Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:39:09.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relative abundance, density and distribution of the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) along the west coast of the UK

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2008

L. Goodwin  and
C. Speedie
L. Goodwin*
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK
C. Speedie
Affiliation:
The Wildlife Trusts’ Basking Shark Project, c/o Seawatch Charter, Falmouth Marine School, Killigrew Street, Falmouth, TR11 3QS, UK
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: L. Goodwin, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK. email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) is the most frequently sighted cetacean in the UK, yet there is a conservation need to assess both abundance and distribution for this species. During May–August, 2002–2004 a boat-based visual survey, employing effort-related line transect methodology was conducted for specified areas of the west coast of the UK. Estimates of relative abundance were made, with full DISTANCE analysis being carried out during 2004 for each of the areas surveyed. A generalized additive model (GAM) was constructed examining porpoise presence in relation to month, position (latitude and longitude), depth and sea surface temperature for all years and for each year of the study individually. Harbour porpoise density showed a significant decrease in the South West, with an increase for West Scotland over the study period, whilst the highest numbers for both Northern Ireland and the Firth of Clyde were recorded in 2003. The porpoise population in the south-west of England was estimated at 163 (67LCI–400UCI) individuals during the months of May and June, 387 (170LCI–877UCI) individuals were present off Northern Ireland during July, 1645 (823LCI–3289UCI) individuals around the Firth of Clyde in July and 3105 (2032LCI–4745UCI) off West Scotland during August and September. The GAM demonstrated that porpoise presence increased around the 100 m depth contour. Whilst further research is required in each of the areas throughout the year, this study provides important information on the distribution and habitat use of the harbour porpoise within UK waters.

Keywords

harbour porpoiseabundancedensitydistributionUK.
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 88 , Special Issue 6: Marine Mammals , September 2008 , pp. 1221 - 1228
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Au, D. and Perryman, W. (1982) Movement and speed of dolphin schools responding to an approaching ship. Fishery Bulletin 80, 371–379.Google Scholar
Ballance, L.T., Pitman, R.L. and Fiedler, P.C. (2006) Oceanographic influences on seabirds and cetaceans of the eastern tropical Pacific: a review. Progress in Oceanography 69, 360–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bannon, S.M. (2006) Diversity and relative abundance of cetaceans in three areas off the west coast of Scotland. In Evans, P.G.H. (ed.) European Research on Cetaceans—20. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the European Cetacean Society, Gydnia, Poland. Cambridge: European Cetacean Society, in press.Google Scholar
Barlow, J. (1987) Abundance estimation of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) based on ship surveys along the coasts of California, Oregan and Washington. Administrative Report LJ-87-05. National Marine Fisheries Service. Southwest Fisheries Center.Google Scholar
Cañadas, A., Sagarminaga, R., De Stephanis, R., Urquiloa, E. and Hammond, P.S. (2005) Habitat preference modelling as a conservation tool proposed for marine protected areas for cetaceans in southern Spanish waters. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 15, 495–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carwardine, M. (1995). In Evans, P. and Weinrich, M. (eds) Whales, dolphins and porpoises. London: Dorling Kindersley Handbooks, pp. 242–243.Google Scholar
Cockcroft, V.G., Ross, G.J.B. and Peddemors, V.M. (1990) Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus distribution in Natal's coastal waters. South African Journal of Marine Science 9, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connor, D.W., Gilliland, P.M., Golding, N., Robinson, P., Todd, D. and Verling, E. (2006) UK SeaMap: the mapping of seabed and water column features of UK seas. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.Google Scholar
Evans, P.G.H. (1992) Status Review of Cetaceans in British and Irish Waters. Report to UK Department of Environment. Sea Watch Foundation, Oxford.Google Scholar
Evans, P.G.H., Anderwald, P. and Baines, M.E. (2003) UK Cetacean Status Review. Report to English Nature and Countryside Council for Wales. Sea Watch Foundation, Oxford.Google Scholar
Evans, P.G.H., Fisher, Q.C.P., Jordon, W., Limer, R. and Rees, I. (1994) A study of the reactions of harbour porpoises to various boats in the coastal waters of Southeast Shetland. In Evans, P.G.H (ed.) European Research on Cetaceans—8. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of the European Cetacean Society, Montpellier, France. Cambridge: European Cetacean Society, pp. 60–64.Google Scholar
Evans, P.G.H. and Wang, J. (2002) Re-examination of distribution data for the harbour porpoise around Wales and the UK with a view to site selection for this species. Oxford: Sea Watch Foundation.Google Scholar
Gaskin, D.E. (1968) Distribution of Delphinidae (Cetacea) in relation to sea surface temperatures off eastern and southern New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 2, 527–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, L. and Edwards, J. (2007) The South West Dolphin Report. A joint publication produced by Marine Connection and the Wildlife Trusts.Google Scholar
Gordon, J. and Northridge, S.P. (2003) Potential impacts of acoustic deterrent devices on Scottish marine wildlife. Contract Report to Scottish Natural Heritage.Google Scholar
Grellier, K. and Wilson, B. (2003) Bottlenose dolphins using the sound of Barra, Scotland. Aquatic Mammals 29, 378–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamazaki, T. (2002) Spatiotemporal prediction models of cetacean habitats in the mid-western North Atlantic Ocean (from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA to Nova Scotia, Canada). Marine Mammal Science 18, 920–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, P.S., Berggren, P., Benke, H., Borchers, D.L., Collet, A., Heide-Jørgensen, M.P., Heimlich, S., Hiby, A.R., Leopold, M.F. and Øien, N. (2002) Abundance of harbour porpoise and other cetaceans in the North Sea and adjacent waters. Journal of Applied Ecology 39, 361–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, P.S. and MacLeod, K. (2006) SCANS II—Report on Progress. Document for ASCOBANS Meeting of Parties, Egmond aan Zee, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Hastie, G.D., Swift, R.J., Slesser, G., Thompson, P.M. and Turrell, W.R. (2005) Environmental models for predicting oceanic dolphin habitat in the Northeast Atlantic. ICES Journal of Marine Science 62, 760–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hastie, G.D. and Tibshirani, R.J. (1990) Generalized additive models. Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability. London: Chapman & Hall, 335 pp.Google Scholar
Heide-Jørgensen, M.P., Teilman, J., Benke, H. and Wulf, J. (1993) Abundance and distribution of harbour porpoises Phocoena phocoena in selected areas of the western Baltic and the North Sea. Helgoländer Meeresunters 47, 335–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hui, C.A. (1979) Undersea topography and distribution of dolphins of the genus Delphinus in the Southern California Bight. Journal of Mammalogy 60, 521–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, T.A., Hung, S.K., Law, L., Torey, M. and Treganza, N. (2002) Distribution and abundance of finless porpoises in Hong Kong and adjacent waters of China. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 10, 43–55.Google Scholar
Johnston, D.W., Westgate, A.J. and Read, A.J. (2005) Effects of fine scale oceanographic features on the distribution and movements of harbour porpoises Phocoena phocoena in the Bay of Fundy. Marine Ecology Progress Series 295, 279–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenney, R.D. and Winn, H.E. (1986) Cetacean high-use habitats of the Northeast United States Continental Shelf. Fishery Bulletin 84, 345–357.Google Scholar
Leepold, M.F., Wolf, P.A. and van der Meer, J. (1992) The elusive harbour porpoise exposed: strip transect counts off southwestern Ireland. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 29, 395–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacLeod, K. (2004) Abundance of the Atlantic white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus acutus) during summer off northwest Scotland. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 6, 33–40.Google Scholar
MacLeod, K., Simmonds, M.P. and Murray, E. (2003) Summer distribution and relative abundance of cetacean populations off north-west Scotland. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 83, 1187–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molina-Schiller, D., Rosales, S.A. and De Freitas, T.R.O. (2005) Oceanographic conditions off coastal South America in relation to the distribution of Burmeister's porpoise, Phocoena spinipinnis. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Mammals 4, 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palka, D. (1995) Influences on spatial patterns of Gulf of Maine harbour porpoises. In Blix, A.S. et al. (eds) Whales, seals, fish and man. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, pp. 69–76.Google Scholar
Parsons, E.C.M., Warburton, C.A., Woods-Ballard, A., Hughes, A. and Johnston, P. (2003) The value of conserving whales: the impacts of whale-watching on the economy of rural West Scotland. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13, 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, A. (1999) Porpoises. Grantown-on-Spey, Scotland: Colin Baxter Photography.Google Scholar
Redfern, J.V., Ferguson, M.C., Becker, E.A., Hyrenbach, K.D., Good, C., Barlow, J., Kaschner, K., Baumgartner, M.F., Forney, K.A., Balance, L.T., Fauchald, P., Halpin, P., Hamazaki, T., Pershing, A.J., Qian, S.S., Read, A., Reilly, S.B., Torres, L. and Werner, F. (2006) Techniques for cetacean-habitat modeling. Marine Ecology Progress Series 310, 271–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, J.B., Evans, P.G.H. and Northridge, S. (2003) Atlas of cetacean distribution in north-west European waters. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.Google Scholar
Scott, N.J. and Parsons, E.C.M. (2004) A survey of public awareness of the occurrence and diversity of cetaceans in south-west Scotland. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 84, 1101–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slooten, E. (1994) Behaviour of Hector's dolphin: classifying behaviour by sequence analysis. Journal of Mammalogy 75, 956–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stockin, K.A., Fairbairns, R.S., Parsons, E.C.M. and Sims, D.W. (2001) Effects of diel and seasonal cycles on the dive duration of the minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 81, 189–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tynan, C.T., Ainley, D.G., Barth, J.A., Cowles, T.J., Pierce, S.D. and Spear, L.B. (2005) Cetacean distributions relative to ocean processes in the northern California Current System. Deep-Sea Research. Part II—Tropical Studies in Oceanography 52, 145–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, C.R., Pollack, C., Cronin, C. and Taylor, S. (2001) Cetaceans of the Atlantic Frontier, north and west of Scotland. Continental Shelf Research 21, 1047–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) (2004) Cetaceans and pelagic trawl fisheries in the Western Approaches of the English Channel. A WDCS Scientific Report: The Report of the 2004 WDCS/Greenpeace Winter Survey.Google Scholar
Wood, S.N. (2004) Stable and efficient multiple smoothing parameter estimation for generalized additive models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 99, 673–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar