMT Wind to Whales Program. This project, which began in 1997, is an interdisciplinary collaborative research project involving scientists and engineers from UCSC, NMFS, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, Moss Landing Marine Labs, MBNMS, and Naval Postgraduate School. CIMT uses data collected via remote sensing, moorings and ship-board surveys to investigate linkages between: coastal upwelling, nutrient delivery, spatial and temporal variability in phytoplankton, and the distribution and abundance of organisms at higher trophic levels including squid, fishes, seabirds, sea turtles, pinnipeds, and whales. Current studies on humpback whales include:

  1. Monthly ship-board surveys to determine distribution and abundance
  2. bottom-mounted passive acoustic mooring system to monitor vocal behavior and determine abundance patterns
  3. tagging with archival dive recorders to monitor short-term (hours to days) foraging movements and behavior

Top of page ]

Research Gaps

Many of the information gaps identified in the 1991 Recovery Plan1 are being addressed by on-going research programs, especially the SPLASH research project. Additional research programs focused on humpback whales in the MBNMS could include:

  • Systematic, MBNMS-wide surveys to determine distribution and abundance of humpback whales in Sanctuary waters and to identify the location of important foraging habitat in the MBNMS.
  • Determine the impacts of various types of acoustic disturbance that occur in the MBNMS.18,19

Top of page ]

Recommended Actions
  • Support a continued international ban on commercial hunting and other directed lethal take. Support efforts to detect and prevent illegal whaling.
  • Support observer programs for U.S. and Mexican commercial fisheries that have the potential to take or injury this species incidental to fishing operations.20
  • Monitor whale-watching activities around humpback whales; ensure that effective protective measures (e.g., vessel approach regulations) are developed and enforced; provide education outreach to commercial and private vessels regarding viewing regulations and develop incentives that will increase voluntary compliance rates.21,22
  • Identify regions and time periods when risk of ship strike is greatest in the MBNMS. Explore ways to reduce injury and mortality from ship strikes, such as regulatory changes or education outreach efforts to reduce transit speed at times and in areas where humpback whales are concentrated.
  • Reduce injury and mortality from entanglement in and ingestion of marine debris, particularly abandoned fishing gear. Efforts should include education outreach to the fishing industry, abandoned gear recovery, and entanglement/stranding response teams.23
  • If certain acoustical disturbances are found to negatively impact humpback whales, work to minimize those activities in the MBNMS.

Top of page ]

Cited References
1. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMF) (1991) Recovery plan for the Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). Prepared by the Humpback Whale Recovery Team for the National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD.
2. Carretta JV, Forney KA, Muto MM, Barlow J, Baker J, Hanson B, Lowry M (2005) U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2004. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-375, U.S. Department of Commerce.
3. Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) (2005). North American Conservation Action Plan for the Humpback Whale. Communications Department, CEC Secretariat, Montreal, Canada.
4. National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) (2003) A Biogeographic Assessment of North/Central California: To Support the Joint Management Plan Review for Cordell Bank, Gulf of the Farallones, And Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuaries; Phase I - Marine Fishes, Birds and Mammals. Prepared by NCCOS's Biogeography Team in Cooperation with the National Marine Sanctuary Program, Silver Spring, MD.
5. Don Croll, University of California Santa Cruz, personal communication
6. John Calambokidis, Cascadia Research, personal communication
7. Calambokidis J, Steiger GH, Rasmussen K, Urban R. J, Balcomb KC, de Guevara P. PL, Salinas Z. M, Jacobsen JK, Baker CS, Herman LM, Cerchio S, Darling JD (2000) Migratory destinations of humpback whales that feed off California, Oregon and Washington. Marine Ecology Progress Series 192:295-304. Destinations 2000.pdf
8. Baker CS, Medrano-Gonzalez L, Calambokidis J, Perry A, Pichler F, Rosenbaum H, Straley JM, Urban-Ramirez J, Yamaguchi M, Von Ziegesar O (1998) Population structure of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA variation among humpback whales in the North Pacific. Molecular Ecology 7:695-707.
9. Calambokidis J, Steiger GH, Straley JM, Herman LM, Cerchio S, Salden DR, Urban R. J, Jacobsen JK, von Ziegesar O, Balcomb KC, Gabriele CM, Dahlheim ME, Uchida S, Ellis G, Miyamura Y, de Guevara PPL, Yamaguchi M, Sato F, Mizroch SA, Schlender L, Rasmussen K, Barlow J, Quinn TJI (2001) Movements and population structure of humpback whales in the north Pacific. Marine Mammal Science 17:769-794. Movements and Population Structure 2001 PDF
10. Calambokidis J, Chandler T, Schlender L, Steiger GH, Douglas A (2003) Research on humpback and blue whales off California, Oregon and Washington in 2002. FINAL REPORT. Prepared for Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, and Office of Naval Research by Cascadia Research, Olympia, WA.
11. Braham HW (1984) The status of endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review 46.
12. Calambokidis J, Chandler T, Falcone E, Douglas A (2004) Research on large whales off California, Oregon, and Washington in 2003. Annual Report for 2003. Prepared by Cascadia Research for the Southwest Fisheries Science Center.
13. NOAA fisheries website
14. Folkens P, Reeves RR, Stewart BS, Clapham PJ, Powell JA (2002) National Audubon Society Guide to Marine Mammals of the World. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY.
15.Carretta JV, Forney KA, Muto MM, Barlow J, Baker J, Hanson B, Lowry M (in prep) Draft U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2005. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC, U.S. Department of Commerce.
16. National Research Council (2005) Marine Mammal Populations and Ocean Noise: Determining When Noise Causes Biologically Significant Effects. Committee on Characterizing Biologically Significant Marine Mammal Behavior. National Academies Press, Washington, DC. 142 pages.
17. Barlow J, Cameron GA (2003) Field experiments show that acoustic pingers reduce marine mammal bycatch in the California drift gill net fishery. Marine Mammal Science 19:265-283.
18. Addressed in part by JMPRWildlife Disturbances Issues - Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle Disturbance Action Plan: Low Flying Aircraft Disturbance and Strategy. Joint Management Plan Review (JMPR). Proposed Action Plans. Draft report. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
19. Addressed in part by JMPRWildlife Disturbances Issues - Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle Disturbance Action Plan: Acoustic Disturbance Strategy. Joint Management Plan Review (JMPR). Proposed Action Plans. Draft report. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
20. Addressed in part by JMPRWildlife Disturbances Issues - Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle Disturbance Action Plan: Commercial Harvest Related Disturbance Strategy. Joint Management Plan Review (JMPR). Proposed Action Plans. Draft report. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
21. Addressed in part by JMPRWildlife Disturbances Issues - Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle Disturbance Action Plan: Vessel Disturbance Strategy. Joint Management Plan Review (JMPR). Proposed Action Plans. Draft report. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
22. Addressed in part by JMPRWildlife Disturbances Issues - Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle Disturbance Action Plan: Enforcement Activity Disturbance Strategy. Joint Management Plan Review (JMPR). Proposed Action Plans. Draft report. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
23. Addressed in part by JMPRWildlife Disturbances Issues - Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle Disturbance Action Plan: Marine Debris Strategy. Joint Management Plan Review (JMPR). Proposed Action Plans. Draft report. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
24. Perry SL, DeMaster DP, Silber GK (1999) The Great Whales: History and Status of Six Species Listed as Endangered Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973. Marine Fisheries Review 61:1-74.

References and Resources
Click here for images, reports, and links to other websites for this species.

Acknowledgement of Reviewers

Thank you to John Calambokidis (Cascadia Research) and Don Croll (U.C. Santa Cruz) for reviewing this report and providing helpful comments and corrections.

Content Last Modified: 01/2006

Top of page ]