Joseph R. Geraci • Valerie J.

Lounsbury
 Sponsored by
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration
National Marine Fisheries Service
Office of Protected Resources
With additional support from:
Edgerton Research Laboratory of the New England Aquarium
U.S. Marine Mammal Commission
Alma Mater Fund of the Ontario Veterinary College
NOAA National Sea Grant College Program

Cover 2
Marine Mammals Ashore
A Field Guide for Strandings

by

Joseph R. Geraci
and

Valerie J. Lounsbury

A TEXAS A&M SEA GRANT PUBLICATION

Publication of this book is the result of a collaborative effort between the Texas A&M
University Sea Grant College Program and the U.S. Department of Commerce's
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Marine Fisheries Ser-
vice, pursuant to NOAA Sea Grant Award No. NA16RG0457-01. The views
expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of
NOAA or any of its subagencies.

The illustrations that appear throughout the book are copyrighted by Joseph R.
Geraci and Valerie J. Lounsbury, both of the University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario,
Canada, and are reproduced herein with the permission of the holders.

Copyright ©1993 Texas A&M University Sea Grant College Program.

All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.

Book design by Amy Broussard

Texas A&M University Sea Grant College Program

Publication TAMU-SG-93-601
ISBN1-883550-01-7

For information on Texas A&M Sea Grant publications, contact:

Sea Grant Program
Texas A&M University
P.O. Box 1675
Galveston, Texas 77553-1675

ii
 Foreword

When I came to the National Museum of Natural History in Washington in 1972,

examination and collection of samples from stranded marine mammals was under-
taken on a catch-as-catch-can basis. There were virtually no standards for any
operations. That year witnessed the passage of the Marine Mammal Protection Act
and signalled the start of major changes in scientific and public awareness of the
problems marine mammals were facing. At the same time, legal statutes restricted
access to stranded animals, and laid the groundwork for organized regional
networks to oversee the collection of specimens and data.
In 1977, and again ten years later, workshops drew together members of those
networks to share experiences and reinforce the call for detailed and standardized
investigation of strandings. Still, workers in the field had no ready source of
information on what to collect and how to do it. We have all been frustrated at one
time or another to find important data missing from a stranding record, or searched
in vain for voucher specimens to confirm the identity of a rare animal. And it is clear
that without information on age, sex and reproductive status, tissue samples for
toxicological analysis are almost useless. The protocols described in this manual are
designed to ensure that the efforts of those investigating strandings result in the
maximum gain for marine mammal science.
So much of the life history of marine mammals has been learned through the
perseverance of loyal members of stranding networks. I am pleased to see this
reference book that brings the knowledge to become a productive member of any
stranding team within everyone’s reach.
James G. Mead
Curator, Marine Mammals
National Museum of Natural History
Smithsonian Institution
❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋ ❋

For the general public, marine mammals are one of the most conspicuous
components of marine biological diversity. Any that come ashore dead or ill raise the
level of uneasiness about the health of our oceans. This has been particularly true
over the past decade, when the incidence of large-scale die-offs of seals, dolphins
and other species seems to have accelerated. However disturbing these events,
stranded specimens provide a rare opportunity to learn about marine mammal
biology, illness and mortality. Data and specimens gathered carefully over time
continue to provide biological information on known species, and, indeed, new
species are still being described.
However, knowledge arising from marine mammals washed ashore grows in
small increments. Every piece of information must be obtained in a standardized,
systematic way for the records to be dependable over the long term. Such

iii
consistency is difficult to achieve and requires protocols. Dedicated volunteers,
students and newcomers to marine mammal stranding networks are a godsend for
assistance with data collection during these events, and often are the only ones
available to deal with strandings on short notice. However, even for those with
advanced training in biology, there is no established coursework to prepare them for
this task; expertise is gained slowly through hands-on experience. Without a mentor,
novices can be rightfully overwhelmed by their first encounter with a large, ripening
beach-cast carcass, a gathering crowd, an incoming tide and looming nightfall.
Although there is no formal coursework, there is now a textbook! This field guide
is a splendid contribution, and is easy to read and follow. The contents span topics
such as organization of response teams, legal and regulatory requirements, identi-
fication and natural history, anatomy, handling and sampling protocols, safety, and
public relations. Having access to this reference in their field kits will give the
psychological and technical muscle new participants will need to carry out their work.
Although written from a North American perspective, the guide will be an exception-
ally valuable resource for non-specialists who work in remote regions without access
to stranding networks or experienced senior personnel. The faithful application of
techniques described herein can lead to the accumulation of meaningful knowledge
on marine mammals in all parts of the world. This opens significant doors, because
the greater the rate at which we learn about marine mammal biology, the greater the
possibilities for averting future crises for this vital component of biological diversity
along our shorelines.
Thomas J. O’Shea
Assistant Director
National Ecology Research Center
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

iv
 A Personal Note to the Reader
Marine mammals have foundered ashore over the ages, for reasons that are now
becoming understood—and popularized. Anyone exposed to the daily media is
aware that a lone seal pup howling on the beach or a whale thrashing too close to
shore or a manatee stuck in a culvert needs help. For those who wish to lend a
hand, there are numerous ways to find out when to act, how to proceed, expected
outcomes, and the value of getting involved in the first place. For direction one can
turn to scientific and popular writings, burgeoning files from stranding centers, and
the wisdom of veteran rescuers. The material is not easy to obtain and is about as
varied as a beachcomber’s cache.
The National Marine Fisheries Service, the agency responsible for protecting and
managing most of the nation’s marine mammals, saw the need to analyze and
condense this information into a practical manual to serve its nationwide marine
mammal stranding network. Thus arose this Field Guide.
It is intended for the person planning to become involved, and for those already
active in stranding programs who would benefit from knowing what others have
learned. Chapters on Historical Perspectives and Organization show that what one
can accomplish alone, an organized team can do faster, safer and with better results.
The book takes the reader through a spectrum of options for dealing with stranded
animals of each major group (pinnipeds, cetaceans, manatees, sea otters), from the
first approach on the beach, to immediate release and rehabilitation, to euthanasia
for those beyond hope. A comprehensive plan is offered for gathering scientifically
valuable specimens and data from animals living or dead. Throughout, we take into
account the right of the public to witness and become involved in stranding
operations, using each event as an educational opportunity.
Some topics are touched upon briefly. Although the text describes clinical
techniques, medical conditions demanding emergency care, and ways to transport
animals, we deliberately avoid any attempt to teach procedures that must be left to
qualified personnel. The sections on rehabilitation present only an overview of basic
husbandry programs. It is written less for the care-giver than for the person on the
beach who wishes and perhaps needs to know what happens once the animal is
taken to a facility. Such topics as life history and mortality have been written
concisely, with emphasis on natural and human-related processes that play a role
in stranding events.
We wrote this book from a U.S. perspective, while recognizing that marine
mammal movements and habitats are not limited by national boundaries. We would
like to have included all of North America but were limited by available literature and
other sources of data from adjacent countries. Coverage is thus somewhat thin, for
example, on Baja California and the Gulf of California, while eastern Mexico and
most of the Canadian Arctic are excluded. Any bias toward New England can
probably be traced to Salisbury Beach and Plum Island at the mouth of the Merrimac
River, where the authors JRG and VJL (strangers then) respectively spent their
childhood days.

v
 We probed the literature, used our own experiences, and sought advice from
more than 50 colleagues from eight countries to help identify approaches and action
plans that work. Our choice of reference material was ultimately restricted by the
book’s small format. We therefore offer as many review articles and general works
as possible, with more specialized publications used selectively. The bibliography
should provide at least a starting point for anyone wishing to pursue a topic in more
depth.
The format of this book is our own and we are entirely responsible for its factual
content. We ask the reader to bring any inaccuracies or shortcomings to our
attention, and to offer suggestions on how the next edition might be improved.
We hope this Field Guide offers some useful and enjoyable reading in the office
or the lab. But it will earn its salt as a reliable companion if it helps to rescue a
distressed animal, or enables us to learn more about environmental circumstances
and behavioral and medical conditions that force marine mammals from their world
into ours.
Joseph R. Geraci
Valerie J. Lounsbury

vi
 Acknowledgements
This book grew from a commitment by Nancy Foster of the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), Office of Protected Resources, to streamline the collec-
tion of marine mammal tissues for the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s
(NIST) National Tissue Bank, and took shape with the indispensable help of friends
and colleagues with a wide range of expertise.
James Mead provided data from the Smithsonian Institution’s (Washington,
D.C.) Marine Mammal Events Program;Jon Lien (Memorial University, St. John’s,
Newfoundland), John Parsons (Nova Scotia Stranding Network), Lloyd Lowry
(Alaska Department of Fish and Game), and Francis Fay (University of Alaska)
offered information on stranding patterns from areas where published data are
sparse. Dean Wilkinson’s (NMFS) review and knowledge of marine mammal
stranding programs in the U.S. were essential to our chapter on organizing networks.
Greg Early of the New England Aquarium (NEA), Boston, Mass., gave freely of his
insights and experiences. All are valuable; some he has offered in the hopes that
others won’t make the same mistakes.
For their various contributions in the preparation of background material, we are
indebted to Padraig Duignan, Michael Geraci, Elissa Kuecks, Carl Porter, Gary
Smith, and Brian Wilcock from the Department of Pathology at the University of
Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, andJohn Lynch of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and
Food. Sentiel Rommel (Marine Mammal Program, Smithsonian Institution) re-
viewed illustrations based on his anatomical drawings of the bottlenose dolphin,
harbor seal, and California sea lion.
David St. Aubin (University of Guelph) contributed his broad knowledge,
experience, editing skills and continued encouragement. As always, he was indis-
pensable. Stephen Wise (NIST) helped consolidate the proposal and funding
arrangements that made the book possible. Ted Lillestolen, National Marine
Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources, galvanized the project from its
conception to its publication, solving every imaginable problem along the way. We
thank Victor Omelczenko of NOAA’s National Sea Grant Office and Amy
Broussard of the Texas A&M University Sea Grant College Program for providing
more than they had bargained for in the design and production of the book. And for
helping with the preparation of the manuscript, figures and appendices, as well as
keeping everything and everyone organized, we are particularly grateful toHeather
Copland (University of Guelph).
The strength of this work...both its narrative and accompanying illustrations...owes
much to our Panel of Reviewers. The entire manuscript was reviewed by: Andrea
Conley and Greg Early, New England Aquarium; Thomas Hulland, University of
Guelph; James Mead, Smithsonian Institution; Thomas and Sally Murphy, South
Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Charleston, S.C.; David
Obendorf, Tasmania Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries, King Meadow,
Tasmania; and Frank Roylance, The Baltimore Sun, Baltimore, Md. We are grateful
to James Mead for his scrutiny of the cetacean species illustrations.

vii
 Individual chapters were reviewed by: Daniel Baden, Rosenstiel School of
Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Miami (Ch. 10); Peigin Barrett and
Laurie Gage, Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito, Calif. (also Lance Morgan,
Krista Hanni, Dawn Smith) (Ch. 4, 5, 13); Anne Baker, Infectious Disease Unit,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (Ch. 12);Brian Beck, Bedford Institute of
Oceanographic Research, Halifax, Nova Scotia (Ch. 10); Peter Best, University of
Pretoria, South Africa (Ch. 6, 11); Robert Bonde, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
National Ecology Center, Gainesville, Fla. (Ch. 8, 11); Gregory Bossart, Miami
Seaquarium (Ch. 8); Robert Brownell, U.S. State Department, Washington, D.C.
(Ch. 11); Deke Buesse, Oviedo, Fla. (Ch. 8); Martin Cawthorn, Wellington, New
Zealand (Ch. 6); Elizabeth Dolgoff, National Aquarium in Baltimore (Ch. 3);
Francis Fay, Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska Fairbanks (Ch. 5);
Nicholas Gales, Underwater World, Perth, Western Australia (Ch. 6, 7); Sylvia
Galloway, NMFS, Living Marine Resources Management, Charleston, S.C. (Ch.
10); Michael Gosliner, Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, D.C. (Ch. 11);
Günter Heidemann-Institut Für Haustierkunde, Der Christian-Albrechts-Universität,
Kiel, Germany (Ch. 5); John Heyning, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles
County (Ch. 11); Ronald Jameson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National
Ecology Center, San Simeon, Calif. (Ch. 9); Barbara Koster, NIST, Organic
Analytical Research Division, Gaithersburg, Md. (Ch. 10);Kathy Krieger, NEA (Ch.
5, 6, 7); Lloyd Lowry, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fairbanks (Ch. 5, 6);
Helene Marsh, Environmental Studies, James Cook University of North Queensland,
Australia (Ch. 11); James McBain, Sea World, Inc., San Diego (Ch. 9); Thomas
McIntyre, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, Silver Spring, Md. (Ch. 11);
William Medway, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, Penn. (Ch. 12); Daniel Odell, Sea World, Inc., Orlando, Fla. (Ch. 4,
7, 8, 11, 13); Thomas O’Shea, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Ecology
Center, Ft. Collins, Colo. (Ch. 8, 9, 10); William Perrin, NMFS, Southwest Region,
La Jolla, Calif. (Ch. 6, 11); Sam Ridgway, Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
(Ch. 5, 6, 11, 12); Ian Robinson, RSPCA, Norfolk Wildlife Hospital, King’s Lynn,
Norfolk, U.K. (Ch. 5); Thomas Smith, Canada Department of Fisheries and
Oceans, Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo, British Columbia (Ch. 1, 5, 11);John
Twiss, Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, D.C. (Ch. 11); Michael Walsh,
Sea World, Inc., Orlando, Fla. (Ch. 6, 7, 8); Dean Wilkinson, NMFS, Office of
Protected Resources, Silver Spring, Md. (Ch. 1, 10);Thomas Williams, Monterey
Bay Aquarium, Monterey, Calif. (Ch. 9); Stephen Wise, NIST, Organic Analytical
Research Division, Gaithersburg, Md. (Ch. 10); and Amy Woodworth, National
Aquarium in Baltimore (Ch. 3).

viii
 Table of Contents
Foreword .......................................................................................iii
A Personal Note to the Reader ..................................................... v
Acknowledgements ...................................................................... vii
Dedication .....................................................................................xi
Chapters
1 Perspectives on Strandings and Response Programs............ 1
2 Getting Organized ................................................................... 7
3 Public Support and Media Relations ..................................... 19
4 Decisions on the Beach......................................................... 27
5 Pinnipeds............................................................................... 35
6 Cetaceans—Single Strandings ............................................. 71
7 Cetaceans—Mass Standings .............................................. 133
8 Manatees............................................................................. 145
9 Sea Otters ........................................................................... 159
10 Specimen and Data Collection ............................................ 175
11 Carcass Disposal ................................................................ 229
12 Health and Safety Risks ...................................................... 239
13 The Follow-Up ..................................................................... 245
References ................................................................................ 249
Appendices
A: Suggested Field Equipment ................................................ 291
B: Sample Necropsy Report Form........................................... 294
C: Sample Telephone Directory for Strandings ....................... 299
Subject Index ............................................................................ 301
Species Index............................................................................ 305
About the Authors ..................................................................... 309

ix
x
 Two men have, in countless ways, influenced the writ-
ing of this book. Sadly, one of them, Forrest G. Wood, did
not live to see the final version. He was a pioneer of marine
mammal science, a poet, and a defender of the English
language. The other, William E. Schevill, scholar, mentor
and friend, continues to provide the wisdom, inspiration
and guidance that keep the rest of us from stranding.

xi
 Chapter 1
Perspectives on Strandings
and Response Programs
1.1. Animals ........................................................................................1
1.2. Defining a Stranded Animal .......................................................2
1.3. Of What Interest Is a Stranded Animal?....................................3
1.4. Development of Stranding Response Programs ......................5
References ..............................................................................249

1.1. Animals
Early in the evolution of mammals, a variety of forms began to explore
the sea as an alternative to living on land. Many of those attempts were
unsuccessful, and some varieties came and went without making a
lasting mark. Others—muskrats, otters and seals—have partially adapted,
while still preserving vital ties to the shore. The cetaceans (whales and
dolphins) and sirenians (manatees and dugongs) alone are completely
and only at home in water.
Adjusting to the marine environment required the modification of
numerous body systems. The proficient divers—pinnipeds and ceta-
ceans—demonstrate a host of anatomic and physiologic adaptations
for efficiently acquiring, storing and utilizing oxygen. Some of the more
apparent features are:
• lungs made firm and “springy” by small coils of cartilage that encircle
the airways throughout, permitting the lungs to virtually snap open
after a dive
• a large volume of blood that is quite dark owing to its rich supply of
oxygen-carrying hemoglobin
• an expansive circulatory system with intriguing reservoirs (thoracic
rete in cetaceans, hepatic venous sinus in pinnipeds) for storing blood
until it is needed, or for re-routing it elsewhere
• muscles that are dark, often nearly black with myoglobin, a pigment
that can store extra oxygen for release during long dives
For overall thermal protection, otters and fur seals depend on a
blanket of thick fur. Cetaceans and other pinnipeds rely instead on
blubber, a tissue that is mostly fat. By regulating blood circulation, a
marine mammal is able to deal with extreme variations in temperature
when swimming from the surface to the bottom or from one region to
another.

1
2

Blubber has other important roles besides providing insulation. The

tissue is buoyant and enables the animal to remain at the surface to
breathe and rest there without effort. Marine mammals drink little sea
water and draw most of their fresh water from food. During fasting, or
when prey is scarce, fat from the blubber is released for energy, and, like
that in a camel’s hump, produces crucial fresh water as a by-product. To
endow her newborn with precious blubber, a mother hooded seal will
transfer enough fat-rich milk to the pup for it to double its body weight
within four days of birth (an average gain of 6.5 kg/day), while losing
about 30 kg of blubber herself3.
As vital, but less obvious, are the adaptations for coping with the
demanding nature of the saltwater environment itself. The skin of all
marine mammals is impervious to sea water. To achieve this impen-
etrable state, the epidermis of cetaceans employs extraordinary cells
tightly woven into an architecture that is unique among mammals. The
adrenal gland’s response to stress both in cetaceans and pinnipeds also
serves to protect the animals from surrounding sea water. Aldosterone
released from the adrenal cortex causes the animal to retain its own salt
and water, freeing it from the need to drink any quantity of sea water. By
this mechanism, an animal in stress becomes physiologically isolated
from the external environment.
These adaptations enable an otter, for example, to keep warm in icy
waters, a baleen whale to migrate thousands of kilometers over several
months while fasting, a sperm whale to breath-hold for hour-long dives
to 2,000 meters or more, and a seal pup to begin life with energy
reserves in place. On the other hand, failure of a system can jeopardize
the tenuous shield protecting the animal from its environment. An animal
that cannot eat for whatever reason becomes thin. With less blubber, it
must work harder simply to stay afloat and keep warm, thereby burning
more energy that depletes more fat—its only remaining source of
nourishment and water. The life-draining spiral tightens rapidly, and its
effect can be seen in animals that come ashore to strand. Many are
emaciated, dehydrated, and exhausted.

1.2. Defining a Stranded Animal

A “strand” is a beach, or land bordering a body of water, and stranded
is defined as having run aground. The latter term also describes any
creature having been left in a helpless position, such as a marine
mammal that falters ashore ill, weak, or simply lost. The expression
mass-stranded, while not so enshrined in convention, generally refers
 Perspectives ... 3

to a simultaneous stranding of two or more cetaceans other than a

female and her calf29.
Mass die-off refers to mortality on a large scale. The term does not
describe the cause of death, the number of species involved, nor
whether any animals came ashore, but merely the outcome. Mass die-
offs have resulted from rapidly spreading viruses such as influenza7 and
phocine distemper12,14,20,27, parasitic infection15, and long-term inges-
tion of algal toxins9. Each of these events has brought hundreds or
thousands of animals ashore, but none in the manner that could be
called a “mass stranding”.
Since shore is not the only place where a marine mammal is helpless,
a strandling is routinely defined as an animal that cannot cope in its
present situation or—borrowing from aviation vocabulary—one that is
outside its survival envelope. That includes an arctic seal in Florida
waters, a manatee immobilized after a vessel strike, an ice-bound gray
whale, orphaned dependent offspring, a dolphin swimming aimlessly, or
an otter drenched with oil. This enlarged concept of stranding calls for
help as a preventive measure and highlights the quandary of deciding
when to act.
Some writers distinguish between strandings and beachings, the
latter referring to animals cast ashore already dead. For scientific
purposes it is useful to adopt that distinction when it can be made, that
is, when the animal’s condition on arrival is known. Otherwise, the
common tendency is to use “stranded” for any live or dead speci-
men13,18.

1.3. Of What Interest Is a Stranded Animal?

History is full of references to beached marine mammals. In pre-
historic New England and on the Pacific coast, carcasses were used for
food and featured prominently in Indian mythology. Maushop, the
legendary giant who was said to live on the Massachusetts island of
Martha’s Vineyard, fished for whales.Those he didn't eat, he cast ashore
to share with his friends. Pilgrims later proposed to name what is now
Wellfleet Bay on Cape Cod “Grampus Bay” (“grampus” was a common
term for “dolphin”) because of the frequency of strandings there. Some
of the first laws enacted in the New England colonies were to establish
the ownership of beached whale carcasses.
As the shore developed into a fashionable dwelling place, the occur-
rence of a seal or whale on a beach must have been a curiosity at best,
and at worst a nuisance. But they had value, too. Strandings furnished
4

some of the first cetaceans for live displays16 and were a source of
specimens for museum exhibits and curios for coastal dwellers. Adorn-
ing our laboratory is a handsome walrus skull from the relict East Coast
population, dredged not from the ocean floor, but from a bushel of acorn
squash in a small village store in Quebec’s Iles de la Madeleine.
So evident was the scientific potential of stranded animals, that
Frederick True, noted cetologist and one of the first curators of the
National Museum of Natural History (Smithsonian Institution), or-
ganized a marine mammal stranding program along the East Coast
more than a century ago19. Through successive marine mammalogists,
and particularly since 1972 under the guidance of Marine Mammal
Curator James Mead, the Smithsonian is now regarded not only for its
traditional collection of marine mammal skulls and skeletons, but also for
its archive of photographs, measurements, stomach contents, repro-
ductive organs, teeth for age determination, samples for toxicologic
analysis and genetic studies, parasites, and even samples of diseased
tissues.
Such efforts worldwide have been rewarded. The existence of some
marine mammal species is known only from strandings. Details accumu-
lated over the years have furnished pictures of growth rates, age at
maturity, gestation period, birth intervals, reproductive season, and
longevity of numerous species17,26. We have learned about individual
illnesses and wholesale mortalities caused by viruses, bacteria, para-
sites, and algal toxins4,8,10,12,21 , and the types, amount, geographic
sources, and trends in the levels of oceanic contaminants1,5,6,25 .
How this scientific information relates to conservation measures
and policy depends on the species. The animals that strand most
commonly are generally those that are most abundant, and for that
reason, “rehabilitating” a harbor seal in New England or a California sea
lion for eventual release will not likely benefit either population in any
way. In fact, releasing one carrying infectious organisms is apt to be
harmful. The rescue of an endangered monk seal is another matter;
every addition will have a measurable effect on the very small popula-
tion. Still, only time may tell whether reintroducing any creature that was
“weeded out” in the first place is, in the long term, beneficial to the wild
population.
The average person today would not respond to a stranding merely
because the animal has some scientific value. If collecting scientific
information were the only motivation, the next harbor seal to stagger
onto a beach would probably be left abandoned. More often, we are
 Perspectives ... 5

moved by the humane need to help an animal in distress. Beyond

that, marine mammals have taken on a new role that is reflected in the
way we view them and how we react when any one of them comes
ashore. Manatees crippled by boats are a steady reminder of how we
indulge our recreational activities at the expense of wildlife. Otters killed
by oil expose the growing ambivalence between our desire to protect
fragile coastal ecosystems and our demands on industry to exploit these
areas for economic benefit. Any mass stranding of whales is certain to
rekindle arguments over the possible role of pollutants, of which the
ocean has plenty. Marine mammals, it seems, have become a totem of
our battle for a fresh, clean environment. We search the beaches for
evidence of casualties and find stranded animals. We can only specu-
late on how many are victims of our excesses, but each and every one
of them helps us keep the vigil.

1.4. Development of Stranding Response Programs

The vast body of literature on strandings consists mostly of reports of
single animals. Earlier accounts, though valuable for their detail, were
not integrated into any overall scheme that gave an accurate reflection
of stranding patterns and distribution. To be truly valuable, data have
to be collected in a consistent way, on the greatest possible
number of specimens, and over a long period of time.Only then can
the information contribute to an understanding of the size, shifts or
movements in a population, and factors underlying natural mortality. A
unified plan was needed to collect this kind of information.
The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 gave the federal
government jurisdiction over marine mammals in the United States. By
protecting them from capture or harassment, and prohibiting the taking
of parts from carcasses except by those specifically authorized to do so,
the Act was a driving force to organize formal regional stranding
response networks.
Initially, scientists working with stranded animals were required to
obtain a research permit. But such a requirement was unworkable and
meant that research opportunities were missed. Because of these
concerns, the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission sponsored a work-
shop in 1977, in Athens, Georgia, at which 42 scientists from 19 states,
Canada and England met to discuss marine mammal strandings. The
presentations covered every conceivable topic and generated lively
debate on a range of issues that ultimately led to 10 recommendations11.
One recommendation was to establish the framework for a National
6

Stranding Alert Network with regional centers and a central data file,
coordinated by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
The workshop served as a springboard for the formation of a national
stranding plan in the United States. Centers have been organized within
each of the NMFS administrative regions; data are being compiled—
regionally by member institutions and state agencies, and nationally by
the NMFS, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Smithsonian
Institution. The integration of these activities made it possible for the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish
an archive for tissues from stranded animals.
The Second Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop, held in Miami,
Florida, in 198722, reviewed the history and achievements of the national
plan, region by region, and consolidated a scheme for collecting and
archiving data. The range of scientific presentations highlighted the
value of using stranded animals to advance our understanding of marine
mammal biology from the population to the cellular and molecular level.
The decade of the 1980s witnessed the expansion of organized
stranding programs in other countries as well. From Australia came the
“Victorian Whale Rescue Plan”28, the first step-by-step approach to
organizing a civic stranding response. A 1983 workshop on strandings
sponsored by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
(RSPCA) produced a brief account of first-aid for cetaceans on the
beach24. Another manual was prepared in New Zealand for training
personnel in marine mammal rescue2. The richest popular document of
the decade was Frank Robson’s book Strandings: Ways to Save
Whales23. It is a splendidly detailed narrative of a retired fisherman’s
life-long devotion and personal investment in a field few others knew, or
cared much about. Scientific scrutiny aside, everyone will profit from
reading it.
It is unlikely that any new stranding plan can be developed without
borrowing extensively from previous thought and experience. Wilkinson29,
in a review of marine mammal stranding networks in the United States,
analyzed past and current operations, identified strengths and weak-
nesses within each, and offered recommendations for overall improve-
ment. Response networks will thus continue to evolve. The goals,
however, seem already well established:
• Provide for the welfare of live animals.
• Minimize risk to public health and safety.
• Support scientific investigation.
• Advance public education.
 Chapter 2
Getting Organized
2.1. The Stranding Network ...............................................................7
2.2. Regulatory Authority ...................................................................7
2.3. The Operations Center ...............................................................9
2.4. The Response Team ................................................................10
2.5. Logistic Support ........................................................................13
2.6. A Model Response....................................................................14

2.1. The Stranding Network

The objectives of a stranding network are:
• to provide rapid and effective action that will best serve the well-being
of the stranded animal(s)
• to protect the public while acting on its concern
• to gain maximum scientific information
Essential elements of a network include an emergency response
team with a veterinary component; logistic support and equipment for
moving animals; a facility for medical treatment and rehabilitation; and
a complement of scientists able to collect, analyze, and archive speci-
mens and data. To function as a unit, the network requires formal
training programs and practice drills, uniform protocols, and a spirit of
group effort maintained through solid lines of communication.
Stranding networks in the U.S. are nominally based on the adminis-
trative regions of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). For
the purposes of this field guide, it is more practical to establish zoogeo-
graphic zones based on species distribution and stranding records
(Fig. 2.1). This scheme disregards state or national boundaries, as well
as regions established by NMFS, but will help to predict the types of
activity one may expect in a particular area (see 5.3, 5.12, 6.3, 6.13).

2.2. Regulatory Authority

The network must function within the legal framework established by
various federal, state and regional authorities, and cooperate with them
to ensure effective action and long-term goals. The U.S. Marine Mam-
mal Protection Act specifically prohibits the collection of animals (live
or dead) or parts from them, or any form of harassment, detention or
restraint, however temporary. Exceptions are permitted for government
officials acting in the course of their duties, and for other authorized

7
8

Fig. 2.1. U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service Stranding Network jurisdictions
compared to regions based on marine mammal distribution in U.S. and adjacent
waters. Areas 3 and 8, notably smaller than the others, are transition zones between
generally differing northern and southern fauna. The few strandings that do occur in
these zones may be of animals from either of the adjacent regions.

individuals, when the action is essential to protect the animal’s or the

public’s welfare.
It is clear that a person wanting to help an animal on the beach must
first obtain permission. One approach is for an individual or organization
to apply to NMFS for a letter of authorization, which will allow work with
cetaceans and all pinnipeds except the walrus. Walruses, sea otters and
manatees are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, which must authorize any work involving these species. A more
common way to become involved is to associate with persons or
 Getting Organized ... 9

institutions already authorized as members of marine mammal strand-

ing networks.
Many coastal states have enforcement officers with statewide (Ma-
rine Patrol, Fish and Game personnel) or local (park rangers) jurisdic-
tion. The geographic limits and laws governing these jurisdictions must
be respected by network members. In some areas, state law enforce-
ment officers may be under formal contract with the regulating federal
agency to assist in strandings.
Local police are invaluable participants in a stranding response.
They have legal authority over all activities on the beach and can
maintain order and protect animals by limiting access to the site,
erecting barriers if necessary, and controlling crowds and vehicles.
Police must supervise the use of firearms and may agree to oversee the
distribution of controlled substances such as anesthetics and euthana-
sia solutions. During mass strandings, a representative of the Law
Enforcement Branch of NMFS may assist local police in support of
network activities. Harbormasters and animal control officers may ren-
der additional assistance.
The Coast Guard’s obligatory role in a stranding is limited to situa-
tions involving risk to human life or hazards to navigation. They have
excellent equipment and trained personnel and often go far beyond their
duties to provide valuable support in transporting team members to
remote stranding sites, providing foul-weather gear, and hauling beached
carcasses to sea.

2.3. The Operations Center

Each NMFS region has a stranding coordinator and at least one
stranding Operations Center, served by satellite units that might include
aquariums, dedicated stranding facilities, research stations, museums,
and state departments of wildlife or conservation.
The basic role of the Operations Center is to provide a continually
monitored telephone service for receiving and verifying stranding
reports and to coordinate the response. Those organizations of potential
benefit to the stranding network (police, Coast Guard, municipal authori-
ties, centers for education and research, wildlife and conservation
groups) should be informed of the Center’s existence. The Operations
Center should also:
• organize and administer the regional network
• train staff and volunteers
10

• notify and work with federal and local authorities

• maintain a communications link among all network elements
• promote public awareness of the network’s activities
• coordinate the response from the Center or closest satellite
• gather and archive data
• report findings to the appropriate government agency
• keep track of samples dispersed to authorized individuals
The Center’s effectiveness hinges on local resources and atti-
tudes, which will vary seasonally and among communities. It is unreal-
istic to expect an enthusiastic response on all holidays or during foul
weather. Local officials must be presented with a strong plan of action
and the reasons behind it. Otherwise, the townsfolk may be tempted
simply to push a live animal out to sea, in hopes that if it does re-strand,
it will be somewhere else.
The Operations Center should maintain current files on the capabili-
ties of each coastal community within the region—physicians or hospi-
tals in the vicinity (for emergency care of staff), beach conditions and
obstacles likely to impede or influence the safety of the rescuers—and
plan responses accordingly. Personnel must be aware of ordinances
regulating such activities as carcass dissection (on the beach), disposal,
and transport across town or state lines.
Except in areas where the coastline is continuously monitored by
wildlife agencies, strandings are usually reported by the public. Each
town may have its delegated or volunteer contact person, perhaps the
animal control or conservation officer, harbormaster, or others with a
particular interest. Once familiarized with the network’s program, these
liaisons can expedite the stranding response, while keeping the commu-
nity informed.

2.4. The Response Team

Responsibilities
The composition of a response team depends on the type and
frequency of animals coming ashore in the region. Different strate-
gies are required for oiled sea otters, traumatized manatees and
mass-stranded pilot whales. Common to all situations, however, is
the basic need for the team to:
• respond rapidly
• contact local authorities upon arrival
 Getting Organized ... 11

• evaluate the situation

• provide emergency care
• arrange to take action (release, transport, necropsy, specimen and
data collection, and photographic documentation)
• enlist local assistance
• provide information to the public and media
• protect public health and ensure safety
• maintain a communications link with the Operations Center
Recruiting
The core team requires a wide range of expertise. Apart from the
obvious priorities (rescue, first aid, euthanasia, necropsy, etc.) is the
need to organize others, deal with the public and media, make phone
calls, maintain records, run errands, and provide for the comfort of
beleaguered colleagues too preoccupied to look after themselves. No
individual can perform all these tasks. People differ in their interests,
levels of skill, emotional make-up, and philosophical beliefs. Know your
team and utilize their potential.
Experienced persons can be recruited from aquariums, research
stations, veterinary clinics, academic institutions, and wildlife and con-
servation groups. A number of teams with similar training may be
required to cover a wide geographic range. Additional volunteers with no
previous experience can be recruited and trained by the core group to
provide extended support.
The size of the team is determined by the species and number of
animals, their distribution, and the conditions under which they strand.
Situations demanding prolonged work in water or exposure to cold
require additional personnel for auxiliary teams (see Chapter 12). An
archive of information on the size and composition of teams required
under similar conditions in the past will aid in future planning.
Training
Training programs can use lectures, workshops, demonstrations and
audio-visual material to develop and maintain essential skills. Topics
should include:
• purpose of the Network
• marine mammal biology
• stranding theories
• expected types of events; planning for each
• work standards; importance of persisting with assigned tasks
12

• rationale and criteria involved in decisions (see Chapter 4)

• handling and transport procedures
• first aid
• marking and tagging
• public and media relations (see Chapter 3)
• personal needs of the field party
• dissection techniques (see Chapter 10)
• collecting specimens and data (see Chapter 10)
• disposal of carcasses (see Chapter 11)
• health and safety concerns (see Chapter 12)
• the follow-up (see Chapter 13)
Trained team members can offer basic instruction to satellite groups,
communities where strandings are frequent, local authorities, and vol-
unteers enlisted at the site. Interest can be sustained through periodic
workshops, demonstrations, simulated stranding drills, and the distribu-
tion of literature and newsletters.
All strandings require a core team with a high level of skill. Mass
strandings also need auxiliary personnel, not necessarily trained,
whose greatest assets are their energy and willingness to cooper-
ate. Their tasks must be clearly defined and supervised.
The importance of working within the person’s level of skill should be
stressed. An identification card given to each member, coded to indicate
the dates and degree of training, will facilitate task assignments at the
site. Those familiar with equipment and animal handling can be quickly
assigned to teams providing basic care and support. Others may be
more qualified for dissection and sampling, or for staff support, commu-
nications or administrative duties.
Practice Drills
Practice drills are an exercise in getting the team to a given place on
time. A poor system of notification will be apparent at this point, and
members who consistently fail to appear may be generally undepend-
able. Drills reviewing each stage of the response are an effective way to
check the condition of equipment, test strategies, practice safety mea-
sures, and correct defects before problems occur. Game plans can be
developed for the types of animals and strandings in the region. A beach
cleanup is an example of a good organizational drill that, in addition,
generates positive media and community support.
 Getting Organized ... 13

2.5. Logistic Support

Equipment
The Operations Center should maintain a depot of basic equipment
for restraint, transport, dissection and sampling, medical procedures
and supportive care (see also Appendix A: Suggested Field Equip-
ment). Cranes, front-end loaders, boats, vehicles and other large items,
are usually borrowed at the site from sources identified in advance. One
team member should be responsible for coordinating this effort. At the
stranding site, medical, dissecting and marking equipment, and data
forms are best secured in a central store supervised by a trained person
responsible for their distribution to team members.
General categories of equipment
Heavy machinery and haulage equipment: obtainable from state,
county and municipal public works departments, and from private
sources (a professional operator or contractor can help with the selec-
tion). Establish availability and financial responsibility in advance.
Foul-weather gear: wet suits or dry suits can be rented from dive
shops; dry suits are preferred for long exposure in cold water (see 12.2);
wind-surfing suits are also useful. Everyone should be equipped with
foul-weather gear (raincoat) and at least one change of clothing.
Rescue and first-aid equipment: the Operations Center should
maintain a store of tarpaulins, buckets, shovels, ropes, lights, poles, and
sheets. Additional supplies might be available from state and local fire,
police and public works departments, and military installations.
Medical needs: human and veterinary hospitals and animal shelters
may provide medical equipment and supplies, including antibiotics,
fluids, administration sets, analgesics, blood sampling supplies, and
euthanasia solutions. A collective of cooperating clinics and practitio-
ners might stockpile supplies. Prepare in advance in areas where mass
strandings occur.
Diagnostic equipment: some diagnostic techniques for hematology
and blood chemistry can be adapted for field use, using compact
equipment powered by a small generator. Coolers are needed to store
blood and tissue samples. Local hospitals and veterinary clinics can
provide more advanced diagnostic support.
Marine equipment: police, Coast Guard, and commercial and pri-
vate boat operators often respond to the need for small vessels, foul-
weather gear and radios.
14

Team identification: issue waterproof badges or wristbands coded

for level of training (highly or moderately skilled, untrained), including
name and institutional affiliation. Provide each person with reflective
safety tape or a battery-operated or chemical light for night work.
Animal identification: kits for mass strandings contain:
• marking equipment (tags, tagging gun and replacement parts)
• waterproof pencil and logbooks (available from surveying supply
companies)
• different colors of vinyl ribbon to identify animals for immediate
release, rehabilitation, euthanasia, dissection or disposal
• large visible tags for recording vital information
• chemical lights for marking animals at night.
Dissection and sampling equipment, protocols, data forms, pho-
tographic gear: pre-assembled kits for obtaining, marking, and storing
samples contain knives, sample bags, waterproof tags and markers,
measuring tapes, and data forms (see Appendix A). In a pinch, acquire
knives from commercial fishermen and butchers; make a flensing knife
by fixing a machete blade (army surplus) to a long handle. Keep
photographic supplies protected from moisture.

2.6. A Model Response

Strandings differ, as will the responses, and basic goals and actions
must be tailored to the nature of the event. Animals in some regions
come ashore singly and with predictable regularity, drawing little media
or public attention and needing only a small team. Large whales and
multiple strandings always attract attention and demand skillful organi-
zation. A group of ailing sperm whales, for example, will elicit an
unmanageable amount of resources and help—hence the need for a
plan.
Organization
The response must be organized and structured, stressing the impor-
tance of each task that is assigned. A clear chain of command is vital.
Each person rightfully expects to have the resources to get the job done,
but must respect other overriding needs. Everyone, from the head of the
operation to the person on the beach, must keep sight of the common
goal.
Notification
After learning of the event, the Operations Center requests the
network representative closest to the scene to verify the report and
 Getting Organized ... 15

Fig. 2.2. The Stranding Response.

16

Fig. 2.3. Organization at the stranding site includes preparation for crowd control,
dealing with the media, and assigning tasks to team members and on-site volun-
teers.
obtain basic information (precise location, tentative species identifica-
tion, number of animals, whether dead or alive, weather and beach
conditions, number and level of trained persons on site, level of action
required, and potential complications, i.e., crowded bathing beach).
For operations involving more than one small animal, the Operations
Center notifies the appropriate federal agency and confers with regional
and local authorities on the intended action. An appropriate team is
dispatched, drawing from the Operations Center and the region. Area
representatives are often willing to take control of the stranding site and
to enlist available support and services.
Rendezvous
A rendezvous point is established at or near the site, with continu-
ously monitored telephone service—perhaps a police or Coast Guard
station. Badges previously issued to network members will help law
enforcement officers identify the persons allowed access to controlled
areas. Arriving workers can be briefed and assigned to a team before
going to the stranding site. Be sure to provide clear directions—
detailed maps may be necessary.
A designated parking area near the rendezvous point will help avoid
traffic congestion and damage to the beach environment. Transporta-
 Getting Organized ... 17

tion to and from the beach can be either by scheduled shuttle, or

available on demand, assuming adequate communications.
Coordinators
The response team is supervised by a coordinator who directs the
overall plan and communicates with the Operations Center. Large
events require additional coordinators for each of the main functions
(e.g., veterinary care and support, equipment access/community liai-
son, public information and media support, specimen and data collec-
tion, volunteer organization, and staff support and safety).
Fatigue can alter one’s perspective, and, without a break, motiva-
tion and enthusiasm on the beach can deteriorate to the point of
increasing risks to health and safety (see Chapter 12). A trained
individual should be appointed to look after the comfort and safety of all
personnel. In a small-scale response, the duties may simply involve
locating nearby facilities (bathroom, shower, telephone) and providing
food. For more complex events, the coordinator will establish a staff
support center to provide first aid, shelter, food and beverages, a
portable lavatory, and hot water for washing. A main center might be
located at (or near) the rendezvous point, with a smaller one at the
stranding site.
The staff support coordinator should also arrange off-site accom-
modations for the team, being sure to familiarize the innkeeper with the
nature of the event, the inevitable round-the-clock traffic, cumbersome
equipment, and untidy appearance of the guests.
The media and public relations coordinator may designate areas for
media representatives and the public to gather for periodic progress
reports (see Chapter 3). Other team members must refer requests for
information to this coordinator.
A large response requires considerable on-site administrative work.
A coordinator of volunteers will organize support staff, keep records of
participants and their affiliations, maintain a check-in/check-out system,
and (with the safety coordinator) schedule and supervise revolving
shifts. The safety coordinator will also keep a record of reported injuries,
ensure their treatment, and follow up any complications.
Specimen and data coordinators maintain the supply of dissecting
and sampling equipment and data forms, monitor procedures to ensure
adherence to protocols, keep track of samples processed in field
laboratories or off-site facilities, and collect and organize completed
forms and material (see Chapter 10).
18

Communications
The stranding site, rendezvous point and Operations Center function
as a unit, through a solid line of communication that requires continuous
monitoring by radio, mobile telephones, or a planned courier system.
Scheduled periodic meetings with the team leader help to determine
needs, report progress, and boost energy and morale. Meetings of the
group coordinators maintain overall organization and set the course
for the following day’s activities. The team leader issues progress
reports to the Operations Center, informing the staff of any needs. The
Operations Center responds to requests for support and relays informa-
tion to the responsible regulatory agency.
Know your capability, operate within those limits, and do not
expect more than your resources allow.
 Chapter 3
Public Support and Media Relations
3.1. Public Attitudes .........................................................................19
3.2. Enlisting Public Support ...........................................................19
3.3. Crowd Management..................................................................22
3.4. Media Relations ........................................................................23
3.5. Maintaining Public and Media Support....................................25
References ..............................................................................250

3.1. Public Attitudes

Only a few decades ago, a dead whale on the beach, or even a live
one, might have been viewed as a source of food and oil, a curiosity, or
merely a nuisance. Today, any live whale or dolphin, or an orphaned seal
howling for its mother, is certain to evoke a different response—one that
may quickly reach and influence a nationwide audience. While some
would leave the animal to a natural death, or kill it as they would a stray
dog, most people today expect the animals will be rescued, rehabilitated
and returned to sea.
The range of personal reactions reflects the influences of education
and other first-hand experiences, the media, and regional values1. The
urban dweller may view a seal pup more as a pet, and the hunter or
stockman may regard it with indifference. A maritime community may
see it as a future threat to its fishing economy, and to the scientist, the
seal pup is a source of information. These perspectives all converge at
the site of a stranding. Here, attitudes can change, and unlikely alliances
are forged in the common desire for action.

3.2. Enlisting Public Support

Recruiting On-Site Volunteers
Whatever their viewpoint, most individuals at a stranding are pre-
pared to help and will respect a convincing plan and authoritative
leadership. Others may be reluctant to volunteer without considerable
encouragement. With proper instruction, most volunteers can be as-
signed to teams or supervised tasks. Individuals at the site who may
have their own objectives or simply resist authority should be asked to
leave. Respect the attitudes of those in the crowd who are sympathetic
and supportive but wish no direct involvement. The impression gained
from this experience will shape their attitude toward future events.

19
20

When more people volunteer than are needed, some criteria for
selection are required. Questionnaires concerning experience, abilities
and health limitations will simplify this process. Those with special skills
who are determined to help, quick to recognize mistakes in the response
effort, and show burning enthusiasm are best engaged as allies. When
a lengthy operation is expected, ask willing individuals to return for a
later shift, and find out where they might be reached in case there is a
change in plans.
Do not expect volunteers recruited on-site to have the same dedica-
tion that you demand from the trained team, though you may get as much
and more. Volunteers may arrive unprepared for field conditions or foul
weather, or may have other obligations that require them to leave before
their tasks are complete. For some, the commitment is fragile and
weakens even more when their expectations about their role or contri-
bution are not met.
Education
The Operations Center conducts educational programs to increase
public awareness and appreciation of marine mammals, encourage the
reporting of stranding events, and promote involvement in an organized
response. Augment the program with lectures, posters, distributed
literature, and practice drills, and emphasize regional trends and pat-
terns, such as mass strandings in the Northeastern and Southeastern
regions, or the arrival of pinniped pups ashore in the spring.
Most individuals at a stranding will not have been exposed to the
Operation Center’s educational programs. Distributing information pam-
phlets to persons on the scene will help them determine the role they
wish to play. This literature should contain basic information on the
regional stranding network, a fact sheet (Fig. 3.1) on the species that has
stranded, a recruitment questionnaire (see above), and guidelines on
appropriate conduct, health and safety measures. It should also outline
the range of actions possible, from immediate release to euthanasia.
Rely on a designated spokesperson to establish rapport with the
public and report on progress and developments. Trained educators
from schools, museums, zoos and aquariums are ideal in this role, and
can also provide additional information on natural history, biology,
conservation, and environmental concerns. A video display or a carcass
moved within viewing distance of where public announcements are
made can serve as an educational aid.
 Public Support and Media Relations ... 21

Fig. 3.1. A sample fact sheet for distribution to team members, volunteers and
observers.
22

3.3. Crowd Management

Establishing boundaries
Large animals, mass strandings, or events on densely populated
beaches often attract crowds that will require some attention to satisfy
their curiosity. Observers may move in for a closer look if they are not
kept informed and their questions go unanswered. The main objectives
are to reduce disruptive noise and chaos, prevent accidents, avoid
further stress and injury to the animals, and allow the team to
proceed with its work.
Law enforcement officers are experienced in managing crowds; other
officials, such as game wardens, marine patrol officers and park rang-
ers, also have the legal authority to do so. The person designated for
crowd management and the stranding coordinator can determine what
measures need to be taken. Cordoning an area (with stakes, rope, fencing)
may deter entry, but such symbolic barriers cannot be enforced without
legal authority. The public has the right to be there, unless it is a
private beach. In general, people will respect imposed limits if the reasons
are clear. Establish ample boundaries for the team to work safely and
effectively, with access to the ocean, and allow the public to move freely
outside of that area.
Warn the public of the risks of approaching or handling a stranded
animal, including physical injury (strain, bites, hypothermia) and pos-
sible disease transmission (see Chapter 12). A balanced view will
reassure bystanders that the chance of contracting an illness from a
stranded animal is slight, but remind them that a carcass is no place for
a picnic.
Explaining Your Actions
Clearly explain the intended procedures so that actions are properly
interpreted. The approach to blood sampling, intravenous medications,
and euthanasia all appear the same to anyone unaware of what is in the
syringe. The use of a conspicuous tag to identify all carcasses will show
bystanders that the response team has not left a live animal unattended
or handled it roughly.
Do not risk an animal’s welfare for the benefit of science. Weigh
the values when considering collecting biopsy specimens or teeth from
live animals. Opening a beached carcass for samples while other
animals await attention will evoke a justifiably irate response from
observers.
 Public Support and Media Relations ... 23

Circumstances on the beach can change with a rising tide, advancing

weather front, nightfall, or a team’s dwindling enthusiasm and re-
sources. Keep the public informed of any variation from the expected
plan to avoid confusion.
The public and many team members may be unaccustomed to
euthanasia procedures and respond with questions and alarm if they are
unprepared. While some are entirely opposed to the practice, most
people accept the need to end pain and suffering humanely when
no other options exist. Still, advocates may find the practice emotion-
ally and visually upsetting. The investigators’ responsibility is to explain
in clear detail the need for this action (see 4.6, 4.7), how it will be
performed, and possible complications. Be sympathetic to people’s
concerns and emotions.
The visual and emotional impact of an act of euthanasia will vary,
depending on the animal. When properly done, a lethal injection admin-
istered to pinnipeds and dolphins has a quiet and rapid outcome. The
same procedure in a small whale may result in a brief period of
unconsciousness (anesthesia), accompanied by tail-lobbing or thrash-
ing. There is no preferred method for euthanizing large whales. Lancing
and shooting require equipment that the public may find upsetting, and
their use even more so (see 6.12). Weigh the visual impact of the
intended action and its effectiveness with the alternative of making the
animal as comfortable as possible and allowing it to die unassisted.
Careless remarks and inappropriate jokes reflect a callous atti-
tude toward both the animals’ distress and the team’s effort. Squabbling
over procedures and samples trivializes the importance of the operation
and creates a poor impression. Remember also that the media may be
recording your every move.

3.4. Media Relations

Strandings make excellent news items—the story of nearly mystical
creatures trapped in a perilous setting. The event can grow from a local
report to one of incredible proportions, as did the rescue of three gray
whales in Alaska2. What began as a routine ice entrapment became an
international mission to free the whales, driven largely by media reports.
Nearly everyone is influenced by the media. For some, it may be the
sole source of information on marine mammals and stranding events.
The more information we can provide, the more accurate the coverage
will be, and, in turn, the greater the educational value and benefit to the
24

stranding network. A timely newspaper article can prevent the “rescue”

of a healthy seal pup awaiting the imminent return of its mother.
Organization
The stranding network’s media coordinator is at the heart of the
operation. Suitable candidates can be recruited from the media rela-
tions department of a marine mammal display facility. The general
responsibilities of the position include:
• developing strategies for providing information to the public
• educating staff and volunteers on how to interact with the media
• providing the media with up-to-date material, including press kits
• maintaining a phone list of key staff and press contacts
• planning consistent coverage of stranding events
A press kit might include a regional map, stranding patterns and brief
sketches of the animals typically involved (Fig. 3.1), as well as a
description of the network (from federal to local level), and a list
acknowledging donors, contributors and associated scientists.
Take the initiative to contact the press and keep them informed with
information that is consistent and supportable. Maintain a good
working relationship by avoiding unreasonable demands and being
cooperative. Do not expect the press to appeal for volunteers and
equipment during an event (the response is unmanageable in any
case). Make them aware that you expect reporters to identify them-
selves and to minimize disturbance and interference on the site (e.g.,
low-flying aircraft).
At the Scene
The media coordinator is responsible for providing substantial, accu-
rate information, thus avoiding a distorted story based on speculation
and opinion. Neither the team leader nor other members will have the
time or information to assume this role, and must defer questions when
approached. At the stranding scene, press kits can be distributed from
established communications stations to media representatives. Direc-
tions to the nearest public telephones will be greatly appreciated.
Specify the times and locations of regular press briefings to be given
by the designated media spokesperson, and include at least one of the
investigating scientists on a predetermined schedule to satisfy the
inevitable search for “better answers.” Conflicting views are unavoid-
able and can be presented to the media as a normal part of
scientific inquiry. Avoid public arguments; the stranding site is not
the place to try to resolve such differences in any event. Media represen-
 Public Support and Media Relations ... 25

tatives will appreciate the names and phone numbers of other experts
in the field if they choose to pursue the story in more depth.

3.5. Maintaining Public and Media Support

Beach Etiquette
Team members consumed by enthusiasm and fatigue easily forget
that motel staff are not accustomed to dealing with cluttered rooms and
messy guests, and that no one appreciates the sight of bloody bootprints
while dining in their favorite family restaurant. Caution all personnel to
respect the sensitivity of local residents and businesses. Unless
you have had time to change out of your field attire or clean up, consider
take-out food. Such courtesies will go a long way toward securing a base
of support for future operations.
A Word of Thanks
A firm note of thanks will help keep the public and media trust and
support, hard-earned throughout the event. Let them know the value of
their participation and the outcome of the effort (see Chapter13). Make
a point of personally thanking the local community.
26
 Chapter 4
Decisions on the Beach
4.1. When to Intervene.....................................................................27
4.2. What are the Options?..............................................................28
4.3. Criteria for Making Decisions ...................................................28
4.4. Immediate Release as an Option.............................................32
4.5. Rehabilitation as an Option ......................................................33
4.6. Euthanasia as an Option ..........................................................33
References ..............................................................................251

4.1. When to Intervene

Not every animal on the beach needs help. Pinnipeds and sea
otters normally require periods of time out of water, and even some
cetaceans, which are virtually helpless on land, may occasionally cross
the boundary between sea and land without undue risk. A beluga whale
may come ashore to rub free a winter’s accumulation of sloughing skin,
a killer whale to snatch an unsuspecting seal, and a bottlenose dolphin
after playfully riding a wave into the surf. Recognizing normal behaviors
will avert any unnecessary action.
Certain conditions demand attention. A sea otter that is coated
with oil, a fur seal too feeble to move or a manatee with crippling
propeller wounds is by any measure disabled and cannot recover
without help. The same may be true for an animal in impending danger,
for example: a subarctic hooded seal on a Florida beach or headed
inland across a highway, or perhaps a harbor porpoise trapped in a
fishing weir. Their peril is not as immediate as that of a dolphin on a hot
beach, but they are nonetheless in difficulty and have a better chance of
surviving if given some attention. “Nuisance animals” are a concern
primarily in areas of dense human population1. A California sea lion
intent on following humans off the beach or determined to sleep on
someone’s front porch calls for action.
In time, every would-be rescuer faces an animal in circumstances that
are ambiguous, in which the risk to health is debatable, and any action
taken is certain to be questioned. What should be done for a lone young
bottlenose dolphin marooned in a northern bay at the onset of winter, or
a humpback whale that may (or may not) be too far upriver to find its way
back, or the howling seal pup awaiting its mother’s return from a foraging
trip? Deciding what action to take in these situations requires an
understanding of the animal’s natural history, what typically happens

27
28

when such animals are left alone, and intuition that comes only with
experience (and mistakes).
In making any decision, we should keep in mind that a rescue effort
is notice to the public and authorities that the animal needs help, whether
it really does or not. And aborting the plan because the seal pup
suddenly woke up and dashed back to sea may be viewed by the public
as a failed attempt, even if it is not. These uncertain situations, beyond
all others, require firm planning with the help of experienced colleagues.

4.2. What Are the Options?

Once the decision is made to intervene, three options for immediate
action are to return the animal to sea, transport it to a care facility, or
euthanize it. The decision is simple when dealing with a healthy stray
that needs only to be returned to a suitable habitat, or, at the other
extreme, an animal that is clearly beyond help.
Most situations are more complex, and managing them must take into
account, among other things, the likelihood of success and the safety of
the operation. The “Decision Guide” (Fig 4.1) begins with the broadest
question common to all situations—is there enough help available?
From there, a series of criteria will guide the approach one might use in
most circumstances. As the options are weighed, the most important
maxim is to take no action that will only prolong suffering.

4.3. Criteria for Making Decisions

Logistic Support
Almost anything is possible with adequate resources; little or
nothing can be done without them. An experienced, organized, and
well-equipped response team is of paramount importance. Involvement
of volunteers with little or no training must necessarily be limited to non-
hazardous activities. Good planning will ensure that the required level of
support and expertise is available, and help to guarantee the success of
the operation. Attempting too much with too little causes needless risk
to both the workers and animals. Dragging a pilot whale across a rocky
beach for lack of a decent carrier, or holding a seal in an unventilated box
are harmful actions, and unnecessary if help is only an hour away.
How Many Animals?
A small animal on an accessible beach usually requires simple
straightforward action—few persons and little equipment—whereas a
sperm whale or mass stranding is certain to stretch resources and
 Decisions on the Beach ... 29

Fig. 4.1. “Decision Guide” for live animals.

30

demand an organized response. Most exacting are the large events of

long duration, such as an extended die-off along a vast shoreline. In
such circumstances, it will usually be necessary to husband resources
by being selective and to refrain from planning the type of exhaustive,
uniform approach required (at a cost of nearly $20 million) to rescue and
rehabilitate sea otters after the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill2.
Attempting to give equal attention to more animals than re-
sources permit assures inadequate care for any one. The action plan
for a cohesive group of stranded pilot whales must take into account
their social needs as well as physical health (see Chapter 7). A lone
young survivor is not likely to prosper if it is released in an area devoid
of other pilot whales, and may be better placed in a permanent care
facility.
Environmental Conditions
The action plan must take into account the time of day, beach
topography, sea state and weather conditions. The terrain may be too
rocky, muddy, or littered with sharp debris to drag animals safely or use
vehicles. Remote locations are naturally more difficult to manage. The
configuration of some beaches changes seasonally (a harmless surf
zone in the summer may become a dangerous undertow in winter) and
regionally (a riptide caused by a nearby jetty). Harsh terrain, rough seas,
darkness, or simply a rising tide can increase the risk to animals and the
team, and impede the rescue effort.
Severe weather may force a change in plans, limiting one’s options to
observing the animal, offering minimum protection, and euthanizing it
when conditions are appropriate. Consider moving the strandling to a
safer site for first aid, rather than releasing it into the danger of a heavy
surf.
Cetaceans and pinnipeds are prone to hyperthermia. Their dark
colors absorb heat, and blubber contains it. Circulatory adaptations for
cooling are not efficient on land and break down completely with the
onset of shock. For many reasons, the larger the animal, the greater the
problem. Adding to hyperthermia are dehydration from hot winds and the
destructive effects of sunburn (see 6.6). Pinnipeds may haul out on a hot
beach for brief periods and are not necessarily in need of rescue. A
cetacean on a hot beach requires immediate attention.
A manatee in cold water and a sea otter whose coat has lost its
insulating properties are subject to hypothermia. This is less a problem
with healthy pinnipeds and cetaceans. However, cold temperatures can
affect those with insufficient blubber—a characteristic of many of the
 Decisions on the Beach ... 31

seals and dolphins that come ashore. Small animals are more vulner-
able to cold stress because their surface area is large compared to their
mass. Extreme cold can cause frostbite and necrosis of the trailing
edges of the flukes and fins of even robust whales, and may be
hazardous to the response team, especially those working in the water
(see 12.2).
Wind exaggerates the effects of low temperature and hastens the
onset of frostbite. Sand is irritating to the eyes and mouth, and can be
blown with enough force to etch glass, scour paint, and injure tissues of
the animals and their attendants.
Animal Condition
A healthy animal is resilient, whereas one that is ailing may not
survive the ordeal associated with the rescue. However, it is not always
possible to distinguish between the two from their outward appearance.
In fact it may be difficult to determine at a distance whether a whale
is living, much less in good heath. Marine mammals seldom display
expressions or postures suggestive of pain or discomfort, or abnormal
behavior unless seriously ill. The body contour of cetaceans and pinni-
peds is formed largely by blubber, which retains its basic shape even
when the animal has lost weight. A decrease in blubber eventually leads
to hypothermia, sooner in cold waters than in warm. Thus, a dolphin in
northern latitudes dies before becoming emaciated, but in the tropics
may linger to become a very lean specimen. For the most part, the
health of an animal can be determined only after rigorous clinical
examination.
For some species, the options are predetermined. Sea otters and
adult pinnipeds are generally too debilitated by injury or disease to be
immediately returned to sea. Singly stranded odontocetes are usually ill
as well, or may be separated from a vital social group. The fate of these
animals after release is uncertain; consider a care facility as an option.
Larger, older animals generally decline in health more rapidly than
smaller ones. In pinnipeds, this is because most adults are disabled by
injury and disease, whereas pups and juveniles come ashore often
needing only food. Large size is detrimental to beached cetaceans
because of the proportionally damaging effects of mass and gravity.
Prompt action can slow but not entirely arrest the deterioration of an
animal’s health on the beach. Pilot whales released within 24 hours of
coming ashore have re-stranded days later, still showing morphologic
and biochemical evidence of stress and shock caused by the first
event3 (see 6.6). Little of this could have been gleaned from the physical
32

appearance of the whales when they were pushed out. Blood chemistry
might have been more revealing, but the analyses take time. Before
returning any animal to sea, consider that the process of recovery may
take longer than environmental conditions will allow.
Ease of Handling
The ability to approach, handle and move an animal depends on its
size and demeanor. Some are small enough to be picked up by hand,
have the disposition of the family dog, and might even tolerate a car ride
to the nearest facility, assuming a suitable cage is available. At the other
extreme are animals that are too cumbersome to move without unac-
ceptable risk. Little can be done for a large whale cast high and half
buried on a silted beach during a spring tide, or for a vicious, old and
injured walrus bull. Most circumstances lie somewhere in between.
When in doubt, consider first the interest of the animal and the
safety of the attendants.

4.4. Immediate Release as an Option

Return to sea is an option when:
• the animal is manageable and logistic support adequate
• beach and environmental conditions are favorable
• the animal is healthy and able to function normally
• social requirements can be met (e.g., maternal care for young)
• the area of release is within the natural range, suitable (out of harm’s
way) and navigable
Singly stranded odontocetes, and sea otters or pinnipeds unable
to leave the shore, are usually poor candidates for immediate
 Decisions on the Beach ... 33

release. Whether or not to release a large whale or smaller mass-

stranded cetaceans will be determined almost entirely by the available
logistic support. When dealing with the latter, attention should be given
first to younger animals, those in good health, and those on the beach
for the shortest time (see 7.6). Before returning animals to sea, a plan
should be in place for visual or electronic monitoring.

4.5. Rehabilitation as an Option

Rehabilitation is an option when:
• there is a good chance the animal can be restored to health
• facilities are available and equipped for the species and number of
animals involved
• arrangements can be made for safe and expeditious transport
• the animal is manageable and poses no major risk to others or to
facility staff
• there are sufficient funds and staff to provide care for a reasonable
period
Care facilities are increasing in number, capacity, and expertise for
dealing with manatees, sea otters, and most pinnipeds and small
cetaceans. There are only a few commercial institutions large enough to
accommodate a young gray whale or killer whale; most can only handle
those up to the size of a pilot whale. Still, the numbers of marine
mammals coming ashore annually exceeds the capacity of existing
institutions. This pressure will increase as stranding programs con-
tinue to develop, thereby limiting rehabilitation as an option.

4.6. Euthanasia as an Option

Euthanasia is an option when:
• it is necessary to end suffering of an animal in irreversibly poor
condition
• the decision can be made and the action directed by an experienced,
qualified person
• essential materials and equipment are available
• the procedure can be carried out humanely
• no rehabilitation facility is available for orphaned dependent young
• rescue is impossible and no care facility is available
• animals persistently restrand
34

• a distressed cetacean ashore is likely to attract others milling nearby

to mass strand
Euthanasia for marine mammals is a contentious issue, much
more so than the accepted practice of terminating the life of a pet or
other domestic animal. Anyone facing this option should be prepared for
opposition from both the public and other team members.
The Animal Welfare Act defines euthanasia as the humane destruc-
tion of an animal, using a method that produces near instantaneous
unconsciousness and rapid death without evident pain or distress, or
using anesthesia to produce painless loss of consciousness.
Intravenously administered anesthetic agents and euthanasia
preparations that have been used successfully in pinnipeds and
small cetaceans satisfy this definition; other approaches (e.g. firearms,
suffocation) may not, particularly on large whales (see 6.12). A
clumsy attempt to euthanize an animal without adequate equip-
ment or expertise can cause more suffering than a natural
death, and promotes greater reluctance to accept euthanasia as a
humane alternative.
In practice, public response influences the method of euthanasia, not
necessarily because of humane considerations, but for aesthetic rea-
sons. Consider the reaction to shooting a seal or draining a whale of its
blood on a public beach. These considerations aside, there is often
philosophical opposition to euthanasia. Some find the practice unac-
ceptable under any circumstance. Others, including team members,
may be unwilling or unprepared to accept this action after having
struggled earlier to save the animal’s life.
At the stranding site, the topic of euthanasia must be broached with
tact and consideration. Members of the response team, the general
public and the media should be informed of the procedure in all its
dimensions: the reasons, the approach, and possible complications
(see Chapter 3).
 Chapter 5
Pinnipeds
5.1. Biology .......................................................................................35
5.2. Mortality .....................................................................................40
5.3. Stranding Patterns ....................................................................43
5.4. Stranding Response .................................................................44
5.5. Approach and Handling ............................................................47
5.6. First Aid......................................................................................50
5.7. Immediate Release ...................................................................51
5.8. Transport to Care Facility .........................................................51
5.9. Rehabilitation ............................................................................52
5.10. Release Following Recovery....................................................54
5.11. Euthanasia.................................................................................56
5.12. Pinnipeds in U.S. and Adjacent Waters ..................................57
References ..............................................................................251

5.1. Biology
Anatomy
The Suborder Pinnipedia includes the sea lions and fur seals (family
Otariidae), the walruses (Odobenidae), and the “true” or “hair” seals
(Phocidae). Whether this diverse group arose from a single terrestrial
ancestor or two separate lines is still a subject of debate114. The latter
view holds that otariids and the walrus descended from dog-bear stock,
and phocids from otter-like carnivores80,90 . Convergent evolution to
meet environmental constraints would then account for shared charac-
teristics such as streamlined body shape, limbs modified as flippers,
simple grasping teeth suitable for catching fish, and diving and ther-
moregulatory mechanisms54,90. (See 5.12 for distinguishing features of
each family.)
Certain obvious features distinguish phocids from otariids (Fig 5.1).
Most notable are their contrasting methods of locomotion54,63. Phocids
move awkwardly on land. Unable to turn the hind flippers forward to
support themselves, they must hump along on their bellies, using their
short foreflippers for an occasional boost ahead. They are more graceful
in the water, propelling themselves by sculling with their hind flippers
and using the foreflippers for steering. Otariids depend on paddle-like
movements of the forelimbs for swimming, and on the hind flippers and
a long neck for steering. Using both the fore- and hind flippers, they
move on land with a speed and agility that allow them to utilize high rocky

35
36

habitats inaccessible to phocids. The walrus, somewhere in the middle,

uses the hind flippers for swimming, foreflippers for steering, and both
sets of limbs for moving on land.
In fetal life, phocids develop a coat of woolly lanugo hair. Hooded
seals, most harbor seals and some bearded seals shed the lanugo in
utero, while other species shed theirs a few days to several weeks after
birth. Hair has little insulating value for adult phocids, and they depend
on a thick layer of blubber to retain body heat. Otariids are less tolerant
of cold and rely more on their dense pelage. Fur seals, at least, must
remain active to prevent hypothermia when in cold water39.
The dentition of most pinnipeds is rather simple43,63 . Deciduous or
milk teeth in phocids are resorbed before birth or shed shortly after, and
those of otariids, within 3 to 4 months. All teeth behind the incisors and
canines have a nearly uniform shape characteristic for each species,
and are referred to simply as “post-canines.” The canines have annular
rings in cross section that can be used for determining the animal’s age.
Pinniped internal anatomy is similar to that of most carnivores43,63,
with a simple stomach, small intestine, caecum, large intestine, and a
multi-lobed liver. The elongated thorax stretches the diaphragm in a
decidedly oblique orientation. The lungs of some species (e.g., ribbon
seal) are made firm by microscopic cartilaginous coils that surround the
airways, resulting in a lumpy texture. The cardiovascular system is
specialized for diving23; one obvious adaptation is the immense hepatic
sinus, an enlargement of the vena cava that, when constricted by a
sphincter at the diaphragm, acts as a reservoir of oxygenated blood
during a dive. Like those of cetaceans, pinniped kidneys are lobulated.
The female genital system is similar to that of terrestrial carnivores. The
testes in the Phocidae and the walrus are in the inguinal region,
concealed between the blubber and the abdominal muscles. Otariids, in
contrast, have a scrotum into which the adult testes descend during the
mating season.
Natural History
Females of most pinniped species become sexually mature by about
4 to 6 years of age, with some as early as 3 years (northern elephant
seal) and the walrus as late as 6 to 9 years31,63 . Males reach sexual
maturity at about the same age or slightly older, but may not breed
successfully until several years later. This is particularly true of highly
gregarious species.
The 11- to 12-month pregnancy period includes a 2- to 4-month
phase during which the newly fertilized egg develops into a blastula,
 Pinnipeds ... 37

then remains dormant until the mother's hormonal levels allow develop-
ment to proceed. By delaying implantation, the female can give birth
during the same brief time each year when conditions are ideal for both
mating and rearing pups. This synchrony is particularly important in
polar environments. The walrus, which breeds every 2 or 3 years, has a
pregnancy period of around 15 to16 months, including 3 to 4 months of
delayed implantation31.
The nursing period of phocids is typically 3 to 6 weeks43,63 but has
been compressed to an impressive 4 days in the hooded seal11. Females
of most species remain with their pups continuously until weaning;
harbor and ringed seal mothers may leave to feed for brief intervals.
Otariids provide maternal care for a few months to a year or more42,63.

Fig. 5.1. External morphology of seals (Phocidae) and sea lions (Otariidae).
The gender of a pinniped is easily determined. In the female, the anus and vagina
lead into a common opening ventral to the base of the tail. The male has two widely
separated openings, with that for the penis a few cm behind the umbilical scar. There
is a well-developed baculum (penis bone). The distinction between young males and
females usually requires close examination and manipulation. As the animals
mature, there are often prominent secondary sexual characteristics that can be
discerned at a distance. For example, the males are usually larger and more robust
and, in otariids, may develop sagittal crests and manes. (After Geraci 1981.)
38

During this time the female periodically makes lengthy foraging trips.
Walrus calves may begin to feed upon bottom-dwelling invertebrates as
early as 5 to 6 months of age, but usually continue to suckle, at least as
a dietary supplement, until about 2 years old31. Knowing the maternal
care patterns of pinnipeds in the region will help reduce the
common mistake of picking up a healthy pup that is merely awaiting
its mother’s return.
While generally favoring fish and squid, pinnipeds have a varieddiet
that may also include invertebrates, mammals, and birds62. Most spe-
cies, and certainly individuals, show distinct preferences in their choice
of prey, often determined by seasonal or regional abundance. Some
species, such as the harbor seal and California sea lion, feed in coastal
waters and often enter rivers. Others, such as the northern fur seal,
northern elephant seal and gray seal, forage in deep water, well
offshore. Walruses and Steller sea lions occasionally prey upon other
species of pinnipeds41,71.
Distribution
Pinniped demography is tied to a crucial need for land or ice on which
to give birth and rear the young, social organization (solitary or gregari-
ous), and methods of exploiting food resources4. Regional stranding
patterns clearly reflect these elements of life history. Orphaned pups of
coastal harbor and elephant seals as well as California sea lions come
ashore near rookeries with seasonal predictability, while adults strand in
a scattered procession along their migration routes. Harp, hooded and
ribbon seals undoubtedly become orphaned and sick as well, but since
they live far out at sea, hauling out on ice rather than land, few casualties
ever reach shore. Knowledge of the normal patterns of animal
distribution, habitat use and stranding is vital to recognizing un-
usual events.
Pinnipeds normally range throughout coastal areas of the United
States and Canada, except in the southeastern U.S. and the Gulf of
Mexico (see 5.12). The East Coast features only phocid seals and the
walrus; the latter was once common as far south as Sable Island, Nova
Scotia, but is now restricted to waters from Labrador northward72.
Bearded and ringed seals occur year-round in the Arctic15,78 . Hooded
and harp seals breed on springtime ice floes in the Gulf of St. Lawrence
and east of Newfoundland88,91. Gray and harbor seals range from
Labrador to Cape Cod10,73 and even farther south. Harbor seals are the
most common type to strand along the East Coast; gray seals, which are
more pelagic, trail by a wide margin. Less frequent but increasing
 Pinnipeds ... 39

incidents involve harp, hooded and ringed seals that stray from northern
populations30.
The California sea lion ranges from the Gulf of California, where it is
the only resident pinniped81, northward to Vancouver Island. This
species accounts for the majority of strandings in California98. The
Steller sea lion occurs along more northern parts of the West Coast, with
primary haul-out and rookery sites in British Columbia, the Gulf of
Alaska, and the Aleutian Islands7,52,96. Steller sea lion numbers in the
western Gulf of Alaska and eastern Aleutians have declined alarmingly
since the late 1950s and continue to do so, although the causes of this
loss remain uncertain69,75,79 . The northern fur seal has a similar range.
Principal fur seal rookeries in North American waters are in the Bering
Sea (St. Paul and St. George islands). There is one additional rookery
off southern California (San Miguel Island)38. Outside of the breeding
season, this species is largely pelagic and rarely found ashore.
The ubiquitous harbor seal ranges in the eastern Pacific from Baja
California to the Aleutians and the southern Bering Sea. They can be
found along the open coast as well as in protected areas such as
estuaries and rivers5,6,53. The northern elephant seal, the largest of the
North American phocids, resides primarily on islands off California and
Mexico’s Baja Peninsula but also migrates northward to British Colum-
bia and the Gulf of Alaska during the warmer months77. Recent tracking
studies suggest that summer migrations to the eastern Aleutian Islands
may not be unusual22, and one stray has been reported as far afield as
Midway Island in the Hawaiian chain48.
Farther north, the ringed seal, one of the smallest pinnipeds, is the
most abundant phocid in Alaska and the Canadian Arctic. Rarely seen
on land, these seals occupy shorefast ice, where they can maintain
breathing holes in surfaces more than 2 m thick56,103. Bearded seals
occupy a wide range of habitats over the continental shelf, preferring
depths of 25-50 m13,57. The Pacific walrus is limited to the Bering,
Chukchi, and western Beaufort seas and breeds on offshore ice31,99.
During summer months, adult males occupy traditional haulouts on land,
mainly in Bristol Bay70. Females and young may haul out on land during
fall migration and when ice is unavailable31. Spotted seals pup and mate
in pack ice in the spring but haul out on shore after the ice has
retreated86. The elusive and strikingly marked ribbon seal is virtually
pelagic and rarely ventures near shore13,14.
The only pinniped native to the Hawaiian Island region is the Hawai-
ian monk seal, which is largely restricted to the westernmost islands of
40

the chain. This most tropical of phocids is truly in danger of extinction,

facing every conceivable threat, including human encroachment, natu-
ral poisoning and predation, and, for females, mutilating sexual attacks
by male monk seals60,75.
Pinniped populations in North American waters range from less than
1,500 Hawaiian monk seals75 to about 2 million harp seals100.

5.2. Mortality
Natural Mortality
As in other mammalian species, mortality in pinnipeds is high in
the very young, decreases rapidly with maturity, and increases
again in advanced age87 . Generally between 10 to 20 percent of pups
die before they are weaned, and 20 to 50 percent of all newborns may
not survive the first year5,61,67,73 . The leading causes of pup mortality
are accidental separation or premature abandonment due to storms,
crowding, trauma, illness, insufficient food, or human disturbance,
followed by starvation2,61,66,94 .
Rookeries can be dangerous places for pups and adults when
population density increases2,17,67 . Young northern elephant seals66,67,
Hawaiian monk seals112, Steller sea lions94 and Pacific walruses31 are
bitten or trampled by adults, which also are victims of aggressive
encounters. Injured animals may die of their wounds, or through ensuing
infection, starvation or increased predation61,92 .
The security of a rookery is also undermined by weather condi-
tions. Storms, unusually high tides, and persistent and extensive ice
cover have resulted in the loss of nearly the entire season’s pups of
northern elephant seals17, northern fur seals61, and Steller sea lions94.
Polar species are threatened by ice that can crush them or trap them out
of water56,78,100 . The only known natural mass harp seal mortality
followed a severe winter storm in the Gulf of St. Lawrence in 1973, in
which hundreds, perhaps thousands, of dependant pups and their
mothers were crushed by broken ice.
One of the more elusive factors affecting population vitality is the
gradual or sudden decline in available food. For example, Galapagos
fur seals and sea lions faced widespread starvation when the abun-
dance and quality of prey declined profoundly in waters warmed by the
1982-83 El Niño event110 . “Pinniped hyponatremia,” a fatal disease
induced by stress, was diagnosed in free-ranging Arctic ringed seals 46
at a time when persistent ice interfered with food production103 . Pacific
 Pinnipeds ... 41

walruses have evidently reached or exceeded “carrying capacity”—the

number of animals the environment can support. The resulting nutri-
tional stress, together with disease, is believed to be responsible for the
increased juvenile mortality observed since the mid- to late 1970s33,34.
Predators take their toll on certain species. Foxes in some Arctic
regions consume or kill as many as 40 percent of ringed seal pups
hidden in the illusionary safety of their birth lairs101,103. Polar bears and
walruses prey on juveniles and adults71,102. Steller sea lions, killer
whales and sharks eat northern fur seal pups41,61,115 . Harbor and gray
seals in the Northwest Atlantic12,106 , Hawaiian monk seals112 and Cali-
fornia sea lions are also taken by sharks, while coyotes kill significant
numbers of harbor seal pups in certain coastal regions of Washing-
ton105. Predator-inflicted injuries may bring pinnipeds ashore, and even-
tually into rehabilitation centers.
Toxins produced by marine algae can be carried through the food
chain, poisoning a predator somewhere along the way. As captain of the
schooner Antarctic in the early nineteenth century, Benjamin Morrel
recorded a mass mortality of Cape fur seals at Possession Island in
southwest Africa. A fresh appraisal of Morrel’s findings suggests the
event might have been caused by toxic dinoflagellates113 . Clusters of
northern fur seals61 and, in one instance, Hawaiian monk seals48 died
in circumstances also suggestive of natural poisoning.
Virtually all adults and most weaned pups serve as either intermedi-
ate or definitive hosts for parasites of all kinds (see 10.12). Mites occupy
respiratory passages and lice dwell on skin. Cestodes and nematodes
are ubiquitous, and include gastrointestinal roundworms, tapeworms,
hookworms, as well as heart and lung worms44. Except for fatal epi-
sodes of infection by hookworm in northern fur seal pups61 and lung-
worm in California sea lions, northern elephant seals and harbor
seals18,36, parasites seem to have little obvious effect on the well-being
of a healthy host. However, stress and pre-existing illness can upset the
balance, transforming innocuous parasites into serious pathogens that
induce pneumonia, gastric ulcers, intestinal inflammation and a host of
other ailments44 seen in stranded animals.
Ailing pinnipeds eventually die of diseases brought about by a variety
of pathogens. Except for leptospirosis in California sea lions26,47,97 and
northern fur seals115 , bacteria are not significant primary agents of
disease. However, as secondary invaders, they can kill animals already
stressed by habitat degradation, malnutrition, parasites and other pre-
existing conditions2,107 . Infections complicate traumatic wounds61,66,
42

even the mild irritations that arise when a young pup drags its exposed
umbilicus along a sandy beach92. From a practical standpoint, we
recognize that bacterial infections can mask or overwhelm the
clinical picture of a stranded animal and therefore demand imme-
diate attention.
Diseases, if severe enough, can reduce populations. Viruses, once
considered insignificant in natural mortality, have suddenly emerged as
serious pathogens in certain species. The 1955 die-off of crabeater
seals (2,500 dead) in the Antarctic sparked an investigation that stirred
the first empirical diagnosis of viral disease65. The unaccounted mass
mortality of Galapagos sea lions in the 1970s42 is also suggestive of a
viral agent. In 1979-80, an influenza virus swept through the winter
population of New England harbor seals, killing at least 450 ani-
mals45 , and influenza continues to strike there in modest form. In 1987,
a morbillivirus (related to human measles and canine distemper) named
Phocine Distemper Virus (PDV-2) killed several thousand seals in Lake
Baikal. No one was prepared for the ensuing epidemic caused by
another strain of the virus (PDV-1) that eventually claimed more than
17,000 harbor seals in the North Sea50,59,83,111 . In searching for the origin
of the virus, investigators have noted isolated cases of disease in seals
along the North American east coast19,28 and have detected antibodies
in harp seals sampled from Greenland prior to the epizootic76.
Why the sudden increase in virus-induced mortalities? Such large-
scale events would not have gone unrecognized in recent history,
suggesting that these outbreaks are indeed a new phenomenon. Cir-
cumstances are changing: protected animal populations are expand-
ing; human occupation and industrial activity in coastal waters are
increasing; sophisticated fisheries operations are competing for
dwindling food resources; increasing air and water temperatures
are influencing pinniped behavior and distribution; and habitats
are showing the effects of chronic contamination.
Human-Related Mortality
Our attitude toward pinnipeds, among other animals, is partly shaped
by social and regional values that span both ends of the ideological pole.
A seal just released from a benevolent recovery program may find
itself in the cross-hairs of a gunsight if it chooses to invade a pen of
cultured salmon. Consequently, it may reappear for a second round of
rehabilitation—if lucky. Despite legal protection, some animals are shot
because they are considered a nuisance or threat, among them Steller
sea lions52, Pacific harbor seals105,108, and, in increasing numbers,
 Pinnipeds ... 43

California sea lions20,36,49 . Only 2 of the more than 2,000 harbor seals
examined by the New England Aquarium since 1972 have been gunshot
fatalities. A far greater number of pinnipeds is taken in native hunts—
particularly phocid seals56,57,58,103 and walrus31 in the Bering, Beaufort,
and Chukchi seas.
The number of pinnipeds killed or injured deliberately is insignificant
compared to those that succumb to fishing net or marine debris
entanglements. Fisheries-related mortality is high in Pacific harbor
seals52,97,108 , Steller sea lions52,69, Hawaiian monk seals75, harp seals68,
and northern fur seals35. Hawaiian monk seals and northern fur seals
also become entangled in plastic debris, such as packing bands and
straps64.
Other forms of human disturbance may be as pernicious, but their
effect is not always measurable. Human intrusion on beaches was
blamed for an increase in pre-weaning mortality among Hawaiian monk
seals on Midway and Kure atolls in the 1950s-’60s60,112. Oil spills have
contaminated seals and fouled their coats, killing some and undoubtedly
harming others93. Pollution has been linked to reproductive failure in
certain pinniped populations21,51,89, although no firm evidence for a
cause-effect relationship has been demonstrated1.

5.3. Stranding Patterns

With some exceptions, a stranded pinniped is likely to be a species
that resides in the area permanently or seasonally, or that finds its way
ashore at some point along its migratory route. In fact, stranding data are
useful for mapping resident locations and movements of some species.
Northern elephant seals and harbor seals in California faithfully reoc-
cupy rookeries in the winter and spring months; some of their pups are
certain to strand nearby. In winter, the animals may go elsewhere, as do
harbor seals from maritime Canada that retreat southward to join dense
colonies on Cape Cod. Armed with facts on the life history of a specific
region’s pinnipeds, one can reasonably predict the time and place
that a given segment of the population is likely to strand.
Yet, there will always be unexpected appearances. With increasing
frequency, young hooded seals wander from their subarctic ice sanctu-
aries in northern Canada to Massachusetts, and rarely as far south as
Florida82. One bizarre journey, probably across the Canadian Arctic16,
brought a healthy young female hooded seal ashore in southern Califor-
nia27. Harp and ringed seals are also appearing well south of their
historical ranges30.
44

Fig. 5.2. Options for responding to stranded pinnipeds.

Following the general pattern of mortality, first-year pups are the
most likely to strand. Most come ashore during the nursing period or
soon after, particularly when that activity is interrupted by storms or other
disturbances. Because their nursing period is brief, maternally depen-
dent phocid pups appear over the course of only a few days or weeks,
whereas otariid pups rely on their mothers much longer and are more apt
to suffer from any disruption of the mother-pup bond. The frequency of
pup strandings tapers off after weaning, through a phase where individu-
als may appear with residual illnesses stemming from their early days on
the rookery. Juveniles and adults come ashore for myriad reasons, with
little predictable pattern, except for increased strandings that are asso-
ciated with a fleeting incident such as a storm, or that signal the onset
of an epidemic or toxic event.

5.4. Stranding Response

Jurisdiction
Pinnipeds are protected in U.S. waters by the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972. In addition, the Endangered Species Act of 1973
 Pinnipeds ... 45

applies to the Hawaiian monk seal, Guadalupe fur seal, and Steller sea
lion. Walruses are managed under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and all others by the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Procedures for reporting and handling stranded specimens tend to be
individualized and vary from region to region. The Operations Center
(see 2.3) establishes a cooperative agreement with the responsible
federal agency and carries out rescue, rehabilitation and release pro-
grams with the agency’s approval or direction.
Evaluating the Event
A pinniped that does not eventually retreat or return to water
when approached is either accustomed to such annoyance, naive
(as many pups are), or stranded and in need of help. When in doubt,
assume first that the animal is healthy, and continue observations for at
least one tidal cycle. Meanwhile, evaluate the reasons a pinniped
normally hauls out: mating, pupping, resting, molting. Then consider
whether the place, time and season are appropriate for such activities.
Might the seal be fatigued during a long migration or after a storm? Is the
pup abandoned or will its mother return to resume nursing? While
deliberating, the only appropriate action is to protect the animal from
disturbance. Sometimes it is necessary to rescue a healthy animal from
a perilous setting such as a roadway, or when it is well outside its normal
range.
Too many perfectly healthy pups are inappropriately carried
away from shore. Newborns, because they are thin, feeble, cry plain-
tively and trail a short umbilical stump, might appear distressed. But
most will have an anxious mother waiting nearby and do not need human
assistance. Resist the urge to intervene until it is certain that action is
required.
More than one or two ailing pinnipeds on the beach simultaneously
might be the first sign of a toxic event or outbreak of infectious disease.
Until a precise diagnosis is made, assume the latter and take steps to
protect the team from unnecessary exposure to pathogens (see 12.2).
Specific Equipment (see also 2.5)
Much of the equipment required for pinniped strandings is geared to
capturing and moving animals. Any animal beyond the size of a harbor
seal or young sea lion will require heavy equipment. Refer to Fig. 5.3 for
help in estimating an animal’s weight. Useful items for capture, handling
and transport include:
46

Fig. 5.3. This graph can be used to estimate the weight of a pinniped of any given
length. Derived from literature sources used to prepare section5.12, it is based
on average to maximum size and represents species occurring in North American
waters. NOTE: This information is not to be used as a guide for administering
medications or anesthetics, as many stranded animals are emaciated and fall
far below this average range, while others, such as pregnant females and well-
nourished pups, may be above it.
 Pinnipeds ... 47

pole/hoop nets pole noose

tangle nets cages (various sizes)
jute bags rope
blankets or towels ice
herding boards (3 or more) water-sprayers
4-wheel drive vehicles with bumper winch
heavy welder’s gloves
Note: equipment for dead and sick animals should be used only for
that purpose.

5.5. Approach and Handling

Unweaned pups that are sick and abandoned can generally be caught
and restrained without difficulty. Animals truly in need of help will not shy
away from an approaching rescuer. In fact, some pups are quite
aggressive and may bite, if only with their budding teeth. Young speci-
mens can be corralled and secured with a net or pole noose (Fig. 5.4 and
5.5), blanket, or even items of clothing for placement into a transport
carrier. If necessary, a small seal can be chased into a clean plastic trash
can, using the lid for herding (or as a visual barrier) and the handles for
carrying it over rough terrain74. Pups, for their small size, are deceptively
heavy and difficult to grasp by hand. Consider this when planning the
rescue strategy.
Older animals may frighten easily and retreat to water when ap-
proached. Always advance slowly and quietly, keeping a low profile
by crawling, if necessary, and hiding from view as much as possible.
Herding boards (Fig. 5.5)
can double as a shield for
this purpose. Position
teammates in locations
where they can distract the
animal’s attention from ap-
proaching persons and
block any avenue of es-
cape back into the water. A
carefully planned quiet ad-
vance will likely be more
successful than a military-
style assault, except for
48

Fig. 5.4. Capture and handling phocid seals. A. Use of net stretcher in capture.
B. Physical restraint suitable for small phocids. C. Capture and restraint
involving throw net, physical restraint, and covering head.
animals that are too helpless to resist any approach at all.
Handling pinnipeds requires skill and common sense40,43 . Proceed
with the certainty that they can bite and, when cornered, may become
frightened and attack, injuring rescuers or themselves. Large animals
such as gray seals, hooded seals and sea lions can inflict serious bites
and other injuries, and may go out of their way to do it. Herding boards
provide some security, but an aggressive animal can take swift advan-
tage of a small opening or a moment of inattention. Personnel must wear
heavy clothing, boots and gloves. Bite wounds from animals should be
treated immediately to avoid infection (see 12.2).
Phocid seals can be managed with stretcher nets, throw nets, and
hoop nets. Thereafter, a smaller animal can be restrained by one or two
people straddling it and securing the head with both gloved hands
placed firmly around the neck (Fig 5.4). Use as little force as necessary;
a small seal can suffocate under the weight of a handler, especially if
rocks or sticks are pressing into its thorax. One strategy for moving a
large passive seal (up to 135 kg) is to roll it in a large blanket and onto
a stretcher for removal to the transport vehicle. There, it is transferred
to a cage and the blanket removed immediately74.
 Pinnipeds ... 49

Small otariids can be handled like phocid seals. Large ones, because
of their agility and speed, are more difficult to capture and restrain, and
several people may be required to close in and block the escape route
with herding boards. A large specimen on a sandy beach can then be
caught with a pole net and herded into a cage. If the terrain or other
obstacles will interfere with the rescue, it may be necessary to frighten
the animal back into the water, presuming it will re-strand in a more
accessible place74.
The door of a typical transport cage is usually too narrow for easy
entrance by a stranded animal unaccustomed to the procedure. Boxes
can be designed specifically for capture by incorporating such features
as an opening at each end with drop-in doors that will encourage the

Fig. 5.5. Capture and handling otariids and large phocids. A. Capture of small
otariids with hoop nets (inset). B. Use of crowding boards to maneuver animal into
cage. C. Capture with pole noose (inset) and restraint of hind flippers.
50

animal to enter, believing it has an escape route at the other end. A seal
can also be herded into a box that can then be turned upright and
covered with a lid. A small plastic sheet (such as those sold for snow
sledding) can be used to slide heavy wooden cages along sandy
beaches.
Some pinnipeds become agitated by the capture procedures. A
hood of dark cloth, towel or blanket, or a moistened jute bag placed
over the animal’s head may induce calming (not appropriate for gray
or hooded seals) and thereby help avoid injury to both animal and
handler. Harp seals often become stuporous and virtually freeze in place
when approached closely, and remain so while being handled.
Calming beyond these simple measures requires chemical immobili-
zation37, which is always risky. Apart from the usual problems encoun-
tered when sedating or anesthetizing pinnipeds, there are the added
complications of accurately judging the weight, the thickness of blubber
that the needle must penetrate, and the health of the subject. Chemical
immobilization must be carried out only by qualified individuals.

5.6. First Aid

Determining Condition
The criteria for determining an animal’s health depend largely on the
physical appearance and behavior as seen by the experienced eye. A
clear decision can be made for an animal that is unresponsive, emaci-
ated, injured, or exhibits other disorders such as weakness, rapid or
open-mouth breathing (normal breathing rate 3 to 6 breaths/minute),
coughing, or nasal or eye discharges43,109 . Such animals should be
prepared for transport to a care facility with no further attempt on the
beach to determine the nature of the ailment.
Supportive Measures
Once the decision has been made to intervene, the best approach is
to remove the strandling from the beach as quickly as possible.
Little can be done on site to bring relief to a pinniped from the probable
condition that brought it ashore, except cutting away netting or other
marine debris. Even treating lacerations will require procedures that are
better carried out in a rehabilitation center. A pressure pack to reduce
profuse bleeding should be attempted only when the subject is passive
enough to tolerate the procedure.
While awaiting transport, keep the animal cool (with water or ice) and
sheltered from warm temperatures, direct sun and blowing sand. In
 Pinnipeds ... 51

freezing or sometimes even temperate weather, a thin animal may

require protection against hypothermia; one might consider using a
blanket to cover a scrawny pup.

5.7. Immediate Release

Candidates for immediate release include healthy seals that may
have strayed too far inland or have come ashore entangled in debris but
uninjured. Ordinarily, any seal that is stranded due to injury or illness is
fit for release only after rehabilitation.
Releasing a pinniped usually involves little more than opening a cage
door at a suitable shoreline site. Remote beaches near haul-out sites
occupied by others of the same species are preferred. Let the animal
enter the water of its own accord, and it will probably swim away before
long. Pinnipeds need no assistance orienting themselves; it is unnec-
essary, and also dangerous, to enter the water with an animal.
All animals should be tagged before release (see 5.10), and the
location and time of release noted along with other life history data as
part of the animal’s permanent record.

5.8. Transport to Care Facility

Transport cages must be large enough to allow an animal to stretch
to its full length, raise up its head, and turn around. Some of the more
aggressive species, such as hooded seals, are better off in smaller
quarters. The cage must be designed to permit free air circulation and
prevent contact with wastes. Containers, whether of wood, plastic or
metal, should have openings small enough to discourage the animal
from biting the caging material (or anyone near it) and thus damaging its
mouth, but large enough to allow periodic wetting or the addition of ice
for drinking and cooling. The cage door must be secure to prevent
escape; never underestimate a seal’s ability to out-fox its rescuer.
Road vehicles are usually involved in a transport, if only to move the
strandling to and from other means of conveyance. Small pups can be
carried in the back seat of a car, though not all family members will
appreciate the lingering evidence. Any vehicle must provide protection
from direct sun, heat, wind and freezing temperatures (aim for a
temperature of l0˚ to 20˚C). Prevent the entry of exhaust fumes, such as
those that may occur in the back of an open truck, or their build-up in an
enclosed vehicle. Secure the cages to minimize shifting and jolting, and
include equipment for appropriate on and off transfer of animals by hand,
forklift, or crane. When renting a vehicle, select one with air shock
52

absorbers (“air-ride suspension”) and a hydraulically operated lifting

platform at the rear. Keep noise and commotion to a minimum, and
provide drinking water during layovers.
Well-insulated pinnipeds are prone to overheating and must be
closely observed for signs of hyperthermia during transport. Stereotypic
behavior, such as incessant movement, will also compound the prob-
lem. Plan the transport so animals are not kept in cages unattended for
longer than 2 to 4 hours during any leg of the journey. Interrupt the
transport at these intervals to refresh the animal by dousing it with water.

5.9. Rehabilitation
General Considerations
The physical and organizational needs of a rehabilitation center are
substantial if the facility hopes to accommodate the spectrum of health
conditions in the stranded population. More than a collection of cages,
pools and haul-out decks, a rehabilitation center must provide for
emergency treatment, nutrition, surgery, quarantine, chronic care, and
raising orphaned pups. Operations can be expected to continue around
the clock. It also serves as a halfway house where seals are conditioned
for eventual release, and as a research laboratory where information is
gathered on ways to continually improve standards of care.
No beach resident or even satellite facility has the resources to
rehabilitate a stranded pinniped, short of one that may simply need to
be freed from an entangling net. Yet pinnipeds, more than any other
marine mammal, are likely to find themselves in temporary holding
quarters while arrangements are made to ship them. During this time,
the only practical measures are to provide for the animal’s comfort by
sheltering it from the elements, minimizing stress from unnecessary
handling and disturbance, isolating it from domestic animals, and giving
access to fresh water for cooling and drinking.
At the rehabilitation center, strandlings should be weighed and given
a preliminary visual examination. A more detailed clinical evaluation,
including hematology, plasma chemistry and parasitological and micro-
biological screening25,43,55,109 can wait up to 24 hours until the animal
has recovered from the stress of capture and transportation. Even then,
diagnostic indices such as respiratory and heart rates and body tem-
perature may be misleading. As an example, some phocids become
“cataleptic” and stop breathing entirely for a minute or two when
restrained. Uncooperative animals can make visual inspection of mu-
 Pinnipeds ... 53

cous membranes a challenge. Never force the eyelids open for close
examination, as this risks damage to the cornea.
Pinnipeds that are candidates for rehabilitation are usually malnour-
ished and dehydrated, regardless of age. Treatment usually begins with
or includes therapy to restore fluid and electrolyte balance. Early critical
care is also directed toward hypo- or hyperthermia, injuries and infec-
tions. When dealing with highly contagious pathogens, special attention
is required to protect animal handlers and other strandlings from infec-
tion. The rehabilitation center must have veterinary and support staff
prepared to deal with all of these conditions.
Nutrition
Strandlings are generally divided into two categories depending on
their nutritional needs: premature and orphaned pups; and subadults
and adults. Pups need special diets and feeding regimes, and many
different formulas and approaches have been used successfully3,29,104.
When a phocid pup in good condition arrives at the New England
Aquarium, it is given several feedings of 100 to 200 mL each of saline or
water. After 24 hours, the fluids are replaced with the same quantity of
a dilute special formula that is gradually changed to full formula over the
next 2 days. The pup is weaned onto fish within 4 to 5 weeks. Pups
should be weighed at the same time each day. Aim for a target weight,
usually taken as the weight at weaning of a free-ranging pup of that
species (see 5.12).
California sea lions (and other otariids) normally nurse for a consid-
erably longer period, up to 6 to 12 months of age. However, hand-reared
pups can be weaned within a few weeks or months on formulas similar
to those used for phocids—often with the addition of blended fish104.
Adult pinnipeds thrive on a mixture of good quality fish such as herring
and smelt43,62 . Pup formula can also be used to nourish older animals
during the initial phase of critical care, but the process is time-consum-
ing, expensive, and is only practical when dealing with one or two
individuals. Part of the problem is that the formula must be given by
stomach tube, a procedure most adults will resist. As soon as possible,
replace formula with a gruel of ground fish, water and supplements.
Better still, offer whole fish, which the animal can take on its own. Those
that refuse may be force-fed, but this is difficult to do and dangerous for
the attendant. It may be necessary to use a mild sedative on an
aggressive seal when no safe option is available, but as a routine,
force-feeding adults is impractical. An adult that will not eat can be
impossible to deal with.
54

Disease and Injuries

Virtually every new arrival harbors microorganisms that are normally
harmless but can cause disease when the animal is weak or stressed;
pneumonia, for example, is common. For that reason, the veterinarian
will probably place apparently healthy pups and other strandlings on a
program of preventive antibiotic therapy. A few microorganisms are
inherently pathogenic (e.g., Leptospira, influenza virus and morbillivirus),
and infected animals must be isolated from all others in the facility.
Because time and special techniques are required to identify these
infectious agents, all new arrivals should be quarantined while
health assessments are made.
Parasites alone seldom debilitate otherwise healthy pinnipeds,
but can harm stranded animals weakened by other conditions.
Nematodes in the stomach and lungs can cause ulcers and pneumonia.
Some stranding centers treat for parasites on a broad scale; others
select specific cases for treatment. What is certain is that nearly every
animal beyond the age of a newborn, and sometimes even those36, will
have parasites.
Pinnipeds sometimes arrive ashore with serious injuries, many caused
by shark bites or net entanglement. Wounds to soft tissue and bone can
be extensive and take months to heal. This category of animals usually
requires an abiding commitment to long-term (sometimes permanent)
care on the part of the center.

5.10. Release Following Recovery

Criteria
A pinniped should be released only when there is reasonable
expectation that it will survive and lead a normal life. The candidate
must be healthy, well-nourished, free of transmissible disease, coordi-
nated and active; able to forage, detect and escape predators, and
contend for a suitable niche among others of its species. An ideal
program would prepare animals for life in the wild (complete with a
transition to live prey), but on a large scale, this is costly and impractical.
At the very least, caretakers strive to reduce human dependence while
encouraging the animal to socialize with its own kind. Adopt the basic
rule: do not treat candidates for release as pets.
The timing of the release should be synchronized with seasonal or
annual cycles in the wild population. Most pinniped species have
inshore-offshore or north-south movements or migrations that are linked
with environmental conditions such as food availability and oceanic
 Pinnipeds ... 55

Fig. 5.6. Some techniques for tagging pinnipeds. A. Plastic cattle ear tags are
commonly used40,67,100, easy to apply with special pliers, and have a long
retention time. Tags are attached to the hind flipper of phocids (between the third and
fourth digits) and to the foreflipper of otariids. Rounding the point on the male half of
the tag before application will help reduce subsequent irritation. A disadvantage of
this tag is its small size, making resighting difficult. B. Marking with dye (such as
lanolin-based sheep dye, human hair dye), quick-drying paint, or peroxide
bleach67 on the top of the head or back is fast and harmless (be careful of the eyes).
The marks are highly visible, last until the next molt, and are suitable for short-term
observation. C. Radio transmitters (satellite or VHF) can be mounted on a mesh base
which is attached with marine epoxy to the fur of the back between the shoulders,
or on the top of the head. These tags will be lost when molt occurs.(Additional
references: Laws, R.M. 1952. Seal-marking methods. The Polar Record 6: 359-361.
Loughlin, T.R. 1973. Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina L.) distribution and capture
technique in Humboldt Bay, California. Tenth Annual Conference on Biological
Sonar and Diving Mammals.)
56

temperatures, as well as with breeding or molting cycles. Current U.S.

regulations address this biological reality by stipulating that animals
should be returned at a time and place appropriate for the species. (See
also 5.7.)
Observing and Monitoring
Marking or tagging a released animal (Fig. 5.6) is the only reliable
way to know where it is and how long it survives, and allows a means
of identifying one that restrands. Tagging animals that marginally meet
the criteria for release will provide additional information that will even-
tually help to establish new standards. Monitoring studies add yet
another element of cost to the stranding program but are nonetheless
fundamental to the entire operation. Stranding centers increase the
monitoring efficiency by focusing resources on an intensive surveillance
of a few animals rather than a superficial attempt on many.

5.11. Euthanasia
Euthanasia can only be carried out by a trained individual under the
authority of a qualified veterinarian. This is usually accomplished by
lethal injection of barbiturates or other agents normally used to euthanize
domestic species. On the beach, adult male sea lions or elephant seals
with obviously serious injuries are best dispatched by gunshot, providing
it is safe to do so. The procedure is usually carried out by discharging a
high-velocity bullet into the brain; the technique requires skill, training
and legal authorization for the weapon.
 Pinnipeds ... 57

5.12. Pinnipeds in U.S. and Adjacent Waters: A Brief Guide

to Species Identification, Life History, and Stranding
Frequency
Note: Descriptions and life history data were taken from general references63,95
and selected reports for each species.

Fig. 5.7. Marine mammal zoogeographic regions in U.S. and adjacent waters and
color key to stranding frequency.
58

Order Carnivora
Suborder Pinnipedia
Superfamily Otaroidea
Includes the Otariidae (sea lions and fur seals) and the Odobenidae
(walruses); the hind flippers can be rotated forward; females have 4
mammary teats.

Family Odobenidae (Walrus)

General characteristics: ear opening obvious, but without external
pinna; testes in inguinal region, between blubber and abdominal muscles.

Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus)31,32,70,72,99

Range: 1 (northern, winter); 2 (northern, occasional); 10 (north of Bering Str.
summer and autumn only; main breeding areas, Bering Sea).
Size: 1.0-1.4 m, 35-85 kg (neonate); 2 m, 350 kg (weaning); 2.3-2.6 m, 560-
1000 kg (adult female); 2.7-3.2 m, 900-1600 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Squarish head with large moustachial pad and many short stiff vibris-
sae; enlarged upper canines (tusks); thick, wrinkled skin with short
hair; tail contained in fold of skin. Teeth: I1/0, C1/1, PC3/3 each side.
Habits: Highly gregarious; females and young mostly segregated from adult
males in nonbreeding season; calving Apr.-June; molting June-Oct.;
coastal to offshore on sea ice, using shore haulouts in summer and
autumn.
 Pinnipeds ... 59

Family Otariidae (Fur Seals and Sea Lions)

General characteristics: body form generally slender with long neck;
small ear pinna present; foreflippers long, hairless in most species, with
rudimentary nails set back from tips of digits; testes scrotal. Teeth: I3/2,
C1/1, PC5/5 or 6/5 each side.

Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus)7,32,52,70,85,94,96,97,98

Range: 7; 8; 9; 10 (Aleutian Is. and Bering Sea); breeding range from Pribilof
Is. to central California (Año Nuevo Is.).
Size: 1 m, 17-23 kg (neonate); 2.2-2.7 m, 260-330 kg (adult female); 2.8-
3.0m, 560-800 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Pelage with sparse underfur; gap between 4th and 5th postcanines;
color light tan to reddish brown, pups darker brown; pronounced sexual
dimorphism; adult males with moderately developed sagittal crest,
more muscular neck with mane of longer hair; roar-like vocalizations.
Habits: Coastal to pelagic; gregarious year-round; pupping May-July; haul-out
sites and rookeries on land; often on land outside of breeding season.
60

California sea lion (Zalophus californianus)7,8,24,81,85,97,98

Range: 6; 7; 8; 9 (to Vancouver I., mostly males); primary breeding range from
Channel Is. southward to central Mexico.
Size: 0.7 m, 5.5-6.4 kg (neonate); 25 kg (weaning); 1.5-1.8 m, 50-110 kg
(adult female); 2.0-2.3 m, 250-300 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Pelage with sparse underfur; no gap between 4th and 5th postcanines;
color dark brown, juveniles and females lighter; extreme sexual dimor-
phism, males with prominent sagittal crest, more muscular neck; sharp
bark-like vocalizations.
Habits: Coastal, entering estuaries; rookeries and haul-out sites on land;
pupping May-June; gregarious year-round; often on land in mixed
groups outside breeding season.
 Pinnipeds ... 61

Northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus)24,32,38,70,85,97,98,115

Range: 7 (San Miguel I. year-round); 8-9 (winter-spring, offshore); 10 (sum-
mer-fall); breeding areas, Pribilof Is. and San Miguel I.
Size: 0.7 m, 4.5-6 kg (neonate); 12-14 kg (weaning); 1.3-1.6 m, 35-60 kg
(adult female); 1.9-2.3 m, 185-275 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Pelage with coarse outer guard hairs and soft, dense underfur; fur on
foreflipper stops at wrist; snout short, down-curved and pointed; males
brown, females dark gray and lighter gray or chestnut ventrally;
neonates black; extreme sexual dimorphism, adult males with massive
neck and bushy mane.
Habits: Coastal to pelagic (offshore in winter); migratory; rookeries on offshore
islands; pupping June-Aug.; rarely on land (and nongregarious) out-
side of breeding season.
62

Guadalupe fur seal ( Arctocephalus townsendi) 3,24,98

Range: 7 (Channel Is. to Cedros I.; breeding on Guadalupe I. only).
Size: 0.6 m (neonate); <2 m, 140 kg (adult male); female smaller.
Distinguishing
features: Pelage with dense underfur; fur on forelimb extending onto flipper;
snout long and pointed; color grayish black.
Habits: Coastal, preferring rocky areas and caves; rookeries on land; gregari-
ous; pupping June.
 Pinnipeds ... 63

Family Phocidae (Hair Seals)

General characteristics: body fusiform and rotund, with short, thick
neck; pinna absent; hind flippers cannot rotate forward; flippers with hair
on both surfaces; claws at tips of flippers; testes in inguinal region,
between blubber and abdominal muscles; 2 or 4 mammary teats. Teeth:
I2-3/1-2, C1/1, PC5-6/5 each side.
Phoca spp.: general characteristics include hind flipper with 1st and 5th
digits slightly longer than middle three; foreflipper with 1st and
2nd digits longer than third; two mammary teats; vibrissae
beaded, slender and curled; forehead with concave profile
and short snout; eye closer to tip of nose than to ear opening;
nostrils forming V-shape; sexes of nearly same size; neonates
usually with white lanugo.

Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina)5,6,8,10,24,30,53,82,84,97,98

Range: 1; 2; 3 (occasional); 7; 8; 9; 10 (Aleutian Is., Pribilof Is., Bristol Bay);
breeds throughout most of range (north of New Hampshire on Atlantic
coast).
Size: 0.7-0.9 m, 9-15 kg (neonate); 0.9 m, 20-27 kg (weaning); 1.5-1.8 m, 75-
120 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Snout blunt; color variable (gray to tan to brownish-black, with darker
spotting); pups gray to tan (white lanugo may be shed after birth in
northern populations); pelage on back smooth to touch. Teeth: I3/2,
C1/1, PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Coastal year-round, entering rivers and some lakes; commonly haul
out on land, sandbars and ledges at low tide; form casual small to large
groups; pupping season varies with latitude (May-June area 1,
Mar.-May area 2, Mar.-June areas 7-8, May-July area 10); molt varies
with latitude, occurring 2-3 months after pupping season.
64

Spotted seal (Phoca largha)6,13,32,70,86

Range: 10 (winter-spring, along ice front; summer, Bering and Chukchi seas);
breeds along ice front.
Size: 0.8 m (neonate); 1.5-1.6 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Similar to harbor seal; belly light silver-gray, back and head darker and
marked with silver rings, brown to black spots scattered over body;
neonates with white lanugo. Teeth: I3/2, C1/1, PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Solitary or form small groups on ice; groups to 2000 or more on summer
land haulouts; pupping and molting haulouts on pack ice; pupping
March-April, molt May-June.

Ringed seal (Phoca hispida)30,32,56,70,78,84,103

Range: 1 (Labrador northward); 10 (Beaufort and Chukchi seas; Bering Sea
north of Bristol Bay); breeds over most of range.
Size: 0.6-0.7 m, 4-4.5 kg (neonate); 0.8 m, 9-16 kg (weaning); 1.2-1.5 m, 60-
100 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Head narrow with somewhat pointed nose; back dark gray with light
rings, belly silver-gray; neonates with white lanugo; older pups dark
gray above, silvery below; pelage on back coarse, harsh to touch.
Teeth: I3/2, C1/1, PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Prefer stable land-fast ice in winter and spring; nongregarious, forming
casual groups; pupping mid-March to May in snow-covered lairs; molt
from May-July on fast or pack ice.
 Pinnipeds ... 65

Harp seal (Phoca groenlandica)30,68,84,91,100

Range 1 (Dec.-May); 2 (uncommon); breeding areas in Gulf of St. Lawrence
and off northeast coast of Newfoundland.
Size: 0.8-1.0 m, 7-12 kg (neonate); 1.0 m, 30-35 kg (weaning); 1.7-1.9 m;
120-180 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Dark harp-shaped pattern on back and sides, white to tan background
(pattern less distinct in females), dark head; neonates with white
lanugo, juveniles gray to tan with darker spots. Teeth: I3/2, C1/1, PC5/
5 each side.
Habits: Migratory; pupping and molting on pack ice; scattered during breeding,
gregarious during migration and molt; pupping late Feb. to mid-Mar.,
molt Apr.-May.

Ribbon seal (Phoca fasciata)13,14,32,58,70

Range: 10 (Bering and Chukchi seas; winter-spring, offshore along ice front;
summer range unknown); breeds along ice front.
Size: 0.9 m, 9-11 kg (neonate); 0.9-1.1 m, 28 kg (weaning); 1.5-1.8 m, 80-
140 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Adult males with white bands on dark brown to black background,
females with less distinct bands on lighter background; neonates with
white lanugo; juveniles blue-gray on back, paler ventrally. Teeth: I3/2,
C1/1, PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; nongregarious; pupping and molting on pack ice; pupping
April-May; molt April-July.
66

Gray seal (Halichoerus grypus)9,30,73,84

Range: 1; 2 (Nantucket Is. northward); breeding range from southern Nova
Scotia to Gulf of St. Lawrence and Sable Island, isolated colony on
Nantucket Is.
Size: 0.8-1.0 m, 11-20 kg (neonate); 1.1 m, 40-45 kg (weaning); 1.8-2.1 m,
100-180 kg (adult female); 2.2-2.4 m, 200-300 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Hind flipper with 1st and 5th digits slightly longer than middle three;
foreflippers with long, slender, curved nails and 3rd digit shorter than
1st and 2nd; vibrissae beaded, slender and curled; snout long with
straight or convex profile; nostrils W-shaped; eye closer to ear than to
nose; 2 mammary teats; males distinctly larger than females; pelage
coarsely spotted, with dark spots on a tan-gray background in females,
and lighter spots on a dark background in males; juvenile coloration
less distinct; neonates with white lanugo for 2-3 wks. Teeth: I3/2, C1/
1, PC5/5 or 6/5 each side.
Habits: Prefer remote exposed islands, sandbars and shoals; feed offshore;
pupping (area 1) Jan.-Feb. on islands or land-fast ice; molt May-June.
 Pinnipeds ... 67

Bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus)13,15,32,57,68,70,84,95

Range: 1 (Labrador northward); 10 (southward to Bristol Bay in winter); breeds
over most of range.
Size: 1.3 m, 35 kg (neonate); 1.5 m, 85 kg (weaning); 2.1-2.4 m, 230-340 kg
(adult).
Distinguishing
features: Hind flipper with 1st and 5th digits slightly longer than middle three;
foreflipper broad and squarish with 3rd digit longest; 4 mammary teats;
vibrissae smooth, thick, straight and bushy; head proportionately
small; back and sides gray, silver-gray on belly; pups grayish brown
with irregular light patches; juveniles silver-gray; teeth of adults
often worn or missing. Teeth: I3/2, C1/1, PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Solitary or form casual groups; pupping March-May; molt May-June;
pupping and molting haulouts on pack ice.
68

Hooded seal (Cystophora cristata)16,27,30,68,82,84,88

Range: 1 (Dec.-Apr.); 2 (occasional); breeding areas in Davis Str., Gulf of St.
Lawrence, and off northeastern coast of Newfoundland.
Size: 0.9-1.1 m, 15-30 kg (neonate); 2.0-2.2 m, 150-300 kg (adult female);
2.3-2.7 m, 200-375 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Hind flipper with 1st and 5th digits much longer than middle three; adult
males with inflatable hood extending from crown of head to upper lip,
and inflatable nasal sac; adult males larger than adult females; 2
mammary teats; body gray with irregular black patches, face dark;
neonates blue-gray on back, white on belly, with dark face. Teeth: I2/
1, C1/1, PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Migratory; associated with offshore pack ice, area 1; occur in small
family groups; pupping Mar.-Apr.; molt June-Aug.

Hawaiian monk seal ( Monachus schauinslandi) 60

Range: 11 (northwestern).
Size: 1.0 m, 16-18 kg (neonate); 1.0 m, 56-86 kg (weaning); 2.1-2.2 m, 175
kg (adult male); 2.3-2.4 m, 200-275 kg (adult female).
Distinguishing
features: Hind flipper with reduced claws, and 1st and 5th digits much longer
than middle three; vibrissae smooth; 4 mammary teats; females
slightly larger than males; pelage dark gray above, lighter below;
neonates black. Teeth: I2/2, C1/1, PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Pupping Jan.-Aug., peak March-May; molt May-Sept.; nongregarious;
frequently haul out on sandy beaches.
 Pinnipeds ... 69

Northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris)22,77,85,97,98

Range: 7 (primary range of adult females); 8; 9 (spring-fall, mostly juveniles
and males); breeds in area 7.
Size: 1.2 m, 30-45 kg (neonate); 135-175 kg (weaning); 2-3.2 m, 900 kg
(adult female); 4-5 m, 2000-2500 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Hind flipper with reduced claws and 1st and 5th digits much longer than
middle three; adult males with inflatable proboscis that may overhang
mouth; 2 mammary teats; males larger than females; color gray to
brown with no markings; neonates black; adult males with thick,
cracked and scarred skin on the neck and chest. Teeth: I2/1, C1/1,
PC5/5 each side.
Habits: Highly gregarious; feed offshore; pupping and molting haulouts on
land; pupping Jan.-Feb., molt May-August.
70
 Chapter 6
Cetaceans — Single Strandings
6.1. Biology. ......................................................................................71
6.2. Mortality .....................................................................................76
6.3. Stranding Patterns. ...................................................................78
6.4. Stranding Response .................................................................79
6.5. Approach ...................................................................................83
6.6. First Aid......................................................................................83
6.7. Handling, Lifting and Moving....................................................88
6.8. Immediate Release ...................................................................92
6.9. Transport to Care Facility .........................................................97
6.10. Rehabilitation. ...........................................................................98
6.11. Release Following Recovery..................................................100
6.12. Euthanasia...............................................................................100
6.13. Cetaceans in U.S. and Adjacent Waters.............................. 104
References. .............................................................................258

6.1. Biology
Anatomy
The Cetacea are the oldest and most diverse group of marine
mammals, with fossil evidence dating back at least 40 to 50 million
years. All living families of toothed (suborder: Odontoceti) and baleen
(suborder: Mysticeti) whales recognized today had evolved by 5-25
million years ago7. The Artiodactyla, or even-toed ungulates, are the
cetaceans’ closest terrestrial relatives8 .
Cetaceans have fusiform, streamlined bodies, with paddle-like flip-
pers used for steering, balancing and stopping, but not for moving
forward. That action is powered by both the upward and downward
movement of the tail or flukes58 . Most species have a dorsal fin, which
serves as a stabilizer. The flukes and dorsal fin are mostly composed of
dense connective tissue but no bone. Streamlining is aided by the
smooth, rubbery skin, generally lacking in glands and hairs, and the
absence of protruding ears and hind limbs and, in males, of external
genitalia.
Odontocete teeth are usually closely spaced, uniform in shape and
size, and bear growth rings in cross section that are useful for estimating
the age of the animal91 . Mysticetes have, instead of teeth, a series of
baleen plates suspended from each side of the upper jaw. Hair-like
bristles on the inner edges of these keratinous plates intertwine, forming

71
72

a sieve that filters food from the water 97 . The color, number and length
of the plates can be used to help identify the species (Fig. 10.16).
The nose, or blowhole, is situated on top of the head, somewhat to
the left of the mid-line in odontocetes. The nostrils are paired in
mysticetes and single in odontocetes. The nasal passages of the latter
contain an interconnected series of air sacs that are involved in sound
production74. A unique arrangement of the larynx allows odontocetes to
swallow and breathe at the same time. The lungs are symmetrical,
without external lobulation, and turgidly elastic; the pleura is unusually
thick and well-vascularized62,126. There is a well-defined lung-associ-
ated lymph node.
The cardiovascular system has a unique adaptation of arteries and
veins, known as the periarterial venous rete, which helps the animal
regulate body temperature. Each artery at the surface (particularly
evident in the flukes, flippers and dorsal fin) is surrounded by a network
of veins, all encased in a rigid channel of connective tissue underlying
the dermis. When there is a need to retain body heat, arterial blood flows
to the surface under low pressure and returns along the surrounding
venous rete, which absorb heat from the central artery. To cool, blood
flows under high pressure, thereby collapsing the surrounding veins
against the rigid tunnel walls, and returns instead by superficial veins
that lie closer to the surface of the skin 33,117 . The vessels in the flukes
are the usual sites for blood sampling (Fig. 10.3).
The gastrointestinal tract has some unusual modifications41,50,52 .
The esophagus is penetrated dorso-ventrally by the laryngeal tube. In
most species, food must pass to either side of this structure to reach the
three-chambered stomach; in pygmy sperm whales, the left side is a
blind pouch and food must pass to the right of the laryngeal tube144 .
Digestion begins in the first stomach (forestomach), actually an enlarge-
ment of the distal part of the esophagus, aided by enzymes and
hydrochloric acid that reflux from the second (fundic) chamber. Undi-
luted acid in excess can produce ulcers in all chambers (particularly the
first), a condition often seen in starving strandlings. The third (pyloric)
stomach secretes mucus and prepares the food for intestinal digestion.
In odontocetes, the first and second chambers often contain nema-
todes, and it is not unusual for the second and third chambers to have
a mucosal surface embedded with grape-like structures, each contain-
ing the trematode Braunina cordiformis118. The intestinal tract of
odontocetes is not visibly organized into small and large intestines126 ,
and in small animals it can measure 20 to 30 m in length. Mysticetes have
 Cetaceans ... 73

a distinguishable colon135.
Other notable features41 include the absence of a gall bladder, a
peculiarly small and firm spleen, which may be accompanied by one or
more even smaller accessory spleens, and a long chain of large
mesenteric lymph nodes. The kidneys are elongated and lobulated, and
the urinary bladder small. The testes are intra-abdominal and lie ventral
to the kidneys. The testes in Phocoena and certain other species
become so enlarged during the mating season that they exceed the
kidneys in size and weight. Veins carrying cool blood from the dorsal fin
and flukes are juxtaposed to arteries supplying the testes; the resulting

Fig. 6.1. External morphology of toothed (odontocete) and baleen (mysticete)

whales. The genders can be distinguished by the difference in the configuration of
the genital fold; the male usually has two openings, one behindthe other, separated
by a bridge of tissue. The female has a longer, more prominent slit which
encompasses the closer-spaced genital and anal openings and is flanked by a
small slit on each side containing the nipples. An object inserted into the genital
opening of a female will be directed toward the head, and in a male, toward the flukes.
NOTE: In males of Phocoena and Kogia, the genital aperture is situated much
closer to the umbilicus than to the anus.
74

cooling action allows the production and storage of viable sperm under
otherwise unsuitably high body temperatures110 .
Natural History
Life histories vary widely among species and even among geo-
graphic stocks. Some factors, including age at sexual maturity, lactation
period and calving interval, are also influenced by external conditions
such as population density and food availability, and are therefore
subject to change34,70,93 .
The smaller odontocetes have shorter life spans and accelerated
reproductive cycles compared with the larger species. The little harbor
porpoise, with a life span of only 7 to 15 years, becomes sexually mature
at age 4 to 6 and has a gestation period of 10 to 12 months, followed by
6 to 8 months of nursing40 . Sperm, killer and pilot whales, at the other
end of the range, possibly live to 60 years or more; they reach sexual
maturity at 8 to 10 years. The pregnancy lasts 14 to 16 months, and
calves may nurse for 2 years or more10,60,93 ; the females of such species
may have a long post-reproductive life60.
Baleen whales evolved reproductive cycles that are synchronized
with annual migrations between low latitude winter calving grounds and
high latitude summer feeding areas. Quite in contrast with the large
odontocetes, these massive animals mature relatively young (4 to 10
years), carry the fetus for only about 10 to 12 months, nurse for a brief
4 to 10 months70, and reach ages of 50 to 80 years or more154 .
The social structure of odontocetes is diverse. Some species, such
as harbor porpoises, are usually seen singly or in pairs. Others, spinner
dolphins for example, form highly organized schools that provide for
them the benefits of cooperative foraging, protection from predators,
and a safe neighborhood for rearing their young83 . Not all highly social
species mass strand, but mass strandings always involve social
species, such as pilot, sperm and false killer whales (see Chapter 7).
Baleen whales have a different social organization and, except for
mother-calf pairs, appear to lack the binding dependence evident in
odontocete schools. They occur alone or in loose aggregations, with
behaviorally interacting units consisting of about 2 to 6 animals70 .
Circumstances (e.g. ice entrapment) have forced small groups of
mysticetes to founder ashore, but in the true sense, these animals do not
mass strand.
Although most odontocete species feed primarily on schooling fish
and squid, many also include shrimp, crabs, and bottom-dwelling fish
and invertebrates in their diets146,147. Animals of the same species may
 Cetaceans ... 75

have definite food preferences. For example, some pods of killer whales
feed exclusively on fish, while others prefer marine mammals72,89 .
Mysticetes are adapted to foraging on prey that can be engulfed and
strained from the water — dense patches of krill (euphausiid and
copepod crustaceans) and small schooling fishes such as capelin and
menhaden97. Gray whales, unique among mysticetes in feeding behav-
ior, scour the bottom in search of benthic invertebrates81 .
Distribution
More than 40 species of cetaceans occur in North American
waters66,67, but only some of these are found predictably in specific
areas. Fin and sperm whales and Risso’s dolphin, among others, are
wide-ranging and have far different stranding patterns than animals with
a more restricted distribution, such as the vaquita of the northern Gulf of
California. Some are coastal year-round (e.g., gray whales, harbor
porpoises, some bottlenose dolphins), while others come inshore peri-
odically (e.g., long-finned pilot whales), during calving or migration (e.g.
beluga whales, right whales) or even diurnally (e.g., Hawaiian spinner
dolphins). Pelagic species such as beaked whales may be seen at sea
so rarely that their description relies entirely on stranding records.
Topographic and oceanographic conditions influence the coastal
cetacean fauna152 . The inshore waters of the warm, shallow Gulf of
Mexico are virtually uninhabited by baleen whales at any time of the
year. Northern right, fin and humpback whales do occur, however, in
cool, deep waters offshore in winter 35,115,116 .
On the Atlantic coast, the Gulf Stream occasionally brings warm tem-
perate species such as the bottlenose dolphin and dwarf sperm whale
as far north as the Canadian Maritimes, while the broad shelf keeps
pelagic species further offshore. Inshore waters north of Cape Hatteras
are influenced by the Labrador Current and are home to cold water
species such as the harbor porpoise and Atlantic white-sided dol-
phin35,66,115,123,124,149 .
The steep, rocky Pacific coast allows pelagic species, such as the
short-finned pilot whale, close to shore, while the California Current
brings such cold water forms as the harbor porpoise as far south as
southern California. Warm temperate species (e.g., bottlenose dolphin)
seldom occur north of central California67,84,95,152 .
Northern waters are a permanent home for some species, while
others only visit there during the summer months. The bowhead whale,
narwhal, and beluga are more or less confined to Arctic and subarctic
waters, the beluga being the most wide-ranging of the group54,102 .
76

Wanderers from the isolated St. Lawrence River stock occasionally

reach Nova Scotia and New England and have been reported as far
south as Long Island Sound88,100. During the summer, blue, fin, minke,
sei, right, gray and humpback whales move into northern feeding
grounds.
The Hawaiian Islands are an archipelago of steep-sloped volcanic
cones, offering little in the way of a coastal shelf able to support large
numbers of resident cetaceans. A wide variety of pelagic forms occurs
in nearby waters, as evidenced by known stranding records involving
about 20 species82. Some of these, including short-finned pilot whales,
pygmy killer whales, rough-toothed dolphins, and pantropical spotted
dolphins are common year-round in the deep channels between the
islands. Nearshore species include a wintering population of humpback
whales, resident communities of bottlenose dolphins, and the pelagic
Hawaiian spinner dolphin that moves into coastal waters during the
day5.
The size of a cetacean population is not easily determined, particu-
larly for pelagic stocks. Populations of baleen whales in North American
waters are estimated to range from hundreds (e.g., blue whale, northern
right whale), to thousands (e.g., humpback, bowhead whale), to tens of
thousands (gray whale, fin whale)152. A species abundant in one area
may be in peril in another (e.g., Western Arctic vs. St. Lawrence River
beluga stocks)96,127, depending on regional conditions such as habitat
degradation, patterns of exploitation, and fisheries interactions that
might influence food abundance, health and survival.

6.2. Mortality
Natural Mortality
Little is known about natural mortality in cetaceans, because it is
difficult to garner such basic information as population size, calf produc-
tion and survival data, and accurate age estimates87,93 . The type of
long-term observations made on killer whales in British Columbia wa-
ters 10 or Florida bottlenose dolphins120 are not feasible for most spe-
cies. Instead, information comes from stranded animals21,23,47 , those
harvested commercially19,20,130 , and some taken incidentally in fisheries
operations22,92,143 .
Following the general mammalian pattern, mortality is high in the
very young, decreases sharply with maturity, and increases again
in advanced age98. Species that provide longer maternal care have
greater juvenile survival87 . Mortality rates seem higher in males than
 Cetaceans ... 77

females in species presumed to be polygynous (i.e., dominant males

mate with a number of females), including pilot and sperm whales98 .
Some mortality is related to environmental conditions. Cetaceans
in high latitudes occasionally become trapped in ice, and may subse-
quently die of starvation or fall victim to predators or hunters. As many
as 3,000 beluga whales at one time15 have met this fate, as have
narwhals, gray whales, bowheads, and white-beaked dolphins125,128.
Nearly every cetacean beyond the age of a newborn has parasites
(Fig. 10.28-10.29); some may even be acquired in utero 26 . Some
parasites play an arguable role in disease and mortality 48 . Nematodes
that reside seemingly innocuously in lungs and stomach can overwhelm
a host facing other stressful conditions. Aberrant migrations of trema-
todes through the brain have been linked to strandings of common
dolphins106 . Damage to the bones of the head, caused by nematodes of
the genus Crassicauda, has been linked to mortality of young pantropical
spotted dolphins92. Other species of Crassicauda injure renal blood
vessels65 and mammary tissue, perhaps with serious effects45 . Small
respiratory tract nematodes of the genus Stenurus are commonly found
in the auditory or eustachian tubes, middle ears and cranial sinuses, but
there is no firm evidence for the popular notion that they precipitate
strandings.
Cetaceans have been found with cardiovascular problems, lung
diseases not associated with parasites, nutritional disorders, and infec-
tions caused by a range of opportunistic pathogens12,23,104. These
conditions simply reflect the broad range of illnesses facing any species,
and none is regarded as having population-wide effects.
However, certain large-scale threats are becoming identified. The
recent outbreak of morbillivirus infection that killed at least 750 striped
dolphins, Stenella coeruleoalba, in the Mediterranean28,30,141 suggests
that viruses may have long been overlooked as possible causes of
mass mortality. Fourteen humpback whales died near Cape Cod after
eating fish that contained saxitoxin produced by the marine dinoflagel-
late Gonyaulax tamarensis (responsible for paralytic shellfish poisoning
in humans)44. Brevetoxin produced by Gymnodinium breve was impli-
cated in the mass mortality of bottlenose dolphins along the Atlantic
coast during 1987-198842 . If these events are linked to human-induced
changes in the environment, they may foreshadow an emerging trend
in cetacean mortality.
78

Human-Related Mortality
Cetaceans too often become trapped in fishing nets. Entanglement
associated with coastal fisheries is a serious threat to the harbor
porpoise throughout much of its range27,99,140 and has driven the
vaquita to critically low numbers140 . It is also a significant cause of injury
and death to humpback whales, mainly around Newfoundland139 .
Occasional entanglements combined with ship collisions may be imped-
ing the recovery of the northern right whale63,108 .
Pelagic fisheries, particularly in the North Pacific, are harmful140 to
offshore species. Large numbers of spotted and spinner dolphins, and
Pacific white-sided and northern right whale dolphins, among others, are
taken in purse seines and drift-nets. The situation in the Eastern Tropical
Pacific has steadily improved over the past two decades with the
introduction of new fishing techniques for tuna. Restriction of North
Pacific high seas drift-net fisheries since 1987, combined with the
planned global moratorium beginning in 1993, will further reduce the
needless killing of pelagic marine mammals.
Oil spills, like other forms of pollution, contribute to overall degrada-
tion of habitat, can influence prey abundance and diversity, and may
increase stress and susceptibility to infection43 . Some cetacean popu-
lations have accumulated high levels of contaminants that are tenta-
tively linked with disease, including tumors and reproductive disor-
ders1,39,46,73.
Rarely, a cetacean is the victim of a bullet wound131 . In stranded
animals, the opening left by an entering bullet may be too small to detect
without careful dissection, or difficult to distinguish from damage in-
flicted by scavenging birds and embedded sea shell fragments51 .

6.3. Stranding Patterns

Coastal animals that reside in an area or migrate through it seasonally
have a stranding pattern that is predictable and more or less consis-
tent75. Bottlenose dolphins strand throughout the year in the southeast-
ern United States, whereas newborn gray whales are likely to come
ashore in the lagoons of Baja California only during the winter calving
season. These trends have a long history that is rooted firmly in the
biology of the species. More recently, traditional patterns have become
complicated by human activities that are less direct and not always
predictable — for example, a coastal fisheries operation that, when in full
swing, may have a serious impact on local cetaceans.
Stranding patterns are not quite as evident for pelagic species,
 Cetaceans ... 79

although correlations with locations, tides, storms, geomagnetic distur-

bances and other factors have been proposed (see 7.1). Some species
follow the inshore migration of prey. Long-finned pilot whales, for
example, pursue squid into shallow waters of Cape Cod Bay during the
autumn and early winter and can be expected to strand during these
seasons. These events also correlate somewhat with storms that com-
bine with monthly peak tides.
Animals that strand in a cluster over a period of a few days may be
victims of poisoning42,44 , infectious disease28,30 , intensive local fisher-
ies operations14,27, or unusual environmental events75. These episodes
can be of such short duration that the ultimate cause may no longer be
evident by the time the investigating team takes action.
The mother/calf bond is strong and may remain so long after the end
of lactation17. Consequently, if both come ashore, it may be impossible
to determine which led the way. Young males of some social species
may appear alone at predictable times of the year. For example, juvenile
white-sided dolphins strand along the northeast coast during the fall,
suggesting they may have been lost or displaced from a bachelor group.
There is evidence that yearling Tursiops come ashore alone after being
displaced from the herd during the breeding season144 .
Animals that wander beyond their normal range, fail to migrate with
the onset of winter, or make unusual appearances in bays or far up river,
always generate public interest. A single male beluga whale, apparently
a stray from the St. Lawrence River population, resided in Long Island
Sound for over a year before it died from a gunshotwound88 . “Humphrey,”
a humpback whale reluctant to leave San Francisco Bay in October
1990, was finally towed out to sea after elaborate efforts failed to coax
him to leave on his own. When bottlenose dolphins left their summer
feeding grounds off northern Virginia in the fall of 1988 and headed south
for warmer waters, “Rascal,” a young male, stayed behind. Lingering in
a shallow near-frozen bay, he extracted sympathy from every conceiv-
able source, until he was “rescued,” placed into a facility, and released
months later. Rescue efforts following the ice entrapment of three gray
whales in Alaska in 1988 became an international event 114 . Public
sentiment may override any consideration as to whether interven-
tion in these cases is necessary, justifiable or even possible.

6.4. Stranding Response

Jurisdiction
All cetaceans in U.S. waters fall under the jurisdiction of the National
80

Fig. 6.2. Options for responding to stranded cetaceans.

Marine Fisheries Service and are protected by the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972. The sperm whale and the vaquita, as well as all
baleen whales except minke and Bryde’s whales, are also listed under
the Endangered Species Act.
Evaluating the Event
A cetacean may be observed swimming dangerously close to shore,
although for some, such as right whales, this is normal behavior. If there
is no obvious injury or disability and intervention is deemed necessary,
attempts can be made to direct the animal back to sea. This has been
done by using boats and chains of people (under calm conditions) as a
means of herding, and by creating disturbance and underwater noise
(slapping the water’s surface or striking objects together below it, using
boat engines)109,145 (Fig 6.3). Under the best of conditions, it is difficult
to sustain the effort needed to herd an animal a long distance, and there
is a good chance it will come ashore somewhere else, probably close to
the original site. If the animal is seriously debilitated, no amount of
effort is likely to avert the eventual stranding.
The response team’s appropriate course of action for a stranded
 Cetaceans ... 81

cetacean will depend on the animal’s size, age and health, the available
support, environmental conditions, and the time on the beach(see 4.3).
The options are to tag and release the animal if it is healthy, transport
it to a facility for medical attention, euthanize it, or let it die naturally.
Decisions should be timely and the action swift to relieve the animal of
progressive injury and discomfort.
Except for obvious abnormalities, it is not always possible to judge
the health of a cetacean by its outward appearance. Even sophis-
ticated tests may not reveal the nature of the illness, and such analyses
take more time than the beached victim can spare. When circumstances
do not permit an exhaustive examination, certain broad assumptions
can be made to anticipate the animal’s health. These assumptions are
based on an understanding of life history and historical stranding
patterns.
Coastal animals such as Tursiops, expected to be familiar with the
nearshore environment, usually strand singly only when ill23,47 ,
although they may be occasional victims of an outgoing tide. Unless it’s a
simple case of refloating, their only reasonable chance of survival is in a
care facility. Some offshore animals have characteristic illnesses. Delphi-
nus off the California coast frequently strand because of terminal brain
damage caused by the trematode Nasitrema106; even with the best medical
care, there is little chance they will recover.
Many pelagic specimens come ashore in apparent good health,
or at least free of recognizable disease. Smaller ones on the beach for
only a short period of time have a reasonable chance of withstanding the
rigors of being returned to sea4,109,112,113,145 , although their long-term
survival is undocumented. The larger the animal and the longer it lies

Fig. 6.3. Techniques for stranding prevention and returning cetaceans to sea,
including use of underwater noise, manual re-orientation, herding with small craft,
and towing in a sling or stretcher.
82

Fig. 6.4. This graph can be used to estimate the weight of a cetacean of any given
length. Derived from literature sources used to preparesection 6.13, it is based on
average to maximum size and represents species occurring in North American
waters. NOTE: This information is not to be used as a guide for administering
medications or anesthetics, as many stranded animals are emaciated and fall far
below this average range, while others, such as heavy-bodied species or pregnant
females, may be above it.
on the beach, the less likely it is to survive after release. Nothing can be
done to save a whale too large to handle with the available resources,
or one that has suffered prolonged exposure. The animal should either
be euthanized or left to die naturally; the latter is becoming more
unacceptable to the general public.
Specific Equipment (see also 2.5)
Much of the equipment required for cetacean strandings is geared to
moving or supporting the animals. Any specimen beyond the size of a
small pilot whale will require heavy equipment. (Refer to Fig. 6.4 for help
in estimating an animal’s weight). Many devices specifically designed
 Cetaceans ... 83

for moving cetaceans have been cumbersome and impractical to use.

Basic equipment will generally prove to be the most useful. These items
include:
foam pads or mattresses tarpaulins
sheets, towels or blankets zinc oxide
shovels ropes
buckets slings
water sprayers stretchers and poles
“space blankets” inflatable rafts
heavy machinery (cranes, front-end loaders)

6.5. Approach
Observe the animal’s behavior and prepare a safe plan before making
the approach. Advance slowly, calmly and cautiously, avoiding loud or
startling sounds, abrupt movements, or bright lights. This will allow the
strandling to become gradually accustomed to your presence. The
animal is not likely to be aggressive, but people have been bitten
accidentally, and the thrashing flukes of a confused whale have wrecked
more than one knee joint. Only persons with experience should
approach the animal, keeping well clear of the flukes and mouth.
Animals may panic in certain situations. A mother separated from
her calf or attempting to protect it may become aggressive17. A lone
member of a social species may become frightened when separated
from the pod83. Consider the animal’s possible response to your in-
tended actions.

6.6. First Aid

Determining Condition
Countless procedures are used to evaluate the health of an animal,
ranging from distant observation to blood and tissueanalyses85,104,133,134 .
Behavioral observations are quick, non-invasive, and can be done by
persons with minimum training. Behavioral criteria can be used to
assign animals to one of three categories 31 :
1. alert (aware, responsive to environmental stimuli)
2. weakly responsive (responsive only after much stimulation)
3. non-responsive (not responding to noise or touch)
A stranded cetacean inevitably develops respiratory fatigue and
distress. This occurs sooner in larger animals whose chest cavity will be
84

more severely compressed by body weight. Signs include irregular and

increased respiratory rate (up to 6 to 8 breaths/minute may be normal for
an excited Tursiops; a fin or pilot whale may respire as little as once
every minute or so) and audible gurgling sounds as the animal breathes
in and out. If respirations are slower than expected, flushing water over
the blowhole may stimulate breathing144 . Extensive bleeding, frothy or
foul-smelling fluid from the blowhole are signs of critically poor health.
Without using invasive procedures, it is possible to make a rough
evaluation of cardiovascular function. Heart rate, for what it is worth,
can be determined using a stethoscope in a small animal, and perhaps
by placing a hand firmly under the axillary region of a larger one. Even
under normal conditions, however, the rate varies considerably (e.g.,
from 30 to 100 beats/minute in Tursiops104) during the breathing cycle.
One result of deteriorating cardiovascular function is poor circulation,
making it difficult to obtain blood samples from the usual peripheral sites
(see 10.2). Body temperature control is also reduced when blood fails to
reach the extremities where excess heat is normally dumped.
The next level of assessment requires handling the animal.
Gentle tapping near the eye should elicit a blink. Attempts to pry open
the jaw, pull the tongue or tug the flipper forward should be met with firm
resistance. Once the jaw is open, a finger pressed firmly on the gums
over the teeth causes blanching followed by immediate return of normal
pink color; a slow return or bluish discoloration is a sign of poor
circulation.
Body temperature can be determined accurately enough for early
assessment purposes using a deep rectal thermometer. In small to
medium-sized animals, normal temperatures are about 36.5˚ to 37˚C. In
cold weather, temperature may drop rapidly below 35.6˚C, signalling the
onset of hypothermia or cardiovascular shock. Temperatures above
40˚ C are critical and above 42˚ C probably terminal112 .
If time permits and a clinical laboratory is accessible,a blood sample
may be collected for hematologic and plasma chemical analyses. These
may reveal conditions that are not readily apparent and can help
establish a long-term prognosis.
Supportive Care
General — The time between stranding and the arrival of the rescue
team can be gainfully used by volunteers to relieve distress and improve
the animal’s chance of recovery (Fig. 6.5). The key is to prevent further
injury and keep the animal comfortable while minimizing handling
and disturbance.
 Cetaceans ... 85

Fig. 6.5. First aid measures on the beach. A. Summer: provide shade, drape
leaving dorsal fin exposed, and keep moist; dig holes for flippers and fill with water.
B. Winter: provide protection from wind, cover dorsal fin and flukes with cloths
soaked in vegetable or mineral oil; dig holes for flippers.C. Always: keep blowhole
unobstructed and eyes free of sand; allow flippers to assume a natural position.
The eyes and blowhole must be protected from blowing sand and kept
moist with clean fresh or salt water. Flushing the area around the
blowhole can be done only when the blowhole is closed; the best time is
immediately after the animal breathes. Inexperienced persons should
observe the breathing sequence before attempting to do this. No matter
where water is applied to clean or cool the animal, the source (hose,
bucket, sponge) should be held close to the skin to minimize the startle
reflex.
It is easier to keep the blowhole free of water and sand, and presents
less risk to the lungs, when the strandling is placed on its belly. This can
be done easily with a small animal, but in larger ones, only with some risk
to the rescuers. Using a spade to burrow beneath the animal, dig holes
in the sand to allow the flippers and flukes to lie in a natural position.
Banking sand or placing other (non-injurious) material alongside the
body will reduce the tendency to roll.
Exposure to Warm Temperatures — For their comfort and well-
being, animals on the beach must be protected from the elements (Fig.
86

6.5). Prolonged exposure to wind and sun can result in excessive drying
and damage to the skin, overheating at warm temperatures(hyperther-
mia), and hypothermia at cold temperatures.
A cetacean on the beach faces the risk of hyperthermia, even on
cloudy temperate days. The risk increases dramatically as the tempera-
ture rises. Dark skin absorbs heat, blubber retains it, and the circulatory
system that normally helps to dissipate heat may be sluggish and not up
to the task. A whale out of water has no other mechanism to cool itself.
The danger of hyperthermia can be minimized by draping exposed
surfaces except the blowhole with towels or sheets kept moist by
periodic wetting. Lighter colored materials are preferable because they
reflect light and heat, but in a pinch, items of clothing, newspapers, or
even wet seaweed or mud will do. If the situation permits, a small shelter
constructed over the animal will provide valuable protection. Heat loss
occurs principally from the extremities, which should therefore be kept
wet or cooled with ice. A trench dug in the sand around the animal can
be kept filled with water through a channel connection to the sea.
 Cetaceans ... 87

An application of zinc oxide will protect skin from sun and windburn
and help prevent dehydration. Oil-based compounds (lanolin), including
those used in sun tanning products, retard heat loss and may do more
harm than good. Skin already damaged should be kept moist, shaded
and protected with zinc oxide or antibiotic ointment.
Exposure to Cold Temperatures — A good layer of blubber insu-
lates an animal against cold. Emaciated specimens, calves and small
species are at greater risk of becoming hypothermic. The diagnosis
requires some expertise. On a frigid beach, provide shelter from wind
and precipitation, and cover the extremities with a mineral or vegetable
oil-dampened cloth.
Protection from Surf — A cetacean in the surf zone may be battered
by waves, trapped among rocks, rolled onto its side or become mired. If
the animal is too large to be moved into deeper water or to higher ground,
shift it so it is perpendicular to the water’s edge, with the head facing
land. In this position, the body offers the least resistance to the surf, and
the blowhole is as far from water as it can be under the circumstances.
Heavy, struggling animals can become bogged down and trapped in
sand or mud that eventually fixes them into place. They are then victims
of the rising tide and nearly impossible to rescue because of the
difficulties and hazards of working in soft sediments.
Lacerations and Injuries — Sharp rocks and sea shell fragments
can have the same effect on cetacean skin as a keen-edged knife,
causing serious injury to a struggling animal. The risk of lacerations can
be reduced by removing or covering hazardous objects, placing padding
around the body, or moving the victim to a safer place. Efforts to calm or
restrain whales under these circumstances are unrealistic. Tranquiliz-
ers and sedatives should never be used on animals that are to be
immediately released.
There is no proven benefit to medicating an animal that has just
stranded and is about to be released. Without opportunity for continued
care, a single application of ointment, a bolus of antibiotics, or a feeding
of fish has little value. However, an animal that faces a longer period out
of water before it is released or transported will benefit from prompt
medical care to wounds, fluid therapy to maintain hydration, and even a
long-acting antibiotic.
Stress and Shock — A cetacean on the beach is almost certainly
stressed. Stimulated by the pituitary gland, hormones (cortisol and
aldosterone) from the adrenal cortex are released into the circula-
tion 137 . The presumed benefit of cortisol is to ensure a supply of blood
88

glucose and reduce some of the adverse consequences of the inflamma-

tory response. Aldosterone is also released, probably to maintain salt
and water balance under critical conditions. Sustained high cortisol has
deleterious effects on circulating white blood cells, wound healing and
the immune response; prolonged high aldosterone causes excessive
sodium retention, thereby increasing the animal’s thirst for water.
Within a few hours after stranding, some cetaceans begin to
show evidence of shock or vascular collapse49 . Blood pools in the
thoracic and abdominal viscera, with effective circulation only to the
heart and brain. The rest of the body is largely bypassed, and organs
such as liver, muscle and skin, lacking blood, begin to exhibit impaired
function. Compounds normally metabolized and detoxified by the liver
can accumulate to dangerous levels, cortisol and aldosterone among
them. Since the animal may appear to be healthy, blood studies are
required to detect these changes. Only a long course of intensive care
offers some hope of recovery. Whatever the reason the whale came
ashore, the onset of shock further impairs its chance of survival.
Rescuers have attempted to reduce circulatory problems and muscle
cramps by periodically shifting the animal’s body position and rolling it
onto each side for 20 minutes or so 29,109,145 . If a stretcher is available,
floating the animal in shallow water may be of some value. Some
advocate massaging the muscles of the back109 ; this procedure may
benefit a small animal, but it is not likely to be effective on a larger one
with thick blubber. Corticosteroids and other medications may help
minimize muscle damage and delay the onset of shock 133,144 .

6.7. Handling, Lifting and Moving

In any rescue operation, moving and handling are critical activities,
whether dragging an animal from dangerous surf, maneuvering it into
deeper water for release, or loading it onto a transport vehicle (Figs. 6.6,
6.7, 6.8, 6.10). Most procedures are potentially injurious to both the
animals and personnel and should only be attempted when supervised
by trained staff and when adequate support is available. Six people
might be able to carry a medium-sized bottlenose dolphin on a stretcher,
whereas a beluga or pilot whale may require 16 or more strong bodies.
Several methods are useful for moving small whales and dolphins. An
animal can be placed or rolled onto a tarpaulin or stretcher (or plastic
“snow sheet”) (Fig. 6.6), then lifted or dragged (Fig. 6.7). Field stretchers
should be large and strong enough to bear the weight of any reasonably
large animal, which means a small one will be safely enveloped in it.
 Cetaceans ... 89

Fig. 6.6. Technique for positioning a cetacean onto a tarpaulin or stretcher without
lifting.
When the whale will remain in the stretcher for more than 15 or 20
minutes, openings must be provided for the flippers (Fig. 6.8) (to prevent
crushing and overheating) and the genital region (to prevent urine
burns). For short rescue procedures, the flippers may be more conve-
niently kept within the stretcher. Fabrics should be smooth and easy to
clean and sterilize; canvas, woven plastic, and netting are commonly
used. Lining with towels or sheeting (“lambskin” liners are heavy when
wet and trap sand) further reduces the chance of skin injury. Once the
animal is in the stretcher, care should be taken to ensure no seams or
creases press into the skin.
Dragging is an acceptable option only when lifting is impossible.
Slings positioned under the body behind the flippers can be used to drag
the animal on the beach or to support it in the water (Fig. 6.7, 6.10); on
land, extra support under the head may be necessary. Ensure that such
90

slings are well-padded and wide enough to distribute pressure suffi-

ciently to minimize injury and discomfort when the animal is pulled.
Never use naked rope as a sling. Drag only over smooth terrain after
all obstacles have been removed.
Although it has been suggested to be an effective means of moving
cetaceans109,145, rolling is not recommended112 . An animal healthy
enough for release can be expected to react violently. This procedure will
certainly be stressful and may result in damage to the flippers or dorsal

Fig. 6.7. General rescue sequence involving first aid and supportive measures;
moving the animal to the water by lifting in a stretcher or dragging with slings; support
in the water with gradual acclimatization; and observation and monitoring of released
animals.
 Cetaceans ... 91

Fig. 6.8. Cetacean transport methods. A. Stretchers with holes for flippers. B.
Specially constructed transport box with foam pad and waterproof liner.C. Manual
method of moving a small pilot whale onto a foam-padded transport vehicle, using
poles positioned cross-wise through stretcher handles to allow necessary support.
D. Use of heavy equipment to move whales.
92

fin. If an animal is small enough to roll, it is small enough to maneuver

onto a stretcher or sling.
Cranes and other heavy lifting equipment are needed for moving large
specimens and for loading them onto transport vehicles (Fig. 6.8).
Secure the animal in the stretcher with enough rope or straps to prevent
thrashing, and attach guide ropes or “tag lines” that will enable handlers
to hold the stretcher steady. Make sure that no one stands directly
underneath the load.

6.8. Immediate Release

General Considerations
Coordinate the animal’s release with an incoming or high tide, and
assure that personnel and equipment are adequate for operating in the
surf zone and perhaps deeper water. Choose a route that is free of
obstacles such as shallow reefs or sandbanks, by first consulting a
hydrographic chart or persons familiar with the area. Under some
conditions, transport to an alternate site—perhaps miles away—may be
necessary. When weather or tide conditions are unsuitable, the animal
may be placed in a tidal pond or fabricated pen enclosure and released
when circumstances improve.
Make every effort to keep a mother and calf together during release.
A free-ranging dolphin may remain with her dead offspring forweeks17,84,
suggesting that returning even a dead calf to the water with its mother
may help to prevent her restranding. Orphaned maternally-dependant
young should not be released under any circumstances. Calves
whose mothers cannot be verified should be considered orphaned.
Lone animals of a social species are not good candidates for release,
unless there is a good chance they will regain contact with a herd ( see
7.6).
Marking and Tagging
Any animal returned to sea should be marked or tagged57,59 (see
Fig. 6.9) and the details of its release carefully documented. Only then
can observers determine whether or not the animal survived and if
rescue procedures were effective. Dorsal fin tags are easy to apply with
the appropriate attachment devices. They can be made in various
colors, shapes and sizes. Every team should be equipped with a quantity
of colored or numbered plastic cattle ear-tags, and a small boring device
for attaching the tag through the dorsal fin. Freeze brands are effective
for long-term marking but are not immediately visible and must be
 Cetaceans ... 93

Fig. 6.9. Some techniques for tagging cetaceans. Skill and experience are required
to minimize tissue damage and prevent infection. The dorsal fin or ridge is the
preferred site for convenience of attachment andvisibility. A. Large plastic cattle ear
tags, attached with special pliers, can be used to mark carcasses and to tag live
animals prior to release. Tags are attached through the trailing edge of the dorsal fin
and cause little tissue damage when they are lost. These tags may be retained for
several months, but are reliable only for short-termobservation. B. Other types of
markers include a “button” tag, a plastic disk attached by a bolt through the dorsal
fin, and a “spaghetti” tag, a streamer with a barbed head anchored in theblubber57,67.
C. Freeze-brands on the dorsal fin or on the sides just below it can provide long-
lasting marks that are visible from a distance. Brands will not be clear immediately
and are best combined with a plastic dorsal fin tag for interim observation. D.
Satellite or VHF tags can be mounted on a molded plastic “saddle” that is bolted
through the dorsal fin.(Additional reference: Mate, B. 1988. Development of satellite-
linked methods of large cetacean tagging and tracking in OCS lease areas - final
report. OCS Study 87-0038. U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Management
Service, Alaska OCS Region, Anchorage, AK. 137 p.)
94

combined with some other type of tag. Radio (satellite or Very-High-

Frequency [VHF]) tags provide much more information but are costly
and require specialized tracking equipment. Tags can be applied only
by trained personnel. Natural marks (e.g., unusual fin or fluke
shapes, scars) should be photographed to assist in later identifica-
tion of restranded animals, or as a way to monitor individuals from small,
local populations.
Acclimating Animals in the Surf
There is more to releasing a stranded whale than hauling it back to
sea. Without careful planning, handling and treatment, rescue attempts
can end in disaster.
In preparation for its release, the animal on the beach should be kept
wet and cool to avoid a quick change in temperature that might evoke a
startle reaction85. Once in water, the body should be kept upright and the
blowhole clear of the surface. One person alone may be able to handle
a harbor porpoise (assuming reserve help is on hand), but certainly more
are needed for a larger species (Fig. 6.7, 6.10). Acclimation is not
complete until the animal is able to surface on its own to breathe. The
process can take a long time and puts rescuers at risk of hypothermia.
Proper gear (e.g., wet suits) and a relief team must be available ( see
12.2, 12.3). A mother and calf should be acclimated together.
Gentle side-to-side rocking of an animal that is not fully coordinated
when refloated, has the presumed benefit of restoring blood circulation
and muscle tone4,113,145. Some species, such as false killer whales,

Fig. 6.10. Supporting cetaceans in the water. A. Use of strap or sling to keep
blowhole above surface. B. Supporting a small porpoise.
 Cetaceans ... 95

tolerate this handling well, while others, such as striped dolphins, react
violently. Abandon the procedure or use a more gentle approach if the
animal resists36. After about 30 minutes of rocking, try again to move the
animal into deeper water.
Many cetaceans restrand with frustrating persistence, each time
compounding the damaging effects of the last stranding, until their
condition is irreversible. The rescue team should know when to quit
and pursue another alternative.
Herding and Towing
The animal, even when acclimated, may need to be directed outward
to sea. Doing this by swimming alongside is risky because a cetacean’s
behavior is unpredictable. Kayaks and surfboards are light, portable,
and work well in shallow water 36 . “Jet” boats are quiet, maneuverable,
have no propellers that might cause injury, and are also suited to inshore
work94. Once the whale is farther offshore, sturdier craft are needed,
manned by at least one observer in addition to the pilot. Boats are
generally positioned flanking and to the rear of the whale. Keep engine
speed low and constant. Where conditions (e.g., estuaries or inland
waterways) inhibit effective herding operations, it may be preferable to
secure the animal and tow it to sea.
Towing a cetacean requires skill and experience, as well as a suitable
boat. Improperly placed ropes or slings can cut into the skin or prevent
the animal from surfacing to breath. A whale that suddenly makes a burst
for the open sea may swamp a small boat or escape before it can be
properly released from its harness. Accounts of restranded animals with
rope wounds around necrotic tails are testimony that not all towing
attempts are successful. The first rule is to tow head first. Towing
backwards by the tail can damage the flukes, dislocate vertebrae, and
result in suffocation. If the animal is strong enough to withstand this
treatment, a further danger awaits, as observed by Backus andSchevill2
during attempts to rescue a stranded Cuvier’s beaked whale:
“....and being towed as it was, tail foremost, [it] swam shoreward when
it swam....”
Towing head-first and orienting the animal seaward may help prevent
this from occurring. With all methods of towing, it is certain thata whale,
sensing freedom of movement in the water, may decide on its own
course.
Better than ropes, a harness with wide banding and substantial
padding will help to distribute pressure due to the force of towing. For
96

Fig. 6.11. A method for towing utilizing a “rescue sheet” with quick-release fasteners,
a swivel between lines from sling and main tow-line to reduce twisting, and a spring
in the main tow-line to dampen speed surges.
example, a length of cloth or strapping can be draped over the back; the
two ends are then passed behind and underneath the flippers (one on
each side) and attached to the tow-line. This arrangement tends to lift the
animal’s head when tension is applied. A similar procedure with more
technical detail94 (Fig. 6.11) incorporates a broad sheet for maximum
distribution of pressure, a swivel to prevent the tow-line from twisting,
and a spring in the tow-line to minimize speed surges inevitable in
swells. All ropes and harnesses must allow for rapid release when
the need arises.
The tow-line must be sturdy, long enough to keep the whale a safe
distance from the engines, but short enough to allow maneuverability. A
longer line will help keep the animal level and reduce its tendency to rise
up and pitch forward into the water. Towing speed should not exceed 1
knot145. Stop intermittently (e.g., 20 seconds moving, 10 seconds stop)
to allow the whale to breathe.
The animal can be placed in a flooded inflatable raft and towed31 , or
into a specially designed stretcher supported by two rafts or pontoons,
which is then towed as a unit or fastened alongside a boat. Cetaceans
can also be “towed” in a stretcher or sling fixed to the side of an
adequately large boat (Fig. 6.3). A net sling has the advantages of
minimum resistance and easy release9 .
How far to drive or tow an animal offshore will depend largely on the
topography of the region. A few kilometers will normally be enough if the
beach is open, the coast straight and the water deep. Strong coastal
currents and complex topography may require that the animal be towed
a considerable distance offshore before it is released.
Helicopters and Boats
Helicopters have been used to move animals off the beach quickly. In
 Cetaceans ... 97

one incident, 22 Tursiops were trapped by a receding tide in a bay on the

South Island of New Zealand18. A cow and a calf were placed together in
a sling, flown offshore, and tethered near a waiting fishing boat. All the
remaining animals were transported in rapid succession and released in
the vicinity of the tethered cow. When the operation was completed, the cow
was released and the entire pod swam calmly into deeper water. The
rescue was presumed to have been successful.
In a similar manner, small cetaceans can be carried on the decks of
fishing boats and released at a suitable site 36 . Such methods have the
advantage of moving animals directly to a specific location—one far
enough offshore to discourage restranding. Where the stranding area is
inaccessible to land vehicles, helicopters and boats may also be useful
for moving animals to alternate holding or release sites.
Observing and Monitoring
The success of a release can only be measured by knowing exactly
what has happened to the animals. One cannot assume that a whale has
survived simply because it has not restranded.
Maintain visual contact as long as possible. In a few instances, an
animal can be observed from shore, but most serious efforts will require
sea-going vessels or aerial reconnaissance. Unfortunately, this is ex-
pensive and often difficult to arrange. Chemical lights that are visible up
to a mile or more away can be used to track released animals at night.
The lights come in a variety of colors and can be attached (using
biodegradable cotton string) to the dorsal fin tag. Still, though logistically
difficult, electronic tagging (satellite, VHF) is the only reliable means of
determining whether the animal has fully recovered.

6.9. Transport to Care Facility

The same equipment and approach to moving a whale on the beach
is used to load it for transport (Fig. 6.8). The success of the operation will
depend on the type of vehicle that can be driven to the scene. Animals
may be transported on thick foam pads. Close-cell foam is rigid and,
because it does not absorb water, remains light; it is ideal for short-term
transport. Open-cell foam, preferred for longer travel, is softer, contours
easily to the animal’s form, but will absorb water and become heavy.
Some individuals may be more comfortable on their sides64 . Specially
constructed transport boxes are generally used for longer distances.
Protect the animal from sun, wind, and exhaust fumes, and keep
it cool and wet. One or more representatives from the rehabilitation
98

center should be involved in the handling and transport since they

ultimately share responsibility for the animal’s health.
During transit to the rehabilitation center, attendants should monitor
respiratory rate, record body temperature, and, if possible, collect blood
samples and swabs for culture (see Chapter 10). This will expedite
assessment of the animal’s condition upon arrival, allowing therapy to
begin with minimal delay.

6.10. Rehabilitation
General Considerations
The care required to rehabilitate a stranded cetacean until it is well
enough for release can strain a facility’s endurance and budget. An
isolation pool is necessary to avoid contaminating other animals, and a
skilled team is needed for care and support. The institution bearing these
costs may understandably shy away from your plea for help if previous
efforts were unsuccessful, as they often are. To keep the doors open,
and in the interest of humane care, select animals for rehabilitation
that have a reasonable chance of recovery, and respect the decision
of the accepting facility.
Small young specimens lifted from the beach soon after stranding are
usually good rehabilitation candidates, because they can easily be
transported and handled for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. A
coastal species such as Tursiops truncatus has reasonable prospects,
whereas stranded Delphinus delphis, Stenella spp. and other pelagic
forms seem to have more difficulty adjusting to captivity, although some
have adapted successfully. A pelagic animal that has come ashore in a
mass stranding, which as far as we know is a behavioral and not health-
related phenomenon, may have a better chance than a singly stranded
animal which is more likely to be sick and debilitated.
At the center, a new arrival may be placed in shallow water where it
is more easily handled for support and medications. In water of any
depth, an animal unable to swim or remain upright will need assis-
tance. A stretcher fashioned out of neoprene (wet suit material) will
provide additional buoyancy and protection against heat loss for an
animal that is hypothermic144 . Certain animals list to one side, either
because they are weak, have problems with one lung, prefer to look to
the surface with one eye, or simply because the pool currents force that
position. More active animals may require some measures (i.e., atten-
dants placed strategically to guide the animal) to prevent their colliding
with pool walls.
 Cetaceans ... 99

Cetaceans often fare better in pairs or groups than alone. Social

groupings are seldom possible unless the animal is part of a multiple
stranding. The remaining option of placing a newly arrived strandling
alongside a colony animal combines the worst elements of poor
husbandry and bad medical practices.
A medical examination is performed as soon as the animal arrives at
the facility so therapy can begin immediately. To restore salt and water
balance caused by dehydration and shock, the animal can be placed for
up to a week or so in brackish water of about 10 ppm, roughly equivalent
to the salinity of body fluids, or in fresh water for a few hours at a time,
in hopes that it will drink. Replacement fluids can also be given by
stomach tube.
After a long time on the beach, larger specimens, such as pilot
whales, may suffer poor blood circulation to vital organs including liver
and muscle, which then malfunction. Rigorous intervention is required to
control and reverse this condition—incipient shock. Sometime during
the course of rehabilitation, cetaceans are often given medications for
stress, as well as antibiotics to control infections and to prevent
bacteria from invading what might now be a weakened subject.
Nutrition
A rigorous nutritional program may be required to restore and
maintain the animal’s health. First, it is necessary to restore fluid balance
by tube-feeding fluids for a few days before giving whole fish or fish
gruel. The effort needed for such a feeding schedule is demanding at
first, but within a few days most patients will take fish or swallow the
feeding tube with minimal help from one or two persons. Formulas for
dependent calves have been developed but have not been as exten-
sively tested as those for other marine mammals. However, prepara-
tions have been used successfully to rear a bottlenose dolphin that came
ashore in Florida still bearing an umbilical cord 138 and an orphaned
harbor porpoise at the Pt. Defiance Aquarium in Tacoma, Washing-
ton105 .
Besides special nutritional needs, dependent calves requirea social
setting that is difficult and expensive to provide in captivity. Attempts to
satisfy this need have included companion animals, such as pinnipeds
and a steady stream of volunteers. Calves are also best provided with
a choice of toys and gadgets, as long as the objects are too large to
swallow.
100

6.11. Release Following Recovery (see also 6.8)

It may be months or a year or more before a cetacean is ready to be
returned to sea. Criteria for judging suitability for release include medical
evaluation, overall physical fitness including swimming and diving be-
havior, and the ability of the animal to feed on its own. There should be
good evidence that any member of a highly social species will be able
to interact with others of its kind (see Chapter 7). Any human-dependent
behavior should be extinguished as part of the approach to precondition-
ing animals for release.
A young dependent cetacean has a poor chance of survival and still
less of being successfully returned to sea. While rearing a calf to the
point of physical independence might be feasible, “social maturity”
may be equally vital for survival and perhaps impossible to attain in
captivity. The host facility caring for an orphan may have to face
accusations that the rescue effort was a veiled attempt to acquire an
exhibit specimen.

6.12. Euthanasia
Saving stranded animals is not always possible. Sooner or later,
the response team will find themselves faced with a situation where
actions to save the victim are futile and prolong pain and suffering.
Euthanasia then becomes the only humane option. Indications of a clear
call for euthanasia include4,85,112,113 :
• disabling injuries such as a dislocated or broken tailstock, penetrating
wounds in the thorax or abdomen
• significant hemorrhage from the mouth, blowhole, genital opening or
anus
• rectal temperature of 42˚C or above
• blistering and sloughing of a major portion of the skin surface
• loss of reflexes (e.g., blowhole, palpebral, corneal, genital, and
tongue withdrawal)
• loss of jaw tone, or protruding penis
Most methods of euthanasia, even when rapidly effective and consid-
ered humane, can be visually disturbing and even hazardous to onlook-
ers. Discretion is essential. For the sake of other whales on the beach
as well as the public, carry out the procedure behind a visual barrier
when methods other than injection are used.
Injection
In many regions, the use of syringes, needles, and euthanasia
 Cetaceans ... 101

solutions is regulated. A veterinarian may be required to carry out the

procedure. On the beach, access to and use of solutions must be strictly
controlled. Certain preparations become viscous when cold and require
special handling in a winter stranding.
A cetacean up to the size of a pilot whale can be euthanized by
injecting a barbiturate or other lethal agent into a vein of the flippers,
dorsal fin, flukes or caudal peduncle, or directly into the heart85,111,133
or abdominal cavity144 . The dose can be estimated from length measure-
ments133 . More than the calculated amount may be required if the needle
is not seated well enough in the vein, and almost always when an animal
is in shock, because circulation to the heart and brain is impaired.
At the point of death or immediately before, the tail may begin to stroke
rhythmically in a swimming motion for a few seconds—a behavior known
to the old whalers as “flurrying”. The action in water may be enough to
propel the animal forward, even when held by handlers. The period of
flurrying may be reduced or eliminated altogether when enough agent is
given quickly, and prolonged if too little is injected or if it is released
slowly. Flurrying is less apt to occur if the animal is first given a sedative.
It is advisable to prepare onlookers for problems that might arise with
lethal injections.
An attempt to euthanize a large whale by injection into the tail vein or
peripheral vessels is likely to be unsuccessful as well as prohibitively
expensive. On one occasion, personnel from the South Carolina Wildlife
and Marine Resources Department79 used 1500 mL of solution (worth
$1,200.00) before abandoning the approach. The animal, a 20-ton fin
whale, was later euthanized quickly by an injection directly into the heart.
This was accomplished using a “needle” fashioned from 1 m of stainless
steel automobile brake line (available from auto supply stores in diam-
eters ranging from 3/16" to 5/16"). The line was sharpened to a beveled
point on one end, attached by means of a rubber sleeve to a large syringe
on the other, and fitted inside with a plug (trocar). Subsequent observa-
tions suggested using a needle equal in length to about one-half the
diameter of the whale, inserted through an incision (made following
local anesthesia) penetrating the skin and blubber.
Although the precise entry point for each species has yet to be
mapped, as a rule of thumb, the heart can be reached by directing the
needle from a point just behind the origin of the flipper to the same
point on the opposite side of the body. The heart can also be reached
by inserting the needle to either side of the sternum, at a point just
posterior to a line joining the base of the flippers (Fig. 6.12). The quantity
102

of solution required will depend on its type and strength and on the
condition of the animal, but will be much less than if administered into
peripheral vessels.
Explosives
When euthanasia solutions or persons qualified to use them are
unavailable, other methods can be employed, providing implementation
is relatively painless and death is rapid. Suffocation by obstructing
the blowhole is not effective or humane85,113. Explosives can be used
to euthanize large whales humanely, although the procedure must be
supervised by an expert and may require special arrangement with
local authorities. When placed either deep in the whale’s mouth18 or on
the cranium or nape and covered with sandbags and heavy rubber9,36,
explosion can result in immediate death without excessive noise or
damage to the carcass. This method, however, is dangerous if not done
properly, may be prohibited by local statutes, and is likely to be met with
resistance if attempted on a public beach. Strict precautions must be
taken to keep observers at a safe distance.
Shooting
Smaller specimens can be killed quickly by shooting. Use a
firearm with a large bore (.303 or greater), high muzzle velocity, and a
free, solid or jacketed bullet. The gun should be fired approximately 1
meter from the animal’s head; a firearm discharged directly against the
animal’s skin may explode. Aiming down and backward through the
blowhole to an imaginary point joining the flippers is sometimes recom-
mended112,145, but if the shot is aimed too far backwards, the bullet must
pass through the thickest part of the skull. Preferably, aim slightly
upward through a point midway between the eye and the ear open-
ing113,145 , or shoot through the eye, angling the shot backwards and
upwards toward a point above the opposite ear.
Shooting into the heart of a cetacean with a large girth will probably
not result in a quick death. After efforts to rescue a Cuvier’s beaked
whale failed, a policeman fired 2 clips of bullets from a submachine gun
into the animal in an attempt at euthanasia; the scapula was shattered,
but the whale, weakened as it was by repeated strandings, was still
alive 2 . Even in a small animal, the site for bullet entry is critical.
Shooting is generally not an effective way of euthanizing whales over
about 8 m in length111 or a sperm whale of any size (due to their cranial
anatomy)112,145, and may be inadvisable in areas where rocks increase
the danger of ricochet.
 Cetaceans ... 103

Fig. 6.12. The base of the cetacean heart can be reached from either side of the
sternum along a line connecting the base of the flippers.
Exsanguination (Bleeding)
Exsanguination is an option when equipment required for other
methods is unavailable, shooting unsafe, or there is no qualified person
to administer a lethal injection. The technique is bound to generate
adverse public reaction, even if the penetration site is first injected with
local anesthetic.
The cetacean brain draws its principal blood supply not from the
internal carotid arteries, as in most other mammals, but from a rete
mirabile network that enters through the foramen magnum, protected
deep in a mass of tissue in the back of the head. The Faroe Islanders,
in their pilot whale harvest, have traditionally sought that site for cutting
the blood supply to the brain. It is approached by directing a lance
downwards from the back of the animal’s neck. Inserted deep enough,
the lance will sever both the vessels and spinal cord, and death will be
quick. Severing the carotids4 is not the best approach to euthana-
sia.
A lance can also be inserted deep into the thorax to penetrate the
heart and cut major vessels. Proper entry sites for each whale species
have not been mapped, but they generally lie on either side of the ventral
midline, behind the origin of the flippers (Fig. 6.12). In some specimens,
the location is marked by an obvious heartbeat. Observers should be
prepared for the disturbing appearance of this procedure.
104

6.13. Cetaceans in U.S. and Adjacent Waters: A Brief Guide

to Species Identification, Life History, and Stranding Fre-
quency
Note: Descriptions and life history data were taken from general refer-
ences66,67,146 and selected reports for each species.

Fig. 6.13. Marine mammal zoogeographic regions in U.S. and adjacent waters and
color key to stranding frequency.

Order Cetacea
Suborder Mysticeti (Baleen Whales)
General characteristics: upper jaw with baleen plates rather than
teeth; lower jaw robust, without teeth; blowholes paired.

Family Balaenidae (Right Whales)

General characteristics: body form robust; head large (>25 percent
body length); upper jaw narrow and highly arched, with long baleen
plates; dorsal fin absent; flippers broad; throat grooves absent.
 Cetaceans ... 105

Northern right whale (Eubalaena glacialis)25,32,61,86,95,108,115,116,124,149

Range: 1 (May-Nov.); 2 (March-Nov.); 3-4 (Dec.-March); 5 (rare offshore, Jan.-
March); 7-11 (rare).
Size: 5.5 m (neonate); 15-17 m, 45-60 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Lower jaw and head with numerous rough callosities; flippers large and
rounded; skin mostly black, often with white patches on chin and belly;
baleen plates (<2.8 m) dark with fine bristles, 200-270 plates/side.
Habits: Frequent coastal waters; females and calves inshore in areas 3-4,
Jan.-March; migratory.

Bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus)70,101,102,146,155

Range: 1 (Labrador northward); 10.
Size: 4-4.5 m (neonate); 6.1 m (weaning); 15-18 m, 70-100 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Skin smooth with no callosities; flippers broad and spatulate; body
black with white on chin and sometimes peduncle; baleen plates (to
3.7-4.3 m) usually black, 230-360 plates/side.
Habits: Coastal and offshore, mostly along ice fronts and leads; migratory.
106

Family Eschrichtiidae

Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus)3,95,119,121,128,132,142,151,155

Range: 6, southern 7 (Jan.-Mar.); northern 7, 8, 9 (Mar.-May, Oct.-Dec., few in
summer); 10 (June-Sept.).
Size: 4.6-5.0 m, 500 kg (neonate); 8.5 m (weaning); 12-14 m, 16-33 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Head narrow and tapering, no central ridge; rostrum with many pits,
each with 1 hair; barnacle encrustations common, heavy on head;
dorsal fin absent, series of low bumps (7-12) along posterior dorsal
midline; skin mottled gray; baleen short (<0.4 m), white to yellowish,
140-180 plates/side; 2-5 creases on throat.
Habits: Coastal south of Alaska, more offshore in northern feeding grounds;
strongly migratory.
 Cetaceans ... 107

Family Balaenopteridae (Rorquals)

General characteristics: body form more slender; head broad and
flattened with 1 or 3 dorsal ridges; jaw not highly arched, baleen short to
moderate in length; dorsal fin present; flippers narrow; throat grooves
numerous.

Humpback whale ( Megaptera novaeangliae) 3,32,61,68,69,70,71,82,86,

115,119,121,124,139,150,155

Range: 1-2 (peak summer); 3; 4 (Jan.-May); 5 (offshore, winter); 6 (year-

round); southern 7 (winter); northern 7-10 (summer); 11 (peak Dec.-
Apr.).
Size: 4.1-4.5 m (neonate); 7.6-8.5 m (weaning); 13-15 m, 30-40 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Jaws and head with numerous knobs, often barnacle encrusted; fleshy
mass near tip of lower jaw; dorsal fin on hump, 2/3 back on body;
flippers large (to 1/3 body length); flukes long, with sawtoothed margin;
body dark gray to black, white on throat; throat grooves (14-24) wide,
extending to navel; baleen short (<0.7 m), black with dark brownish
gray bristles, 270-400 plates/side.
Habits: Coastal in many areas; strongly migratory; often in groups of 2-10.
108

Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus)32,38,61,69,82,86,95,115,116,119,121,124, 128,142,149

Range: 1-northern 2 (spring-summer); 2-3 (year-round, peak Apr.-Oct.); 4-5
(winter, offshore); 6 (year-round); 8-10 (summer); 11 (winter).
Size: 6 m, 2 t (neonate); 11 m (weaning); 22-24 m, 60-70 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Head flattened and wedge-shaped; dorsal fin (to 0.6 m) falcate,
about 2/3 back on body; strong dorsal ridge anterior to tail; body gray
to brownish above, white below; lower right jaw white, left dark; baleen
(<0.7 m) dark gray and yellow striped, but white to yellow anterior right
side, 260-470 plates/side; throat grooves (56-100) extend at least to
navel.
Habits: Generally pelagic, visiting coastal waters in many areas; migratory;
occur singly or in small groups.

Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus)61,69,95,119,121,124,128,148,149,153

Range: 1 (Apr.-Aug.); 2-3 (rare); 6 (spring and fall); 7-southern 9 (spring-fall);
northern 9-southern 10 (summer).
Size: 7 m, 3 t (neonate); 21-26 m, 90-125 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Head broad, rostrum U-shaped, central ridge short; dorsal fin small
(<0.25 m), 3/4 back on body; body dark blue-gray, with pale mottling;
flippers pointed, white below; baleen (<0.9 m) black with dark, coarse
bristles, 270-400 plates/side; tongue and palate black; throat grooves
(55-88) extend at least to navel.
Habits: Pelagic, but may frequent coastal waters and shallow banks; migra-
tory; occur singly or in groups of 2-3.
 Cetaceans ... 109

Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis)37,61,69,70,95,115,124,128,149

Range: 1-2 (May-Oct.); 3; 4; 5; 6 (peak Dec.-March); 8-9 (summer-fall);
southern 10 (summer).
Size: 4.5 m (neonate); 9 m (weaning); 15 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Dorsal fin (0.3-0.6 m) falcate, about 2/3 back on body; body gray to
blue-gray above, lighter below, often with light oval scars; flukes dark
below; baleen (<0.8 m) black with fine white to grayish-brown bristles,
220-400 plates/side; throat grooves (32-60) ending between flipper
and navel.
Habits: Pelagic; northward shift in summer; occur singly or in small groups.

Minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata)3,32,70,86,95,115,119,121,124,128,

129,142,155

Range: 1-2 (Apr.-Nov.); 3 (winter, offshore); 4; 5 (winter, offshore, uncommon);6;

7 (winter); 8-9 (year-round); 10 (summer); 11 (Leeward Is.).
Size: 2.4-2.8 m (neonate); 5.0 m (weaning); 8.5-9.2 m, 6-9 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Head narrow and pointed with sharp median ridge; dorsal fin falcate,
prominent; body black above, white below; may have chevron mark-
ings behind head; flipper small with broad white band; baleen short
(<0.2 m), white to yellowish with fine white bristles, 230-325 plates/
side; throat grooves (50-70) extending nearly to navel.
Habits: Frequent coastal regions, bays, estuaries, and offshore banks; north-
ward shift in summer; often occur singly, sometimes in groups of 2-3.
110

Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni)9,24,86,115,116,121,128,142

Range: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7 (rare); 11.
Size: 4 m (neonate); 7.1 m (weaning); 14 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Head with 3 prominent ridges anterior to blowhole; dorsal fin (to 0.5 m)
strongly curved with pointed tip; body dark gray; baleen short (<0.4 m),
dark gray with coarse bristles, 250-370 plates/side; throat grooves (50-
70) extend at least to navel.
Habits: Variable habits: some pelagic populations migratory, some resident in
nearshore waters; occur singly or in pairs.
 Cetaceans ... 111

Suborder Odontoceti (Toothed Whales)

General characteristics: teeth present in one or both jaws (only in
adult males of some species); blowhole single.

Family Physeteridae (Sperm Whales)

General characteristics: head blunt or squarish, with blowhole to left
of midline; lower jaw narrow and underslung; functional teeth in lower
jaw only.

Sperm whale (Physeter catodon)9,32,35,61,69,82,86,95,103,115,119,121,124,128,132,

136,142,155

Range: 1-2 (summer-fall); 3; 4; 5; 6 (southern); 7-8 (peak Nov.-Apr.); 9 (spring-

fall); southern 10 (summer, males); 11 (year-round).
Size: 3.5-5 m, 1 t (neonate); 6.7 m, 2.7 t (weaning); 11-13 m, 12-18 t (adult
female); 15-18 m, 36-68 t (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Huge square head with blowhole near left tip; lower jaw narrow with
large conical teeth; dorsal fin hump-like, followed by smaller bumps
along dorsal ridge; flippers small and blunt; body dark brownish gray,
skin “corrugated;” throat with short furrows. Teeth: 0/18-25 each side.
Habits: Generally pelagic; highly social, sexually segregated herds of up to 40-
50; migratory, with larger males moving into higher latitudes, females
and juveniles usually remaining south of 50o N; old males solitary.
112

Pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps)16,32,61,82,86,115,116,119,121, 128,132,136,142

Range: 1-2 (rare north of Cape Cod); 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; southern 9; 11.
Size: 1.0-1.2 m, 55 kg (neonate); 3.0-3.7 m, 360-400 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body chunky, tapering to narrow tail stock; small lower jaw with sharp
curved teeth; “false gill” marking posterior to eye; dorsal fin small (<0.2
m), about 2/3 back on body; flippers short and broad, located forward
on body; no throat creases; body dark blue-gray to brownish on back,
lighter on sides, white on belly. Teeth: 0/12-16 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; occur singly or in small groups.

Dwarf sperm whale (Kogia simus)16,32,80,82,86,115,121,136,142

Range: 3; 4; 5; 7 (rare further north); 11.
Size: 1.0 m, 46 kg (neonate); 2.1-2.7 m, 140-280 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Similar to K. breviceps but body smaller, dorsal fin taller and near
midback; several short creases in throat; upper jaw occasionally with
1-3 pairs of teeth. Teeth: 0-3/8-11 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; occur singly or in small groups.
 Cetaceans ... 113

Family Ziphiidae (Beaked Whales)

General characteristics: teeth (1 or 2 pairs) in lower jaw only; beak
distinct, lower jaw often extending beyond upper; throat with two creases
forming a “V”; flippers small; median notch in flukes indistinct or absent;
dorsal fin small, more than 1/2 way back on body; wide crescent-shaped
blowhole.

Cuvier’s beaked whale ( Ziphius cavirostris)32,35,56,82,86,95,115,119,

121,128,142,155

Range: 2-3 (summer); 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10 (Aleutians); 11 (rare).

Size: 2-3 m (neonate); 6.7-7 m, 2-3 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Forehead sloping onto poorly defined beak; depression behind blow-
hole; dorsal fin about 2/3 back on body; lower jaw of adult males with
one pair of conical teeth protruding from tip (unerupted in females and
juveniles); color variable, gray to brown to tan to white, lighter with age;
white scratches and round scars common.
Habits: Pelagic; occur singly or in groups of up to 20-30.
114

Baird’s beaked whale (Berardius bairdii)6,95,132,142,149,155

Range: 7-8 (peak June-Oct.); 9 (Apr.-Oct.); 10 (winter).
Size: 4.5 m (neonate); 10-13 m, 10 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body long and rotund; melon prominent, steeply sloping to long
cylindrical beak; dorsal fin small, triangular, >2/3 back on body; adults
with 2 pairs of laterally flattened teeth near tip of lower jaw, anterior pair
visible with mouth closed; throat creases to 70 cm long, some with
small central crease; color black to brown to gray with white patches
ventrally; heavily scarred.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in pods of 2-20 with some segregation of sexes.

Northern bottlenosed whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus)61,76,124,128

Range: 1 (year-round, peak fall-winter); 2 (occasional, fall-winter).
Size: 3.6 m (neonate); 8-10 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body robust; melon bulbous, sloping sharply to a prominent beak;
lower jaw with 1 pair of teeth at tip (erupted in adult males only), not
visible with mouth closed; dorsal fin falcate, about 2/3 back on body;
body black to brown above, lighter below, with various lighter markings
in adults; head of adults light.
Habits: Pelagic; occur singly or in groups of 2 to 4.
 Cetaceans ... 115

Mesoplodon spp.77,78
General characteristics in addition to those of the Ziphiidae: only one
pair of laterally flattened teeth, erupted in adult males only, often on an
arched prominence on the lower jaw; body generally spindle-shaped
with a small head and narrow tailstock; color dark above and lighter
below; blowhole in depression behind the melon, which slopes to a long
beak; body wall with pocket-like depressions for flippers; adults, particu-
larly males, frequently heavily scarred. NOTE: Several species of this
genus may be found in North American waters and are rare, not well-
known, and difficult to identify in the field. Identification of females and
immature males, in which teeth are unerupted, is even more difficult.

Hubb’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon carlhubbsi)77,95,119,121,132

Range: 7; 8; southern 9.
Size: 2.5 m (neonate); 5.3 m, 1.5 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Adult males with notable white raised area anterior to blowhole; tip of
beak white; teeth massive, flat and wide, protruding from raised arches
about 1/2 way from tip of jaw to angle of mouth; throat creases long;
body heavily scarred.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups.

Stejneger’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon stejnegeri)77,95,119,128,155

Range: 7; 8; 9; 10.
Size: 5.3 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Teeth large and flattened, protruding from arches at about middle of
lower jaw and tilting slightly forward; top of head has no raised white
area; back with ridge from dorsal fin to flukes.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups.
116

Hector’s beaked whale ( Mesoplodon hectori) 77,78

Range: 7.
Size: 4.3-4.5 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Beak short; teeth small and triangular, near tip of lower jaw.
Habits: Pelagic.

Blainville’s beaked whale( Mesoplodon densirostris ) 32,61,77,78,82,

86,115,121,124

Range: 1; 2; 3; 4; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11.

Size: 4.5-4.7 m, 1 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Forehead flattened with marked depression anterior to blowhole; teeth
protrude from front edge of prominent arch near corner of mouth and
tilt forward; skin of adults scarred; body dark on back, lighter gray
ventrally and on sides, with blotchy gray to pinkish markings and white
oval scars.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups.
 Cetaceans ... 117

Gervais’ beaked whale (Mesoplodon europaeus) 32,77,78,86,115,148

Range: 2; 3; 4; 5.
Size: 2.1 m (neonate); 4.5-5.2 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body laterally compressed; head extremely small with narrow beak;
teeth triangular, about 1/3 back from tip of lower jaw.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups.

True’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon mirus) 32,61,77,78,86,115,124

Range: 1 (summer); 2; 3; 4.
Size: 5.1-5.4 m, 1.4 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body heavy, with depression behind blowhole and slightly bulging
melon; teeth small, triangular and compressed, located near tip of
lower jaw.
Habits: Pelagic.

Sowerby’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon bidens)11,61,68,77,78,86,128

Range: 1; 2; 5 (rare).
Size: 2.4 m (neonate); 3 m (weaning); 5 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Teeth small and pointed, about 1/2 way from tip of lower jaw to corner
of mouth.
Habits: Pelagic.
118

Ginko-toothed beaked whale (Mesoplodon ginkodens)77

Range: 7 (rare).
Size: 2.1 (neonate); 5.2 m, 1.5 t (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Upper jaw narrow and pointed; teeth large, wide and flattened, located
about halfway between tip of lower jaw and the corner of mouth, on top
front edge of prominent arch; area anterior to blowhole neither mark-
edly depressed nor raised; body dark with numerous white blotches
and oval scars on belly.
Habits: Pelagic.

Family Monodontidae
General characteristics: dorsal fin absent, replaced by low dorsal
ridge; flippers paddle-shaped; melon prominent; beak indistinct.

Beluga whale ( Delphinapterus leucas) 13,15,32,54,123,124,128,155

Range: 1 (Labrador northward; St. Lawrence River estuary, Gulf of St.

Lawrence); 2 (occasional strays, winter); northern 9; 10.
Size: 1.3-1.6 m, 50-80 kg (neonate); 3.0-4.0 m, 500-900 kg (adult female);
4.0-4.5 m, 900-1400 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Body rotund with small head, bulbous melon, and well- defined flexible
neck; beak short; color dark gray in juveniles, light gray to white in
adults. Teeth: 8-11/8-9 each side.
Habits: Coastal in bays, estuaries and rivers; migratory along leads; winter
offshore in pack ice; gregarious in small to large groups.
 Cetaceans ... 119

Narwhal (Monodon monoceros)53,68,124,125,128

Range: 1 (Labrador northward); 10 (rare).
Size: 1.5-1.7 m, 80 kg (neonate); 4.2-4.7 m, 1000-1600 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body rotund with small head and no beak; males with a spiral tusk up
to 3 m long; newborn blotchy gray; adults dark purplish black with white
mottling on backs and sides and white bellies, becoming lighter with
age.
Habits: Usually associated with pack ice and deep water; occur singly or in
small to large groups.

Family Phocoenidae (Porpoises)

General characteristics: body small with triangular or rounded dorsal
fin; snout rounded with indistinct beak; teeth spade-shaped.

Harbor porpoise ( Phocoena phocoena) 3,32,40,61,86,115,11 9,121,124,128,

132,148,149,155

Range: 1, 2 (common inshore Apr.-Oct.); 3; 4 (rare); northern 7; 8; 9; 10

(southern in winter).
Size: 0.7-0.9 m (neonate); 1.0-1.1 m (weaning); 1.4-1.7 m, 60-90 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Dorsal fin broad-based, low and triangular; flippers small and blunt;
back, flippers, flukes and tail stock black to brown; sides gray, belly
white. Teeth: 23-28/22-26 each side.
Habits: Coastal in bays, estuaries and rivers; frequent offshore banks; occur
singly, in pairs or small groups.
120

Dall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli ) 3,40,95,119,121,132,155

Range: 7 (inshore winter-spring); 8-southern 10 (year-round).
Size: 1.0 m, 25 kg (neonate); 1.8-2.2 m, 100-200 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Heavy body with small head, mouth, flippers and flukes; tail stock with
prominent dorsal and ventral keels; distinct black and white color
pattern. Teeth: 23-28/22-26 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; nearshore in deep water; occur in small groups.

Vaquita (Phocoena sinus) 40,142

Range: 6 (northern, rare).
Size: 0.7 m (neonate); 1.3-1.5 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Similar to harbor porpoise; range limited to northern Gulf of California.
Habits: Coastal.
 Cetaceans ... 121

Family Delphinidae
General characteristics: teeth in both jaws (except for Grampus);
teeth conical, not spade-shaped; dorsal fin usually well-developed; beak
variable.

Killer whale (Orcinus orca)3,10,32,61,72,82,95,115,119,121,124,128,149,155

Range: 1 (inshore peak spring-summer); 2 (occasional); 3-5 (uncommon); 6;
7; 8; 9 (inshore year-round); 10 (north of Bering Strait in summer only);
11 (rare).
Size: 2.1-2.5 m, 180 kg (neonate); 4 m (weaning); 7-8 m, 4000 kg (adult
female); 8-9.5 m, 8000 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Body heavy with blunt, indistinct beak; dorsal fin at midback, high (to
1.8 m) and triangular in males, smaller and more curved in females;
flippers broad and rounded; striking black and white coloration with
oval white patch above and behind eye; teeth large, squarish in cross-
section. Teeth: 8-11/8-11 each side.
Habits: Frequent inshore visitors; regularly coastal only in 9-10; occur
commonly in pods of 10-40; strong social organization.
122

False killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens)3,35,82,86,115,119,128,136,142

Range: 3; 4; 5; 6 (occasional); 7; 8-9 (occasional); 11.
Size: 1.7-2.0, 80 kg (neonate); 5.0 m (adult female); 5.5-6.0 m, 1360 kg
(adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Body long and slender; head rounded and tapering with no beak and
long straight mouthline; flipper long, narrow and pointed, with notable
hump at middle of leading edge; dorsal fin near midbody, moderately
high and falcate; color black except for variably distinct gray anchor-
shaped area between flippers. Teeth: 8-11/8-11 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; form large schools.

Pygmy killer whale (Feresa attenuata)82,86,115,116,128,136

Range: 4; 5; 11.
Size: 2.4-2.7 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body slender with rounded head, no beak, and straight mouthline;
dorsal fin falcate, placed at midback; flippers with convex anterior
margin, rounded at tip; color dark on back, lighter on sides and belly;
anchor-shaped light area between flippers, white patches on abdo-
men, lips and chin. Teeth: 8-11/11-13 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups.
 Cetaceans ... 123

Melon-headed whale (Peponocephala electra) 82,142,148

Range: 4 (rare); 7 (rare); 11.
Size: 2.7 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body slender; head triangular from above; beak indistinct; mouthline
long and straight; flippers with convex anterior margin, pointed at tips;
dorsal fin falcate, slender, and sharply pointed; color black above with
anchor-shaped gray patch on throat, and white areas on abdomen and
lips. Teeth: 21-25/21-25 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups to large herds.

Long-finned pilot whale (Globicephala melas)32,35,61,86,115,122,123, 124,128,149

Range: 1; 2; 3; 4 (northern, rare).
Size: 1.6-2.0 m, 70-90 kg (neonate); 2.4 m (weaning); 4.5-5.0 m, 800-1200
kg (adult female); 4.5-6 m, 1000-1800 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Head with bulbous melon and indistinct beak; dorsal fin long-based,
low, and strongly curved with rounded tip, located forward on the body;
pectoral fins long (>1/5 body length) and sickle-shaped; color black
with light anchor-shaped patch on throat and variable lighter markings
on belly. Teeth: 8-11/8-11 each side.
Habits: Pelagic, moving inshore late summer and fall; highly social, in small
groups to large herds.
124

Short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus)32,35,60,82,86,

115,119,121,128,142

Range: 2 (southern)-3 (summer); 4; 5; 6; 7 (inshore peak late winter/early

spring); 8-9 (uncommon); 11.
Size: 1.5 m, 60 kg (neonate); 4-5 m, 600-1200 kg (adult female); 5-6 m, 1200-
1800 kg (adult male).
Distinguishing
features: Similar to above, but with shorter (<1/5 body length) pectoral fins.
Teeth: 7-9/7-9 each side.
Habits: Generally pelagic; highly social, in small groups to large herds.

Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus)3,32,35,82,86,115,119,121,128,132,142,148,149,155

Range: 1-2 (uncommon north of Cape Cod); 3; 4; 5; 6; 7-8 (year-round);
southern 9 (spring-fall); 11 (rare).
Size: 1.2-1.6 m (neonate); 3-4 m, 300-600 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body heavy anteriorly, tapering to narrow tail stock; head blunt with no
distinct beak, but with unique vertical crease in melon; dorsal fin tall
and pointed, near midback; flippers long and pointed; color light to dark
gray with numerous white scars, becoming lighter with age; flippers,
flukes and dorsal fin darker; no teeth in upper jaw. Teeth: 0/3-8 each
side.
Habits: Pelagic; occur singly or in small to large groups.
 Cetaceans ... 125

Pacific white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens)84,95,119,121,

132,155

Range: 6 (southern); 7 ( peak fall-spring); 8; 9; 10 (Aleutian Is., summer).

Size: 0.8-1.0 m (neonate); 2.2-2.3 m, 150 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Head short with short beak; flippers long and tapered; dorsal fin at
about midback, tall, sharply hooked, and bicolor; color pattern distinct,
with black back, elongated light gray area above flipper and light stripe
along side, and white belly; beak dark with stripe from mouth to flipper.
Teeth: 23-32/24-31 each side.
Habits: Generally pelagic; nearshore in deep water; form large schools.

Atlantic white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus acutus)32,61,123,124,128,149

Range: 1-2 (common inshore spring-autumn); 3 (uncommon).
Size: 1.0-1.3 m (neonate); 2.4-2.7 m, 200-240 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Beak short; dorsal fin tall and sharply falcate; flippers strongly curved
and pointed; tail stock with prominent dorsal and ventral keels; sides
of body with distinct elongated white patch followed by one of tan or
yellow; flippers, back, and short beak black, dorsal fin black and gray,
flank lighter gray, belly white; dark stripe from flipper to dark part of
body. Teeth: 30-40/30-40 each side.
Habits: Pelagic but may feed in deep water close to shore; may occur singly,
in small groups or in schools of hundreds.
126

White-beaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus albirostris)123,124,128,148,149

Range: 1-2 (Nov.-June).
Size: 1.1-1.3 m (neonate); 3.0-3.2 m, 275 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Large size; dorsal fin tall and falcate; flippers slightly curved; beak often
white or light gray; body dark on back and sides, light gray to white
below, with white markings on back and sides; dorsal fin black; dark
color of flippers continuous with that of body. Teeth: 22-28/22-28 each
side.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups or large schools to 1500.

Fraser’s dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei)55,86,115,128

Range: 4-5 (rare); 11.
Size: 1 m (neonate); 2.4 m (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body heavy; beak short; flippers small; dorsal fin triangular, small and
pointed; tail stock with dorsal and ventral keels; back blue-gray, belly
white; adults with dark stripe from rostrum to anus. Teeth: 40-44/39-44
each side.
Habits: Pelagic; occur in small groups to large schools.
 Cetaceans ... 127

Northern right whale dolphin (Lissodelphis borealis)89,119,132,148

Range: 7 (inshore winter-spring); 8 (offshore year-round); southern 9 (uncom-
mon).
Size: 0.8-1.0 m (neonate); 2.2-2.3 m (adult female); 2.6-3.0 m (adult male);
90 kg (average adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body slender and smooth; no dorsal fin; slender beak demarcated by
faint crease; long straight mouthline; body mainly black, some white on
ventral surface and near tip of lower jaw. Teeth: 37-49/37-49 each side.
Habits: Generally pelagic; nearshore in deep water; forms large (>100) herds.

Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)32,35,82,86,107,115,116,121,123,124,128,

136,142,149

Range: 1-2 (summer offshore, uncommon); 3; 4; 5; 6; 7 (rare further north); 11.

Size: 1-1.3 m, 12-25 kg (neonate); 2.2-3.0 m, 140-240 kg (adult coastal
form); 3.3-3.8 m, 250-650 kg (adult offshore form).
Distinguishing
features: Body robust; head with distinct thick beak; dorsal fin moderately high
and falcate, near midback; flippers tapering to point; body gray to black
above, becoming lighter ventrally. Teeth: 20-26/18-24 each side.
Habits: Frequents bays and estuaries in southern regions; generally offshore
in areas 1-3.
128

Common dolphin (Delphinus delphis)32,61,68,86,95,115,119,121,124,128,132,142

Range: 1 (summer); 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7 (year-round); 8 (uncommon); 9 (rare).
Size: 0.8-1.0 m (neonate); 2.3-2.5 m, 80-135 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Beak well-defined; dorsal fin tall and pointed, triangular to falcate, near
midback; body with complex yellow/tan and gray crisscross pattern on
sides; back black, belly white; beak often black with white tip; narrow
black stripe from flipper to mid lower jaw and from eye across base of
melon. Teeth: 40-50/40-50 each side.
Habits: Generally pelagic; commonly in schools of about 50, sometimes to
1,000.

Rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis)35,82,86,115,116,121,136,142

Range: 3-5 (uncommon); 7 (uncommon); 11.
Size: 2.4-2.7 m, 130-160 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Forehead sloping without crease to long slender beak; dorsal fin tall
and falcate with long base; flippers large and tapered; color dark gray
or purple-brown with pink or yellowish white spots on sides; belly and
lips white; light scratches, circular scars common. Teeth: 20-27/20-27
each side.
Habits: Pelagic; generally occurs in small groups.
 Cetaceans ... 129

NOTE: Dolphins of the genus Stenella have long slender beaks, many
small teeth, and various patterns of stripes and spots. There is great
variation among stocks, making identification difficult.

Spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris) 35,82,86,115,116,121,128,136

Range: 4-5 (common); southern 7; 11.
Size: 0.7-0.8 m (neonate); 1.8-2.2 m, 75-95 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body slender; head with long narrow beak; dorsal fin triangular to
falcate; body dark gray dorsally, lighter on sides, white on belly; beak
dark on top, white below, with black tip and black lips; black stripe from
flipper to eye. Teeth: 46-65/46-65 each side.
Habits: Pelagic and coastal; daytime in shallow bays in 11; form large herds.

Clymene dolphin (Stenella clymene)35,86,115,116,128,136

Range southern 2; 3; 4.
Size: 1.8-2.0 m, 75 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Similar to spinner, but beak short, caudal peduncle moderately keeled,
and coloration pattern more complex, particularly on head (dark band
across beak and along top of beak to melon; light band continues over
melon to blowhole); black on back not extending to tail stock; white
stripe from eye to flipper and darker stripe running forward along flanks
from anus. Teeth: 43-58/43-58 each side.
Habits: Pelagic in small to large groups.
130

Striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba)32,35,82,86,115,119,121,124,128, 136,142,149

Range: 1 (southern, rare); 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; southern 9 (rare); 11.
Size: 1.0 m (neonate); 1.7 m (weaning); 2.2-2.6 m, 100-130 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Body slender; beak long and sharply defined; color pattern distinct with
dark back, lighter gray sides, white to gray belly and throat, and black
stripes from eye to anus and eye to flipper; tall, curved dorsal fin; fin,
flukes and flippers dark. Teeth: 43-50/43-50 each side.
Habits: Pelagic; form herds up to several hundred.

Pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata)32,82,86,90,115,128,142,155

Range: 2-3 (uncommon); 4; 5 (uncommon); 6; southern 7; 11.
Size: 0.8-1.0 m (neonate); 1.4 m (weaning); 1.6-2.6 m, 90-120 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Beak long and sharply defined; dorsal fin tall and curved; flippers
pointed; young unspotted, dark gray above and light gray below;
darker spots appear on belly, enlarging and merging with age; lighter
spots appear on dorsal cape and sides; peduncle dark above, light
below; degree of spotting and details of flipper and eye stripes highly
variable among stocks; approx. 80 vertebrae. Teeth: 35-48/34-47 each
side.
Habits: Pelagic stocks often occur in schools of more than 1000, coastal
populations in smaller herds (<100).
 Cetaceans ... 131

Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis)32,35,86,90,115,116,128,136

Range: 2 (southern); 3; 4; 5.
Size: 0.8-1.2 m (neonate); 1.4 m (weaning); 2.0-2.3 m, 100-140 kg (adult).
Distinguishing
features: Similar to above, but heavier-bodied; ventral margin of cape obscured
by pale blaze extending along sides from head to below dorsal fin;
ventral background white rather than gray; adults become heavily
spotted, obscuring background pattern; peduncle not divided into
upper dark and lower light halves; flipper stripe demarcated above by
narrow light line; approx. 70 vertebrae. Teeth: 32-42/30-40 each side.
Habits: Generally pelagic; occur in small groups to schools of several hundred.
132
 Chapter 7
Cetaceans - Mass Strandings
7.1. What Is the Attraction to Shore?............................................133
7.2. In the Surf Zone ......................................................................135
7.3. Common Elements................................................................. 136
7.4. Stranding Response .............................................................. 138
7.5. First Aid....................................................................................140
7.6. Options ....................................................................................140
7.7. Organizing to Collect Specimens and Data ..........................142
7.8. Monitoring for Restranding.....................................................143
References ..............................................................................268

A mass stranding can be defined as two or more cetaceans (excluding

parent-calf pairs) coming ashore alive at the same time and place. In
North America, only a few species of odontocetes typically mass strand
in groups of 15 to 100 or more: sperm whales, pilot whales, false killer
whales, white-sided dolphins and white-beaked dolphins. Several other
species occasionally come ashore in smaller numbers (e.g., pygmy killer
whales, pygmy sperm whales, common dolphins, rough-toothed dol-
phins, and spotted and striped dolphins) (see 6.13). All are gregarious,
more or less pelagic forms, or at least less accustomed to inshore waters
than such coastal dwellers as bottlenose dolphins or harbor porpoises.

7.1. What Is the Attraction to Shore?

Certain pelagic species follow their prey inshore. Atlantic white-
sided dolphins do this regularly in the Bay of Fundy, and long-finned pilot
whales seeking squid and herring venture closer to Cape Cod as winter
approaches. The activity is uneventful for the most part, but occasionally
a group of animals strikes land. Between 1981 and 1991, there were 10
separate mass strandings of pilot whales within a 20-mile radius on
Cape Cod, totalling 476 animals ashore between the months of Septem-
ber and December. This appears to have been a peak decade for pilot
whale strandings; only one incident had been recorded from that area in
the previous 20 years14.
There are too few data to suggest any cyclic activity in stranding
patterns. Some investigators have correlated stranding frequency with
periods of climatic warming and oceanic current changes that result in
lower abundance or a shift in the distribution of prey 53,57,70,73 . Perhaps
such shifts bring greater numbers of animals closer to shore, thereby

133
134

increasing the likelihood that some will run aground.

While cetaceans do follow prey inshore, there is often no evidence
they were feeding at, or just prior to, the time of stranding22,26,46 . Apart
from bringing whales and dolphins into risky territory, it is doubtful
inshore foraging behavior alone plays a major role in these events.
Breland and Breland in 1966 5 , and later F.G. Wood84 , proposed that
in times of stress, cetaceans may seek safety on land. This escape
behavior presumably had evolved in amphibious ancestors and was
retained in the primitive subcortical region of the brain. Why such a
maladaptive trait should persist after 50 million years of evolution, and
be expressed in only a few species (some distantly related), are
questions that defy experimentation or explanation.
Other thoughts are as alluring—and just as untestable. The concept
of suicide—implying some advantage, real or imagined, in taking one’s
own life—does not hold with what we know of animal (other than human)
behavior. Nor does the whimsical notion that whales strand while
attempting to follow the migratory routes that were laid down by their
ancestors.
Sergeant69 reasoned that mass strandings may be a means of
regulating populations of social species having low juvenile mortality
rates and long life spans. High population density can result in lower
birth rates and a reduced period of fertility in social cetaceans3,16,42 ;
such density dependent mechanisms likely play a greater role in popu-
lation control than strandings, which involve a relatively small number of
animals.
Klinowska36,37,38 proposed that cetaceans use the earth’s magnetic
field as both a compass, as some other vertebrates do25 , and as a map
for navigation. Her idea stemmed from a historical review showing that
strandings on the British coast tend to occur where the north-south
magnetic contours of the ocean floor intersect land perpendicularly
(especially in areas of geomagnetic lows or “valleys”), suggesting that
the animals might have misinterpreted geomagnetic information. At-
tempts at similar correlations on other continents are not as clear2,9,11,34,78.
Some cetaceans, for example pygmy sperm whales and common
dolphins, apparently have single-domain magnetite crystals 2,10,85 in the
soft tissue covering the brain, similar to those found in other verte-
brates that use the magnetic field for orientation35 . It remains to be
seen whether these simple particles can allow a cetacean to deter-
mine north and south, and more importantly, its actual position. The
latter, a “magnetic map sense,” has not been proven for any species of
 Mass Strandings ... 135

animal 25 . The only experimental study with cetaceans, involving two

bottlenose dolphins, failed to show any response to changes in a
magnetic field or its intensity2 .
Further study may establish whether cetaceans utilize geomagnetic
information77, which might bring them inadvertently to certain inshore
locations. The results are less likely to explain why they strand.

7.2. In the Surf Zone

Many species of cetaceans come close to shore, but few strand. The
reason for their presence in shallow water seems less important than the
possible factors that occasionally result in large numbers coming ashore.
In some cases, animals are trapped and grounded by the outgoing
tide. A fortunate few, maybe some with experie nce55 , refloat themselves
and swim away on the following tide 22,27,45,68,71 ; others become stuck 22,75.
Such accidents typically occur in areas with long meandering channels,
broad tidal flats, strong or unusual currents, or extreme tidal flow or
volume44,52,68,76 , sometimes in conjunction with spring tides near full or
new moon11,44 . There are several such “whale traps” in North America,
including Wellfleet Bay (Cape Cod)66,69, Sable Island (Nova Scotia)18,72,
Lingley Cove (Maine)22, and parts of the Gulf of California 23.
The way a species behaves in panic might influence its chances of
stranding 24. Humpback and gray whales reportedly change direction
repeatedly during flight75, and whether that is related or not, seldom
mass strand. In contrast, a frightened sperm whale may steer a straight
course for hours67, even ramming objects in its path75 without changing
direction. They do mass strand. Coastal whalers use sharp sounds to
drive striped dolphins and pilot whales ashore, banking on their ten-
dency to flee in a straight line from the source of alarm48,70. This type of
response might direct pelagic animals away from danger in open water,
but when inshore, they strand on any beach that is in the way. To
complicate matters, some species prone to panic, including pilot whales
and sperm whales 24 , sometimes swim calmly to shore with no apparent
sign of alarm15,56,64 .
Shortly after the discovery that some odontocetes use echolocation
to perceive their environment 33,43, Dudok Van Heel12,13 proposed that
distortion of echolocation signals in shallow water may present an
animal with false clues, causing it to beach. The problem would be
greatest in areas of gently sloping beaches, a feature common to many
(but certainly not all17,36) mass strandings, and during storms when
water is churned with air and sand. Sonar failure has since been linked
136

to several other suggested causes of mass strandings, notably environ-

mental factors including thermal gradients 54,61, complex topography 50
and turbidity12, and illnesses such as parasitic neurologic disease 49,62.
This theory presumes the species in question rely almost exclusively
on sonar when in nearshore waters and that this faculty becomes
seriously unreliable under certain conditions. It also supposes the sonar
of pelagic forms is somehow less sophisticated than that of Tursiops, a
species that rarely mass strands and the one from which we have largely
modeled our understanding of cetacean echolocatio n32,59. Yet experi-
ments with false killer whales indicate an acoustic sense comparable to
that of some inshore species and the capacity to alter signals to
compensate for background noise 74 —in other words, some capacity to
adapt to unusual conditions. The ability of pelagic forms to navigate
inshore is not entirely deficient since we know they enter shallow waters
much more often than they strand.
To what extent does noise in the surf zone limit the ability of a sonar-
equipped cetacean to perceive its environment accurately? What hap-
pens to a whale whose hearing is physically impaired by neurologic
disease8,28 or parasites20,49,62 ? Would a whale in trouble use echoloca-
tion to the exclusion of other senses? Cetaceans have good underwater
and aerial vision29,51 and would also be expected to employ passive
listening59 to gain environmental cues. When information received from
one sense is confusing or conflicts with that received by another, would
they not employ an alternate strategy? These are fascinating topics for
research that must be squarely addressed before flawed echolocation
can be accepted as a basis for strandings.
Limited studies have shown that many individuals within a mass-
stranded group bear evidence of illness at the time they are exam-
ined80,81,82 . Others show effects of long-standing disease, which in
some cases may have debilitating effects4,22. Whether these conditions
might have influenced the group to wander beyond its “safe” range, or
encouraged the initial stranding is impossible to determine. Confound-
ing the issue is that chronic disease processes are commonly found in
outwardly healthy free-ranging cetaceans, both those that mass strand
and those that do not 4,39,79.

7.3. Common Elements

Cetaceans that mass strand are pelagic forms with a highly
evolved social structure. Certain aspects of behavior that benefit the
school in open water seem sometimes deleterious near shore. Norris
 Mass Strandings ... 137

and Dohl55 explained that for these species, “the school represents the
focus of all living activity, and lone animals at sea tend to be severely
frightened ... once a large number of a group project common signals
about the direction of movement, the factors that determine school
structure act to ensure its unified application."
In other words, once a critical number of animals heads for shore, the
rest of the herd is likely to follow. What is the initial stimulus? Observa-
tions suggest there may be many situations, such as simple grounding,
illness in an individual60 , electrical storms and other meteorological
events50,65,75, in which animals are drawn to assist one another 7,41,60 or
perhaps led to panic 24,65 .
Social organization alone, however, does not provide all the answers.
For example, some strandings are spread over miles of coastline, or
occur over a period of days or longer 6,15,30,60 . Only part of a pod may
strand while the rest of the animals leave or do not become involved1,44,63.
Many species that form large schools, such as spinner dolphins and
beluga whales, seldom, if ever, mass strand. Clearly, other factors

Fig. 7.1. Possible causes of cetacean strandings. 1. Complex topographic and

oceanographic conditions. 2. Pollution. 3. Weather conditions. 4. Predators. 5.
Natural toxins. 6. Geomagnetic disturbances and errors in navigation while following
geomagnetic contours. 7. Following prey inshore. 8. Disease. 9. Disturbance of
echolocation in shallow water. 10. Social cohesion. 11. Human-related injuries.
138

contribute to strandings19, but social cohesion is a common thread

running through other sometimes nebulous and often untestable theo-
ries.
At some point certain strandings seem to be ordained and the animals
determined to remain ashore, returning each time they are pushed out
to sea6,15,56. Refloating the majority of the group may be successful,
some suggest, when a vocalizing animal is first returned as a decoy to
deeper water11,15,58,64. However, rescue is not always that simple.
Our studies with D. St. Aubin at the University of Guelph and G. Early
at the New England Aquarium show that the initial stranding can result
in physical damage and physiological stress and shock (see 6.6),
conditions that can affect survival21 . When released, stranded animals
sometimes return, not necessarily because they are compelled to be
there, but because one or more of them are now overcome with illness
acquired during the last stranding. In other words, subsequent attempts
to strand may have little to do with the reason the animal or group came
ashore in the first place. Understanding the debilitating effects of the
stranding process, particularly to those animals that restrand, is
vital to planning an effective response with realistic goals.

7.4. Stranding Response

Information on cetacean biology and natural history, stranding pat-
terns, basic equipment for handling, supportive care, rehabilitation and
euthanasia is presented in Chapter 6. Much of it applies here, but a mass
stranding requires a particular approach tailored to the size and number
of animals, time ashore, and, of course, the available resources. Small
details on the location, weather conditions, orientation of the car-
casses—of little value in single strandings—suddenly become important
resources for later attempts to determine the cause of the event ( see
Table 10.1, Level B data). See Chapter 2 for information on basic
organization and training. The following sections discuss specific needs
and actions when responding to a mass stranding.
Organization
One person must be in charge of on-site activities. This Stranding
Coordinator can then delegate the responsibilities for various aspects of
the operation to several assistants. These may include:
• coordinating with local authorities, the public and media
• procuring supplies and equipment
• training and supervising on-site volunteers
 Mass Strandings ... 139

• providing personal amenities for all workers

• looking after the health and safety of the team
• supervising animal support, handling and transport teams
• examining carcasses and collecting tissues
• assembling completed data forms and collected samples
• disposing of carcasses
• debriefing of all involved personnel
Individuals must remain focused on their assigned tasks. Volun-
teers recruited on-site are an essential resource in any mass stranding,
and only too willing to help out, particularly during rescue operations.
Their work—tasks involving little risk—must be fully supervised ( see
3.2, 12.3).
Early Warnings
Mass strandings may be foreshadowed by unusual behavior of
animals still in the water1,31,62,64 . For example, pelagic species appear-
ing uncharacteristically near shore or remaining inshore may be candi-
dates for eventual stranding. The pod may be “milling”—continually
circling or moving haphazardly in a tightly packed group—with a member
occasionally breaking away and swimming toward the beach. Such
behavior may last for only a few minutes or as long as days before any
stranding occurs. Early reporting will allow the Operations Center to
respond promptly, with greater chance of either preventing the stranding
or rescuing the animals that come ashore.
Averting a Stranding
When a stranding appears imminent, measures can be taken to drive
or herd the animals from the surf (see 6.4). Take advantage of the same
social instincts that formed the group in the first place. Use noise, nets,
people, and boats to herd the animals offshore. Align one or more
animals in deeper water facing seaward for others to follow, or hold or
tether one offshore as a decoy11,15,58,64.
Choosing a decoy is not easy. The “herd leader” might be the ideal
candidate, but only the other members of the group know which one that
is, and if they followed it to shore once, they may do so again. The animal
chosen should be healthy (a sick one may also bring the pod back), alert,
some suggest vocal, and able to withstand towing or other procedures.
Although an adult might seem appropriate15,40, a juvenile may, in fact,
elicit a greater response from other pod members.
Position the decoy animal so it vocalizes toward the herd (hopefully
beckoning and not discouraging them), and release the decoy once the
140

group ventures into deeper water. Every animal handled should be

identified with a tag (see 6.8), and the details (tag number, time, location)
reported to the Operations Center.

7.5. First Aid

Determining Condition
At a mass stranding, always deal with the live animals first. Decide
quickly whether further strandings can be averted, and determine which
animals should be returned to sea, prepared for transportation to a care
facility, or euthanized (see Chapter 6). Besides the health of the animals,
other factors—environmental conditions and the time and resources
available (see 4.3)—will influence how many can be saved. Identify each
animal, as well as carcasses, with non-adhesive, highly visible, colored
ribbon or tape to direct the teams responsible for treatment and handling
(see Chapter 6), sampling (see Chapter 10) and disposal (see Chapter
11).
Handling and Supportive Care
All live animals should be given supportive care. Organize enough
working groups to ensure safe handling of each animal (see 6.6, 6.7,
6.8) without squandering resources. Keep the team’s safety in mind;
allow only those with suitable apparel and equipment (e.g., wet suits) to
operate in harsh surf or weather conditions (see 12.2, 12.3).
Each group should be large enough to tend to an individual animal’s
needs (see 6.6). When fewer persons are available, invest in the
animals judged to have the greatest prospect of survival, not those
near death, and stick to the basics. Protect against sunburn, douse with
water, and monitor respiratory rates and behavior as a head start for the
handling team when it arrives. Avoid the urge to do much more. Moving
any cetacean requires force. Up to 10 or more people may be needed to
carry a young pilot whale; three times that number will be unable to lift
an adult.

7.6. Options
Immediate Release
The goal should be the swift release of the largest manageable
number that have the best chance of surviving. Carefully select candi-
dates for release, and resist the pressure to “let them all go.” As social
animals, the integrity of the group may be as important to survival
as the health of the individual. Without information on what constitutes
 Mass Strandings ... 141

the minimum size or critical composition of a viable pod of whales, an

arbitrary decision will have to be made when assembling a group for
release.
Animals in adequate condition closest to the water-line should be the
first returned. Begin by holding them, together with any unbeached
animals, in shallow water as a nucleus for rescue. Healthy, strong
animals receive priority. Mothers and calves should be moved together.
A mother whose calf is dead may be less prone to restrand if the calf is
refloated with her and kept from shore. Individuals further up the beach
will have to wait for sufficient resources to move them to the water, but,
meanwhile, must receive supportive care (see 6.6).
A proven approach is to relocate as many animals as possible to a
safe place in shallow water where they can rest and become reori-
ented14,47,58,83 . There, assigned team members can tag each one,
monitor behavior and vital signs, and obtain blood samples, so that
useful correlations can be made for any animal that restrands. After this
preliminary operation, the group is released into a clear path of open
water (see 6.8). This strategy permits the team to work as a unit instead
of dealing with animals independently and haphazardly. It also allows
the entire pod to be freed together when surf and tidal conditions are
appropriate.
Transport to Care Facility
Animals that require a period of medical care may be transported to
rehabilitation facilities (see 6.9, 6.10). Make a point of selecting two or
more individuals for each center. A cetacean recovering from a mass-
stranding will undoubtedly benefit by mixing with others of its kind, and
any successful release virtually depends on it. Recognize, however, that
few facilities can afford this option, have it available, or are in a position
to risk the introduction of harmful pathogens to the animals in their
permanent collection.
Euthanasia
Euthanasia (see 6.12), besides its humane purpose, may be the only
recourse to prevent hopelessly stranded animals from drawing others to
shore. Thus, the survival of the group may rest on the lives of a few.
Rescuers are on trial each time they confront a whale that is healthy, but
unrescuable, and with a condition that will inevitably deteriorate. Take
the time, base the decision on careful examination, including blood-
samples if possible, and logistic considerations; explain your reasoning,
and proceed confidently.
142

The time and method of euthanasia should be noted on the data sheet
and on the identification tag, to assist other teams that will require this
information.

7.7. Organizing to Collect Specimens and Data

Data and specimens collected from fresh carcasses may be among
the most valuable gathered from the entire event ( see Chapter 10). Yet
the stranding investigator who ignores the needs of live animals for the
sake of “science” will understandably anger team members and observ-
ers alike. One approach is to quickly remove some of the freshest
carcasses to a location suitable for dissection, while maintaining efforts
on the beach to help those that are still alive.
Valuable time can be lost wandering among carcasses, puzzling
over what to do and whether it has already been done. Examining large
numbers of cetaceans requires working teams, each performing a
specific task on all carcasses.
At least three teams are needed:
1. Measuring group 2 persons to obtain measurements
1 person to record data
2. Sample collection 1-2 persons with basic anatomical knowledge
to collect specimens
1 person to label and bag samples
3. Necropsy team 1 skilled “pathologist”
1 assistant
1 to record data
Each group conducts its activity in pre-arranged order, marks the
carcass (alphabetic, numeric or color code) to show its work is com-
pleted, and moves on to the next. Specimens for contaminant analyses
and microbiology can only be taken from fresh carcasses; this requires
close cooperation between the sampling and necropsy teams ( see
10.9, 10.10). The disposal group removes only the carcasses that are
marked to show all other tasks have been completed. This approach
allows the on-site coordinators to assess the progress of the operation
at a glance and make adjustments in task assignments to balance
activities as necessary.
The teams’ progress depends on a steady supply of equipment
and data sheets. Pre-packaged measurement, dissection, and sam-
pling kits (see 2.5) will save time at the outset and will need to be
replenished as materials are misplaced, broken, or depleted. Individuals
 Mass Strandings ... 143

should be assigned the task of collecting completed data sheets and

placing them into a (supervised) central file.
Pay attention to hygiene, and provide personal amenities for the team
(see 2.6). Require everyone to wear gloves. Arrange for a steady supply
of clean water for washing hands and equipment. Have the necessary
materials and equipment to clean and sterilize instruments when collect-
ing specimens for microbiology and toxicology ( see 10.9, 10.10).
All collected samples and data must be retrieved, organized, and
centrally stored at the end of each day, under the supervision of a
designated person. Specimens for shipping must be properly packaged
and documented (see 10.14).
Emphasize quality (see 10.1). It is better to obtain good samples
and perform thorough examinations with accurate documentation
on a small number of animals than to do a hasty job on many.

7.8. Monitoring for Restranding

Mass stranded animals returned to sea may restrand, sometimes
immediately, but perhaps days or even weeks la ter 15,30,46,56 . The suc-
cess rate of these rescue operations is unknown, and can only be
determined by long-term monitoring of animals that are released ( see
6.8, 6.11). The cost of surveillance can be cut and the effectiveness
increased if local individuals or groups (e.g., fishermen, Coast Guard,
144

sailing clubs) are involved in the effort. Combined with the attention of
the media (now certain to be involved), this broadened array of
observers will increase the likelihood that sightings or strandings
will be reported in time to take action.
 Chapter 8
Manatees
8.1 Biology .....................................................................................145
8.2. Mortality ...................................................................................149
8.3. Stranding Response .............................................................. 151
8.4. Approach and Handling ..........................................................154
8.5. First Aid....................................................................................156
8.6. Transport to Care Facility .......................................................156
8.7. Rehabilitation ..........................................................................156
8.8. Release ....................................................................................157
8.9. Euthanasia...............................................................................157
References ..............................................................................273

8.1. Biology
Natural History
The West Indian manatee, Trichechus manatus, occupies a unique
ecological niche as the only member of the order Sirenia in North
American waters. The manatee’s low metabolic rate and diet of coastal
vegetation restrict it to warm, nearshore waters, shallow protected
lagoons and estuaries, and freshwater systems. Its use of the open
ocean is generally limited to travel between favored habit ats 20 .
Like cetaceans, manatees have streamlined bodies, no external ear
pinnae or hind limbs. They have horizontal tail flukes for propulsio n22 ,
but lack the speed and flexibility of an active predator. Their mobile
foreflippers are used to bring food items to their mouths and sometimes
even to support the forebody while browsing on shoreline vegetation.
The ponderous body severely limits coordinated movement on land.
Manatees breed primarily during the non-winter months in Florida, so
most calves are born during warmer weather, after a gestation period of
about 12-13 months 21,42. Cows apparently seek sheltered waters in
which to give birth to their single calf20 . The nursing period is normally
1 to 1.5 years, although the young may begin to graze at 2 to 3
months 20,40 . The interval between births is at least 2 to 3 years20 and
likely 3 to 5 years for some individuals 40 . Both females and males may
reach sexual maturity as early as 3 to 4 years of age21,27, although they
may not breed successfully until they are about 5 to 8 years old31,33 . The
life span is long; the oldest known animal from Florida was estimated to
be more than 50 years of age 27 .

145
146

Fig. 8.1. External morphology of the manatee.

Manatees consume a wide variety of aquatic and semi-aquatic plants.
While showing some preference for submerged succulent forms 20,46,
they will feed on floating mats of seaweed, overhanging and emergent
vegetation, and even algae, detritus, and salt-marsh grasses when
preferred plant species are depleted 20,33,40,47 . To compensate for the
low energy content of their diet and low digestive efficiency 9 , manatees
must feed for 6 to 8 hours per day20 , and consequently linger in areas
where vegetation is abundant.
An unusually low metabolic rate and poor insulation limit a
manatee’s ability to tolerate cool water conditions23,51 . Observa-
tions in the field17,52 and laboratory 23 indicate manatees are not well
adapted energetically to water temperatures less than about 20˚C, a
condition occurring in much of upper Florida during the winter. At
temperatures approaching 16˚C, they may become lethargic and stop
eating17. Southeastern U.S. waters are therefore the northern limit of the
manatee’s tropical range.
Distribution
The U.S. manatee population centers around peninsular Florida,
with some movement into nearby states during spring and sum-
mer. Although migration patterns are more complex and extensive than
 Manatees ... 147

previously considered, there appears to be little interchange between

the Atlantic and Gulf coasts 45 . Manatees are frequent visitors to Georgia
and are sighted with diminishing frequency northward along the Atlantic
coast to Cape Hatteras, and rarely as far as Virginia 41 . On the Gulf
coast, they occasionally wander as far west as Louisiana 39 . Strays from
the declining Mexican population are sometimes sighted in Texas
waters19,39.
Manatee distribution throughout this range is uneven, with local
concentrations in areas such as the Indian, Banana, and St. Johns
rivers on the Atlantic coast, and the Suwannee, Crystal, and Homosassa
rivers (the “Big Bend” region) on the Gulf side; Tampa Bay, the Charlotte

Fig. 8.2. Manatee distribution in the United States. Important wintering sites: 1.
Jacksonville*; 2. Blue Spring; 3. Indian River*; 4. Riviera Beach*; 5. Fort Lauderdale/
Port Everglades*; 6. coastal Everglades; 7. Ft. Myers*; 8. Tampa Bay*; 9. Crystal and
Homosassa rivers. *Indicates artificial warm water refuge. (After O’Shea 1988 34.)
148

Harbor-Caloosahatchee River area, and the lower southwest coast to

the Everglades are also favored. Manatees are infrequently seen in
coastal waters between the southern Big Bend region and Tampa Bay,
in Florida Bay, or in the Florida Keys 34 .
From about April to November, manatees range widely between
suitable habitats, particularly on the east coast, with its extensive
protected waterways 34,45,52. When traveling from one site to another,
manatees swim at speeds of about 3-7 km/hr, although they may reach
18-25 km/hr for short periods when frightened 20 .
With the onset of cooler weather, most manatees retreat to warm
water refuges. Historically, these refuges included freshwater springs
or locations in southernmost parts of Florida where water temperatures
remain above 20˚C17,23. In the past few decades, artificial sources of
warm water (20˚ to 23˚C) from power plants and factories have enabled
manatees to successfully overwinter in many areas where a natural
refuge is unavailable—as far north as Tampa Bay on the west coast, and
Jacksonville and even Brunswick, Georgia, on the Atlantic 4,24,45,52.
Continued expansion of the range farther northward is considered
unlikely, because potential sites are not warm enough and lack sufficient
food in winter 39,41.
Whereas some manatees spend the entire winter within a few kilome-
ters of a warm water source 20,24, others may move considerable dis-
tances from one site to another. Single bouts of travel documented by
satellite telemetry on the Atlantic Coast involve journeys of 200 to 300
km covered in 1 to 2 weeks at rates of up to 50 km perday 44 . Occasional
sightings at warm springs of animals with marine algae and barnacles on
their bodies suggest they may spend considerable time in saline waters,
even during winter 20 . Manatees can apparently maintain their body
temperature well enough for short periods of time to allow foraging in
colder waters, but return to warmer waters to complete digestion 23 .
Important wintering areas along the Gulf coast of Florida include
the headwaters of the Crystal and Homosassa rivers 20,39,43, power
plants in Tampa Bay and at Ft. Myers, and inshore waters of the
Everglades24,34 . Along the East Coast, most manatees move south-
ward, though some may congregate at more northerly power plants such
as those in Jacksonville and the Indian Riv er 34,45,50,52. Manatees in the
upper St. Johns River winter primarily at Blue Spring, approximately 250
km from the ocean40.
The Florida population numbers at least 1,8501. This is likely an
underestimate, since more than 900 individuals have been identified
 Manatees ... 149

photographically by natural markings and scars8,34 . There have been

dramatic increases since the mid-1970s in some monitored northern
populations, including those in the Crystal and St. Johns rivers, partly
due to strong protective laws, high fecundity, low human-related mortal-
ity, some immigration, and abundant food resources resulting from the
introduction of exotic aquatic plants 34,39,43. Increased sightings in Mis-
sissippi may be a reflection of the growing population along the north-
western coast of Florida 39,43. In other parts of Florida, however, habitat
degradation and boating activities continue to hinder the recovery of
manatee stocks 33,34,49 .

West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus)18,20,31

Range: 3 (rare); 4; 5 (eastern).
Size: 1.1-1.5 m, 30 kg (neonate); 3.5-4.1 m, 1000-1620 kg (max. adult).
Distinguishing
features: Large bulky body tapering to a spatulate tail; mobile forelimbs with 3-
4 nails; body gray to brown, nearly black in newborn; thick, wrinkled
skin; prominent facial vibrissae.
Habits: Protected shallow coastal waters, estuaries, rivers where vegetation is
abundant.

8.2. Mortality
Natural Mortality
Since 1974, the Sirenia Project (administered by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service [USFWS]), the Florida Department of Natural Re-
sources (FDNR) and their various cooperators, have investigated causes
of manatee mortality in Florida 2,11,36. About one-third of the more than
1,900 carcasses examined were considered to have died from natural
causes; an equal number could not be classified, primarily because of
rapid decomposition in this warm climate14,36.
150

Natural mortality is highest among calves, especially when aban-

doned or orphaned. Congenital disorders and reproductive complica-
tions resulting in abortion and/or stillbirth also contribute to significant
losses; the causes of these conditions are unknown11,15,36,55.
Most manatee carcasses are recovered in winter 36 , when ex-
tremely cold weather leads to hypothermia 23 . Losses were high
during the severe winters of 1977, 1981, 1984, and 1990 14,18,36 . From
1986 to 1990, deaths attributed to cold stress ranged from about 5 to 23
percent of the total mortality18. Common findings included emaciation
and absence of food in the gastrointestinal tract11,36 . Independent
juveniles and subadults, with a higher surface to volume ratio and little
experience in finding warm-water sources, are at greater risk of cold
stress36.
At least 37 manatees died between February and April 1982, after
inadvertently consuming ascidians contaminated with brevetoxin from
the “red tide” organism, Gymnodinium breve 38. Affected animals were
disoriented and had to be held at the surface to breathe. Many appar-
ently recovered after a brief episode of neurological dysfunction. Those
that did not had cerebral hemorrhage or congestion and watery contents
of the cecum and/or large intestine; all had ascidians in the digestive
tract. Death was probably due to inhibited respiration and inability to
surface.
Parasitic infections are common in manatees 7,11 but typically are not
debilitating14. Microbial disease is uncommon; toxoplasmosis was impli-
cated in one case of meningoencephalitis13.
Human-Related Mortality
Human activities were responsible for the deaths of roughly one-
third of the manatees recovered since the mid-1970s 6,34,36. Their
preference for traveling along protected waterways and boat channels
puts these animals at great risk. Collisions with boats and barges are
especially common in heavily populated areas along the Atlantic coast
and in the St. Johns River, as evidenced by the prevalence of scars on
living animals8,34. The manatees die either from propeller strikes,
usually seen as a series of parallel marks along their back or sides, or
from internal injuries caused by impacts that sometimes leave no
external wounds6.
Drowning or crushing in navigation locks or flood-control gates is
limited to a few regions, primarily in southeastern Florida32. Although
there was some suggestion such accidents might have been decreasing36,
unpublished information indicates gate-mortality is on the rise again35.
 Manatees ... 151

Entanglement in fishing gear, entrapment in culverts, ingestion of

foreign material such as fish hooks or plastic, and vandalism also take
their toll 5,14,36. Despite regulations, hunting pressure was strong until
the 1930s and 1940s, and poaching continues to be a matter of concern,
particularly in remote areas of Florida and Georgia 34 .

8.3. Stranding Response

Jurisdiction
Manatees are protected in U.S. waters by the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972 and the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973.
Florida legislation enacted in 1897 and 1907 prohibited hunting, and the
Manatee Sanctuary Act of 1978 recognized the manatee as the official
State Marine Mammal and designated the Florida Department of Natural
Resources (FDNR) as the agency responsible for its protection. In
addition, federal and state agencies began in the mid-1970s to acquire
lands, particularly in the Big Bend region, for manatee sanctuaries49 .
The Florida Manatee Recovery Plan, initiated in 1980 and finalized in
152

1989, mandates specific strategies for the recovery of the species by

coordinating all agencies involved in manatee research and manage-
ment53.
The network of federal and state agencies responsible for responding
to manatee strandings is much more organized than that which exists for
other marine mammals. The program was initiated in 1974 by the
USFWS and the University of Miami, and transferred to the FDNR,
Marine Mammal Section, in July 1985.
Reports of dead or injured manatees received by the Manatee Hot
Line are verified by the Florida Marine Patrol and officers of the Florida
Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, who assist in securing the
carcasses. Marine Mammal Section personnel are then responsible for
carcass retrieval, transport to a designated facility, and necropsy accord-
ing to detailed guidelines developed by the USFWS Sirenia Project11 .
With authorization of the USFWS Endangered Species Field Office
(Jacksonville), distressed animals may be taken to Sea World of Florida
in Orlando or to the Miami Seaquarium for rehabilitation; Lowry Park
Zoological Garden in Tampa is also authorized to receive manatees for
rehabilitation49. Only trained, designated personnel may remove and
necropsy carcasses or rescue distressed individuals.
People not specifically involved with these organizations play an
understandably limited role in manatee rescue. An exception oc-
curred in the 1982 die-off associated with red tide, when FDNR, USFWS,
Sea World, and University of Miami personnel enlisted wildlife refuge
staff and volunteers to assist with observation, rescue and field necrop-
sies38. As yet, FDNR has no specific contingency plan for dealing with
a similar large-scale mortality 49 .
Evaluating the Event
Manatees move slowly, often rest motionless at the surface or near
the bottom, and may wander into almost any accessible waterway, even
in highly populated areas20,30. A solitary calf may be left alone tempo-
rarily while its mother feeds. Aggressive behavior during mating activi-
ties may be misinterpreted as distress10. Manatees are also prone to
“bloat,” a condition that leaves them temporarily unable to submerge.
Though it may cause discomfort, the condition normally “passes” (i.e.,
look for bubbles) in a matter of days and requires no interventi on 35 .
Careful, prolonged observation is necessary to determine whether
or not an animal is actually in distress and requires help. In U.S.
waters, only authorized individuals may make this decision.
 Manatees ... 153

While some may pull themselves onto shore, most manatees remain
in the water when no longer able to function normally. Fresh propeller
wounds, monofilament line wrapped around a flipper, weakness, ema-
ciation, inability to submerge, pronounced listing to one side, reluctance
to move or suckle, or labored breathing are signs of distress. (Manatees
normally breathe once every 1 to 2 minutes when active and traveling
and every 5 to 15 minutes when resting on the bottom.) An unaccompa-
nied calf, or an animal far from the normal range or unable to reach warm
water during the winter will also need assistance.
During the 1982 red tide in Lee County, some manatees exhibited
signs of neurological dysfunction, including disorientation (swimming in
tight circles, colliding with pilings, docks and seawalls), inability to
submerge or maintain a horizontal position, flexing of the back, listless-
ness, labored breathing, chewing movements and flaring of the lips, and
lack of response to prodding 38 .
Manatees usually strand alone, although a sick or injured female may
be accompanied by a calf. They are unlikely to strand as a group
because social bonds are unstable 20,48 . While epimeletic (care-giving)

Fig. 8.3. Options for responding to stranded manatees.

154

behavior has been observed, particularly between cows and dead

calves10, manatees generally do not appear to help others in distress 20 .
Multiple deaths or strandings, not necessarily in the same location,
might be anticipated following a spell of extreme cold or a red tide.
Specific Equipment (see also 2.5)
nets stretcher
rope foam pad
buckets crane or winch
flatbed truck or trailer heated truck (live animals in winter)

8.4. Approach and Handling

The effort needed to capture a manatee depends greatly on the
animal’s condition. Severely debilitated manatees may offer little or no
resistance38, whereas otherwise healthy individuals can injure them-
selves or handlers by thrashing about during the rescue operation.
Approaching a manatee before all preparations for capture are in place
will likely scare the animal away and increase the difficulty of subse-
quent capture.
One method of capture is to surround the manatee with a net (30 to
35 m long, 4 m deep, with 10 cm stretch mesh) that is gradually drawn
toward shore until the animal is in water shallow enough for handlers to
physically restrain it. This may require 10-15 people 26,37 for a healthy
manatee. Handlers must use extreme caution to avoid becoming
entangled in the net and being pulled into the water if the animal
attempts escape. As soon as the manatee is pulled into shallow water,
it is maneuvered onto a padded platform and secured with straps25,37 .
A 3.5 m-long stretcher will also do, provided it is wide enough to
accommodate the animal’s large girth. The risk of injury to both the
manatee and the handlers is especially high when removing the animal
from water, and secure restraint is essential.
Once out of the water, manatees generally become calm and may need
little restraint. They should be approached quietly, from the front12. Cover-
ing the eyes and wrapping a small piece of netting over the snout (do not
obstruct breathing) helps to calm the animal by giving it the sense that it is
still being restrained10 . Handlers must be cautious of sudden tail thrashings.
Calves can be restrained and supported in the water by a single individual,
but they must be placed securely in a stretcher before removal from the water.
One person cannot safely lift a calf; they are difficult to hold and may be
seriously injured if dropped.
 Manatees ... 155

Fig. 8.4. Techniques for manatee handling and transport. A. Netting a manatee and
drawing it into shallow water or into a skiff (keep the nostrils above water). B.
Supporting a neonate in the water by grasping it around the pectoral region from
behind; secure in a stretcher before lifting it from the water. C. Transport on a foam
pad; keep moist. D. Moving adults or large juveniles by means of a crane or block
and tackle.
156

8.5. First Aid

Once secured and moved into shallow or protected waters, or onto a
sandy beach well above the water line10, the animal’s condition can be
evaluated. Manatees struck by motorboats may have obvious skin
lacerations, but just as often there may be little outward evidence of
severe internal damage to ribs or lungs. In either case, little can be done
on-site to treat such injuries. Open wounds or injured flippers should be
protected from further injury during handling and transport.
In the rare event that a manatee has been left stranded on shore by
a falling tide, rescuers should provide shade from the sun and keep the
animal wet to prevent overheating until it can be examined by qualified
medical personnel. Beached manatees have been known to swim away
on an incoming tide after several hours of exposure 10 . Cold-stressed
manatees should be taken into a warmer environment (i.e., heated truck
or warm pool) as soon as possible. Calves are particularly prone to
hypothermia.
Some of the manatees presumed to have been affected by the red
tide were so disoriented they required assistance to raise their heads
above the water to breathe38 . Under most circumstances, however,
attempts to help an unrestrained manatee are ill-advised and
dangerous.

8.6. Transport to Care Facility

Rescued manatees are generally secured in a stretcher and trans-
ported by truck on a 15 cm-thick foam pad. Cranes are needed to lift
adults. Transport time of up to 3 hours usually presents no problem for
an otherwise healthy manatee37 , but sick or injured animals obviously
may be less able to endure the procedure. During transport, the animal
should be kept moist and shaded in a 20˚ to 26˚C environment.
Capture stress (myopathy) is not a concern, even after several hours
of transport 37 . Nevertheless, it is best to minimize pursuit, vigorous
handling, and transportation time. One individual transported for 14
hours survived with no apparent ill-effect beyond a temporary increase
in serum levels of muscle enzymes19.

8.7. Rehabilitation
On arrival at the rehabilitation center, the manatee should receive a
thorough physical examination. Blood is drawn using a 25 mL syringe
 Manatees ... 157

with an 18- or 20-gauge, 4-cm-long needle on an extension set, from the

palmar side of the flipper, between the radius and uln a (see Fig. 10.4);
risk of infection is great if the area is not properly cleaned of algae and
bacteria54. Normal values for blood and urine constituents have been
reported 25,28,29,56. Fecal samples should be examined for signs of
dehydration or diarrhea, and cultures taken if possible.
Manatees recovered during winter should be placed in water
20˚C or warmer to allow them to conserve energy. Critical care mea-
sures are particularly effective in dealing with orphaned calves.
In captivity, manatees will soon need to start eating and can be
offered a variety of green plants, including lettuce, cabbage, spinach,
celery, carrot tops, natural water grasses and water hyacin th3 . An
animal that refuses to eat may first require fluids administered by
stomach tube, followed by a gruel consisting of ground lettuce, apples,
monkey chow, and water12. Artificial formulas have been used success-
fully to nurse orphaned manatees back to health54 .

8.8. Release
Few manatees are immediately released at the site. These might
include trapped or entangled animals with no sign of injury, or, as in the
case of manatees affected by red tide toxins 38 , those that regain
strength and coordination by the time the rescue team arrives. Of 47
manatees rescued by Sea World from 1974 to 1987, only 3 were
released at the site49.
The decision to release an animal from a rehabilitation facility is
presently made on a case-by-case basis, with authorization from appro-
priate federal and state agencies. Reynolds and Gluckman 49 suggest
that animals captured as dependent calves should not be released,
since they have not learned important behaviors for avoiding boats
and finding warm water refuges during cold weather. Older animals
slated for release are freeze-branded and generally fitted with a satellite
transmitter to monitor their movements. Rehabilitated manatees moni-
tored by telemetry thus far have readapted well to life in the wild35 .
Manatees are not released from Florida rehabilitation facilities during
the winter months.

8.9. Euthanasia
Lethal injections of barbiturate have been used effectively.
158

Fig. 8.5. Techniques for transport and rele ase12 . A. Lifting a manatee in a stretcher
with a crane. B. Lowering a stretcher into a specially designed transport box. C.
Lowering of transport box into water at the release site. D. Release. NOTE: Be
prepared for sudden thrashing at all stages. Keep a firm hold on stretcher,
poles, lines, and box.
 Chapter 9
Sea Otters
9.1. Biology .....................................................................................159
9.2. Mortality ...................................................................................163
9.3. Stranding Response .............................................................. 164
9.4. Approach and Handling ..........................................................165
9.5. First Aid....................................................................................169
9.6. Transport to Care Facility .......................................................171
9.7. Rehabilitation ..........................................................................171
9.8. Release ....................................................................................173
9.9. Euthanasia...............................................................................174
References ..............................................................................277

9.1. Biology
Natural History
The sea otter, the only exclusively marine mustelid in the Northern
Hemisphere, is the smallest, most recently evolved, and least “marine”
marine mammal. Its lack of a blubber layer and absolute dependence on
fur for insulation, unique among temperate marine mammals, are argu-
able evidence of an incomplete adaptation to its environment. Vestiges
of a more terrestrial existence may have left the sea otter with a narrow
range of environmental tolerance 36 .
For the sea otter, fur is the key to survival. The coat, with its
extreme density of nearly 100,000 hairs/cm 2, requires vigorous and
frequent grooming to remain clean and to maintain its loft, which is vital
for insulation and buoyancy 25 . When the fur is soiled, water penetrates
to the skin and the animal becomes chilled.
With a high metabolic rate and low digestive efficiency 4,5 , these
animals must consume food equivalent to 20 to 33 percent of their body
weight per day. Their needs are even greater in the winter, when activity
levels must increase to maintain body heat 5,13 .
Sea otters forage in shallow, nearshore waters often characterized by
rocky bottoms and kelp beds25 . Prey selection varies with individual
tastes, foraging ability, and prey abundance and diversity10 . Under
favorable conditions, they select calorie-rich prey such as abalones, sea
urchins, crabs, and clams. In habitats where preferred species are
depleted, otters must change their eating habits, spend more than half
the day searching for food, or move on 9,13,41. Some long-established
populations in Alaska have exhausted the supply of bottom-dwelling

159
160

Fig. 9.1. Sea otter external morphology.

invertebrates and now feed primarily on fish10.

The dexterous forelimbs have well-developed claws and are used for
gathering food, feeding, and grooming17. Prey items are carried—often
in the loose fold of skin in the axilla 25 —to the surface for consumption.
When not diving for food, sea otters spend most of their time at the
surface eating, grooming, resting, or traveling from one preferred area
to another. Surface-swimming, with the animal on its back, is accom-
plished by alternate paddling of the hind limbs. They swim underwater
by vertical undulations of the rear body, hind limbs and tail18 .
Sea otters sleep at sea, sometimes joining hundreds of others in
favored resting areas25,34. Some may haul out to rest, particularly in
Alaska, where otters also return to land to give birth, nurse their young,
and to conserve energy during severe weather25,28 . In California, haul-
out sites between Monterey Bay and Point Sur are low, algae-covered
rocks at least 25 m from shore and away from areas of human distur-
bance; otters most often haul out during early morning low tides 11 .
Female sea otters reach sexual maturity at 3 to 4 years and males at
5 to 6 years, although neither may breed successfully until they are
 Sea Otters ... 161

Fig. 9.2. Sea otter distribution in North America.

older. Pupping occurs throughout the year, with a peak from January to
March in California and later in the spring in Alaska. The pregnancy
period, including a phase of delayed implantation, is about 6 to 7 months,
perhaps varying with environmental conditions. Pups are dependent on
their mothers for 5 to 8 months, and the interval between births is about
1 year21,31,33 .
Male and female sea otters often live apart. In expanding populations
and along the California coast, females predominate in the central, more
established portions of the range. Breeding males defend territories
within the female areas, while other males—juveniles and non-breeding
adults—occupy the periphery12,22,25,41. These males are typically the
first to colonize new areas. Although most otters travel less than a few
kilometers daily, juveniles and adult males can cover hundreds of
kilometers in a matter of days12,22,34 .
162

Distinguishing
features: Body elongated and heavy; pelage dense, light buff to brown to nearly
black; head and shoulders often lighter, sometimes almost white in
adults; newborn with light brown woolly coat, darkening by about 3
months of age; canines blunt, molars and premolars rounded and
flattened; fully webbed hind feet, 5th digit the longest. Males distin-
guishable from females by the penile and testicular bulge and more
muscular head and neck; females have abdominal mammae and are
the only ones known to carry pups. Adult dental formula: I3/2, C1/1, P3/
3, M1/2.
Habits: Coastal, often associated with kelp beds and rocky bottom habitats;
generally remain at surface when not diving for food.

Distribution
Sea otters once ranged throughout much of the coastal North Pacific
but were reduced to remnant colonies by the early 1900s. Through
protective measures instituted in 1911, they began a dramatic recov-
ery25, particularly those from the Aleutian Islands eastward to Prince
William Sound (Alaska). In this part of the range, many local populations
are thought to have reached “carrying capacity”—the maximum number
that the environment can support 33,34 . The Alaskan population is esti-
mated to be about 150,00019.
The California population of about 2,000 animals occupies a 380-km
(240-mile) stretch of coastline between Point Año Nuevo and Point
Conception, with greatest densities at the northern and southern lim-
its21. In the 1960s and 1970s, sea otters were successfully translocated
to southeastern Alaska, British Columbia, and Washington23,24,26,34,39,40.
Attempts to establish a colony on San Nicolas Island have not been
 Sea Otters ... 163

encouraging; by the fall of 1991, only 14 of the 135 otters released on the
island since 1987 remained. However, 12 pups have been born there
during that time21,32 . It is worth noting that initial growth of populations
translocated to other areas has also been slo w 23,24,26.

9.2. Mortality
Natural Mortality
Sea otter mortality varies regionally and seasonally. Throughout their
range, severe winter storms bring otters ashore suffering from trauma,
exposure, and emaciation resulting from increased difficulties in forag-
ing3,25,28,29 . Heavy ice conditions and limited food resources also con-
tribute to mortality25,34,41. Dependent pups, juveniles (because of inex-
perience and an incomplete set of permanent teeth), and old animals
with worn teeth are the most common victims25 . In California, a late
summer peak in juvenile strandings coincides with weaning3 .
Other causes of natural mortality include infections following injuries
received during mating or fighting, complications during birth, intestinal
parasitism, and disease, including enteritis associated with prolonged
stress25,29,36 . Shellfish poisoning was suspected in a 1987 die-off in
Alaska8. Predators also take their toll. In Alaska, eagles sometimes prey
on pups, and coyotes kill juveniles that haul out to conserve energy when
food is scarce28 ; in California, sharks are the more serious threat 33 .
Human-Related Mortality
Sea otters in Alaska are occasionally shot as quarry by native hunters
or, as in California, for intruding on fisheries activities. Some, especially
inexperienced juveniles, are hit by boats or become entangled in fishing
nets and marine debris28,34,35,40,41 .
Oil spills are a particularly serious threat to sea otters. The 1989
Exxon Valdez spill in Prince William Sound claimed more than 1,000
animals. Fresh, volatile oil kills by damaging the respiratory, digestive
and urinary systems22,42,44. Though less acutely harmful, oil that re-
mains at the surface presents an enduring hazard. Fouling robs the fur
of natural oils that normally hold the loft that provides insulation.
Metabolic rate increases to counter the elevated heat loss. The victim
becomes so intent on restoring the pelt that it forgoes feeding and
resting, spending its time grooming instead. Sapped of energy, with no
stores to draw from, the otter eventually dies of stress and shock5,14 .
164

Fig. 9.3. Options for responding to stranded sea otters.

9.3. Stranding Response

Jurisdiction
Sea otters were first protected in 1911 under the International Fur Seal
Treaty and then by legislation introduced by the state of California in 1913.
The Marine Mammal Protection Act (1972) placed them under the jurisdic-
tion of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). California sea otters are
further protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and aremanaged
by federal and state agencies. In British Columbia, sea otters are protected
by the Federal Fisheries Act and the B.C. Wildlife Act and Regulations.
The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the USFWS
conduct programs to recover carcasses in California, relying on public
reporting as well as surveys of certain isolated beaches 3,15,20 . Because
most carcasses are washed ashore and may lie undiscovered for days,
investigations into the cause of death are not often successful3,15,29,41.
Along U.S. coastlines, the occurrence and location of sea otter car-
casses must be reported to either federal (USFWS) or state (Alaska,
California, or Washington DFG) authorities.
 Sea Otters ... 165

Evaluating the Event

Unless the need for intervention is obvious, sea otters should be
carefully observed for at least 15 to 20 minutes before any action is
taken2. Hauling out is a normal behavior in some regions, and a sea otter
on shore may simply be resting, about to give birth, or nursing a pup.
While healthy animals will typically avoid humans, they may tolerate
close approach by a boat. A female otter may dive for food, leaving her
pup vocalizing plaintively at the surface. Most situations of this kind
do not warrant action.
Some behaviors signal distress. An otter on shore that appears
lethargic, agitated, reluctant to enter the water, or makes no attempt to
evade capture may need help16. Excessive or exaggerated grooming,
due perhaps to soiling of the fur, may lead to damage to the skin, ears,
or eyes44. Oil-contaminated otters may raise the upper part of the body
out of the water and shake vigorously, although this behavior is not
necessarily restricted to fouled animals16.
More obvious indications of distress are emaciation, wounds, labored
breathing, violent shivering, matted fur, and restricted mobility. If the fur
retains a slick wet appearance after more than 10 seconds at the
surface, the otter may be contaminated and should be considered a
candidate for capture 2 .
Sea otters sometimes wander beyond their normal range into unsuit-
able habitats 25 , but they are unlikely to remain in areas with inadequate
food resources. An animal lingering in an unusual location may require
assistance, especially if it shows signs of distress or is endangered by
local conditions (e.g., fishing activities, pollution).
Sea otters normally strand individually, but dozens or hundreds
of animals may come ashore following severe storms, disasters such
as oil-spills6,14 , or outbreaks of suspected biotoxin poisoning8.
Specific Equipment (see also 2.5)
dip nets stuff bags
tangle nets (modified gill nets) ice
transport cages

9.4. Approach and Handling

Words of Caution
Sea otters are sensitive to and can die from the stress associated
166

with capture, transport, and rehabilitation 25,30,36 . The need for

assistance must be carefully evaluated before subjecting these animals
to unnecessary disturbance. Otters alert and active enough to avoid
capture are better left alone. Chasing mothers with young may result in
abandonment or drowning of the pup16. Always keep pets and other
domestic animals away from the area.
Appearances—winsome face and mannerisms—are definitely de-
ceiving. Sea otters have an aggressive temperament, dexterous
forelimbs, forepaws armed with sharp claws, flexible bodies with loose
skin, and strong jaws with teeth adapted for crushing. They should be
approached quietly, with minimum disturbance42 , and handled cau-
tiously once captured. Heavy leather gloves with long cuffs should be
worn to minimize serious scratch and bite injuries, bearing in mind that
a sea otter can still crush a finger through a glove2,38,42 . Otters are so
flexible, they seem able to turn around inside their loose skin; for that
reason one should never be grabbed by the tail or nape of the neck2 .
Techniques
Sea otters can be captured safely only by trained personnel. The
most successful methods use dip nets, modified gill nets (tangle nets),
 Sea Otters ... 167

Fig. 9.4. Techniques for capture of sea otters. A. Wilson trap (modified from Wild
and Ames 1974). B. Dip nets. C. Modified gill net (redrawn from Hill et al., 1990).

or specially designed diver-held “Wilson” traps1,16,48 (Fig. 9.4). Choice

of method depends on the experience of the handling team, the sea
state, condition of the animal and the type of habitat.
Dip nets can be used from skiffs and are effective for capturing
selected individuals, particularly juveniles and lethargic adults. Older,
healthy animals tend to dive to avoid capture16,48. Dip nets cannot be
used in rough seas or in kelp beds.
168

Gill nets (30 m long x 3-6 m deep) made of 20- to 23-cm stretch mesh
net are modified by removing or reducing the weighted bottom line so
entangled animals will stay at the surface16,48. These nets work well for
active animals too elusive to be taken with dip nets16. Gill nets are,
however, non-selective and require constant monitoring to avoid injuring
trapped animals. Gill nets cannot be used in kelp beds, shallow rocky
areas, or in rough seas.
Diver-held devices designed by CDFG biologist K.C. Wilson have
been used successfully in California to catch animals at the surface and
keep them floating there, safe but secure, until a boat arriv es1,41 . These
traps can be used in kelp beds 32 and have the advantage of surprise,
thus minimizing the stress associated with chasing.
Sea otters should be approached quietly, and from downwind if
possible because of their acute sense of smell 25 . On land, dip nets are
used to capture sleeping otters or weakened juvenile or old animals
driven ashore during storms 25 . Healthy adults are more difficult to catch,
and mothers with pups tend to be more alert and to come ashore in less
accessible places 25 . Distressed otters may make little or no attempt to
escape and can be caught with dip nets, tangle nets, or if weak, picked
up by hand and placed into cages16.
Direct communication between the capture crews, transport vehicles,
and the rehabilitation center is essential, particularly in a large-scale
rescue16,43. A specialist should be present on every capture boat to assess
each sea otter’s condition and provide immediate supportive care43.
Captured otters should immediately be placed in a box or transport
cage32. Lining the box with a net bag will allow for easier removal and
transfer to a cage, but can present problems if the otter becomes
entangled. Unless judged to be hypothermic ( see 9.5), rescued ani-
mals should be transported on a bed of ice shavings or cubes.
Smaller and less aggressive animals can be picked up by the hind
legs, held upside down with their backs to the handler (keeping the
forepaws and head as far away as possible), and placed in a cage or
restraint device. Dip nets, blankets, throw nets, or stuff bags will be
needed for handling larger or more aggressive otters42 (Fig. 9.5).
The degree to which an otter must be restrained depends on its health
and the objectives of the mission. Complete restraint is recommended for
most physical examination and sampling procedures. This can be accom-
plished using transport cages or specially designed restraint cages, de-
vices in conjunction with a stuff bag, or by chemical sedation42,45. Avoid
excessive or prolonged restraint.
 Sea Otters ... 169

Fig. 9.5. Sea otter handling and restraint. A. Holding hind limbs, with animal facing
away from handler. B. Restraint device. Restraint employing (C) dip net, (D) tangle
net, (E) stuff bag.

9.5. First Aid

Determining Condition
Sea otters should be evaluated for evidence of respiratory distress
(normal rate 17 to 20 breaths/minute), dehydration, wounds, soiling of
the pelage, emaciation, and diarrhea. Normal heart rate is 144 to 159
beats/minute. As a rough indication of body temperature, the hind
flippers should be cool to the touch. Very warm or very cold flippers,
violent shivering or panting signify thermoregulatory diffic ulties 42,44
(Fig. 9.6).
170

Fig. 9.6. First aid measures for stranded sea otters: the signs and treatment of
hypothermia and hyperthermia.
The animal’s general condition may be classified as 42 :
1. alert and normal
2. depressed (inactive and unresponsive to environmental stimuli)
3. semicomatose (responding only to painful stimuli)
4. comatose (retaining some simple reflexes, but otherwise unrespon-
sive)
The course of treatment may depend on the age of the animal. A rough
guide according to weight 27 is:
1. small pup (less than 3 months, 1.0-4.5 kg)
2. large pup (3 months-1 year, 4.5-13.5 kg)
3. subadult to adult (>13.5 kg)
Consider in your estimate that an otter can lose as much as 25 to 33
percent of its body weight (mostly from muscle) rapidly when under
prolonged stress41 .
Supportive Care
As soon as possible after rescue, stabilize the otter’s body tempera-
ture, treat shock and dehydration, and offer food and water 42,43,44 . Signs
of dangerous hypothermia (body temperature less than 36˚C) include
lethargy, lack of reaction to handling, cold hind flippers, and violent
shivering (mild shivering is not a reliable sign) 38,42,44. Place the animal
in a dry cage protected from draft, and warm it gradually with a pet dryer
or heat lamp, or in severe cases, place the hind flippers in warm water.
Oral glucose therapy may be necessary until the otter is conscious
enough to accept food38 .
 Sea Otters ... 171

Hyperthermia (>39.5oC) is manifested by lethargy and warm, often

flared, hind flippers. The condition may arise during captivity or transport
when an active or sedated animal is confined without access to ice or
water. Some oiled otters become hyperthermic through excessive groom-
ing and in response to handling16,44. Hyperthermia may be relieved by
using cold or iced water on the hind flippers, or as a bath for immersing
the animal38,44.

9.6. Transport to Care Facility

Sea otters may be transported in uncovered plastic kennel cages with
a rack placed on the bottom to keep the animal from becoming soil ed 16,32.
Cages of wood, fiberglass or metal with netting side panels and a raised
rack in the bottom are also suitable 46 . The wire mesh door on kennel
cages should be replaced with netting to avoid injuries from chewing
during longer transports46. Provide ice as a source of water, particu-
larly during warm weather, and drain accumulated water from the
cage2. During extended transports, offer food (e.g., shellfish meats)
approximately every 2 hours43 .
Transport otters quickly (less than 3 hours transit time) within 6 hours
of rescue16. Transport vehicles should be well ventilated and adequately
lit so animals can be continually monitored. Ice or heaters must be
readily available to allow for prompt treatment of hyper- or hypother-
mia46. Helicopters have proven useful for moving large numbers of
animals rapidly43 .
Before transport or immediately upon arrival at the rehabilitation
center, all animals should be tagged on a flipper for identification 2,38 .

9.7. Rehabilitation
At the care facility, the condition of the animal should be reevaluated and
a blood sample taken. The results will dictate whether to treat for hypo- or
hyperthermia, hypoglycemia, dehydration, diarrhea, or shock.
General Considerations
Facilities for rehabilitating otters must include cleaning areas, dry
cages, cages with pools, and floating pens for holding prior to release—
all with adequate water flow and ventilatio n 38,43 . Enclosures should be
designed to avoid injury from chewing. Secure the area from domestic
pets45.
Sea otters are preferably kept in groups of two or more, although
males and females should be separated and mature males housed
172

individually. Females should be isolated with their pups until the pups
are at least one month old 38 .
Holding pools should be filled with sea water (fresh water may be used
temporarily) to a depth of at least 0.6 m to allow for adequate grooming 38 .
Maintain water temperature at 7˚ to 15˚C and do not use chlorine42.
Recovering animals must be provided with adequate haul-out space. Sea
otters kept in dry pens for more than one or two days may develop pressure
sores; this can be minimized by constructing the pen floor of smooth plastic
perforated with 2.5-cm diameter holes38,45 .
Juvenile and adult sea otters thrive on a mixed diet of shellfish and fish
consumed at a rate equivalent to 20 to 30 percent body wt/day, but they
can consume more than the equivalent of 50 percent of their body wt/day
when unable to maintain body temperature. Animals with serious health
problems should be offered food hourly, while others may be fed every
4 hours38. Avoid overfeeding healthy otters2 . Chips and chunks of ice
are a crafty means of providing water to an animal most likely to tip over
a bucket.
Pups tolerate considerable handling and, after the Exxon Valdez
spill, were generally found to do well if they survived the first two weeks
in captivity 38 . They need constant attention until at least three months
of age, including regular temperature checks, formula-feeding, and
careful washing, drying, and grooming 38,42 . Rehabilitation of an or-
phaned pup may require 6 to 9 months, including a period of weaning the
otter from its attachment to humans42 .
Reduce stress to captive sea otters as much as possible by
maintaining a clean, quiet environment, secure from domestic pets, and
by minimizing handling. Harmful behaviors can be curbed by providing
ready access to water for swimming and grooming, and to food, ice, and
canine chew-toys 38 . Preoccupation with chewing may simply indicate
the otter is hungry 27 .
Caring for Oiled Otters
Oil that fouls an otter may also irritate the eyes and cause sinusitis,
emphysema, anemia, and systemic toxicity. Therapy may require treat-
ment for these conditions as well as measures to restore the insulative
properties of the pelage.
Heavily oiled animals should be cleaned immediately to reduce
ingestion and absorption of oil 44 . Cleaning those that are lightly oiled
may be delayed for 12 to 24 hours to allow for recovery from the stress
of capture and transportation and to provide food and fluid therapy.
 Sea Otters ... 173

Before cleaning can begin, the otter must be sedated—assuming it

is healthy enough to withstand the procedure. Sedation allows safe
handling without excessive stress to the animal and permits monitoring
of rectal temperature. Oiled fur must be washed (Dawn® dishwashing
detergent [Proctor and Gamble] is recommended), rinsed and dried, and
finally freed of all traces of detergent7,42,45 .
Washing removes natural oils from the fur and greatly increases
thermal conductance7. Placing the otters in seawater pools for brief
intervals encourages grooming and restoration of the water repellency,
though it will be necessary to remove them for drying. The animals will
gradually tolerate longer periods in the water without signs of chilling;
after 7 to 10 days the fur should regain its insulative value 44 .

9.8. Release
Animals with health problems that might limit their chances of survival
in the wild should not be released and must either be adopted into a
captive colony or euthanized.
Immediate Release
An animal that is “rescued” but appears healthy and alert and exhibits
normal behavior should be released as quickly as possible. Release
should take place at the “home” site, unless hazards there (e.g., fishing,
boating activities, pollution) warrant selection of an alternate location.
Dependent pups should not be returned to the water unless the mother
is present. Animals captured far outside the normal range are not
candidates for immediate release. Whether released from a boat or on
a beach, otters should always be allowed to enter the water of their own
accord47.
Release Following Recovery
As soon as an animal is judged fit, it should be released, either directly
into the wild or after a period of acclimation in floating pens where visual
and physical contact with humans is minimal43 .
Tagging is the only reliable method of monitoring released sea otters.
Intra-peritoneally implanted transmitters have allowed tracking for up to
3 years with few problems 42 . Transponder chips may also be implanted
for permanent identification 37 . Radio transmitters attached to flippers
have allowed brief tracking, but this method is not recommended: the
transmitter is too easily removed by the otter and may damage the
flipper 42 .
174

9.9. Euthanasia
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has authorized sea otter rehabili-
tation centers to euthanize terminally ill animals16. This is achieved by
injecting a lethal substance into the distal third of the femoral vein, or into
the heart or jugular vein42 .
 Chapter 10
Specimen and Data Collection
10.1. General Considerations....................................................... 175
10.2. Sampling Live Animals .........................................................176
10.3. Evaluating a Carcass............................................................182
10.4. Protocols - General Considerations ....................................185
10.5. Examining the Carcass ....................................................... 187
10.6. Blood Studies ........................................................................200
10.7. Morphometrics ......................................................................201
10.8. Life History ............................................................................202
10.9. Contaminants and Biotoxins ................................................205
10.10. Microbiology ..........................................................................211
10.11. Gross and Histopathology ....................................................216
10.12. Parasitology ..........................................................................218
10.13. Samples for Skeletal Preparations ......................................223
10.14. Packaging and Shipping.......................................................225
References ............................................................................280

10.1. General Considerations

The Quality of information
The quality of information obtained from stranded animals depends
on a number of factors, including:
• condition and location of the specimens
• size, skills, organization, interests and morale of the team
• adherence to clear, detailed protocols
• availability of equipment and supplies
• number of animals to be examined
• amount of time available
• care maintained in packaging and labeling samples
• care in shipping and storing samples
Documenting Data
Information has scientific value only when carefully documented.
Persons recording data need reasonable language skills, legible writing,
and familiarity with appropriate terminology. The use of standardized
data sheets or a bound log book made of good quality paper (waterproof
is ideal) is recommended. Notes should be taken with waterproof ink or
soft pencil. Depending on conditions, data collection may be basic
(Level A), intermediate (Level B), or detailed (Level C) (Table 10.1).

175
176

Beyond written observations, photographic and video-taped

records may bring to life such details as color pattern, distinctive
markings, scars or injuries, and the pattern of a mass stranding that may
provide clues only after careful scrutiny. Ideally, include photographs
showing dorsal, lateral and ventral views, and the head with mouth open
to expose teeth or baleen. At minimum, attempt a full lateral view of
cetaceans and a dorsal view of pinnipeds. For species includedin photo
catalogues, take additional pictures of identifying characteristics,
e.g., scars on manatees, flukes of humpback whales and callosity
patterns on right whales. Photographs should include a reference
scale of known standard size (e.g., ruler, coin) and a label with the field
number, date and location. Make a note of photographs taken, including
the roll and frame number.
Rare specimens are especially valuable and require an extra mea-
sure to ensure a complete body of data. Consider preparing the entire
carcass for removal to a suitable laboratory or museum for study or
preservation.
Public Health: A Reminder
Dead and decaying marine mammal tissues harbor a variety of
potentially harmful organisms, some of which can infect humans ( see
12.1, 12.2). Dangerous consequences from exposure can be reduced by
wearing appropriate clothing (protective overalls and rubber gloves),
eye protection (safety glasses, sun glasses), and by being careful when
handling tissues. Persons should protect open wounds with dressings
and avoid contact with fluids or airborne droplets. Keep disinfectant
solutions at hand.

10.2. Sampling Live Animals

Take photographs of anatomical or other distinguishing features that
will help identify the species or individual. Photograph all lesions. Skin
scrapings, biopsies of skin and blubber, and culture swabs for microbi-
ology (Fig. 10.1) are easily obtained from living animals. If possible, and
if qualified people are present, a blood sample should be collected,
regardless of the animals’ condition or probable disposition (Figs. 10.2-
10.5) (see also 10.6). Referring to Table 10.1, living animals are
designated as Code 1 specimens. Anyone taking blood samples or
performing other medical procedures must comply with state,
regional and federal veterinary regulations.
 Specimen and Data Collection ...177

TABLE 10.1
Level A Data: Basic Minimum Data23,32
1. Investigator: name and address (institution)
2. Reporting source
3. Species
• preliminary identification (by qualified personnel)
• voucher (supporting) material (photographs; specimens, including mandibles
with canines from pinnipeds, entire skulls, mandibles with teeth, or tooth
counts from odontocetes, or 2 pieces of mid-row baleen from mysticetes)
4. Field number
5. Number of animals, including total and sub-groups (if applicable)
6. Location
• preliminary description (local designation)
• latitude and longitude (to 0.1 minute, if possible) with closest named carto-
graphical feature (USGS 1:250,000 series) as determined subsequently in the
lab
7. Date (mm\dd\yy), time of first discovery AND of data and specimen recovery
8. Length (girth and weight when possible) (see 10.7)
9. Condition (recorded for both discovery and recovery times)
Codes (see 10.3) as follows:
1) alive
2) freshly dead (i.e., edible)
3) decomposed, but organs basically intact
4) advanced decomposition (i.e., organs not recognizable, carcass intact)
5) mummified or skeletal remains only
10. Sex (see Figs. 5.1, 6.1, 8.1, 9.1)

Level B Data: Supplementary On-Site Information

1. Weather and tide conditions
2. Offshore human/predator activity
3. Presence of prey species
4. Behavior
• pre-stranding (e.g., milling, directional swimming)
• stranding (e.g., determined effort to strand, passive, thrashing)
• after return to sea (e.g., disoriented swimming, listing); note also tag # and
color; location of sighting
5. Samples collected for life history studies ( see 10.8)
• teeth, claws, ear plugs or bone for age determination
• reproductive tracts
• stomach contents
6. Samples collected for blood studies ( see 10.2, 10.6)
7. Disposition of carcass ( see Chapter 11)
(continued)
178

TABLE 10.1 (continued)

Level C Data: Necropsy Examination and Parasite Collection
1. Necropsy (see 10.4)
• collection of tissues for toxicology (see 10.9)
• collection of samples for microbiology (see 10.10)
• collection of tissues for gross and histopathology(see 10.11)
• collection of parasites ( see 10.12)

Fig. 10.1. Sampling live animals for infectious agents.

 Specimen and Data Collection ... 179

Fig. 10.2. Pinniped blood sampling. A. Blood sampling from the caudal gluteal vein
of otariids. The needle (18 gauge, 4 cm) is inserted at a point along the pelvic bone
approximately perpendicular to the midpoint of a line from knee to base of tail. B.
Extradural blood sampling technique for phocid and otariid seals. The index finger
is used as a guide for inserting the needle between the dorsal spinous processes(1)
of the lumbar vertebrae and into the bilaterally divided extradural vein(2) which
overlies the spinal cord. C. Blood sampling from the hind flipper of a seal. The needle
is inserted into the rich vascular network in the metatarsal region, just above the
origin of the interdigital webbing on the plantar surface.
180

Fig. 10.3. Cetacean blood sampling. A. Dorsal fin. B. Caudal peduncle. C.

Pectoral flipper. D. Flukes. Sampling is carried out at all sites, on small to large
cetaceans, using an 18 gauge 4 cm needle. Needle bore should be scaled down for
the very small Dall’s and harbor porpoises.
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 181

Fig. 10.4. Manatee blood sampling. Needle (18-20 gauge, 2.5-4 cm) with extension
tube is inserted into the palmar side of the forelimb between the radius and ulna (M.
Walsh, Sea World, Inc., Pers. comm.).

Fig. 10.5. Sea otter blood sampling. Blood is drawn from the (A) popliteal vein about
1 cm posterior to the femoral condyles (J. McBain, Sea World, Inc., Pers. comm.) or
(B) from the proximal third of the femoral vein (or from the jugular vein if the animal
is under anesthesia). (Adapted from Williams 1990.)
182

10.3. Evaluating a Carcass

Before obtaining tissue samples from dead animals, the quality of the
carcass must be evaluated to determine its suitability for the intended
study.
External Features
The condition of a marine mammal carcass cannot be evaluated
solely by its outward appearance or estimated by knowing the time since
death. The rate of decomposition is influenced more by body tempera-
ture in a robust (thick blubber layer) animal and by environmental
temperature in one that is lean. Larger, rotund carcasses retain heat
longer than smaller, thin ones. Cetaceans (except the Balaenidae) sink
initially at death, then float days or weeks later when buoyed by
decomposition gases, and arrive ashore outwardly unchanged but
internally decomposed. At the other extreme, seagulls may begin goug-
ing the eyes and penetrating the skin and blubber of the jaw and body
openings of a living dolphin, perhaps already mutilated by shells and
rocks during stranding. By the time the animal dies, the carcass may
already appear to be spoiled. A dead harp seal, buoyant with thick winter
blubber, may float ashore as soon as it dies. In summer or when ill,
leaner carcasses come ashore only after they sink and refloat.
Rigor mortis, defined as stiffening of the body after death, is an
indicator of the time of death in many species33 . Limited studies on
marine mammals12 allow us to make only some generalities on small
animals, mainly pinnipeds. The process begins within hours after death,
varying with the animal’s terminal condition and the ambient tempera-
ture. The duration is also variable, but is measured in hours or, under
cool conditions, perhaps a day or two. The presence of rigor mortis
indicates a carcass in moderately good conditio n (Code 2).
The skin, eyes, and exposed mucous membranes dry rapidly after
death and are not an accurate gauge of quality of a carcass out of water.
These tissues retain their vital appearance longer in water or with
humidity or precipitation and then, too, may be unreliable indicators.
Bloating is generally a sign that a carcass is not fresh (Code 3),
though some diseases may cause gas production in tissues even in live
animals. Tell-tale signs of decomposition include a protruding tongue
and penis. At some point the gases escape, and it may not be obvious
whether the process has just begun or ended.
The only reliable approach is to examine the carcass internally.
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 183

Internal Features
The blubber of a fresh carcass is firm, mostly white, and only moderately
oily. With time, it may become tinged with blood (imbibition) from
underlying tissues. Eventually, the oil begins to separate (delipidation)
and pool, leaving behind a lacework of greasy connective tissue fibers.
Fresh muscle is dark (except in fetuses and manatees) and firm, and
the bundles are distinguishable and easily separated. As a carcass
decomposes, the muscles become soft, pale, translucent, and pasty;
fiber bundles become almost indistinguishable.
The rate of decomposition may be increased by the animal’s
terminal condition, such as a generalized infection with increased body
temperature (fever) or wounds that expose the body to rapid bacterial
invasion33. Because blood tends to promote the process, decomposition
is retarded in animals that bleed to death.
The rate of decomposition of an internal organ is related to tempera-
ture, the amount and arrangement of connective tissue, and proteolytic
enzyme content. Peculiar to marine mammals other than the manatee is
the abundance of hemoglobin and myoglobin that, in contact with
tissues, accelerates decomposition. Skin, blubber and muscle can
remain intact and may even show gross lesions for as long as 7 to 9 days
after death12. The heart and lungs maintain their integrity for perhaps
2 or 3 days, while adrenal glands, liver, spleen, brain, kidney, and
mucosa of the digestive tract decompose with frustrating rapidity.
Carcass Classification
Despite uncertainties inherent in determining the stage of decompo-
sition, any study on carcasses requires a system to define the quality of
the material. The following is an expanded version of the code system
established by the Smithsonian Institution’s Scientific Event Alert Net-
work. Animals or carcasses are assigned to one of five basic categories,
determined by specific characteristics (see Table 10.1, Level A Data).
CODE 1: Live Animals
Uses: morphometrics; limited life history, external gross pathology,
parasitology and microbiology; biopsies; blood studies, including
DNA analysis and clinical chemistry.
CODE 2: Carcass in Good Condition (Fresh/Edible)
Uses: morphometrics; DNA analysis; life history; parasitology; gross
and histopathology; toxicology; microbiology; limited blood studies.
Characteristics: normal appearance, usually with little scavenger dam-
age; fresh smell; minimal drying and wrinkling of skin, eyes and
184

mucous membranes; eyes clear; carcass not bloated, tongue and

penis not protruded; blubber firm and white; muscles firm, dark red,
well-defined; blood cells intact, able to settle in a sample tube; serum
unhemolyzed; viscera intact and well-defined; gut contains little or no
gas; brain firm with no discoloration, surface features distinct, easily
removed intact.
CODE 3: Fair (Decomposed, but organs basically intact)
Uses: morphometrics; DNA analysis; limited life history; parasitology;
gross pathology; marginal for toxicology (useful for metals, marginal
for organochlorines, poor for biotoxins); histopathology of skin, blub-
ber, muscle, lung, and possibly firm lesions.
Characteristics: carcass intact, bloating evident (tongue and penis
protruded) and skin cracked and sloughing; possible scavenger
damage; characteristic mild odor; mucous membranes dry, eyes
sunken or missing; blubber blood-tinged and oily; muscles soft and
poorly defined; blood hemolyzed, uniformly dark red; viscera soft,
friable, mottled, but still intact; gut dilated by gas; brain soft, surface
features distinct, dark reddish cast, fragile but can usually be moved
intact.
CODE 4: Poor (Advanced decomposition)
Uses: morphometrics; limited life history (teeth, baleen, bone, claws,
some stomach contents, possibly reproductive condition); limited
DNA analysis, parasitology, and gross pathology.
Characteristics: carcass may be intact, but collapsed; skin sloughing;
epidermis of cetaceans may be entirely missing; often severe scav-
enger damage; strong odor; blubber soft, often with pockets of gas
and pooled oil; muscles nearly liquified and easily torn, falling easily
off bones; blood thin and black; viscera often identifiable but friable,
easily torn, and difficult to dissect; gut gas-filled; brain soft, dark red,
containing gas pockets, pudding-like consistency.
CODE 5: Mummified or Skeletal Remains
Uses: morphometrics; limited life history (teeth, baleen, claws, bone)
and DNA analysis.
Characteristics: skin may be draped over skeletal remains; any re-
maining tissues are desiccated.
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 185

10.4. Protocols—General Considerations

In our zeal to gather as much information as we can from a carcass,
we may spend time, energy and resources collecting specimens of
marginal or no value. The effectiveness of the operation will be
increased by following clear protocols using only suitable car-
casses. In a mass stranding, it is better to concentrate on the freshest
specimens, not necessarily the most convenient, and to perform the
procedures as soon as possible. Marking carcasses with colored rib-
bons or tags to indicate the stage of protocol completion will increase
efficiency and reduce confusion (see 7.7).
The best samples are obtained through careful dissection, avoiding
contamination of tissues by contact with dirty instruments, other organs,
or body fluids. At the outset, be sure the type and quality of equipment
and packaging materials are satisfactory for the task at hand.
With thoughtful planning, it will be possible to obtain morpho-
metric data first, followed by external samples for microbiology.
Once the carcass is opened, tissue samples for microbiology and
toxicology take precedence, followed by sampling for histopathol-
ogy, parasitology, and life history (Table 10.2). This order follows
the sequence of general dissection and examination (see 10.5).
186

TABLE 10.2 Sample Selection and Preservation Methods

(continued)
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 187

TABLE 10.2 (continued)

Preservation methods:
1. Refrigerate (0-4˚C) for transport to laboratory.
2. Freeze at -20˚C.
3. Freeze at -70˚C (*after trimming contaminated surfaces).
4. Fix in 10 percent neutral buffered formalin (place small subsamples of selected
lesions in 2 percent glutaraldehyde for EM study).
5. Preserve in ethanol (*use 10 percent glycerine in 70 percent ethanol).
6. Preserve in formol-urea solution, or saturated NaCl with 5 percent DMSO.
7. Place in stool preservative.
8. Clean and dry.
9. Preserve endoparasites in AFA (see 10.12) and ectoparasites in 5 percent
glycerine in 70 percent ethanol; place samples of associated lesions in 10 percent
neutral buffered formalin.
a Collect samples for hematology and clinical chemistry in EDTA, heparin, and

EGTA tubes.
b Pericardial, peritoneal, pleural.
c Package in teflon, aluminum foil, or borosilicate glass.
d
Package in teflon, polyethylene, or borosilicate glass.
e Serum or plasma; do not freeze whole blood.

10.5. Examining the Carcass

Procedures for dissecting and examining carcasses vary with the size
and species of the subject and personal preference of the investigator.
The following outline, condensed from specific protocols6,17,28,65 and
personal experience, is one approach to carrying out a systematic
examination of a carcass.
1. IDENTIFY the species and determine the sex (Figs. 5.1, 6.1, 8.1,
9.1). DESCRIBE and PHOTOGRAPH form, color pattern, scars,
other distinguishing features (e.g., number and position of teeth or
characteristics of baleen), injuries, external lesions, etc.; for popu-
lations included in photo catalogues, photograph pertinent charac-
teristics (e.g., callosities of right whales). Tooth counts (see 5.12,
6.13) are taken from one side of the upper and lower jaw.
2. Take MEASUREMENTS (see 10.7, Figs. 10.6-10.8, 10.13), includ-
ing blubber thickness (Fig. 10.9); obtain body WEIGHT if possible.
3. Conduct the EXTERNAL EXAMINATION (Fig. 10.10). Note general
condition (e.g., emaciation); describe and illustrate scars, lesions,
parasites and discharges. Take samples as appropriate. Distinguish
“crush” wounds from “high velocity” wounds (i.e., bullets, propel-
lers); the latter may show shattering and scattering of bone frag-
ments along the wound tracks. Distinguish between a gunshot
wound and any other by locating the bullet; take samples from along
188

Fig. 10.6. Measuring pinnipeds. 1. Standard length, from tip of snout to tip of tail.2.
Anterior length of foreflipper. 3. Axillary girth. 4. Anterior length of hind flipper. 5.
Blubber thickness over posterior end of sternum. (Modified from Scheffer 1967;
Winchell 1990.)

Fig. 10.7. Measuring cetaceans. 1. Snout to melon. 2. Snout to angle of mouth. 3.

Snout to blowhole. 4. Snout to center of eye. 5. Snout to anterior insertion of dorsal
fin. 6. Snout to tip of dorsal fin. 7. Snout to fluke notch. 8. Snout to anterior insertion
of flipper. 9. Snout to caudal end of ventral grooves (when present).10. Snout to
center of genital aperture.11. Snout to center of anus. 12. Flipper length. 13. Flipper
width (maximum). 14. Fluke width. 15. Dorsal fin height. 16. Girth: axillary. 17. Girth:
maximum (specify location).18. Girth: at level of anus. 19. Blubber thickness: dorsal
(anterior and lateral to dorsal fin). 20. Blubber thickness: lateral. 21. Blubber
thickness: ventral. As a minimum, measure 7, 12, 14, 17 and 21. (Modified from
Norris 1961.)
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 189

Fig. 10.8. Measuring manatees. 1. Tip of snout to tip of fluke.2. Tip of snout to center
of anus. 3. Tip of snout to center of genital aperture. 4. Tip of snout to center of
umbilicus. 5. Tip of snout to anterior insertion of flipper.6. Tip of snout to center of
eye. 7. Tip of snout to external ear. 8. Center of eye to ear. 9. Distance between
centers of eyes. 10. Center of eye to center of nostril (same side).11. Flipper length,
anterior insertion to tip. 12. Flipper length, axilla to tip.13. Maximum width of flipper.
14. Perpendicular length of teat, right and left (see Fig. 8.1 for location). 15. Base of
fluke to posterior tip. 16. Maximum width of fluke. 17. Girth at fluke base. 18. Girth
at anus. 19. Girth at umbilicus. 20. Girth at axilla. 21. Thickness of skin: dorsal,
lateral, ventral. Thickness of blubber-Outer: dorsal, lateral, ventral. Inner: dorsal,
lateral, ventral. Girths and flipper lengths recorded on fresh animals C ( ode 2) only.
(Adapted from Bonde et al., 1983.)
the projectile path (preserve in 10 percent neutral buffered formalin)
to determine (by histological examination) whether the injury oc-
curred before or after death. Check for evidence of other HUMAN-
RELATED INJURY (e.g., propeller scars, entanglement)6,29. Look
for TAGS or tag scars (i.e., tear in rear flipper or dorsal fin). Examine
the UMBILICUS of neonates. Examine the MAMMARY GLANDS;
attempt to express milk, note color and consistency, make smears
for examination for parasite ova. In odontocetes, extend the PENIS
from its sheath; examine the surface and soft tissues at the base for
small cauliflower-like lesions.
4. Examine the MOUTH and TEETH/BALEEN; note abnormalities
(i.e., worn or broken teeth, gum and tongue condition, obstructions)
or parasites. For cetaceans, note number and position of teeth, or
the number, color, and length of the longest baleen plates (Fig.
10.16). Check the BLOWHOLE/NASAL PASSAGES for parasites,
discharges, or obstructions; make smears for parasitologic exami-
nation. Examine the EYES for clarity, surface lesions, injuries and
190

Fig. 10.9. Measuring blubber thickness. A. To minimize distortion, measure within

a short incision or measure the column of blubber between two longer incisions. B.
A long incision results in distortion of the blubber and inaccurate measurements.

discharges. Take external swabs for microbiology before opening

the carcass.
5. Open the carcass for INTERNAL EXAMINATION, preferably on or
abutting a plastic or teflon sheet. (In cetaceans, a section of skin and
blubber can serve as a small work surface.) Have all instruments,
collecting jars, labels and preservatives on hand before making the
first incision. For pinnipeds, manatees and sea otters (Figs. 10.11-
10.13), position the carcass on its back; make a mid-line incision
through skin, blubber and muscle from jaw to anus, without penetrat-
ing the abdominal cavity. Fold back the skin and blubber from each
side; remove or deflect the forelimbs, including the scapula. Be
prepared to remove a flipper or claws for age determination. Position
a cetacean carcass on its side, preferably left side up (for easier
removal of rib cage). Remove portions of the lateral body wall and
dorsal musculature (Fig. 10.14).
AT EACH STAGE OF THE EXAMINATION, SAMPLE TISSUE AS
SOON AS IT IS EXPOSED. FIRST TAKE SAMPLES FOR TOXI-
COLOGY (10.9; Figs. 10.17-10.19) AND MICROBIOLOGY (10.10;
Figs. 10.21-10.22). BE PREPARED TO DESCRIBE, PHOTOGRAPH
AND REMOVE TISSUES FOR HISTOPATHOLOGY (10.11; Figs.
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 191

10.24, 10.25). SEARCH SPECIFIC LOCATIONS (Figs. 10.26-

10.31) FOR PARASITES (10.12). PACKAGE AND LABEL
SAMPLES IMMEDIATELY.
6. Examine the BLUBBER or SUBCUTANEOUS FAT; note visible
parasites (cetaceans); sample for toxicology. Dissect the MAM-
MARY GLANDS. Examine the superficial FASCIA (cetaceans) for
parasite tracts (white, noodle-like structures).Note MUSCLE color,
texture, and abnormalities.
7. Cut through the abdominal musculature to expose the ABDOMINAL
CAVITY, but avoid puncturing the intestines. Examine with organs
in place, noting color, consistency, and abnormalities (e.g., fluids,
lesions, discolorations, adhesions). Examine the MESENTERIES
and MESENTERIC LYMPH NODES. In neonates, observe the

Fig. 10.10. The external examination: examples of external pathologic conditions.

A. Circumferential laceration, neck. B. Broken (fractured) tooth. C. Unilateral nasal
discharge. D. 1) Corneal opacity, diffuse. 2) Ocular (conjunctival) discharge. E.
Oval, hairless, smooth gray nodule (give dimensions). F. Three missing claws;
possible nailbed inflammation. (Descriptions courtesy B. Wilcock, Ontario Veteri-
nary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont.)
192

Fig. 10.11. Pinniped dissection and internal anatomy. A. Initial incisions. B. Ventral
view of superficial viscera before removal of sternum and costal cartilages. C.
Ventral view of major internal organs after removal of intestines (redrawn and
modified from Fay et al. 1979; Winchell 1990). D. Lateral view of major internal
organs of a phocid seal (modified from Rommel 1990).
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 193

Fig. 10.12. Manatee dissection and internal anatomy. A. Incisions for manatee
dissection. B. Major internal organs before opening of pericardial cavity. C. Major
internal organs after removal of liver, intestines, and left hemidiaphragm.D. Lateral
view of major internal organs. (Redrawn and modified fromBonde et al. 1983.)
194

Fig. 10.13. Sea otter measurement and internal anatomy. A.Measurements. 1.

Total length from snout to tip of tail. 2. Axillary girth. 3. Length of tail. 4. Length of
foot. B. Ventral view of major internal organs (redrawn and modified from Stoskopf
and Herbert 1990). C. Lateral view of major internal organs (adapted from Barabash-
Nikiforov et al. 1947; Stoskopf and Herbert 1990).
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 195

Fig. 10.14. Cetacean dissection and internal anatomy. A. Initial incisions for removal
of skin and blubber. B. Site of mandibular tooth collection for age determination. C.
Labeled voucher specimens and samples for age determination. D. Opening in
lateral body wall in relation to skeletal structure. E. Lateral view of major internal
organs, female and (inset) male (adapted from Rommel 1982, 1990).
196

umbilical connections to the liver and bladder. Check for cestode

cysts in cetaceans (Fig. 10.28).
A. Move the stomach and intestines aside and, using the kidneys
as landmarks, locate, remove and examine the ADRENAL
GLANDS. Collect, package separately and label, including
“right” or “left”.
B. Remove and examine the SPLEEN; note size, texture and
character of a cut surface. Carefully removethe GASTROINTES-
TINAL TRACT and associated organs, first tying off the stomach
near the base of the esophagus and at the colon. Examine the
peritoneum and abdominal cavity. Spread the GI tract out on a
clean surface (away from the carcass) for examination. Remove
and examine the PANCREAS; note the degree of scarring or
fibrosis in cetaceans; dissect open the HEPATOPANCREATIC
DUCT (in cetaceans) and check for trematodes (flukes). Dissect
the gut free from the mesentery. Examine the STOMACH
surface for perforations. Collect the stomach, with contents,
from small animals after first tying it off at the duodenum; freeze
for later examination. Alternatively, open the stomach into a
plastic bag or bucket and collect the contents ( see 10.8); note
any ulcerations, foreign objects or parasites, both free and
embedded in the mucosa (grape-like clusters in the first and
second chambers of cetaceans). Examine the external surfaces
of the INTESTINES for nodules, segmented discoloration, or
adhesions. Open and examine the gut for hemorrhage, charac-
ter of the mucosa, parasites, and obstructions; describe the
contents. Note the texture of the OMENTUM and MESENTER-
IES; check for acanthocephalan parasites (spiny-headed worms)
in pinnipeds.
C. Remove and examine the LIVER, noting surface texture and
color. Cut the lobes in several places in order to examine the
internal structure. Open the GALL BLADDER (none in ceta-
ceans) and BILE DUCTS; examine for trematodes.
D. Examine the KIDNEYS for adhesions, abscesses, or hemor-
rhage; remove by cutting them away from the dorsal muscula-
ture. Slice in several places and examine the interior for stones
or cysts. Examine the URETERS and BLADDER. Aspirate urine
with a syringe and needle (in males this can be collected from the
penis by squeezing the bladder), check the color, and save for
later analysis. Open the bladder and check for stones. In great
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 197

whales and beaked whales, examine the vessels and urinary

ducts for nematodes.
E. Remove and examine the REPRODUCTIVE TRACT; note
presence of a fetus, tumors, abscesses, or unusual amounts of
fluids. Record the weight, length and sex of any fetus. Collect the
whole fetus for toxicology studies. Examine the ovaries for
corpora lutea; if present, take special care to locate the fetus or
collect the entire reproductive tract. Examine, weigh and mea-
sure the testes. Package the gonads separately and label “left”
or “right” (freeze or fix in 10 percent neutral buffered formalin).
(Examination for and counting of corpora albicantia and corpora
lutea, and checking the epididymis for sperm are best done in
the laboratory. In dolphins, urine may also contain microscopic
evidence of sperm.)
8. Open the THORACIC CAVITY (pinnipeds, sea otters, and mana-
tees) by cutting the rib cage along the sides at the junctions of the
ribs and costal cartilages (Fig. 10.11); remove the sternum and
attached cartilages. In cetaceans, cut the articulations between the
ribs and sternum, and the ribs and vertebrae (cranial ribs have
double articulations along the back) (Fig. 10.14). Attempt to disar-
ticulate rather than cut the ribs; the former may be easier on a large
cetacean. (Large baleen whales often float in on their backs; a
ventral midline incision along the small cartilaginous joints of the
sternum will separate the thorax, and the whale’s weight will help
open the carcass.) Cover the tips of fractured or cut bones to
prevent personal injury. Examine the thoracic cavity with organs
in place; note abnormalities (e.g., discolorations, excess fluids,
lesions, adhesions). Examine the PLEURA and DIAPHRAGM.
Note size, color and consistency of the THYMUS. Sample pericar-
dial fluid with a sterile syringe before opening the pericardium, or
introduce a swab through a small incision.
A. In small animals remove the PLUCK (heart, lungs, trachea, and
esophagus) intact by cutting the tongue from the lower jaw and
pulling it backward, severing connective tissue attachments and
hyoid bones. Note any congestion or hemorrhages in the muscles
of the thoracic inlet. Place the pluck on a clean surface, ventral
side up, for dissection.
B. Remove and examine the THYROID GLAND. Note size, shape,
and consistency.
198

C. Open and examine the ESOPHAGUS; check for ulcers, obstruc-

tions and migrant stomach parasites. In cetaceans, the LARYN-
GEAL TUBE is now exposed for examination.
D. Examine the LUNGS for color, consistency and texture. Note the
condition of the bronchial lymph nodes. In cetaceans, examine
a lung-associated lymph node and sample for histopathology.
Open the TRACHEA and BRONCHI, continue dissection through
to small airways and into the parenchyma of lungs. Note charac-
teristics of airway fluid (i.e., clear, frothy, hemorrhagic). Collect
any parasites present. Describe and sample areas that appear
to stand out in marked contrast to the main body of tissue.
Aspirate fluid to check for the presence of sea water.
E. Examine the HEART. Note color and quantity of pericardial fluid,
and amount of coronary fat. Examine for pale areas, hemor-
rhages or evidence of congenital defects. Sample blood from the
right ventricle. Open the heart following the course of the
circulation— from right atrium to ventricle into pulmonary artery,
and left atrium to ventricle into aorta; note thickness of the walls
and irregularities of valve leaflets. Check for nematodes (seals:
right ventricle and pulmonary artery; cetaceans: left atrium and
ventricle). Note presence and nature of clots.
9. To collect or examine the SKULL, disarticulate the head between
the skull and the first cervical vertebra; secure a tag for identification
(Fig.10.14).
10. Examine the MIDDLE EAR and PTERYGOID SINUSES of ceta-
ceans for parasites by placing the head upside down and dissecting
away the lower jaw. Take time and care to free all tissue attachments
at the angle of the jaw; the alternative of prying open the mandible
with force will crush the tympanic bones. Cut away soft tissue to
expose the entrance to the pterygoid sinus; use a bone cutter to
dissect deep into this cavity. Rinsing sinuses with saline or water will
help flush out concealed trematode parasites.
11. In fresh carcasses of baleen whales, collect the WAX PLUG at the
proximal end of the auditory canal 43; place it in a rigid container with
10 percent neutral buffered formalin for aging studies.
12. To expose the BRAIN (useful only on fresh specimens), remove the
top of the skull and cut away the soft tissues over the cranial vault.
(Fig. 10.15 shows an approach for cetaceans.) This procedure
requires a handsaw, hammer and chisels, and for larger animals, a
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 199

Fig. 10.15. Removing the cetacean brain. Make two horizontal cuts, one through
the occipital condyles and the other posterior to the nuchal crest. Join these laterally
with two vertical cuts. A chisel may be needed to break the bony septum that
separates the hemispheres. Remove the bony plate to expose the brain, tilt the skull
backwards while sliding a hand over the surface of the hemispheres to sever soft
tissue connections to the dura and cranial nerves.
sturdy meathook or prybar as well. Examine the exposed brain for
color, consistency, lesions and parasites. Fix brain for histology by
slicing every 1-2 cm, with some cuts extending deep enough into the
cortices for the preservative to reach ventricles; place in 10 percent
neutral buffered formalin.
13. Sample TEETH for AGE DETERMINATION. In odontocetes, they
may be extracted from the mandible by cutting down into the gum
tissue on either side of the tooth row and prying out at least 6-8 mid-
row teeth. Alternatively, use a saw to take a section of mid-mandible
with teeth in place for later extraction (Fig. 10.14). Upper canines (or
a section of the anterior skull containing them) are the recom-
mended samples for otariids and bearded seals; upper or lower
canines, or the first four postcanines (or section of the skull or
mandible containing them) for other phocids; and lower postcanines
for walruses17,52. Collect the lower first premolar (if not possible, the
upper) of sea otters19. Teeth are not useful for age determination of
manatees16.
200

10.6. Blood Studies

Rationale
Blood samples provide an opportunity to evaluate the functional
capacity of organs, as one approach to determining what processes
might have been responsible for or associated with the stranding
event26,42,58 . A broad spectrum of analyses can be performed,
including plasma chemistry, hematology, antibody titers, and toxicol-
ogy, as a means of investigating a range of pathologic conditions.
Carcass selection: Code 1 ideal; 2 limited; 3, 4, 5 useless.
Blood samples only have value for clinical pathology when taken from
live animals, or within minutes after death. Organs deteriorate rapidly,
causing progressive changes in concentrations of blood gases, en-
zymes and electrolytes, among other parameters. Samples col-
lected from animals dead for more than a few minutes are useful
only for serological studies.
Sampling
Freshly dead animals, including those euthanized by lethal injection,
can sometimes be sampled in the same way as live ones (Figs. 10.2-
10.5). When procedures are carried out more than a few minutes after
death, samples can be taken from the right ventricle of the heart
with a syringe and needle. 20-30 mL of whole blood is enough to run
a comprehensive set of analyses. Five tubes should be ready to receive
the blood: samples are put 1) in EDTA for hematology, 2) in heparin for
harvesting plasma, 3) in a chemically clean tube for separating serum,
4) in EGTA (ethyleneglycol-bis-N4-tetraacetic acid) for catecholamines,
and 5) in sodium citrate for glucose and coagulation studie s. Record
times of death and sampling. Place samples in a cooler or on ice,
but do not freeze, and transport to the laboratory as soon as possible for
processing.
When a delay of more than about 4 hours is anticipated, centrifuge the
blood to separate the plasma or serum; these samples, free of red blood
cells, can be frozen if delivery to the laboratory within a day is impos-
sible. A blood smear is useful if samples for hematology cannot be
analyzed within 24 hours.
Ideal
Samples should be obtained before death and analyzed immediately.
Serial samples collected several hours apart are particularly informa-
tive.
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 201

Practical
Rarely do situations allow for blood to be taken from a carcass in good
enough condition to be of much use for clinical diagnostics. However,
viral antibodies will persist and can be detected in samples taken many
hours or even days after death from Code 2 animals.
Precautions
Samples are easily contaminated with body fluids. Blood cells settle
out in the heart and vessels giving misleading values for hematology,
and the time of death, if not observed, cannot be reliably established.
Red cells can rupture if samples are mishandled or frozen, giving
erroneous results.

10.7. Morphometrics
Rationale
Morphometric and descriptive data provide basic biological informa-
tion and have added value when correlated with factors such as age,
stage of maturity, reproductive status, parasitic burden and disease
processes. The accumulation of such data results in a better under-
standing of general population health, demographic trends, and identi-
fication of discrete stocks. Studies of organ weights help to define
specific physiological adaptations and attributes.
Carcass Selection: Code 2, 3 ideal; 1, 4, 5 limited.
Every carcass provides some morphometric data, even skeletal
remains. The amount available depends on the state of the carcass.
Measurements
Measurements are taken according to the appropriate protocol for the
animal (e.g., Figs. 10.6, 10.7, 10.8, 10.13). The procedure is straightfor-
ward, requiring one or two persons with a tape-measure and ideally a
third to record. Rare species demand a thorough approach. Augment
measurements with photographic documentation.
All measurements can be valuable, but standard length is consis-
tently useful. Except for girth and other specified dimensions, measure-
ments are always taken in a straight line from point to point, never
following the contours of the animal. Standard length is the straight line
distance from the tip of the snout (or the melon, if more anterior) to the
tip of the tail or notch of the flukes. Girth measurements are useful only
when there is no evidence of bloating. The girth of large whales is
recorded as 2 times the measured distance between the mid-ventral and
mid-dorsal points on one side of the body. Estimated measurements or
202

weights must be clearly indicated as such on the data sheet, including

the basis for the estimate (e.g., partial measurements, visual assess-
ment). Blubber thickness (does not include skin) is measured from a
perfectly perpendicular cut (Fig. 10.9); distorting the tissue distorts the
results.
Counts of ventral grooves and descriptions (length, number and
color) of baleen plates 64 are useful for identification of mysticetes. A
count taken of grooves on one side of the body, from the mid-ventral
groove upward, can be doubled to give the total figure. Length is
measured from the tip of the lower jaw to the end of the longest groove
(excluding the mid-ventral) in a straight line parallel to the body axis.
Baleen is counted along the outer edge of the series of plates at gum
level, as shown in Fig. 10.16; optimally, the number is an average of
counts obtained for both sides of the jaw.
Ideal
A complete set of data includes measurements of as many external
features as possible, whole body weights, and weights of major organs.
Practical
Rarely are all measurements taken, but even under poor conditions
with few resources and no time to spare, it will be possible to obtain
standard length, using knots as markers on a rope or string if necessary.
Animals or organs too large to weigh intact can be divided and the pieces
weighed separately. Metric units are preferred, but any system of
measurement can be converted later.
Precautions
Adhere strictly to the protocol, measure uniformly, and always from
the same specified point (e.g., from the midpoint of the genital slit and
not from either end). Units of measurement must be consistent and
clearly indicated. In mass strandings, having one or several specified
teams perform all measurements will ensure uniformity. Obtaining an
accurate standard length of carcasses in rigor mortis, particularly phocid
seals in which the neck may lock in a sigmoid position, can be difficult.
Options include dissection to cut the neck muscles or waiting for rigor mortis
to pass.

10.8. Life History

Rationale
Information on age, genetics, reproductive status, and feeding habits
is vital to understanding the general biology of the species, developing
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 203

demographic models, identifying discrete stocks, and planning conser-

vation and management strategies. Certain life history information
makes interpretation of pathologic and toxicologic data more meaning-
ful. In general, biological data are additive; the more we can obtain on
a given specimen, the more meaningful each element becomes.
Live animals: Code 1 limited.
Live animals are an invaluable resource for obtaining measurements,
information on social organization (i.e., age and sex composition of
groups) and blood or biopsies for DNA analyses.
Carcass selection: Code 2, 3 ideal; 4, 5 limited.
Most carcasses provide suitable samples of teeth, claws or skeletal
parts for age determination, or tissues for DNA analysis. Code 2 animals
are required for earplugs of baleen whales. Gonads and uterine samples
can be taken from Code 2 and possibly Code 3 carcasses. Stomach

Fig. 10.16. Counting and measuring baleen. A. Baleen series extend along each
side of upper jaw; plates at front and rear become smaller and less easily distin-
guished, eventually just hairs. B. Examined in cross-section at gum level, baleen
plates have a width at least 3X their thickness; those with width less than 3X the
thickness are termed hairs. C. Typical baleen plate, consisting of main plate along
outer edge, one to several minor plates, and hairs along inner margin; bristles extend
from plate margins to form filtering network. Plate length is taken as the straight line
distance from the outer edge at gum level to the tip of solid portion of mainplate. D.
Simplified view of arrangement (at gum level) of rows of baleen plates (main and
minor plates, hairs) and baleen hairs. Counts are taken along the outer edge of the
plates. (Adapted from Williamson 1973.)
204

contents can be collected from Code 2, and some from Code 3, 4, and
even Code 5 carcasses (e.g., otoliths and squid beaks).
Sampling
Tooth samples for age determination can be obtained by persons
with minimum training (see 10.5 #13). In the field, teeth (or sections of
skull or mandible) can be placed temporarily on ice, frozen, or packed in
salt to retard tissue decomposition. In the laboratory, teeth can be
extracted, cleaned in an enzyme preparation such as trypsin, labeled,
and stored in 70 percent ethanol. It is wise to avoid drying, prolonged
boiling, or use of solutions containing glycerine 44 . Bone specimens for
aging studies can be frozen, preserved in 10 percent formalin or alcohol,
or cleaned and dried without affecting the clarity of periosteal layers 34 .
The sample should include a bone end incorporating a cartilaginous
growth plate or a scar of an old growth plate. Removing earplugs of
baleen whales requires skill and sometimes heavy equipment to position
the skull 43 . Earplugs should be preserved in 10 percent neutral buffered
formalin. Place pinniped claws in 10 percent glycerine in 70 percent
ethanol. Skin samples for DNA study are optimally placed in a formol-
urea solution (example recipe below) 60 . If this cannot be obtained from
a DNA laboratory or the ingredients are unavailable, tissue can be
preserved in a saturated NaCl solution (with 5 percent DMSO if possible)
or frozen at -20˚C.
Formol-urea solution: 4M urea
0.2M NaCl
0.1M Tris-HCl, pH 8.0
0.5 percent n-lauroylsarcosine
10mM EDTA
In small animals, remove, weigh and preserve (in 10 percent neutral
buffered formalin) the entire reproductive tract and organs. In all
cases, preserve both ovaries and a sample of mammary tissue. Mea-
sure, weigh if possible, and preserve entire testes; repeat for epididymis.
Collect baculum (penis bone). Slice large testes to ensure proper
fixation. Measure, weigh, and determine the sex of the fetus.
Open the stomach carefully and gently flush the contents into a
plastic bag. It may be necessary to scrape the mucosa to obtain the small
but diagnostically important otoliths (ear bones of fish). Contents may
include recognizable prey species, macerated flesh, skeletal fragments,
otoliths— some so small as to be inapparent to the naked eye, numerous
parasites, and a variable amount of fluid. (In cetaceans, the contents
needed for dietary analysis are almost exclusively in the first stomach
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 205

chamber.) Collect and package the entire stomach contents of small

animals, including non-food items. A representative sample may be all
that is possible to collect from large animals. Stomach content
samples for life history studies can be frozen or preserved in 70
percent ethanol. Be prepared to remove a subsample (whole fish,
macerated flesh) for toxicology, and samples of parasites and lesions to
satisfy other protocols (see 10.9, 10.11, 10.12).
Ideal
Obtaining complete samples for life history study is a realistic goal
when the carcass quality permits it. There are usually enough stomach
contents to meet the needs of other protocols.
Practical
A stomach full of food decomposes rapidly, leaving unmanageable
foul-smelling fluid. Collecting and weighing stomach contents of large
animals is an ordeal. When decomposition is advanced, reproductive
organs may still be useful for determining sexual maturity (look for fetus
or corpora albicantia; check size of testes). Obtaining teeth from large
odontocetes requires an energetic approach with rugged tools, and
dissecting earplugs demands considerable skill. Collection of life history
samples from fresh carcasses may interfere with other procedures, e.g.,
samples of reproductive organs for histopathology or stomach contents
for toxin analysis. In these circumstances, investigators must agree
on sampling priorities.
Precautions
Establish sampling priorities. Once the stomach is open, contents
including fluids and parasites will quickly contaminate other organs if
they are not contained. Do not preserve stomach contents of fish-
eating species in formalin, since this may dissolve small bones.
Ovaries and testes should be packaged separately and labeled “left” or
“right”. Though perhaps obvious to the collector, it is wise to label the
origin (position) of tooth samples. Teeth and gonads collected in a flurry
of activity from many animals can easily be mislabeled and mismatched—
with bizarre results.

10.9. Contaminants and Biotoxins

Rationale
Marine mammals are the potential ultimate repository for oceanic
contaminants passed through the food chain. Stranded inshore resi-
dents provide information on regional conditions and trends. Offshore
206

species signal the extent to which the seas are being despoiled. Both
groups reveal the influence of contaminants and toxins onhealth21,22,31,48 .
A commitment to collection and long-term storage of marine mammal
tissues4,5 will enable us to follow patterns of biological toxins, orga-
nochlorines, heavy metals and other contaminants, and to recognize the
need for change and help guide future policy. To be effective, the
collection and preparation of specimens that form this resource
must be impeccable, and the samples matched with reliable life
history information.
Carcass selection: Code 2 ideal; 1, 3 limited; 4, 5 useless.
Specimens from healthy, well-nourished animals are required to
determine contaminant levels in normal populations. Biopsy samples for
this purpose can be taken from skin and blubber. Samples from ill or
emaciated individuals have limited value for determining trends but may
elucidate the role of toxins and contaminants on health1,22 .
Deterioration of tissues after death leads to change in contaminant
load, with the extent of change depending on the tissue and the analyte
involved. Samples for the National Biomonitoring Specimen Bank must
be taken within 6 hours of documented death 5 . Code 2 carcasses
provide reliable samples for most other studies8 .
Sampling
A rigorous sampling protocol (Fig. 10.17) has been developed by the
National Biomonitoring Specimen Bank (U.S. National Institute of Stan-
dards and Technology) and the Alaska Marine Mammal TissueProject4,5 .
Blubber and other body fats concentrate lipid-soluble organic con-
taminants. Blubber is always accessible and may be the only practical
tissue to collect. Samples (300-400 g, about 10 cm square) include the
full thickness of the layer, without skin or muscle (Fig. 10.18). Standard-
ization of sampling sites 5 is suggested (Fig. 10.19) for more accurate
cross-comparison purposes. Pinnipeds with thin blubber, e.g., fur seals,
are sampled along the backbone, while those with thicker blubber are
sampled in the sternal region. Two sites are recommended for ceta-
ceans: one about 10 cm caudal to the blowhole and the other directly
below the dorsal fin on the mid-lateral line 62 . Samples from manatees
are taken from the outermost layer of blubber just to one side of the mid-
ventral line6.
Liver accumulates all known organic and inorganic contaminants and
some biotoxins. Collect the entire liver from small carcasses. For large
ones, standardized sites are suggested 5,6 . Slice 300-400 g samples
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 207

Fig. 10.17. Collecting tissue samples for toxicology.

208

Fig. 10.18. Correct procedure for collecting blubber samples, showing removal of
skin and muscle.

(about 3/4 lb or grapefruit-sized) from the caudal part of the left anterior
lobe of pinnipeds and left lobe of cetaceans (Fig. 10.19). The established
protocol for manatees is to sample from the caudal tip of the rightlobe 6.
Kidneys concentrate metals. Take both kidneys from small animals,
and, from large pinnipeds and cetaceans, the entire left kidney or a 300-
400 g slice from the caudal end. Samples from manatees are taken in a
similar fashion, but from the right kidney6.
Brain and muscle are often taken, but their value is questionable5.
Brain decomposes quickly, and its removal from small animals requires
skill and, in larger whales, more effort than resources usually allow. It is
possible to measure changes in acetylcholinesterase resulting from
exposure to short-lived pesticides and herbicides in brain tissue; for this
purpose, it may be worthwhile to collect (and immediately freeze) the
brain from small Code 2 animals18. Indicate location in the brain from
which any sample was taken.
Contaminant levels in muscle are low and procedures difficult to
standardize. The epaxial muscles (over the back) are usually substantial
in size and permit large samplings. Indicate the source of any muscle
collected. Bone may be taken in cases of suspected long-term expo-
sure to lead.
Liver and blubber samples of about 100 g (about 1/4 lb or ham-
burger-sized) and stomach contents are taken for biotoxin analysis.
Collection, packaging and storage of samples2 are illustrated in Fig.
10.20.
Ideal
Under ideal circumstances, the fresh, intact carcass is sampled in a
laboratory setting under sterile conditions. The National Biomonitoring
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 209

Specimen Bank protocol (Fig. 10.17) requires that the carcass be

opened with clean stainless steel instruments and that personnel
wear talcum powder-free vinyl gloves. Samples should be taken with
a clean stainless steel or titanium knife (washed, rinsed with high purity
water followed by ethanol, and air dried). Each sample should then be
trimmed using a clean titanium knife, washed with high purity water,
and cut into subsamples of suitable size for storage. Each subsample is
placed in a pre-weighed teflon jar with a teflon-lined lid; the jar is
labeled and weighed again. Containers are then refrigerated for imme-
diate analysis or frozen at -70oC or in liquid nitrogen for shipping or
storage. At every stage of the procedure, care is taken to avoid
chemical contamination of the tissues. All chemicals must be pesti-
cide-free grade.
Practical
Most carcasses will not be moved to a laboratory, though it is possible
to construct a protective lean-to at the stranding site. Beach conditions

Fig. 10.19. Sites for collecting tissues for contaminant analysis.Sampling site for
liver (Red) and kidney (Yellow) of cetaceans (A), pinnipeds (B), and manatees (C).
Sampling site for blubber (White) of (B) robust pinnipeds, (C) manatees, (D)
cetaceans, and (E) otariids and thin phocids.
210

Fig. 10.20. Collecting samples for biotoxin analysis.

are seldom sterile, and titanium knives, which dull easily, are not stock
items. The rigorous sampling techniques demanded for tissue banking
purposes require uncommon diligence and special training. Teflon jars,
bulkier than the more available soft plastic packaging, and other special
material add a measure of time, expense and inconvenience that a
stranding team may not be in a position to handle.
When conditions are not ideal, remove a large slice (300-400 g
minimum) of the required tissue as hygienically as possible from a fresh
carcass. Record whether the knife is of ferrous metal or stainless steel.
Package in teflon bags, seal with duct tape, and label with a waterproof
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 211

pen. Place samples in a cooler with blue ice and transport to the
laboratory quickly. From this point on, it is imperative that the ideal
protocol for preparing samples (above) is followed.
The National Biomonitoring Specimen Bank requires that samples for
contaminant analysis be packaged in teflon bags and stored in teflon
containers. Other studies accept the judicious use of alternate materials,
such as borosilicate glass for organic analysis and the same or polyeth-
ylene for tissues for heavy metal analysis8 . A common approach in the
field is to collect oversize samples in aluminum foil, plastic bags or
buckets, and transport them to the laboratory for later trimming. The
samples must be kept cool and free of contamination by fluids or other
tissues, and the trimming operation must follow within one to two hours.
Precautions
Analyses for contaminants are time-consuming and expensive.
Enthusiasm may lead to inappropriate sampling. Collection procedures
are stringent and subtle modifying factors will creep in from the outset.
Specimens are easily contaminated by precipitation, sea spray, sand,
blood, bile and urine, tobacco smoke, exhaust fumes, insect repellents,
soaps, oils, rusty tools, plastics and preservatives5,8 . Carcasses are
often moved to landfill sites for dissection, posing even greater risk of
contamination. Competition for specimens can disrupt the protocol—for
example, a stomach opened to remove parasites will release fluid onto
the liver. Avoid sampling an organ in the region of ruptured membranes
or previously cut surfaces. For organochlorines, sampling the leanest
tissues first (e.g., muscle, kidney) will minimize contamination carried by
fat to other tissues.
If packaged specimens from a fresh carcass are stuffed into a large
container, they will continue to release enough heat and lytic enzymes
to cause rapid decomposition of those in the center. Pack loosely with
liberal amounts of coolant interspersed among the samples.
Persons must be properly trained in the use of liquid nitrogen and the
containers in which it is shipped. Storage temperatures higher than -70˚C
may result in the decay of some organic compounds (e.g., DDT and
BHC)8.
Record any deviation from the protocol.

10.10. Microbiology
Rationale
A complete picture of the life history of any species includes an
212

evaluation of factors underlying natural mortality. Studies reveal that

marine mammals harbor a variety of microorganisms, some of which are
known to have pathogenic potential7,27,53 . We now recognize that
certain endemic diseases can periodically erupt into epidemics causing
large-scale mortalities that have significant influence on the status of
populations or stocks14,15,25,30,35,57 .
Carcass selection: Code 1, 2 ideal; 3 limited; 4, 5 useless.
Even under ideal conditions, it is often difficult to associate bacteria
isolated from a carcass with specific lesions36 . Bacteria that are part of
the normal flora may proliferate rapidly after death and may interfere
with successful isolation of an offending pathogen. Any study on normal
flora requires that only the freshest, uncontaminated specimens be
used. Bacteria associated with active infectious processes tend to
endure longer in viable concentrations, and certain species may be
isolated from more deteriorated carcasses, even frozen stored speci-
mens (Code 3).
Most viruses are fragile and have a short life span in decomposing
tissue. Viruses that persist long enough to be harvested and identified,
however, are generally responsible for some infectious process. Some,
such as the influenza virus in seals, can be cultured and remain infective
in both decomposing and frozen carcasses59 .
Sampling
Sample selection for bacteriology and virology is determined largely
by the nature of the gross pathologic findings. Refer to Figs. 10.21 and
10.22 for sampling protocols.
Samples should be taken aseptically, first from external surfaces
and then from body cavities and internal organs as soon as they are
exposed. The core of a fleshy or hollow organ or fluid-filled lesion (e.g.,
abscess) is sampled by inserting a swab in an incision made through the
sterile surface, prepared by searing (Fig. 10.23) or disinfected with 10
percent formalin or 70 percent ethanol and allowed to dry. Fluid samples
from a cavity are taken by aspiration (through a sterile surface) before
or moments after opening. Tissues destined for laboratory sampling
(sear-sampling, cultures, impression smears) should be large enough
(about 6x6x6 cm) to allow for trimming and must have one capsular or
serosal surface intact.
Take separate samples for bacteriology and virology, and freeze
additional tissues for later use. Large lesions are sampled from two or
three distinct regions. Bone marrow remains uncontaminated longer
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 213

Fig. 10.21. Collecting samples for bacteriology.

214

Fig. 10.22. Collecting samples for virology.

 Specimen and Data Collection ... 215

Fig. 10.23. Sterilizing tissue surface by searing.

than other tissues9 and may, in some species, be worth sampling when
carcass quality is questionable. Standard procedures10 are used to
obtain samples from the femur in pinnipeds; an incision through the skin
is required. In cetaceans, sampling from the 5th to 8th vertebral bodies
anterior to the flukes is recommended56 . If biopsy needles are unavail-
able, collect and submit the entire bone to the laboratory.
Place swabs in the appropriate transport medium (generally available
from diagnostic laboratories) (Figs. 10.21, 10.22). Aspirated pus from
abscesses and other lesions where anaerobic organisms are suspected
should be transported in anaerobic vessels. Package tissues in sealed,
sterile leak-proof bags or jars. Label, cool and transport to the laboratory
immediately. Avoid freezing samples for bacteriology, but if long
delays are unavoidable, freezing at -70˚C is preferable to decomposi-
tion37. Record conditions of collection and storage.
Fecal samples that cannot be cultured immediately can be placed in
a stool preservative (equal volumes of 0.033 M phosphate buffer and
glycerol) to prevent changes in pH36 .
Material taken for examination of mycotic agents (usually from the
skin) is obtained by scraping with a scalpel blade and/or by removing a
number of hairs from the affected area. The samples should be refriger-
ated until they can be inoculated onto a suitable growth medium17 .
Ideal
All equipment required for sampling tissues for viruses, bacteria, and
mycotic organisms is available in the field kit. Fresh transport media has
been obtained. Collection protocols are strictly followed by trained individu-
als. Immediate transportation to the analytical laboratory has been ar-
ranged in advance. The laboratory has been involved in the planning and
is prepared to receive and process all samples.
216

Practical
Sampling for microbiological testing is worth the time and effort
required only when the tissue is in suitable condition, the necessary
equipment is available, and all arrangements have been made for
transportation and processing. There is little latitude between the
ideal and the practical approach.
Precautions
Discard samples suspected of being contaminated, including swabs that
have contacted anything other than the intended fluid or tissue. Do not allow
specimens to dry out. Do not sample internal organs once the gut has been
opened. Team members must wear gloves and protect exposed skin,
mucous membranes and eyes from contact with carcass material.

10.11. Gross and Histopathology

Rationale
Carcasses are a biological record of illnesses endemic in populations,
diseases and disorders underlying natural mortality, and conditions that
might have led the animal to strand. The information is tapped by careful
selection of tissue samples for pathology studies.
Carcass selection:
Gross: Code 2, 3 ideal; 4 limited; 1, 5 useless.
Histopathology: Code 2 ideal; 3 limited; 1, 4, 5 useless.
Injuries such as fractures and lacerations remain evident for long periods
of time, as do certain firm lesions (e.g., tumors). Carcasses too decom-
posed for histopathology may still be useful for describing gross pathologic
conditions. Brain, spleen, liver, and other enzyme-rich organs are the first
to deteriorate 9 .
Sampling
The carcass should be examined systematically (see 10.5) and
samples taken from any areas with visible lesions or suspected patho-
logic change (Fig. 10.24); samples should also be taken from lymph nodes
that drain the site. Because all pathologic conditions cannot be
judged grossly, we suggest taking samples from all organs, even
those that appear normal.
A specimen should encompass normal and abnormal tissue and the
transitional area between (Fig. 10.25). It must be thin enough to allow
penetration of the preservative (i.e., less than 1 cm thick—preferably
about 5 mm). Make numerous parallel cuts in any thicker piece of tissue
to permit adequate preservation.
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 217

Tissues are preserved in 10 percent neutral buffered formalin, pre-

pared by mixing 90 mL water, 10 mL 37 percent formaldehyde, and 2 g
sodium acetate. Use a minimum ratio of 10 volumes of preservative to
1 volume tissue. Samples for electron microscopy are finely diced and
placed in glutaraldehyde fixative. Place samples in watertight glass jars,
plastic containers or bags.
Ideal
Fresh carcasses should be thoroughly examined in clean surround-
ings by equipped, trained personnel. Lesions are described and, if
unusual, illustrated or photographed. Representative samples from
each are collected, properly trimmed, and immediately placed into clean
containers with preservative of appropriate strength and volume. Jars
are labeled inside and out. A record of samples taken is included on the
data form.
Practical
In the field, the depth of the examination is limited by the quality of the
specimen, environmental conditions, and team experience. Except under
severe weather conditions or failing light, a pathologic study on a single
animal can be carried out in its entirety. Complete examination of every
carcass is difficult to accomplish in a mass stranding. Select a few
218

Fig. 10.24. The internal examination: examples of pathologic conditions and their
description. A. Trachea: a tangled mass of nematodes (worms) partially obstructs
the trachea. B. Lung: the lung contains a number of abscesses filled with cottage
cheese-like exudate, under the surface and throughout the organ. C. Liver: the liver
surface is cobblestoned because of a mixture of scarring (the depressions) and
regeneration (the nodules). D. Gut: a smooth nodule (probably a tumor) protrudes
from the external surface of the intestine. E. Back: incision of a swelling visible on the
back behind the dorsal fin reveals a mixture of pus and blood in the blubber and
underlying muscle. (Descriptions courtesy of B. Wilcock, Ontario Veterinary College,
University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont.)

specimens for a full initial study, and identify conditions to look for in a
targeted survey of the remaining animals.
Precautions
Thick tissues packed in a jar will rot. Pay attention to sample size
and the proportion of preservative. Frozen tissues tend to liquify when
they thaw and are unacceptable for histopathology.

10.12. Parasitology
Rationale
Virtually every marine mammal carcass has parasites. Most of these
are innocuous and have value as ecological markers. Others, however,
may cause serious illness to individuals and, perhaps, ultimately affect
populations26,45 .
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 219

Fig. 10.25. Collecting tissues for histopathologic examination.

220

Carcass selection: Code 2, 3 ideal; 1, 4 limited; 5 useless.

Examination for parasites is practical as long as the carcass is
suitable for pathologic investigation.
Sampling
Parasites in marine mammals occur in predictable sites (Figs. 10.26-
10.31) that can be mapped after examining a few carcasses. Collect and
preserve samples of loose parasites. Some, such as lungworms, and
Crassicauda in mammary tissue, are difficult to remove intact. These
and other embedded parasites should be taken with a section of infected
tissue for later identification. Cestode specimens must include the head
to allow for proper identification.
A variety of methods are used to preserve parasites6,46,54 . Alcohol-
formalin-acetic acid, or AFA (formula on page 221), is a simple and
practical fixative for both dead and live endoparasites (Fig. 10.32)23,46 .
Ectoparasites can be fixed in 5 percent glycerin in 70 percent ethanol,
and algae in 5 percent neutral buffered formalin6 .

Fig. 10.26. Some parasites of phocids inNorth American waters11,13,38,39. 1. Skin:

Echinophthirius horridus (2-4 mm). 2. Lungs: Otostrongylus circumlitus (50-70
mm). 3. Stomach: a, Anisakis similis (>60 mm); b, Terranova decipiens (40-70 mm);
c, Contracaecum osculatum (<60 mm). 4. Intestines: a, Diphyllobothrium sp. (D.
lanceolatum, 45-55 mm); b, Corynosoma sp. (3-6 mm); c, Phocitrema fusiforme
(1-1.5 mm); d, Cryptocotyle lingua (0.5-2 mm). 5. Liver, gall bladder, bile and
pancreatic ducts: Orthosplanchnus sp. (<20 mm). 6. Heart: Dipetalonema
spirocauda (140 mm). 7. Nasopharynx: Halarachne sp. (1 mm).
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 221

AFA Solution: 100 mL formaldehyde (37-40 percent)

400 mL distilled water
500 mL ethanol (100 percent)
20 mL glacial acetic acid
Fix feces for parasite examination in an equal volume of hot 10
percent formalin if possible; transfer later to 70 percent ethanol54.
Ideal
All parasites are collected intact for identification and counting, along
with samples of associated infected tissue. Location and density are
recorded and the lesions photographed. Samples are fixed in appropri-
ate medium and labeled with animal identification number and site of
origin.

Fig. 10.27. Some parasites of otariids in North American waters11,13,38,39. 1. Na-

sopharynx: Orthohalarachne sp. (0.6-5 mm). 2. Skin: Antarctophthirius sp. (2-4
mm). 3. Stomach: a, Anisakis similis (>60 mm); b, Terranova decipiens (40-70 mm);
c, Contracaecum osculatum (<60 mm). 4. Intestine: a, Diphyllobothrium sp. (D.
pacificum, 100-250 mm); b, Diplogonoporus sp. (>500 mm); c, Pricetrema zalophi
(<0.5 mm); d, Cryptocotyle jejuna (0.5-2 mm); e, Uncinaria sp. (8-16 mm); f,
Corynosoma sp. (3-8 mm). 5. Liver, gall bladder and bile ducts: Zalophotrema
hepaticum (10-15 mm). 6. Lungs and trachea: a, Orthohalarachne sp. (0.6-0.8
mm); b, Parafilaroides sp.(<25 mm). 7. Muscle and fascia: Dipetalonema odendhali
(55-120 mm).
222

Fig. 10.28. Some parasites of toothed whales in North American waters11,13,38,39. 1.

Teeth: Conchoderma sp. (<15 cm). 2. Cranial sinuses: a, Nasitrema sp. (10-35
mm); b, Stenurus sp. (20-50 mm); c, Crassicauda sp. (>500 mm). 3. Stomach: a,
Braunina cordiformis (4-9 mm); b, Anisakis sp. (>60 mm); c, Contracaecum sp. (<60
mm). 4. Abdominal cavity and mesentery:Monorygma grimaldi plerocercoid cyst
(20-30 mm). 5. Intestine: a, Tetrabothrium fosteri (25-65 mm); b, Corynosoma sp.
(3-6 mm). 6. Skin: a, Syncyamis sp. (2-7 mm); b, Xenobalanus sp. (<50 mm). 7.
Blubber: Phyllobothrium delphiniplerocercoid cyst (4-9 mm).8. Mammary glands,
muscle and fascia: Crassicauda sp. (>500 mm). 9. Liver, pancreas and bile
ducts: a, Campula oblonga (3-6 mm); b, Oschmarinella sp. (30-35 mm). 10. Lungs
and trachea: a, Stenurus sp. (20-50 mm); b, Halocercus sp. (17-80 mm). 11. Brain:
Nasitrema sp. (10-35 mm).

Practical
Collecting parasites is simple and straightforward but requires pa-
tience. A representative sample of generally intact parasites with samples
of infected tissue, properly fixed and labeled, is a realistic goal.
Precautions
Parasites must be removed carefully, as they may be fragile and firmly
attached to the host tissue. Seal lice survive for some time on a carcass
and can be transferred via clothing to seals in captivity.
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 223

Fig. 10.29. Some parasites of baleen whales in North American waters11,13,38,39. 1.

Stomach: Anisakis sp. (>60 mm). 2. Urogenital tract: Crassicauda sp. (>500 mm).
3. Skin: a, Cyamis sp. (10-30 mm); b, Penella balaenopterae (300 mm); c,
Conchoderma sp. (<15 cm); d, Coronula sp. (<50 mm); e, diatoms (Navicola sp.,
Cocconeis ceticola). 4. Intestine: a, Ogmogaster plicatus (6-14 mm); b, Bolbosoma
sp. (35-100 mm); c, Diplogonoporus sp. (>500 mm). 5. Bile ducts: Lecithodesmus
goliath (70-90 mm).

10.13. Samples for Skeletal Preparations

While photographs and measurements can document the specific
identification of some animals, skulls and skeletons can do it much
better. In addition, osteological material provides a means of determin-
ing physical maturity of a specimen and may document skeletal abnor-
malities or injuries.
The skeleton of a small specimen is best prepared in the laboratory
from the intact carcass of an adult animal. Larger animals can be cut into
sections (disarticulated), with each piece labeled, and transported in a
leak-proof container. A large, cumbersome carcass can be buried at the
site, deep enough to prevent disturbance and reduce risk to public
health, and retrieved months or years later. Skeletons can also be
prepared by composting a carcass in manure, or by placing it inside a
cage with 0.5 cm holes and sinking it in the ocean for cleaning by
amphipods.
224

Fig. 10.30. Parasites of the West Indian manatee6. 1. Nasal passages and
bronchi: Cochleotrema cochleotrema (7-10 mm). 2. Skin: a, Harpacticus pulex;
b, barnacles. 3. Intestine and caecum: Chiorchis fabaceus (10 mm). 4. Stomach:
Heterocheilus tunicatus (30-35 mm).

Fig. 10.31. Parasites of the sea otter in North American waters13,47. 1. Gall
bladder: Orthosplanchnus fraterculus(<20 mm). 2. Stomach: Terranova decipiens
(<60 mm). 3. Intestine: a, Diplogonoporus tetrapterus (>500 mm); b, Microphallus
pirum (<0.5 mm); c, Corynosoma sp. (5-18 mm); d, Terranova decipiens (<60 mm).
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 225

Fig. 10.32. Crush-smears of cetacean brain and mammary tissue may show
presence of parasite ova.

10.14. Packaging and Shipping

Packaging and Labeling
Package each specimen to comply with the appropriate protocol.
Label clearly with indelible ink. Preferably “double-bag” (i.e., bag within
a bag) tissue samples, placing a waterproof (and oilproof) label in each
bag. Samples for contaminant analysis are exceptions; no label should
come into contact with the tissues. Jars with preserved materials should
be labeled on the outside but also contain a duplicate label inside. Do not
label lids only, as they can be inadvertently switched. Secure tags
directly to voucher specimens such as skulls or mandibles; tag large
items (e.g., skulls) in more than one location.
Include on the label:
• animal identification number
• species
• date and time (mm/dd/yy/military time) and location
• tissue
226

Fig. 10.33. Collecting parasite samples.

Shipping
Shipping containers must be sturdy. Clearly print name, address and
telephone numbers of both the shipper and receiver. Place a duplicate
address label inside, along with all required documentation (i.e., loan
form, permits and customs documents). Enclose a copy of the stranding
report form to provide pertinent information on species, size, sex and
observed pathologic conditions. Arrange for pick-up at destination
before shipping perishable specimens.
Pack samples in a manner to prevent loss, crushing or deterioration
and to protect persons involved in subsequent handling. Clean all
surfaces of harmful substances (e.g., formalin).
 Specimen and Data Collection ... 227

Fig. 10.34. Proper packaging is essential to protect frozen specimens. Use a well
insulated container with liberal amounts of blue or dry ice interspersed among the
tissues.

Bone specimens can be wrapped in protective paper or plastic, and

packed in styrofoam chips. Fixed tissues are rinsed with distilled water
or fresh preservative, wrapped in cheesecloth or gauze, moistened with
preservative, and double-bagged. Pack perishable samples in a sturdy
ice chest with ample amounts of blue or dry ice interspersed among
specimens (Fig. 10.34). Arrange rapid transport (i.e., courier or air
express). Be aware of current airline regulations concerning biological
and hazardous substances (e.g., formalin) and restricted coolants (e.g.,
dry ice). Make arrangements for obtaining necessary forms, labels and
documentation before taking material to the shipper.
Precautions
Samples arriving at their destination without positive identification
and documentation are useless, as are those that become decomposed
or contaminated by inadequate or improper packaging. Consider the day
of the week specimens will arrive at their destination before shipping
(Fig. 10.35), planning so parcels arrive when they can be unpacked
immediately— this is essential for frozen tissue. Clearly indicate on
the package the day and night telephone numbers of the recipient. When
traveling by air, try to arrange direct flights, avoid airports where long
delays are common, and, if possible, package specimens in small carry-
on containers. Days of toil have been lost by samples gone astray with
errant luggage.
228

Fig. 10.35. Perishable samples are best shipped by express overnight delivery
service. Avoid weekends and holidays, and call ahead to inform the recipi-
ent of shipping details. Be sure that all necessary permits and docu-
ments accompany the shipment.
 Chapter 11
Carcass Disposal
11.1. Let It Lie ...................................................................................229
11.2. Bury It. .....................................................................................231
11.3. Move It .....................................................................................232
11.4. Tow It Out to Sea ................................................................... 234
11.5. Render It ................................................................................. 235
11.6. Blow It Up ............................................................................... 235
11.7. Burn It. .....................................................................................236
11.8. Afterward .................................................................................237
11.9. Conclusion ...............................................................................237
References ..............................................................................284

“That whale is here. We have seen him and smelled him. We are wiser
for it, because we have had a ‘most practical lesson in natural history’..The
whale is composed of several parts...There is the blubber, and the
whalebone and—the smell. The latter seems to be the most prominent
feature of this whale.” 15

The simplest way for a carcass to disappear is to turn your back on it

and walk away. That approach is fine in remote areas, but what if the
scene is a bathing beach or someone’s backyard? Soon after the novelty
wears off, all but the most resolute scientist will be clamoring for the
carcass to vanish. Who is responsible for it then? Maybe the community
or homeowner at first. But as we all learn sooner or later, the local
attitude is, “you cut it, you own it”, and the stranding team may find itself
burdened with the fragrant remains. How the team accomplishes the
task of disposal will depend on circumstances. Here are some often-
attempted, but not always successful ways of getting the job done,
presented with the help of colleagues who have recounted for us some
of their best and worst experiences.

11.1. Let It Lie

Leave it where it is and let weather, tide and scavengers do the work.
This is a common practice in uninhabited areas where there is no
concern about a smelly mess or public health hazard. The process is
fast; even massive carcasses decompose quickly. Eight mature hump-
back whales left exposed on the tidal flats of Cape Cod after a December
1987 stranding were reduced to inconsequential remains by summer.

229
230

The process can be accelerated by predatory sightseers. Peter

Best 2, from South Africa, reminds us that in some parts of the world a
carcass, for all its scientific value, is still a good source of food.

“A straggler from a mass stranding of Risso’s dolphins was left rolling in

the surf while rescue teams struggled elsewhere with the main body of
the animals. Returning six hours later, all that could be found was one
flipper and a skull minus the lower jaw, still attached to a spotlessly
cleaned portion of the rib cage”.

Before the Marine Mammal Protection Act, some folks in the United
States also utilized stranded animals to supplement their lean larders.
That was Bill Perrin’s12 response to a nude bather’s desire to know if the
meat from a whale he was examining was safe “for her dog.” “Good,” she
said as she, together with her unclad husband, piled 50 pounds or so
onto a piece of plywood. Bill recalls “the board was limber and the meat
bounced... everything bounced.”
Such wholesale enterprise is less likely today. Still, before turning
away from the carcass, extract tusks and teeth to protect any souvenir
hunter from unknowingly running afoul of the law. Also open the abdo-
men and thorax. For one thing, it will prevent any bloater decomposing
in the hot sun from becoming the subject of another messy explosion
story. And be careful when cutting. Bob Bonde3 tells us about a salvage
worker who was stripping back the skin of a 50-foot sperm whale...

“The fellow was standing on the carcass making cuts with a 6 foot
Norwegian flensing knife when he disappeared. A ‘splosh’ was heard,
then muffled cries for help. His mates ran around the whale, but alas
could not find their friend. Finally, a gooey, dripping mess emerged
covered from head to toe in oil; the fellow had fallen entirely into the
massive junk case in the whale’s head. He said it took two weeks to
purge himself of the smell, but his close friends, noses hoisted, confess
he’s never completely gotten rid of it.”

Another reason for opening a carcass is so that it will sink in the event
the surf steals it back to the sea. A bloated whale floats high on its back,
the dorsal fin acting like a keel, as it sails before the wind like a 10-meter
yacht. These “floaters,” as they are called, cause endless confusion as
they are rediscovered, renumbered, and relocated. Michael Bigg (as told
by Tom Smith14) bolted into action at the resighting of a floating killer
whale that turned out to be an unfinned and hairy Holstein cow. And
while people were contemplating a course of action for a huge fin whale
that had washed ashore near Kennebunkport Harbor, Maine, in 1991, a
 Carcass Disposal ... 231

hurricane two weeks later propelled the whale across Whale Cove a
kilometer away to Walker’s Point, the home of Kennebunkport’s famous
summer son, former President George Bush.
It is amazing how long a carcass can continue touring the beaches.
Jim Mead9 and one of the authors (Geraci) once responded to the
stranding of a 10-meter long right whale on Monomoy Island, Cape Cod,
that had already lost most of the epidermis through decay. The carcass
answered the first incision with a gush of liquid innards; the afternoon
tide then carried the remains back to sea. Jim’s logbook tells the rest of
the story...
“ Five weeks later, I responded to a call about a whale hung up on an
offshore rock near Buzzards’ Bay, on the Cape. We managed to get out
to it by rowboat and lo and behold, it was the Monomoy right whale,
which in 5 weeks had drifted 15 miles to the west. In the meantime, it had
lost all of its flesh and bones and what we had before us was just a
blubber blanket.
Two days later, the blubber departed and made its way to Craigville
Beach, a popular bathing resort. Details of the ultimate disposal (at sea)
are lacking because the fisheries agent involved turned out to have
spent some time on a submerged rock when the police launch in which
he was riding sunk.”

Do small pieces decompose sooner than whole animals? Greg Early 5

and Bob Prescott had some unexpected results, in a winter marsh
setting at least. Hoping to minimize any ecological damage caused by
large carcasses, they scattered small cut sections from 60 pilot whales
over a large area of bog and sunk the heads deep into salt-marsh pools.
About a dozen carcasses were simply opened and left alone. By spring
the intact carcasses had virtually decomposed, and the underlying
marsh grass was well on its way to recovery. Meanwhile, the scattered
sections had polluted the pools and spoiled the surrounding vegetation,
but were quite intact (testimony to the processes that yield mummified
mammoths and bog-people). So too were the gaseous heads, which
ceremoniously rose on one moon tide and trained their snouts to the
night sky— a macabre silhouette the townsfolk will not soon forget.

11.2. Bury It
Conventional wisdom suggests that a quick way to conceal a carcass
and have it decompose is to bury it. Maintain good public relations and
avoid costly unearthing and re-burial by first agreeing on a site and
obtaining permission from local authorities16. Choose a place where
232

destruction to the beach, vegetation, dunes, and wildlife (i.e., nesting

birds) by the equipment or the hole it digs is trivial enough to justify the
procedure. Complete all studies and sampling before the equipment
arrives, because after the hole is dug, the remains will likely be buried,
ready or not.
Some public landfill sites and private operators accept animal car-
casses. Be aware of regulations and local statutes. Establish a time of
delivery and make financial arrangements in advance. Advise the
operators of any potential health risk, and bury under at least one or two
meters of earth13,16 . Bob Brownell 4 did just that with a pilot whale he
meticulously dissected for later use as a skeleton, and meanwhile buried
at the edge of the parking lot of the Cabrillo Beach Marine Museum in
San Pedro, California...

“The next spring, without notice, the city’s road department sent a work
crew to improve the parking lot, which they did. They extended it, graded
it, then paved it over—whale and all.”

The rate of decomposition depends on the character of the remains,

depth of burial, the terrain, and water and air temperature. A carcass that
is rich with blubber will tend to rise in soft wet sand, even when split open
and weighted down with tons of rocks. Four humpback whales that were
buried in sandy beaches just below the tidal wash on the north shore of
Cape Cod surfaced twice within a year and had to be reburied, and
liquefying parts of others periodically emerged as sands shifted with
tides and storms. Several carcasses that were only opened and left
exposed had already deteriorated by that time.
There may be occasions when you wish to retrieve a carcass that
someone else has recently buried. Peter Best2 notes that attempting to
use a vehicle to drag a carcass out of an opened grave tail-first is
frustratingly unsuccessful. For cetaceans up to the size of a beaked
whale, he suggests tying a long rope to the tail, but then pulling (with the
vehicle) from the head end of the grave. After performing a neat
headstand, the carcass tends to flip over onto the beach.

11.3. Move It
When a carcass is a nuisance, hazard or public health risk, it may be
possible simply to shift it to a more appropriate site. Permission at one
or more levels of government may be required for any transfer, espe-
cially across state lines.
Small or rare animals are often removed intact to a facility for further
 Carcass Disposal ... 233

study or preservation. This is normally done with manatee carcasses

because of the endangered status of the population. Floridians are
especially protective of these endearing animals. While carting away a
bloated carcass he retrieved from a lagoon, Dan Odell11 was pursued by
the Florida Marine Patrol and finally stopped by the Game and Freshwa-
ter Fish Commission for..
“transporting a pregnant manatee in the back of my truck. I didn’t
know how fortunate I was at the time; only later did I discover that the
group reporting the ‘robbery’ had considered using firearms to stop
us. I immediately had the words MANATEE RESEARCH painted in
LARGE letters all over the vehicle”.

Tom McIntyre's (National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Pro-

tected Resources, Silver Spring, Md.) transport to the laboratory of three
brewing carcasses stuffed into a family wagon was not perilous but
perfumed.
"One oversized dolphin lay diagonally in the wagon, flukes lashed to the
left front window post, head right rear. One passenger had to lie atop the
carcass, braced firmly to prevent falling onto the harbor seal alongside
that was proceeding to self-destruct with gaseous gurglings. A barely 6-
foot dolphin was wedged under the head of the first, with its abdomen
and tail occupying most of the space designated for the other passen-
ger. It was not the best of all worlds. For the six-hour drive, with the
heater on full, all hands were frantically cranking windows in an ever
changing array of up and down to find some level of comfort in the
atmospheric inequities."

Large carcasses will probably have to be moved in pieces. This is

what Tom Murphy10 had in mind for a dead humpback whale that
stranded directly in front of a ritzy hotel on Hilton Head Island in South
Carolina...
“We contacted the Charleston Museum, which asked that we salvage
the skeleton. The maintenance department quickly produced a bull-
dozer and an earthmover to drag the carcass to an undeveloped section
of beach for temporary burial. As the two pieces of equipment pulled in
tandem, they began to disappear in the soft sand while the whale
remained firmly in place. I then suggested we cut the whale in half to
simplify the job, and was offered a chain saw to speed up the operation.
It cranked with the first pull and I climbed atop the whale to a position just
behind the skull. By this time it was early evening and a large crowd had
gathered, everyone with cocktails in hand. As the chain saw penetrated
the blubber, I immediately realized that while the exterior looked fresh,
234

Fig. 11.1. Various methods of carcass disposal, including moving to an alternate site,
burial (after opening body cavity), cutting into smaller pieces for disposal, and towing
out to sea (after opening body cavity).

the inside was soup. The chain saw drove deep into the liquified entrails
and produced a spray that plastered my legs and boots and then arched
some 30 feet across the beach. As the sight and odor made its impact
on the crowd, every martini got dumped onto the sand. The reality of a
stranding event took over and the ambiance of the entire afternoon
suddenly changed.”

11.4. Tow It Out to Sea

A large carcass can be towed out to sea, providing it is released far
enough offshore so that currents and winds will not bring it back, it is clear of
a shipping lane, and has enough ballast to sink it. Helene Marsh8 attempted
to tow a dead minke whale head first. “Its mouth opened and acted like
some giant sea anchor. The trawler was going absolutely nowhere.”
 Carcass Disposal ... 235

John Heyning 6 had better success hauling a 75-foot blue whale

carcass out to sea, off Southern California, where it floated like a ghost
ship ...

“The skipper, before securing a line to the flukes, asked if it would take
one or two tons of chain to sink it. I estimated that after 5 days in the July
sun, gases of decomposition had more likely generated about 10 tons
of buoyancy to overcome. I informed the captain that even if his tug sank,
it would only dangle from the bloated body. The skipper disregarded my
warning, and for more than a month I received reports of a mangled
whale carcass floating off Catalina Island with an enormous quantity of
chain draped over its flukes.”

Greg Early5 had a minke whale carcass in Lynn, Massachusetts, that

was in such bad condition he decided not to open it, preferring instead to
tow it out to sea. The Harbormaster granted permission, but decided to tow
it himself. Two miles out, he let the carcass go, and it promptly blew across
the bay onto Revere Beach. The Revere Department of Public Works,
unaware of the previous odyssey, took another approach. They picked the
whale up, stuffed it into a truck, drove it to the New England Aquarium, and
asked the security guards where to leave it. “Out back” was the reply,
pointing to the necropsy room. Greg was called down a few minutes later
to find the whale he had decided not to cut up on the beach—and even riper
now—had followed him to work, to be dissected at last.
The Coast Guard or Harbor Police may be willing to assist with towing
a carcass to sea. It would be wise to consult them before making the
attempt.

11.5. Render It
Some rendering plants and commercial incinerators may accept
marine mammals. It will probably be necessary to pay for this service,
using licensed collectors to pick up and transport the carcasses. Dis-
posal by rendering may require arrangements with federal and local
authorities16.

11.6. Blow It Up
It might seem logical to blow up a carcass, theoretically at least, into
tiny pieces that no one will notice or care much about. This was tried
once with a 14-meter, 8-ton whale in Oregon. It is all on videotape taken
by Ron Finn, but equally vivid is Dave Barry’s1 animated description of
the event.
236

“The responsibility for getting rid of the carcass was placed upon the
Oregon State Highway Division, apparently on the theory that highways
and whales are very similar in the sense of being large objects.

So anyway, the highway engineers hit upon the plan—remember, I

am not making this up—of blowing up the whale with dynamite. The
thinking here was that the whale would be blown into small pieces, which
would be eaten by seagulls, and that would be that. A textbook whale
removal.

So they moved the spectators back up the beach, put a half-ton of

dynamite next to the whale, and set it off. I am probably guilty of
understatement when I say that what follows, on the videotape, is the
most wonderful event in the history of the universe. First you see the
whale carcass disappear in a huge blast of smoke and flame. Then you
hear the happy spectators shouting ‘Yayy!’ and ‘Wheee!’ Then, sud-
denly, the crowd’s tone changes. You hear a new sound, the sound of
many objects hitting the ground with a noise that sounds like ‘splud.’ You
hear a woman’s voice shouting ‘Here comes pieces of ...my GOD!’
Something smears the camera lens.

Later, the reporter explains: ‘The humor of the entire situation

suddenly gave way to a run for survival as huge chunks of whale blubber
fell everywhere.’ One piece caved in the roof a car parked more than a
quarter of a mile away. Remaining on the beach were several rotting
whale sectors the size of condominium units. There was no sign of the
seagulls, who had no doubt permanently relocated to Brazil.”

11.7. Burn It
After deliberating on how to dispose of five hundred tons of stranded
sperm whales in Florence, Oregon, in June 1979, the decision was made
to burn the carcasses, at an unforseen cost to the state of $25,000.
Bulldozers were used to push the carcasses into large pits dug in the
shore. As told by Barry Lopez7 ,..

“the whales were ignited in pits—(it would finally be done with thousands
of automobile and truck tires, cordwood, diesel fuel, and Alumagel)—as
they burned they were rendered, and when their oil caught fire they
began to boil in it. The seething roar was muffled by a steady offshore
breeze; the oily black smoke drifted over the dunes—thinned until it
disappeared against a weak blue sky.”
 Carcass Disposal ... 237

11.8. Afterward
Any person involved with the disposal of a carcass is bound to contact
oils with lingering qualities, some more pleasant than others. Bob
Bonde3 worked on a right whale calf in Georgia...
“..with a friend who does not believe in gloves and gets some perverse
pleasure out of absorbing odors from dead creatures through his hands.
That night we returned to Florida and put away the valuable skeleton.
After washing up with everything from ammonia to bleach to mouth-
wash, we decided to go to one of the University sporting events.
Unfortunately, it was a sell-out game and we had to sit in close quarters.
Occasionally, I would get a slight whiff of ‘dead whale smell’ and check
my fingers. Not me. Soon, however, I noticed others in the stands
smelling their hands too, squinching up their noses, stirring nervously
and searching the soles of their shoes—telltale signs of annoying smells
in a large crowd. We went home early that night, thankful that no one had
found the source.”

11.9. Conclusion
The best way to deal with a carcass is to bury, remove, render or tow
it. Few large-scale disposal operations will turn out as planned. It seems
that for the near future at least, any advances to overcome these
problems will continue to develop at a slower pace than the memorable
stories of what went wrong.
238
 Chapter 12
Health and Safety Risks
12.1. Hazards to the Public..............................................................239
12.2. Hazards to the Team ..............................................................240
12.3. Train and Plan for Safety....................................................... 243
References ..............................................................................285

12.1. Hazards to the Public

A stranding scene is a good place to disregard the popular notions
that a harbor seal is generally friendly, a sea lion preoccupied with
mischievous antics, and a dolphin inherently playful and altruistic. By
definition, a stranded animal is in trouble. With that, its behavior is
unpredictable, and even a normally docile species may be frightened
enough to attack. Even experienced persons have been seriously hurt
by the thrashing flukes of a struggling whale or the unexpected rolling of
a manatee. Such risk increases, of course, for one unaccustomed to the
animal’s behavior and untrained in rescue procedures. Apart from injury
is the potential for infectious agents to be transmitted to persons coming
into physical contact with a stranded animal. Those who would consider
a stranded animal as edible should be cautioned that even apparently
healthy animals can be a source of trichinosis (a parasitic infection), and
harmful toxins from Salmonella sp., Clostridium sp. and other bacteria1.
Any risk to the public, including that of disease transmission, can be
avoided by establishing a safe boundary within which only the response
team should operate. This can be accomplished and still satisfy the
inevitable curiosity of observers (see Chapter 3).
Failure to take appropriate action may be viewed as inattention to
public safety, forcing others in authority to take sterner measures. At a
winter stranding in Nantucket, Mass. (Cape Cod), live pilot whales
struggling on the beach and in the surf drew a large crowd of onlookers.
While some futilely attempted to drag or roll the animals into the water,
other bystanders climbed all over the whales and hoisted children onto
them for photographs. Attempting to prevent mishap, local officials
chose to drag the live animals by their tails overland to a secure area. All
of the whales died, some during the move and others while they were
unattended at the secondary site.
Such scenes can be avoided by good planning that will protect the
public while looking after the well-being of the animals, and by proper
and rapid disposal of carcasses ( see Chapter 11). Do not underestimate
the benefit of public education in the form of posters or pamphlets
239
240

dealing with these issues (see Chapter 3).

12.2. Hazards to the Team

Team members responding to a stranding face situations that can be
risky, although less so than many leisure-time sporting activities. A
person might be struck by a whale’s flukes with appalling force, raked by
teeth, rolled upon, knocked into the surf, suffer sunstroke or hypother-
mia, aches, strains and bruises, catch a faceful of blowhole discharge,
and chance cuts by instruments and bone fragments. Despite such risks,
few serious injuries or illnesses have been reported as a result of
working with stranded animals. The greater the experience and
training of the team, the better their regard for proper precautions, the
less likelihood of a mishap.
Designating safety and staff support coordinators ( see 2.6) at
strandings involving a large number of volunteers will help to ensure that
the team does not try to exceed its limitations. Ultimately, providing
adequate support for the team will greatly diminish the chance of
injuries. Fatigue and other discomforts, such as results from drinking too
much coffee when no facilities are available, wearing wet, gritty clothing,
or being hungry, can reduce morale and concentration, and thus in-
crease the chance of accidents. The longer the operation or the more
adverse the environmental conditions, the more vital essential comforts
will become to the health and well-being of the response team.
Transmissible Disease
Marine mammals harbor a variety of bacteria, fungi and viruses. Few
of these organisms are routinely pathogenic when the term is taken to
mean causing disease whenever present9. Some, however, have
been transmitted from live animals and carcasses.
Several investigators working on an outbreak of seal influenza devel-
oped painful conjunctivitis caused by the same virus21 . At least one
poxvirus in seals can cause irritating skin lesions that take several
months to heal11. The bacteria Erysipelothrix sp.15, Leptospira sp.6,18,
and Mycobacterium sp.8,12 , and the fungal agents Blastomyces sp. 5 and
Loboa loboi20 have also been transmitted to people from contaminated
animals. “Seal finger,” a condition resulting from contact with Atlantic
and Arctic phocids, has recently been associated with a Mycoplasma
infection13 and is treated with tetracycline3. A similar condition known
by the same name but from the Pacific coast 14 is caused by Erysipelo-
thrix and responds to penicillin19. It is important to recognize the
difference, since the treatment for one is ineffective against the other.
Several other organisms are potentially pathogenic to humans. Among
 Health and Safety Risks ... 241

them are caliciviruses that seem to be endemic in California sea lions

and northern fur seals17 , bacteria of the genus Vibrio4, and the
unlikely rabies virus that was recovered from a ringed seal from
Svalbard, Norway16.
The risk of disease is low for persons who are healthy and free of
disease conditions or medications (steroid hormones, immunosuppres-
sive agents) that lower resistance to infection. Risk can be further
reduced by taking the following preventive measures:
• wear (untorn) gloves when handling animals, carcasses, tissues or
fluids
• wear waterproof outerwear to protect clothing from contamination
• cover surface wounds with protective dressings
• wash exposed skin (and clothing) after handling animals
• seek medical attention for bites, cuts and other injuries, and inform
medical attendants of the injury’s source
Any illness that develops after exposure to marine mammals
should be brought to the attention of a physician, preferably one
familiar with conditions potentially transferable from these animals. The
occurrence should also be reported to stranding network officials who
maintain records of physicians with such experience and record these
incidents for future reference.
Exposure
Workers on the beach normally protect themselves against overexpo-
sure to sun and heat by wearing proper clothing, using sunscreening
agents, temporarily escaping into shade, and liberally drinking fluids.
Hyperthermia (heatstroke) is seldom encountered except in those few
who disregard these common sense precautions.
The greater threat is hypothermia, especially for persons who are
wet and wind-chilled, or working in the water where heat is quickly lost
to the surroundings. The earliest indication of cold stress is shivering,
which occurs when body temperature is reduced by as little as 1˚ to 2˚C.
Eventual effects include skin reactions, allergic responses, lower blood
pressure, and reduced heart rate and kidney function2,10 . Persons may
appear confused, sluggish and disoriented, perhaps believing them-
selves still physically able to work. Such behavior can, of course, place
other team members at risk.
Prolonged exposure to cold air and water and reduced activity—
precisely the circumstances encountered when rescuers must support
animals in shallow water for prolonged periods—promote hypothermia.
Going without food, or indulging in alcohol or drugs can also amplify the
242

effects 2, in addition to impairing judgment.

Workers must be protected against the cold with adequate clothing
(layering is best) and waterproof outerwear, gloves and boots. Special
gear must be worn by personnel working in the water for any prolonged
exposure at temperatures less than 30˚ to 32˚C. Wind-surfing suits offer
some protection for brief periods of immersion. Wet suits work best for
people who are literally up to their necks in water by actively heating the
insulating water layer. The neoprene also provides buoyancy, which is
useful when trying to keep animals at the surface. Dry suits are superior
for persons standing still for long time periods.
A rotation schedule should be established for those holding
animals in the water, with limits set on the time that any individual might
be in the water in one day. Exposure times will vary, depending on
ambient temperatures and how well the crew is dressed and equipped.
As a general rule, a worker in a dry suit can spend twice as long in the
water as one in a wet suit. Recovery time afterwards is generally double
the exposure time.
Meeting the personnel needs for a comfortable rotation schedule may
not always be possible, even for a small stranding response. Consider
a situation where the “in-water” time is limited to one hour, and 5 support
personnel are required to hold each whale. Holding 10 whales for 5
hours would require 250 people if no staff were rotated, or 150 people
rotated on a schedule of one-hour on, two-hours off. If adequate
personnel cannot be enlisted for such a procedure, the response team
must resist the temptation to “stretch themselves.”
Injury
Strandings afford numerous opportunities for injury. Moving
along slippery shorelines, lifting or rolling large animals and working with
heavy equipment all present hazards to team members, particularly to
those inattentive to the risks. Little can be done to make a stranding site
safer, other than to mark off obstacles such as holes or bring in spotlights
when the work carries on into the night. The designated safety officer
should be continually on the look-out for potentially dangerous condi-
tions or practices, and take appropriate action to reduce the chance of
injury to personnel.
Heavy lifting equipment is usually, but not always, in the hands of
experienced operators who will ensure that the loads are properly
secured. Even so, ropes may break or knots fail, and no one should be
allowed to stand under an overhead load. All personnel must stay clear
when winching a carcass across a beach in case the line snaps.
The risk of drowning can never be disregarded. Heavy surf and
 Health and Safety Risks ... 243

dangerous undertows can quickly turn an innocent attempt to help into

a personal tragedy. Except for actions along the shoreline, no one
should enter the water unless there are boats available to provide
assistance if necessary.
Procedures and equipment needed for euthanizing animals can
also be hazardous to personnel. Firearms and drugs must remain in the
possession of authorized individuals who will take responsibility for their
safe use (see 6.12). Only those with the authority and expertise to do so
may perform such actions; people uninvolved in these activities will best
avoid danger by leaving the area completely.
The basic equipment for a stranding response will include a first aid
kit appropriately stocked to deal with cuts, abrasions, minor twists or
sprains, and other routine injuries. The safety officer and stranding
coordinator must know the location of nearby medical facilities, clinics
and hospitals in the event of more serious mishaps. Police radios and
portable phones are the best way to summon an ambulance.
Injury Reporting and Liability
Accidents can occur in any field operation. Each stranding network
should consult professionals to establish the legal framework for volun-
teers to operate. The safety officer or stranding coordinator should
document and track the outcome of all injuries. Such information may be
needed in the event that any result in legal action.

12.3. Train and Plan for Safety

Training programs for those involved in stranding must include infor-
mation on the hazards of the job. Injuries can be avoided through
instruction on animal behavior and proper handling techniques. Learn-
ing to recognize dangerous situations such as soft mud, heavy surf, or
244

a beach of broken shells will prepare one to take appropriate action.

Accidents can be reduced by being aware of human limitations and
setting realistic goals.
Task assignments must be made on the basis of training.
People must not become involved in potentially hazardous duties (i.e.,
handling animals, taking samples from live animals, working in the
water) for which they are unqualified. The use of coded badges to
indicate level and area of training will discourage this from happening,
both on the part of the eager helper and on the part of the frustrated team
leader desperate for another pair of hands.
Assignments must also take into consideration the availability of
sufficient numbers of personnel for the task at hand, as determined by
the safety officer or stranding coordinator. This is particularly crucial
when the response involves work in the water during cold weather.
When working in hazardous situations (e.g., heavy surf, cold water, or
in darkness), organize workers in pairs (i.e., “buddy system”) for addi-
tional safety.
The effects of exposure are of primary importance for coordinators
planning field schedules. During mass strandings, 8 to 10 hours “in the
field” followed by an 8- to 10-hour rest period generally works best 7, but
this may need to be tailored to the conditions. Ironically, if field support
is good, volunteers may wish to spend longer periods in the field, risking
physical and mental fatigue.
One person should keep track of the exposure time and rotation of
workers, as the latter are likely to be too busy to check this themselves.
In addition, the safety officer or assistants should watch personnel
closely for early signs of hypothermia, particularly uncontrolled shiver-
ing. Anyone showing signs of shivering, stiffness or lack of coordination
should be required to return to the support center for a period of
recovery.
Recognizing Limitations
Certain operations may need to be discontinued or plans modified if
human safety is jeopardized. Attempts to carry or pull large animals with
insufficient or fatigued personnel, or continued work in the water under
weather conditions that have become adverse, are just two situations
where the response goal must be weighed against staff safety.Once the
safety and stranding coordinators determine the best course of
action, other team members and participants must comply with this
decision. At no point in the response effort can “blind heroism” be
allowed to obscure rational judgement.
 Chapter 13
The Follow-Up
13.1. Collection and Distribution of Data ....................................... 245
13.2. The Sample Trail.....................................................................246
13.3. Who Pays? ..............................................................................246
13.4. A Press Conference................................................................247
13.5. A Word of Thanks ...................................................................247

The file on a stranding event is never closed until all information

has been archived for easy retrieval, tissues are safely stored for
later analyses, team members are recognized for their efforts and
informed of the outcome, and the community is thanked for its
support.

13.1. Collection and Distribution of Data

The story of an event is best written while memories are fresh and
documents are readily accessible. Once everyone has retired from the
scene, first-hand information is lost, and what the account gains in the
re-telling, it loses in accuracy.
An informal “debriefing” meeting will elicit individual points of view,
experiences, criticisms and suggestions. The person assigned to this
task should have the skills to filter through the volume of information,
recognize what is important, and condense it into useful form for the
report.
Reports often are not prepared or completed for fear they may not
meet the scrutiny of a colleague searching for critical details, impeccable
precision and literary style. But that is hardly the purpose of the exercise.
What is required immediately is a summary of the essential findings from
each of the coordinators, including that from the debriefing meeting,
accompanied by the kind of documentation that can later be organized,
analyzed and refined. This summary is made available to team mem-
bers, the relevant federal agencies, and if it merits, to other stranding
networks. The report can be continually updated as new information
becomes available, until it eventually emerges as a completed docu-
ment.
Points summarized in the report are:
1. Notification of the stranding.
2. Eyewitness accounts.
3. Nature, timing, effectiveness of the initial response.

245
246

4. Account of the scene as first viewed by the team.

a. exact location
b. pattern of stranding
c. condition of animals
d. environmental conditions
5. The action taken and reasons for the decisions.
a. intended plan
b. impediments to implementation
c. eventual action
d. intended follow-up (monitoring released animals or following
progress of rehabilitation)
6. Necropsy findings and any available laboratory results.
7. Types of data and specimens collected and their location.
8. Supplementary information.
a. maps, photographs, sketches
b. reports from independent groups, e.g., police, Coast Guard,
wildlife authorities
9. Critique of methods and success; suggested improvements.

13.2. The Sample Trail

Samples from strandings may be dispersed quickly to research and
analytical laboratories, museums, universities, and tissue banks. Impor-
tant opportunities to gain information have been lost because speci-
mens have deteriorated, been poorly labeled or lost, the analyses not
done or their results not reported. To avoid such misfortune:
• match codes (accession number) that each laboratory assigns to the
same animal; keep records
• establish a system for tracking specimens (some pass through a
series of laboratories)
• protect samples in your care from deteriorating (repackage as neces-
sary; top-up preservatives)
• encourage expedient analysis
• assure that results will return into the central data bank, if necessary
by contractual arrangement with the recipient.

13.3. Who Pays?

The stranding network is responsible for settling all financial matters
 The Follow-Up ... 247

arising from any action taken under its authority. Some institutions have
a budget for this purpose; others may rely on donations and other
sources of funding.
Maintain the support of loyal team members by immediately reimburs-
ing personal expenses as pre-arranged. Settle accounts promptly with
any contractor, laboratory, local business and private individual (veteri-
narian, equipment operator, diver), who should not be expected to
absorb the costs (although many do).

13.4. A Press Conference

The media coordinator should consider organizing a press confer-
ence soon after any stranding event that has captured public interest.
Informing the press and public of the response team’s findings will
encourage cooperation and support, and will promote public awareness.
Allow for interviews and make copies of the condensed stranding report
available to the press.

13.5. A Word of Thanks

Nearly everyone on the team devotes untiring effort for which the only
compensation is the satisfaction of helping. Beyond that, the mayor of
the town may have unleashed costly resources, the police worked
unscheduled overtime, the community provided food and beverages,
248

the motel keeper bore the criticism of cleaner guests, and beach
residents endured the trampling of their summer gardens. Compile a list
of everyone involved. There is little we can do for their inconveniences
that is more gratifying than providing each a summary of the incident and
an expression of sincere thanks.
 References
Chapter 1.
1. Aguilar, A. 1984. Relationship of DDE/ DDT in marine mammals to the
chronology of DDT input into the ecosystem. Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 41: 840-844.
2. Baker, V. [ed.]. 1986?. Marine mammal rescue. New Zealand Depart-
ment of Conservation. 103 p.
3. Bowen, W.D., D.J. Boness and O.T. Oftedal. 1987. Mass transfer from
mother to pup and subsequent mass loss by the weaned pup in the
hooded seal, Cystophora cristata. Canadian Journal of Zoology
65: 1-8.
4. Dierauf, L.A., D. Vandenbroek, J. Roletto, M. Koski, L. Amaya and L.
Gage. 1985. An epizootic of leptospirosis in California sea lions.
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 187: 1145.
5. Gaskin, D.E. 1982. The ecology of whales and dolphins. Heinemann
Publ., Exeter, NH. 459 p.
6. Gaskin, D.E., M. Holdrinet and R. Frank. 1982. DDT residues in
blubber of harbour porpoise, Phocoena phocoena (L.), from eastern
Canadian waters during the five-year period 1969-73. p. 135-143.
In Mammals of the seas. Vol. 4. FAO (Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations) Publications, Rome.
7. Geraci, J.R., D.J. St. Aubin, I.K. Barker, R.G. Webster, V.S. Hinshaw,
W.J. Bean, H.L. Ruhnke, J.H. Prescott, G. Early, A.S. Baker, S. Madoff
and R.T. Schooley. 1982. Mass mortality of harbor seals: pneumonia
associated with influenza A virus. Science 215: 1129-1131.
8. Geraci, J.R., D.M. Anderson, R.J. Timperi, D.J. St. Aubin, G.A. Early, J.H.
Prescott and C.A. Mayo. 1989. Humpback whales (Megaptera
novaeangliae) fatally poisoned by dinoflagellate toxin. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46: 1895-1898.
9. Geraci, J.R. 1989. Clinical investigation of the 1987-88 mass mortality
of bottlenose dolphins along the U.S. central and south Atlantic coast.
Final Report to National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Navy (Office of
Naval Research) and Marine Mammal Commission. 63 p.
10. Geraci, J.R., M.D. Dailey and D.J. St. Aubin. 1978. Parasitic mastitis
in the Atlantic white-sided dolphin, Lagenorhynchus acutus,
as a probable factor in herd productivity. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 35: 1350-1355.
11. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1979. Stranding workshop summary
report: analysis of marine mammal strandings and recommendations
for a nationwide stranding salvage program, p. 1-33. In J.R.
Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals:
insights through strandings. National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA. NTIS PB-293 890.
12. Harwood, J. 1990. The 1988 seal epizootic. Journal of Zoology (Lon-
don) 222: 349-351.
13. Hofman, R.J. 1991. History, goals, and achievements of the regional
marine mammal stranding networks in the United States, p. 7-15.
In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in

249
250

Chapter 1 (continued)
the United States: proceedings of the second marine mammal strand-
ing workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report
NMFS 98.
14. Kennedy, S., J.A. Smyth, P.F. Cush, P. Duignan, M. Platten, S.J.
McCullough and G.M. Allan. 1989. Histopathologic and immunocy-
tochemical studies of distemper in seals. Veterinary Pathology 26: 97-
103.
15. Keyes, M.C. 1965. Pathology of the northern fur seal. Journal of the
American Veterinary Medical Association 147: 1090-1095.
16. Kritzler, H. 1949. The pilot whale at Marineland. Natural History 58:
302-308 & 331-332.
17. Martin, A.R., P. Reynolds and M.G. Richardson. 1987. Aspects of the
b i o l o g y o f p i l o t w h a l e s (G l o b i c e p h a l a m e l a e n a) i n r e c e n t
mass strandings on the British coast. Journal of Zoology (London)
211: 11-23.
18. Mead, J.G. 1979. An analysis of cetacean strandings along the east
coast of the United States, p. 54-68. In J.R. Geraci and
D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals: insights through
strandings. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
NTIS PB-293 890.
19. Mead, J.G. (Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC). 1992. Personal
communication.
20. Osterhaus, A.D.M.E., J. Groen, H.E.M. Spijkers, H.W.J. Broeders,
F.G.C.M. UytdeHaag, P. de Vries, J.S. Teppema, I.K.G. Visser, M.W.G.
van de Bildt and E.J. Vedder. 1990. Mass mortality in seals caused by
a newly discovered morbillivirus. Veterinary Microbiology 23: 343-350.
21. Perrin, W.F. and J.E. Powers. 1980. Role of a nematode in natural
mortality of spotted dolphins. Journal of Wildlife Management 44: 960-
963.
22. Reynolds, J.E., III and D.K. Odell [eds.]. 1991. Marine mammal
strandings in the United States: proceedings of the second marine
mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Tech-
nical Report NMFS 98.
23. Robson, F. 1984. Strandings: ways to save whales. Science Press,
Johannesburg. 124 p.
24. Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. 1988. First aid
for stranded cetaceans. R.S.P.C.A., Horsham (U.K.). 20 p.
25. Sergeant, D.E. and F.A.J. Armstrong. 1973. Mercury in seals from
eastern Canada. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada
30: 843-846.
26. Sergeant, D.E., D.J. St. Aubin and J.R. Geraci. 1980. Life history and
northwest Atlantic status of the Atlantic white-sided dolphin. Cetology
No. 37. 12 p.
27. Visser, I.K.G., J.S. Teppema and A.D.M.E. Osterhaus. 1991. Virus
infections of seals and other pinnipeds. Reviews in Medical Microbi-
ology 2: 105-114.
28. Warneke, R.M. [ed.]. 1986. Victorian whale rescue plan: a contingency
plan for strandings of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) on
 References ... 251

Chapter 1 (continued)
the Victorian coastline. Fisheries and Wildlife Service, Department of
Conservation, Forests and Lands, Victoria. 75 p.
29. Wilkinson, D. 1991. Report to: assistant administrator for fisheries.
Program review of the marine mammal stranding networks. U.S.
Department of Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service,
Washington, DC. 171 p.

Chapter 3.
1. Loew, F. (Tufts University, Boston, MA). 1991. Personal communica-
tion.
2. Scheffer, V.B. 1989. How much is a whale’s life worth, anyway?
Oceanus 32(1): 109-111.

Chapter 4.
1. Barrett, P. (Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito, CA). 1992. Personal
communication.
2. Davis, R.W. 1990. Facilities and organization, p. 3-58. In T.M.
Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter rehabilitation program: 1989
Exxon Valdez oil spill. International Wildlife Research.
3. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin and G.A. Early. 1987. Cetacean mass
strandings: the study of stress and shock. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial
Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, 1987,
University of Miami, Miami, FL. Society for Marine Mammalogy.

Chapter 5.
1. Addison, R.F. 1989. Organochlorines and marine mammal reproduc-
tion. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46: 360-368.
2. Baker, J.R. 1984. Mortality and morbidity in grey seal pups
( Halichoerus grypus). Studies on its causes, effects of environment,
the nature and sources of infectious agents and the immunological
status of pups. Journal of Zoology (London) 203: 23-48.
3. Barrett, P. (Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito, CA). 1992. Personal
communication.
4. Bartholomew, G.A. 1970. A model for the evolution of pinniped po-
lygyny. Evolution 24: 546-559.
5. Bigg, M.A. 1969. The harbour seal in British Columbia. Fisheries
Research Board of Canada, Bulletin No. 172. 33 p.
6. Bigg, M.A. 1981. Harbour seal, Phoca vitulina and Phoca largha, p. 1-
27. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine
mammals. Vol. 2. Academic Press, New York, NY.
7. Bigg, M.A. 1985. Status of the Steller sea lion, Eumetopias jubatus,
a n d C a l i f o r n i a s e a l i o n , Z a l o p h u s c a l i f o r n i a n u s, i n B r i t i s h
Columbia. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences No. 77. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Ottawa. 20 p.
8. Bodkin, J.L. and R.J. Jameson. 1991. Patterns of seabird and marine
mammal carcass deposition along the central California coast, 1980-
1986. Canadian Journal of Zoology 69: 1149-1155.
9. Bonner, W.N. 1981. Grey seal Halichoerus grypus Fabricius, 1791, p.
252

Chapter 5 (continued)
111-144. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine
mammals. Vol. 2. Academic Press, New York, NY.
10. Boulva, J. and I.A. McLaren. 1979. Biology of the harbour seal, Phoca
vitulina, in eastern Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada,
Bulletin No. 200. 24 p.
11. Bowen, W.D., O.T. Oftedal, and D.J. Boness. 1985. Birth to weaning
in 4 days: remarkable growth in the hooded seal. Canadian Journal of
Zoology 63: 2481-2486.
12. Brodie, P. and B. Beck. 1983. Predation by sharks on the grey seal
( Halichoerus grypus) in eastern Canada. Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 40: 267-271.
13. Burns, J.J. 1970. Remarks on the distribution and natural history of
pagophilic pinnipeds in the Bering and Chukchi seas. Journal of
Mammalogy 51: 445-454.
14. Burns, J.J. 1981. Ribbon seal Phoca fasciata Zimmerman, 1783,
p. 89-109. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook of
marine mammals. Vol. 2. Academic Press, New York, NY.
15. Burns, J.J. 1981. Bearded seal Erignathus barbatus Erxleben,
1777, p. 145-170. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 2. Academic Press, New York, NY.
16. Burns, J.J. and A. Gavin. 1980. Recent records of hooded seals,
Cystophora cristata Erxleben, from the western Beaufort Sea. Arctic
33: 326-329.
17. Condit, R. and B.J. Le Boeuf. 1983. Density dependent regulation of
elephant seal population. Abstracts of the 5th Biennial Conference on
the Biology of Marine Mammals, Nov. 27-Dec.1, 1983, Boston, MA.
Society for Marine Mammalogy.
18. Dailey, M.D. 1970. The transmission of Parafilaroides decorus
(Nematoda: Metastrongyloidea) in the California sea lion
( Zalophus californianus). Proceedings of the Helminthological
Society of Washington 37: 215-222.
19. Daoust, P.Y., D. Haines, J. Thorsen, P. Duignan and J.R. Geraci.
1993. Phocine distemper in a harp seal (Phoca groenlandica)
from the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada. Journal of Wildlife Diseases
29: 114-117.
20. Deiter, R.L. 1991. Recovery and necropsy of marine mammal car-
casses in and near the Point Reyes National Seashore, May 1982-
March 1987, p. 123-141. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.]
Marine mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of the
second marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5,
1987. NOAA Technical Report. NMFS 98.
21. DeLong, R.L., W.G. Gilmartin and J.G. Simpson. 1973. Premature
births in California sea lions: association with high organochlorine
pollutant residue levels. Science 181: 1168-1170.
22. DeLong, R.L., B.S. Stewart and R.D. Hill. 1992. Documenting migra-
tions of northern elephant seals using day length. Marine Mammal
Science 8: 155-159.
23. Denison, D.M. and G.L. Kooyman. 1973. The structure and function of
 References ... 253

Chapter 5 (continued)
the small airways in pinniped and sea otter lungs. Respiration Physi-
ology 17: 1-10.
24. Dierauf, L.A. 1983. A survey of live pinnipeds stranded along the
northern California coast. California Veterinarian 6: 22-26.
25. Dierauf, L.A. 1990. Pinniped husbandry, p. 553-590. In L.A.
Dierauf [ed.] CRC handbook of marine mammal medicine:
health, disease, and rehabilitation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
26. Dierauf, L.A., D. Vandenbroek, J. Roletto, M. Koski, L. Amaya and L.
Gage. 1985. An epizootic of leptospirosis in California sea lions.
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 187: 1145.
27. Dudley, M. 1992. First Pacific record of a hooded seal, Cystophora
cristata Erxleben, 1977. Marine Mammal Science 8: 164-168.
28. Duignan, P. (Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph,
Ont.). 1992. Personal communication.
29. Early, G.A. (New England Aquarium, Boston, MA). 1992. Personal
communication.
30. Early, G.A. and T.P. McKenzie. 1991. The Northeast regional marine
mammal stranding network, p. 63-68. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell
[eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of
the second marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5,
1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
31. Fay, F.H. 1982. Ecology and biology of the Pacific walrus,
Odobenus rosmarus divergens Illiger. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, North American Fauna No. 74. U.S. Department of Interior,
Washington, DC. 279 p.
32. Fay, F.H. (University of Alaska, Institute of Marine Science, Fairbanks,
AK). 1992. Personal communication.
33. Fay, F.H., B.P. Kelly, P.H. Gehnrich, J.L. Sease and A.A. Hoover.
1986. Modern populations, migrations, demography, trophics, and
historical status of the Pacific walrus. U.S. Department of Commerce
and U.S. Department of Interior, Outer Continental Shelf Environmen-
tal Assessment Program (OCSEAP), Final Reports of the Principal
Investigators 37: 231-376.
34. Fay, F.H., B.P. Kelly, and J.L. Sease. 1989. Managing the exploitation
of Pacific walruses: a tragedy of delayed response and poor commu-
nication. Marine Mammal Science 5: 1-16.
35. Fowler, C.W. 1987. Marine debris and northern fur seals: a case study.
Marine Pollution Bulletin 18(6B): 326-335.
36. Gage, L. (Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito, CA). 1992. Personal
communication.
37. Gales, N. 1989. Chemical restraint and anesthesia of pinnipeds: a
review. Marine Mammal Science 5: 228-256.
38. G e n t r y , R . L . 1 9 8 1 . N o r t h e r n f u r s e a l C a l l o r h i n u s u r s i n u s,
p. 143-160. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook of
marine mammals. Vol. 1. Academic Press, New York, NY.
39. Gentry, R.L., D.P. Costa, J.P. Croxall, J.H.M. David, R.W. Davis, G.L.
Kooyman, P. Majluf, T.S. McCann and F. Trillmich. 1986. Synthesis
and conclusions, p. 220-264. In R.L. Gentry and G.L. Kooyman [eds.]
254

Chapter 5 (continued)
Fur seals: maternal strategies on land and at sea. Princeton University
Press, Princeton, NJ.
40. Gentry, R.L. and J.R. Holt. 1982. Equipment and techniques for
handling northern fur seals. NOAA Technical Report. NMFS SSRF-
758. 15 p.
41. Gentry, R.L. and J.H. Johnson. 1981. Predation by sea lions on
northern fur seal neonates. Mammalia 45: 423-430.
42. Gentry, R.L. and G.L. Kooyman. 1986. Introduction, p. 3-27.
In R.L. Gentry and G.L. Kooyman [eds.] Fur seals: maternal strategies
on land and at sea. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
43. Geraci, J.R. 1981. Marine mammal care. 2nd ed. University of Guelph,
Guelph, Ont. 98 p.
44. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1987. Effects of parasites on marine
mammals. International Journal for Parasitology 17: 407-414.
45. Geraci, J.R., D.J. St. Aubin, I.K. Barker, R.G. Webster, V.S. Hinshaw,
W.J. Bean, H.L. Ruhnke, J.H. Prescott, G.A. Early, A.S. Baker, S.
Madoff and R.T. Schooley. 1982. Mass mortality of harbor seals:
pneumonia associated with influenza A virus. Science 215: 1129-
1131.
46. Geraci, J.R. and T.G. Smith. 1975. Functional hematology of ringed
seals (Phoca hispida) in the Canadian Arctic. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 32: 2559-2564.
47. Gilmartin, W.G., R.L. Delong, A.W. Smith, J.C. Sweeney, B.W. de
Lappe, R.W. Risebrough, L.A. Griner, M.D. Dailey and D.B. Peakall.
1976. Premature parturition in the California sea lion. Journal of
Wildlife Diseases 12: 104-115.
48. Gilmartin, W.G., R.L. DeLong, A.W. Smith, L.A. Griner and M.D.
Dailey. 1987. An investigation into unusual mortality in the
H a w a i i a n m o n k s e a l , Monachus schauinslandi, p . 3 2 - 4 1 . In
W.G. Gilmartin [ed.] Hawaiian monk seal die-off response plan, a
workshop report, 2 Apr. 1980, San Diego, CA. National Marine Fisher-
ies Service, Southwest Fisheries Center Administrative Rep. H-87-19.
49. Hansen, L.J. 1983. The cooperative marine mammal salvage program:
Report on strandings of dead animals in 1981. National Marine Fish-
eries Service, Southwest Fisheries Center Administrative Rep. LJ-83-
03. 20 p.
50. Harwood, J. 1990. The 1988 seal epizootic. Journal of Zoology (Lon-
don) 222: 349-351.
51. Helle, E., M. Olsson and S. Jensen. 1976. DDT and PCB levels and
reproduction in ringed seal from the Bothnian Bay. Ambio 5: 188-189.
52. Hoover, A.A. 1988. Steller sea lion, Eumatopias jubatus, p. 159-193.
In J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals of Alaska: species
accounts with research and management recommendations. Marine
Mammal Commission, Washington, DC.
53. Hoover, A.A. 1988. Harbor seal, Phoca vitulina, p. 125-157. In J.W.
Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals of Alaska: species accounts
with research and management recommendations. Marine Mammal
Commission, Washington, DC.
54. Howell, A.B. 1930. Aquatic mammals: their adaption to life in the
water. Charles C Thomas, Baltimore. 338 p.
 References ... 255

Chapter 5 (continued)

55. Hubbard, R.C. 1968. Husbandry and laboratory care of pinnipeds, p.

299-358. In R.J. Harrison, R.C. Hubbard, R.S. Peterson, C.E. Rice and
R.J. Schusterman [eds.] The behavior and physiology of pinnipeds.
Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, NY.
56. Ke l l y , B. P. 1 9 8 8 . R i nged seal , Phoca hispida, p. 57-75. In
J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals of Alaska: species
accounts with research and management recommendations. Marine
Mammal Commission, Washington, DC.
57. Kelly, B.P. 1988. Bearded seal, Erignathus barbatus, p. 77-94. In
J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals of Alaska: species ac-
counts with research and management recommendations. Marine
Mammal Commission, Washington, DC.
58. Kelly, B.P. 1988. Ribbon seal, Phoca fasciata, p. 95-106. In
J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals of Alaska: species ac-
counts with research and management recommendations. Marine
Mammal Commission, Washington, DC.
59. Kennedy, S., J.A. Smyth, P.F. Cush, P. Duignan, M. Platten, S.J.
McCullough and G.M. Allan. 1989. Histopathologic and immunocy-
tochemical studies of distemper in seals. Veterinary Pathology 26: 97-
103.
60. K e n y o n , K . W . 1 9 8 1 . M o n k s e a l s M o n a c h u s F l e m i n g , 1 8 2 2 ,
p. 195-220. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 2. Academic Press Inc., New York, NY.
61. Keyes, M.C. 1965. Pathology of the northern fur seal. Journal of the
American Veterinary Medical Association 147: 1090-1095.
62. Keyes, M.C. 1968. The nutrition of pinnipeds, p. 359-395. In
R.J. Harrison, R.C. Hubbard, R.S. Peterson, C.E. Rice and R.J.
Schusterman [eds.] The behavior and physiology of pinnipeds.
Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, NY.
63. King, J.E. 1983. Seals of the world. 2nd ed. Cornell University Press,
Ithaca, NY. 240 p.
64. Laist, D.W. 1987. Overview of the biological effects of lost and dis-
carded plastic debris in the marine environment. Marine Pollution
Bulletin 18(6B): 319-326.
65. Laws, R.M. and R.J.F. Taylor. 1957. A mass mortality of crabeater
seals Lobodon carcinophagus (Gray). Proceedings of the Zoological
Society of London 129: 315-325.
66. Le Boeuf, B.J. and K.T. Briggs. 1977. The cost of living in a seal harem.
Mammalia 41: 167-195.
67. Le Boeuf, B.J., R.J. Whiting and R.F. Gantt. 1972. Perinatal behavior
of northern elephant seal females and their young. Behaviour 43:121-
156.
68. Lien, J. (Memorial University, St. John’s, Nfld.). 1992. Personal com-
munication.
69. Loughlin, T.R. and R. Nelson, Jr. 1986. Incidental mortality of northern
sea lions in Shelikof Strait, Alaska. Marine Mammal Science 2: 14-33.
70. Lowry, L.F. (Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Fairbanks, AK). 1992.
256

Chapter 5 (continued)
Personal communication.
71. Lowry, L.F. and F.H. Fay. 1984. Seal eating by walruses in the Bering
and Chukchi Seas. Polar Biology 3: 11-18.
72. Mansfield, A.W. 1958. The biology of the Atlantic walrus, Odobenus
rosmarus rosmarus (Linnaeus) in the eastern Canadian Arctic. Fisher-
ies Research Board of Canada, Manuscript Report Series (Biology)
No. 653. 146 p.
73. Mansfield, A.W. and B. Beck. 1977. The grey seal in eastern Canada.
Environment Canada Fisheries & Marine Service Technical Report No.
704. 81 p.
74. Marine Mammal Center. 1986. Rescue techniques and procedures.
Unpublished protocol issued for personnel responding to strandings.
Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito, CA. 20 p.
75. Marine Mammal Commission. 1992. Annual report to Congress 1991.
Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, DC. 227 p.
76. Markussen, N.H. and P. Have. 1992. Phocine distemper virus infection
in harp seals, Phoca groenlandica. Marine Mammal Science 8: 19-26.
77. McGinnis, S.M. and R.J. Schusterman. 1981. Northern elephant seal
Mirounga angustirostris Gill, 1866, p. 329-349. In S.H. Ridgway and
R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine mammals. Vol. 2. Academic
Press, New York, NY.
78. McLaren, I.A. 1958. The biology of the ringed seal (Phoca
hispida Schreber) in the eastern Canadian Arctic. Fisheries
Research Board of Canada, Bulletin No. 118. 97 p.
79. Merrick, R.L., T.R. Loughlin, and D.G. Calkins. 1987. Decline in
a b u n d a n c e o f t h e N o r t h e r n s e a l i o n , E u m e t o p i a s j u b a t u s,
in Alaska, 1956-86. Fishery Bulletin 85: 351-365.
80. Mitchell, E.D. 1975. Parallelism and convergence in the evolution of
Otariidae and Phocidae. Rapports et Procès-Verbaux des Réunions
Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer 169: 12-26.
81. Odell, D.K. 1981. California seal lion Zalophus californianus
(Lesson, 1828), p. 67-97. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison
[eds.] Handbook of marine mammals. Vol. 1. Academic Press Inc.,
New York, NY.
82. Odell, D.K. 1991. A review of the southeastern United States marine
mammal stranding network: 1978-1987, p. 19-23. In J.E.
Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the
United States: proceedings of the second marine mammal stranding
workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report.
NMFS 98.
83. Osterhaus, A.D.M.E., J. Groen, H.E.M. Spijkers, H.W.J. Broeders,
F.G.C.M. UytdeHaag, P. de Vries, J.S. Teppema, I.K.G. Visser, M.W.G.
van de Bildt and E.J. Vedder. 1990. Mass mortality in seals caused by
a newly discovered morbillivirus. Veterinary Microbiology 23: 343-350.
84. Parsons, J. (Nova Scotia Stranding Network, Nova Scotia Museum,
Halifax, Nova Scotia). 1992. Personal communication.
85. Pike, G.C. and I.B. MacAskie. 1969. Marine mammals of British
Columbia. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin No. 171. 53p.
 References ... 257

Chapter 5 (continued)
86. Quakenbush, L.T. 1988. Spotted seal, Phoca largha, p. 107-124. In
J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals of Alaska: species ac-
counts with research and management recommendations. Marine
Mammal Commission, Washington, DC.
87. Ralls, K., R.L. Brownell, Jr. and J. Ballou. 1980. Differential mortality
by sex and age in mammals, with specific reference to the sperm
whale. Report of the International Whaling Commission, Special Issue
2: 233-243.
88. Reeves, R.R. and J.K. Ling. 1981. Hooded seal Cystophora cristata
Erxleben, 1777, p. 171-194. In S. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.]
Handbook of marine mammals. Vol.2. Academic Press Inc., New York,
NY.
89. Reijnders, P.J.H. 1980. Organochlorine and heavy metal residues in
harbour seals from the Wadden Sea and their possible effects on
reproduction. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 14: 30-65.
90. Repenning, C.A. 1976. Adaptive evolution of sea lions and walruses.
Systematic Zoology 25: 375-390.
91. Ronald, K. and P.J. Healey. 1981. Harp seal Phoca groenlandica,
p. 55-87. In S.H. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 2. Academic Press Inc., New York, NY.
92. Ruempler, G. 1986. [Biology, ecology and pathology of seals
( Phoca vitulina L., 1758) of the North Sea]. Zeitschrift des
Koelner Zoo 29: 135-157.
93. St. Aubin, D.J. 1990. Physiologic and toxic effects on pinnipeds, p.
103-127. In J.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Sea mammals
and oil: confronting the risks. Academic Press Inc., San Diego, CA.
94. Sandegren, F.E. 1970. Breeding and maternal behavior of the Steller
s e a l i o n ( E u m e t o p i a s j u b a t u s) i n A l a s k a . M . S . T h e s i s ,
University of Alaska, College, AK.
95. Scheffer, V.B. 1958. Seals, sea lions and walruses. Stanford Univer-
sity Press, Stanford, CA. 179 p.
96. Schusterman, R.J. 1981. Steller sea lion Eumetopias jubatus (Schreber,
1776), p. 119-141. In S. Ridgway and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 1. Academic Press Inc., New York, NY.
97. Scordino, J. 1991. Overview of the northwest region marine mammal
stranding network, 1977-1987, p. 35-42. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K.
Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the United States: proceed-
ings of the second marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL,
Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report. NMFS 98.
98. Seagars, D.J. and E.A. Jozwiak. 1991. The California marine mammal
stranding network, 1972-1987: implementation, status, recent events,
and goals, p. 25-33. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine
mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of the second
marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987.
NOAA Technical Report. NMFS 98.
99. Sease, J.L. and D.C. Chapman. 1988. Pacific walrus, Odobenus
rosmarus divergens, p. 17-38. In J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected
marine mammals of Alaska: species accounts with research and
258

Chapter 5 (continued)

management recommendations. Marine Mammal Commission,

Washington, DC.
100. Sergeant, D.E. 1991. Harp seals, man and ice. Canadian Special
Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 114. 153 p.
101. Smith, T.G. 1976. The icy birthplace of the Arctic ringed seal. Cana-
dian Geographical Journal 93: 58-63.
102. Smith, T.G. 1980. Polar bear predation of ringed and bearded seals in
the land-fast sea ice habitat. Canadian Journal of Zoology 58:
2201-2209.
103. Smith, T.G. 1987. The ringed seal, Phoca hispida, of the Canadian
western Arctic. Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
No. 216. 81 p.
104. Spotte, S. 1990. Artificial milks for unweaned marine mammals, p.
521-532. In L.A. Dierauf [ed.] CRC handbook of marine mammal
medicine: health, disease, and rehabilitation. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL.
105. Steiger, G.H., J. Calambokidis, J.C. Cubbage, D.E. Skilling, A.W.
Smith and D.H. Gribble. 1989. Mortality of harbor seal pups at different
sites in the inland waters of Washington. Journal of Wildlife Diseases
25: 319-328.
106. Stobo, W.T. and B. Beck. 1987. Harbour seal pup production and pre-
weaning mortality on Sable Island. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial
Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, University of
Miami, Miami, FL. Society for Marine Mammalogy.
107. Stroud, R.K. and M.D. Dailey. 1978. Parasites and associated pathol-
ogy observed in pinnipeds stranded along the Oregon coast. Journal
of Wildlife Diseases 14: 292-298.
108. Stroud, R.K. and T.J. Roffe. 1979. Causes of death in marine mam-
mals stranded along the Oregon coast. Journal of Wildlife Diseases
15: 91-98.
109. Sweeney, J. 1974. Procedures for clinical management of pinnipeds.
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 165: 811-814.
110. Trillmich, F. 1985. Effects of 1982/83 El Niño on Galapagos Island fur
seals and sea lions. Noticias de Galapagos 42: 22-23.
111. Visser, I.K.G., J.S. Teppema and A.D.M.E. Osterhaus. 1991. Virus
infections of seals and other pinnipeds. Reviews in Medical Microbiol-
ogy 2: 105-114.
112. Wirtz, W.O., II. 1968. Reproduction, growth and development and
juvenile mortality in the Hawaiian monk seal. Journal of Mammalogy
49: 229-238.
113. Wyatt, T. 1980. Morrell’s seals. Journal du Conseil, Conseil Interna-
tional pour l’Exploration de la Mer 39: 1-6.
114. Wyss, A.R. 1989. Flippers and pinniped phylogeny: has the problem of
convergence been overrated? Marine Mammal Science 5: 343-360.
115. York, A.E. 1987. Northern fur seal, Callorhinus ursinus, Eastern Pa-
cific population (Pribilof Islands, Alaska, and San Miguel Island,
California), p. 9-21. In J.P. Croxall and R.L. Gentry [eds.] Status,
biology and ecology of fur seals: proceedings of an international
 References ... 259

Chapter 5 (continued)
symposium and workshop, Cambridge, England, 23-27 Apr. 1984.
NOAA Technical Report. NMFS 51.

Chapter 6.
1. Addison, R.F. 1989. Organochlorines and marine mammal reproduc-
tion. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46: 360-368.
2. Backus, R.H. and W.E. Schevill. The stranding of a Cuvier’s beaked
whale (Ziphius cavirostris) in Rhode Island, U.S.A. Norsk Hvalfangst-
tidende 5:189-193.
3. Baird, R.W., K.M. Langelier and P.J. Stacey. 1988. Stranded whale
and dolphin program of B.C. - 1987 report. British Columbia Veterinary
Medical Association Wildlife Veterinary Report 1: 9-12.
4. Baker, V. [ed.]. 1986?. Marine mammal rescue. New Zealand Depart-
ment of Conservation. 103 p.
5. Balcomb, K.C., III 1987. The whales of Hawaii. Marine Mammal Fund,
San Francisco. 99 p.
6. Balcomb, K.C., III. 1989. Baird’s beaked whale Berardius bairdii
Stejneger, 1883: Arnoux’s beaked whale Berardius arnuxii
Duvernoy, 1851, p. 261-288. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison
[eds.] Handbook of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the
larger toothed whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
7. Barnes, L.G., D.P. Domning and C.E. Ray. 1985. Status of studies on
fossil marine mammals. Marine Mammal Science 1: 15-53.
8. Barnes, L.G. and E.D. Mitchell. 1978. Cetacea, p. 582-602. In
V.J. Maglio and H.B.S. Cooke [eds.] Evolution of African mammals.
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
9. Best, P.B.(Marine Mammal Research Institute, University of Cape
Town, Cape Town, South Africa). 1992. Personal communication.
10. Bigg, M. 1982. An assessment of killer whale (Orcinus orca)
stocks off Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Report of the Interna-
tional Whaling Commission 32: 655-666.
11. Bonde, R.K. and T.J. O’Shea. 1989. Sowerby’s beaked whale
( Mesoplodon bidens) in the Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Mammalogy 70:
447-449.
12. Bossart, G.D., D.K. Odell and N.H. Altman. 1985. Cardiomyopathy in
stranded pygmy and dwarf sperm whales. Journal of the American
Veterinary Medical Association 187: 1137-1140.
13. Brodie, P.F. 1989. The white whale Delphinapterus leucas (Pallas,
1776), p. 119-144. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the larger toothed
whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
14. Burn, D.M. and G.P. Scott. 1988. Synopsis of available information on
marine mammal-fisheries interactions in the southeastern United
States: preliminary report. National Marine Fisheries Service, South-
east Fisheries Center, Coastal Fishery Resource Division, Miami
Laboratory, Miami, FL. 36 p.
15. Burns, J.J. and G.A. Seaman. 1985. Investigation of belukha whales in
coastal waters of western and northern Alaska: II. biology and ecology.
Final Report to U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
260

Chapter 6 (continued)
Atmospheric Administration, Offshore Continental Shelf Environmen-
tal Assessment Program (OCSEAP), Contract NA81RAC00049. Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Fairbanks. 129 p.
16. Caldwell, D.K. and M.C. Caldwell. 1989. Pygmy sperm whale
Kogia breviceps (de Blainville, 1838): dwarf sperm whale Kogia
simus Owen, 1866, p. 235-260. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison
[eds.] Handbook of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the
larger toothed whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
17. Caldwell, M.C. and D.K. Caldwell. 1966. Epimeletic (care-giving)
behavior in Cetacea, p. 755-783. In K.S. Norris [ed.] Whales, dolphins
and porpoises. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Ange-
les, CA.
18. Cawthorn, M. (Marine Mammal Specialist, Wellington, New Zealand).
1992. Personal communication.
19. Cockrill, W.R. 1960. Pathology of the Cetacea: a veterinary study on
whales - Part I. British Veterinary Journal 116: 1-28.
20. Cockrill, W.R. 1960. Pathology of the Cetacea: a veterinary study on
whales - Part II. British Veterinary Journal 116: 175-190.
21. Cowan, D.F. 1966. Pathology of the pilot whale Globicephala
melaena. Archives of Pathology 82: 178-189.
22. Cowan, D.F. and W.A. Walker. 1979. Disease factors in Stenella
attenuata and Stenella longirostris taken in the eastern
tropical Pacific yellowfin tuna purse seine fishery. National Marine
Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Center Administrative Rep.
No. LJ-79-32C. 19 p.
23. Cowan, D.F., W.A. Walker and R.L. Brownell, Jr. 1986. Pathology of
small cetaceans stranded along southern California beaches, p. 323-
367. In M.M. Bryden and R.J. Harrison [eds.] Research on dolphins.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
24. Cummings, W.C. 1985. Bryde’s whale Balaenoptera edeni
Anderson, 1878, p. 137-154. In S.H. Ridgway and R.
Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians
and baleen whales. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando.
25. Cummings, W.C. 1985. Right whales Eubalaena glacialis (Müller,
1776) and Eubalaena australis (Desmoulins, 1822), p. 275-304. In
S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine mammals,
Vol. 3: The sirenians and baleen whales. Academic Press, Inc.,
Orlando.
26. Dailey, M., M. Walsh, D. Odell and T. Campbell. 1981. Evidence of
prenatal infection in the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)
with the lungworm Halocercus lagenorhynchi (Nematoda:
Pseudaliidae). Journal of Wildlife Diseases 22(1): 164-165.
27. Deiter, R.L. 1991. Recovery and necropsy of marine mammal car-
casses in and near the Point Reyes National Seashore, May 1982 -
March 1987, p. 123-141. In J.E. Reynolds III and D.K. Odell [eds.]
Marine mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of the
second marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5,
1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
28. Domingo, M., L. Ferrer, M. Pumarola, A. Marco, J. Plana, S. Kennedy,
 References ... 261

Chapter 6 (continued)
M. McAliskey and B.K. Rima. 1990. Morbillivirus in dolphins. Nature
348: 21.
29. Dudok van Heel, W.H. 1972. Transport of dolphins. Aquatic Mammals
1: 1-32.
30. Duignan, P.J., J.R. Geraci, J.A. Raga and N. Calzada. 1992. Pathol-
o g y o f m o r b i l l i v i r u s i n f e c t i o n i n s t r i p e d d o l p h i n s (S t e n e l l a
coeruleoalba) from Valencia and Murcia. Canadian Journal of Veteri-
nary Research 56: 242-248.
31. Early, G.A. (New England Aquarium, Boston, MA). 1992. Personal
communication.
32. Early, G.A. and T.P. McKenzie. 1991. The Northeast regional marine
mammal stranding network, p. 63-68. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell
[eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of
the second marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec.3-5,
1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
33. Elsner, R., J. Pirie, D.D. Kennedy and S. Schemmer. 1974. Functional
circulatory systems of cetacean appendages, p. 143-159. In
R.J. Harrison [ed.] Functional anatomy of marine mammals. Vol. 2.
Academic Press, London and New York.
34. Fowler, C.W. 1984. Density dependence in cetacean populations, p.
373-379. In W.F. Perrin, R.L. Brownell, Jr. and D.P. DeMaster [eds.]
Reproduction in whales, dolphins and porpoises. Report of the Inter-
national Whaling Commission, Special Issue 6. International Whaling
Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
35. Fritts, T.H., A.B. Irvine, R.D. Jennings, L.A. Collum, W. Hoffman, and
M. A. McGehee. 1983. Turtles, birds, and mammals in the northern
Gulf of Mexico and nearby Atlantic waters. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-82/65. 455 p.
36. Gales, N. (Underwater World, Perth, Australia). 1992. Personal com-
munication.
37. Gambell, R. 1985. Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis Lesson,
1828, p. 155-170. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.]
Handbook of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians and baleen
whales. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando.
38. Gambell, R. 1985. Fin whale Balaenoptera physalus
(Linnaeus, 1758), p. 171-192. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison
[eds.] Handbook of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians and baleen
whales. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando.
39. Gaskin, D.E. 1982. The ecology of whales and dolphins. Heinemann
Publ., Exeter, NH. 459 p.
40. Gaskin, D.E., G.J.D. Smith, A.P. Watson, W.Y. Yasui and D.B. Yurick.
1984. Reproduction in the porpoises (Phocoenidae): implications for
management, p. 135-148. In W.F. Perrin, R.L. Brownell, Jr. and D.P.
DeMaster [eds.] Reproduction in whales, dolphins and porpoises.
Report of the International Whaling Commission., Special Issue 6.
International Whaling Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
41. Geraci, J.R. 1981. Marine mammal care. 2nd ed. University of Guelph,
Guelph, Ontario. 98 p.
42. Geraci, J.R. 1989. Clinical investigation of the 1987-88 mass mortality
262

Chapter 6 (continued)
of bottlenose dolphins along the U.S. central and south Atlantic coast.
Final Report to National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Navy (Office of
Naval Research) and Marine Mammal Commission. 63 p.
43. Geraci, J.R. 1990. Physiologic and toxic effects on cetaceans, p. 167-
197. In J.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Sea mammals and oil:
confronting the risks. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA.
44. Geraci, J.R., D.M. Anderson, R.J. Timperi, D.J. St. Aubin, G.A. Early,
J.H. Prescott and C.A. Mayo. 1989. Humpback whales (Megaptera
novaeangliae) fatally poisoned by dinoflagellate toxin. Canadian Jour-
nal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46: 1895-1898.
45. Geraci, J.R., M.D. Dailey and D.J. St. Aubin. 1978. Parasitic mastitis
in the Atlantic white-sided dolphin, Lagenorhynchus acutus,
as a probable factor in herd productivity. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 35: 1350-1355.
46. Geraci, J.R., N.C. Palmer and D.J. St. Aubin. 1988. Reply to Beland
and Martineau. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
45: 1856.
47. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1979. Stress and disease in the marine
environment: insights through strandings, p. 223-233. In J.R.
Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals: insights
through strandings. National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA. PB-293 890.
48. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1987. Effects of parasites on marine
mammals. International Journal for Parasitology 17: 407-414.
49. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin and G.A. Early. 1987. Cetacean mass
strandings: the study of stress and shock. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial
Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, 1987,
University of Miami, Miami, FL. Society for Marine Mammalogy.
50. Green, R.F. 1972. Observations on the anatomy of some cetaceans
and pinnipeds, p. 247-297. In S.H. Ridgway [ed.] Mammals of
the sea: biology and medicine. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, IL.
51. Hare, M.P. and J.M. Mead. 1987. Handbook for determination of
adverse human-marine mammal interactions from necropsies. Na-
tional Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Cen-
ter Processed Rep. 87-06. 35 p.
52. Harrison, R.J., F.R. Johnson and B.A. Young. 1970. The oesophagus
a n d s t o m a c h o f d o l p h i n s (T u r s i o p s , D e l p h i n u s , S t e n e l l a) .
Journal of Zoology (London) 160: 377-390.
53. Hay, K.A. and A.W. Mansfield. 1989. Narwhal Monodon monoceros
Linnaeus, 1758, p. 145-176. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.]
Handbook of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the larger
toothed whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
54. H a z a r d , K . 1 9 8 8 . B e l u g a w h a l e (D e l p h i n a p t e r u s l e u c a s) ,
p. 195-235. In J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals of
Alaska: species accounts with research and management
recommendations. Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, DC.
55. Hersh, S.L. and D.K. Odell. 1986. Mass stranding of Fraser’s dolphin,
Lagenodelphis hosei, i n t h e w e s t e r n N o r t h A t l a n t i c . M a r i n e
Mammal Science 2: 73-76.
 References ... 263

Chapter 6 (continued)
56. Heyning, J.E. 1989. Cuvier’s beaked whale Ziphius cavirostris G.
Cuvier, 1823, p. 289-308. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.]
Handbook of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the larger
toothed whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
57. Hobbs, L. 1982. Appendix A. Tags on whales, dolphins, and porpoises,
p. 218-230. In S. Leatherwood, R.R. Reeves, W.F. Perrin and W.E.
Evans. Whales, dolphins, and porpoises of the eastern North Pacific
and adjacent Arctic waters. NOAA Technical Report, NMFS Circular
144.
58. Howell, A.B. 1930. Aquatic mammals: their adaption to life in the
water. Charles C. Thomas, Baltimore, MD. 338 p.
59. Irvine, A.B., R.S. Wells and M.D. Scott. 1982. An evaluation of tech-
niques for tagging small odontocete cetaceans. Fishery Bulletin 80:
135-143.
60. Kasuya, T. and H. Marsh. 1984. Life history and reproductive biology
of the short-finned pilot whale, Globicephala macrorhynchus,
off the Pacific coast of Japan, p. 259-310. In W.F. Perrin, R.L.
Brownell and D.P. DeMaster [eds.] Reproduction in whales, dolphins
and porpoises. Report of the International Whaling Commission,
Special Issue 6. International Whaling Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
61. Katona, S.K., V. Rough, and D.T. Richardson. 1983. A field guide to
the whales, porpoises and seals of the Gulf of Maine and eastern
Canada. 3rd ed. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, NY. 255 p.
62. Kooyman, G.L. 1973. Respiratory adaptations in marine mammals.
American Zoologist 13: 457-468.
63. Kraus, S.D. 1990. Rates and potential causes of mortality in North
A t l a n t i c r i g h t w h a l e s (Eubalaena glacialis) . M a r i n e M a m m a l
Science 6: 278-291.
64. Krieger, K. (New England Aquarium, Boston, MA). 1992. Personal
communication.
65. Lambertsen, R.H. and B.A. Kohn. 1987. Unusual multisystemic pathol-
ogy in a sperm whale bull. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 23: 510-514.
66. Leatherwood, S., D.K. Caldwell, and H.E. Winn. 1976. Whales, dol-
phins, and porpoises of the western North Atlantic: a guide to their
identification. NOAA Technical Report, NMFS Circular 396, Seattle,
WA. 176 p.
67. Leatherwood, S., R.R. Reeves, W.F. Perrin and W.E. Evans. 1982.
Whales, dolphins, and porpoises of the eastern North Pacific and
adjacent Arctic waters: a guide to their identification. NOAA Technical
Report, NMFS Circular 444, Seattle, WA. 245 p.
68. Lien, J. (Ocean Sciences Centre, Memorial University of Newfound-
land, St. John’s, Newfoundland). 1992. Personal communication.
69. Lockyer, C. 1976. Growth and energy budgets of large baleen whales
from the southern hemisphere. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organiza-
tion of the United Nations) Advisory Committee on Marine Resources
Research, ACMRR/MM/SC/41. 179 p.
70. Lockyer, C. 1984. Review of baleen whale (Mysticeti) reproduction and
implications for management, p. 27-50. In W.F. Perrin, R.L. Brownell,
264

Chapter 6 (continued)

Jr. and D.P. DeMaster [eds.] Reproduction in whales, dolphins and

porpoises. Report of the International Whaling Commission, Special
Issue 6. International Whaling Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
71. Lowry, L.G. (Alaska Dept. Fish and Game, Fairbanks, AK). 1992.
Personal communication.
72. Lowry, L.G., R.R. Nelson and K.J. Frost. 1987. Observations of killer
whales, Orcinus orca, in western Alaska: sightings, strandings,
and predation on other marine mammals. Canadian Field Naturalist
101: 6-12.
73. Martineau, D., A. Lagace, P. Beland, R. Higgins, D. Armstrong and
L.R. Shugart. 1988. Pathology of stranded beluga whales
( Delphinapterus leucas) from the St. Lawrence estuary, Quebec,
Canada. Journal of Comparative Pathology 98: 287-311.
74. Mead, J.G. 1975. Anatomy of the external nasal passages and facial
complex in the Delphinidae (Mammalia: Cetacea). Smithsonian Con-
tributions to Zoology 207: 1-72.
75. Mead, J.G. 1979. An analysis of cetacean strandings along the east
coast of the United States, p. 54-68. In J.R. Geraci and D.J.
St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals: insights through
strandings. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
NTIS PB-293 890.
76. Mead, J.G. 1989. Bottlenose whales Hyperoodon ampullatus
(Forster, 1770) and Hyperoodon planifrons Flower, 1882,
p. 321-348. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the larger toothed
whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
77. Mead, J.G. 1989. Beaked whales of the genus Mesoplodon,
p. 349-430. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the larger toothed
whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
78. Mead, J.G. (Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC). 1992. Personal
communication.
79. Murphy, T. (South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Depart-
ment, Charleston, SC). 1992. Personal communication.
80. Nagorsen, D.W. and G.E. Stewart. 1983. A dwarf sperm whale
( Kogia simus ) from the Pacific coast of Canada. Journal of
Mammalogy 64: 505-506.
81. Nerini, M. 1984. A review of gray whale feeding ecology, p. 423-450.
In M.L. Jones, S.L. Swartz and S. Leatherwood [eds.] The gray
whale Eschrichtius robustus. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL.
82. Nitta, E.T. 1991. The marine mammal stranding network for Hawaii, an
overview, p. 55-62. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine
mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of the second
marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987.
NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
83. Norris, K.S. and T.P. Dohl. 1980. The structure and functions of
cetacean schools, p. 211-261. In L.M. Herman [ed.] Cetacean
behavior: mechanisms and functions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York, NY.
 References ... 265

Chapter 6 (continued)

84. Norris, K.S. and J.H. Prescott. 1961. Observations on Pacific ceta-
ceans of Californian and Mexican waters. University of California
Publications in Zoology 63: 291-401.
85. Obendorf, D.L. and J.H. Arundel. 1986. Veterinary aspects of whale
strandings, p. 42-67. In R.M. Warneke [ed.] Victorian whale rescue
plan: a contingency plan for strandings of cetaceans (whales, dolphins
and porpoises) on the Victorian coastline. Fisheries and Wildlife
Service, Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands, Victoria.
86. Odell, D.K. 1991. A review of the southeastern United States marine
mammal stranding network: 1978-1987, p. 19-21. In J.E. Reynolds
and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the United States:
proceedings of the second marine mammal stranding workshop,
Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
87. Ohsumi, S. 1979. Interspecies relationships among some biological
parameters in cetaceans and estimation of the natural mortality coef-
ficient of the Southern Hemisphere minke whale. Report of the Inter-
national Whaling Commission 29: 397-406.
88. Overstrom, N.A., S. Spotte, J.L. Dunn, A.D. Goren and H.W. Kaufman.
1 9 9 1 . A r e s i d e n t b e l u k h a w h a l e (D e l p h i n a p t e r u s l e u c a s) i n
Long Island Sound, p. 143-149. In J.E. Reynolds III and D.K.
Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the United States:
proceedings of the second marine mammal stranding workshop, Mi-
ami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
89. Perrin, W.F. 1992. (NMFS, Southwest Fisheries Center, La Jolla, CA).
Personal communication.
90. Perrin, W.F., E.D. Mitchell, J.G. Mead, D.K. Caldwell, M.C. Caldwell,
P.J.H. van Bree and W.H. Dawbin. 1987. Revision of the spotted
dolphins, Stenella spp. Marine Mammal Science 3: 99-170.
91. Perrin, W.F. and A.C. Myrick, Jr. [eds.]. 1980. Report of the workshop,
p. 1-50. In Age determination of toothed whales and sirenians. Report
of the International Whaling Commission, Special Issue 3. Interna-
tional Whaling Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
92. Perrin, W.F. and J.E. Powers. 1980. Role of a nematode in natural
mortality of spotted dolphins. Journal of Wildlife Management 44: 960-
963.
93. Perrin, W.F. and S.B. Reilly. 1984. Reproductive parameters of dol-
phins and small whales of the family Delphinidae, p. 97-133. In
W.F. Perrin, R.L. Brownell, Jr. and D.P. DeMaster [eds.] Reproduction
in whales, dolphins and porpoises. Report of the International Whaling
Commission, Special Issue 6. International Whaling Commission,
Cambridge, U.K.
94. Phillips, S.S. 1988. Observations on a mass stranding of Pseudorca
crassidens at Crowdy Head, New South Wales, p. 33-41. In
M.L. Augee [ed.] Marine mammals of Australasia: field biology
and captive management. Royal Zoological Society of New South
Wales, Special Publication, Sydney, New South Wales.
95. Pike, G.C. and I.B. MacAskie. 1969. Marine mammals of British
Columbia. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin No. 171. 53 p.
266

Chapter 6 (continued)
96. Pippard, L. 1985. Status of the St. Lawrence River population of
beluga. Canadian Field Naturalist. 99: 438-450.
97. Pivorunas, A. 1979. The feeding mechanisms of baleen whales. Ameri-
can Scientist 67: 432-440.
98. Ralls, K., R.L. Brownell, Jr. and J. Ballou. 1980. Differential mortality
by sex and age in mammals, with specific reference to the sperm
whale. Report of the International Whaling Commission, Special Issue
2: 233-243.
99. Read, A.J. and D.E. Gaskin. 1988. Incidental catch of harbor por-
poises by gill nets. Journal of Wildlife Management 52: 517-523.
100. Reeves, R.R. and S.K. Katona. 1980. Extralimital records of white
w h a l e s ( D e l p h i n a p t e r u s l e u c a s) i n e a s t e r n N o r t h A m e r i c a n
waters. Canadian Field Naturalist 94: 239-247.
101. Reeves, R.R. and S. Leatherwood. 1985. Bowhead whale Balaena
mysticetus Linnaeus, 1758, p. 305-344. In S.H. Ridgway and R.
Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians
and baleen whales. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando.
102. Reeves, R.R. and E. Mitchell. 1987. Underwater world: cetaceans of
Canada. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Ottawa. 27 p.
103. Rice, D.W. 1989. Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus Linnaeus,
1758, p. 177-233. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals. Vol. 4: River dolphins and the larger toothed
whales. Academic Press Ltd., London and San Diego.
104. Ridgway, S.H. 1972. Homeostasis in the aquatic environment, p. 590-
747. In S.H. Ridgway [ed.] Mammals of the sea: biology and medicine.
Charles C Thomas, Springfield, IL.
105. Ridgway, S.H. (Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA). 1992.
Personal communication.
106. Ridgway, S.H. and M.D. Dailey. 1972. Cerebral and cerebellar involve-
ment of trematode parasites in dolphins and their possible role in
stranding. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 8: 33-43.
107. Ridgway, S.H. and C.A. Fenner. 1982. Weight-length relationships of
wild-caught and captive Atlantic bottlenose dolphins. Journal of the
American Veterinary Medical Association 181: 1310-1315.
108. Right Whale Recovery Team. 1990. Draft national recovery plan for
the northern right whale, Eubalaena glacialis. U.S. Dept. Commerce,
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington, DC. 77 p.
109. Robson, F. 1984. Strandings: ways to save whales. Science Press,
Johannesburg (South Africa). 124 p.
110. Rommel, S.A., D.A. Pabst, W.A. McLellan, J.G. Mead and C.W. Potter.
1992. Anatomical evidence for a countercurrent heat exchanger asso-
ciated with dolphin testes. Anatomical Record 232: 150-156.
111. Rowell, S.F. 1985. Stranded whales. Veterinary Record 116: 167.
112. Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. 1985. Report
of the stranded whale workshop: a practical and humanitarian ap-
proach. R.S.P.C.A., Horsham (U.K.). 64 p.
113. Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. 1988. First aid
for stranded cetaceans. R.S.P.C.A., Horsham (U.K.). 20 p.
 References ... 267

Chapter 6 (continued)
114. Scheffer, V.B. 1989. How much is a whale’s life worth, anyway?
Oceanus 32(1): 109-111.
115. Schmidly, D.J. 1981. Marine mammals of the southeastern United
States coast and the Gulf of Mexico. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Office of Biological Services, Washington, DC.,FWS/OBS-80/41. 163 p.
116. Schmidly, D.J. and S.H. Shane. 1978. A biological assessment of the
cetacean fauna of the Texas coast. Marine Mammal Commission,
Washington,DC. 38 p.
117. Scholander, P.F. and W.E. Schevill. 1955. Counter-current vascular
heat exchange in the fins of whales. Journal of Applied Physiology 8:
279-287.
118. Schryver, H.F., W. Medway and J.F. Williams. 1967. The stomach
fluke Braunina cordiformis in the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin. Journal
of the American Veterinary Medical Association 151: 884-886.
119. Scordino, J. 1991. Overview of the northwest region marine mammal
stranding network, 1977-1987, p. 35-42. In J.E. Reynolds and
D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the United States:
proceedings of the second marine mammal stranding workshop, Mi-
ami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
120. Scott, M.C., R.S. Wells and A.B. Irvine. 1990. A long-term study of
bottlenose dolphins on the west coast of Florida, p. 235-244. In
S. Leatherwood and R.R. Reeves [eds.] The bottlenose dolphin.
Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA.
121. Seagars, D.J. and E.A. Jozwiak. 1991. The California marine mammal
stranding network, 1971-1987: implementation, status, recent events,
and goals, p. 25-33. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine
mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of the second
marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987.
NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
122. Sergeant, D.E. 1962. The biology of the pilot or pothead whale
Globicephala melaena (Traill) in Newfoundland waters. Fisheries Re-
search Board of Canada, Bulletin No. 132. 84 p.
123. Sergeant, D.E. and H.D. Fisher. 1957. The smaller Cetacea of eastern
Canadian waters. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada
14: 83-115.
124. Sergeant, D.E., A.W. Mansfield and B. Beck. 1970. Inshore records of
Cetacea for Eastern Canada, 1949-1968. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 27: 1903-1915.
125. Sergeant, D.E. and G.A. Williams. 1983. Two recent entrapments of
narwhals, Monodon monoceros, in Arctic Canada. Canadian
Field Naturalist 97: 459-460.
126. Simpson, J.G. and M.B. Gardner. 1972. Comparative microscopic
a n a t o m y o f s e l e c t e d m a r i n e m a m m a l s , p . 2 9 8 - 4 1 8 . In S . H .
Ridgway [ed.] Mammals of the sea: biology and medicine. Charles C.
Thomas, Springfield, IL.
127. Smith, T.D., D.J. St. Aubin and J.R. Geraci. 1990. Research on beluga
whales, Delphinapterus leucas: introduction and overview, p. 1-5.
In T.D. Smith, D.J. St. Aubin and J.R. Geraci [eds.] Advances
in research on the beluga whale, Delphinapterus leucas. Canadian
268

Chapter 6 (continued)
Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences No. 224.
128. Smithsonian Institution Marine Mammal Events Program. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, DC. (Records, courtesy J. Mead).
129. Stewart, B.S. and S. Leatherwood. 1985. Minke whale Balaenoptera
acutorostrata Lacépède, 1804, p. 91-136. In S.H. Ridgway and R.
Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians
and baleen whales. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando.
130. Stolk, A. 1962. Tumors in whales. III. Granuloma malignum (Hodgkin’s
disease) in the fin whale Balaenoptera physalus. Proceedings of the
Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenchappen 65: 250-268.
131. Stroud, R.K. and T.J. Roffe. 1979. Causes of death in marine mammals
stranded along the Oregon coast. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 15: 91-
98.
132. Sullivan, R.M. and W.J. Houck. 1979. Sightings and strandings of
cetaceans from northern California. Journal of Mammalogy 60: 828-
833.
133. Sweeney, J.C. 1989. What practitioners should know about whale
stranding, p. 721-727. In R. Kirk [ed.] Current Veterinary Therapy. 10th
ed. W.B. Saunders, Co., Philadelphia, PA.
134. Sweeney, J.C. and S.H. Ridgway. 1975. Procedures for the clinical
management of small cetaceans. Journal of the American Veterinary
Medical Association 167: 540-545.
135. Tarpley, R.J. 1981. Structural studies of the alimentary system of the
bowhead whale, Balaena mysticetus, p. 1-42. In R.J. Tarpley,
R.F. Sis, M.J. Shively and G.G. Stott, Structural studies of the alimen-
tary, reproductive and skeletal systems of the bowhead whale
( Balaena mysticetus). Final Report for the Period 1 Sept. 81
through 31 Aug. 82 to the North Slope Borough, Barrow, Alaska.
Department of Veterinary Anatomy, Texas A&M College of
Veterinary Medicine, College Station, TX.
136. Tarpley, R.J. 1987. Texas marine mammal stranding network. South-
west Veterinarian 38: 51-58.
137. Thomson, C. and J.R. Geraci. 1986. Cortisol, aldosterone, and
leucocytes in the stress response of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops
truncatus. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
43: 1010-1016.
138. Townsend, F. (Gulfarium, Ft. Walton Beach, FL). 1992. Personal
communication.
139. U.S. Humpback Whale Recovery Team. 1989. National recovery plan
for the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in waters
of the United States of America. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA,
NMFS, Washington, DC. 115 p.
140. U.S. Marine Mammal Commission. 1992. Annual report to Congress
1991. Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, DC. 227 p.
141. Van Bressem, M.F., I.K.G. Visser, M.W.G. Van De Bildt, J.S. Teppema,
J.A. Raga and A.D.M.E. Osterhaus. 1991. Morbillivirus infection in
M e d i t e r r a n e a n s t r i p e d d o l p h i n s (S t e n e l l a c o e r u l e o a l b a) .
Veterinary Record 129: 471-472.
 References ... 269

Chapter 6 (continued)
142. Vidal, O. 1991. Catalogue of osteological collections of aquatic mam-
mals from Mexico. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 97. 36 p.
143. Walker, W.A. and D.F. Cowan. 1981. Air sinus parasitism and pathol-
o g y i n f r e e - r a n g i n g c o m m o n d o l p h i n s (D e l p h i n u s d e l p h i s)
in the Eastern Tropical Pacific. National Marine Fisheries Service,
Southwest Fisheries Center Administrative Rep. No. LJ-81-23C. 19 p.
144. Walsh, M. (Sea World, Inc., Orlando, FL). 1992. Personal communica-
tion.
145. Warneke, R.M. [ed.]. 1986. Victorian whale rescue plan: a contingency
plan for strandings of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) on
the Victorian coastline. Fisheries and Wildlife Service, Department of
Conservation, Forests and Lands, Victoria. 75 p.
146. Watson, L. 1981. Sea guide to whales of the world. Elsevier-Dutton
Publ. Co., New York, NY. 302 p.
147. Wells, R.S., A.B. Irvine and M.D. Scott. 1980. The social ecology of
inshore odontocetes, p. 263-317. In L.M. Herman [ed.] Cetacean
behavior: mechanisms and functions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
York, NY.
148. Wilkinson, D. 1991. Report to: Assistant Administrator for Fisheries.
Program review of the marine mammal stranding networks. U.S.
Department of Commerce, NOAA, NMFS, Washington, DC. 171 p.
149. Winn, H. (Principal Investigator). 1980. Cetacean and Turtle Assess-
ment Program, University of Rhode Island. A characterization of
marine mammals and turtles in the Mid-and North Atlantic areas of the
U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, annual report for 1980. Bureau of Land
Management, Washington, DC. 468 p.
150. Winn, H.E. and N.E. Reichley. 1985. Humpback whale Megaptera
novaeangliae (Borowski, 1781), p. 241-273. In S.H. Ridgway and
R. Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians
and baleen whales. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando.
151. Wolman, A.A. 1985. Gray whale Eschrichtius robustus (Lilljeborg,
1861), p. 67-90. In S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison [eds.] Handbook
of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians and baleen whales. Aca-
demic Press, Inc., Orlando.
152. Würsig, B. 1990. Cetaceans and oil: ecologic perspectives, p. 129-
165. In J.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Sea mammals and oil:
confronting the risks. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA.
153. Yochem, P.K. and S. Leatherwood. 1985. Blue whale Balaenoptera
musculus (Linnaeus, 1758), p. 193-240. In S.H. Ridgway and R.
Harrison [eds.] Handbook of marine mammals, Vol. 3: The sirenians
and baleen whales. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando.
154. Zeh, J., C. Clark, J. George, D. Withrow, G. Carroll and W. Koski. 1993.
Current population size and dynamics, p. 409-489. In The
bowhead whale. Society for Marine Mammalogy.
155. Zimmerman, S.T. 1991. A history of marine mammal stranding net-
works in Alaska, with notes on the distribution of the most commonly
stranded cetacean species, 1975-1987, p. 43-53. In J.E. Reynolds
and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the United States:
proceedings of the second marine mammal stranding workshop, Mi-
ami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
270

Chapter 7.
1. Baird, R.W., K.M. Langelier and P.J. Stacey. 1989. First records of
false killer whales (Pseudorca crassidens) in Canada. Canadian Field
Naturalist 103: 368-371.
2. Bauer, G.B., M. Fuller, A. Perry, J.R. Dunn and J. Zoeger. 1985.
Magnetoreception and biomineralization of magnetite in cetaceans, p.
489-507. In J.L. Kirschvink, D.S. Jones and B.J. MacFadden [eds.]
Magnetite biomineralization and magnetoreception in organisms. Ple-
num Press, New York, NY.
3. Bossart, G.D., M.T. Walsh, D.K. Odell, J.D. Lynch, D.O. Buesse, R.
Friday, and W.G. Young. 1991. Histopathologic findings of a mass
stranding of pilot whales, Globicephala macrorhynchus, p. 85-90.
In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings
in the United States: proceedings of the second marine mammal
stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical
Report NMFS 98.
4. Bigg, M. 1982. An assessment of killer whale (Orcinus orca)
stocks off Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Report of the Interna-
tional Whaling Commission 32: 655-666.
5. Breland, K. and M. Breland. 1966. Animal behavior. MacMillan, New
York, NY. 210 p.
6. Caldwell, D.K., M.C. Caldwell and C.M. Walker, Jr. 1970. Mass and
individual strandings of false killer whales, Pseudorca crassidens,
in Florida. Journal of Mammalogy 51: 634-636.
7. Caldwell, M.C. and D.K. Caldwell. 1966. Epimeletic (care-giving)
behavior in Cetacea, p. 755-783. In K.S. Norris [ed.] Whales, dolphins
and porpoises. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Ange-
les, CA.
8. Colgrove, G.S. and G. Migaki. 1976. Cerebral abscess associated with
stranding in a dolphin. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 12: 271-274.
9. Cornwell-Huston, C.J. 1987. Further analysis of cetacean mass
strandings and geomagnetic parameters along the North American
eastern seaboard. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial Conference on the
Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, 1987, Miami, FL. Society for
Marine Mammalogy.
10. Credle, V.R. 1987. Biogenic magnetite isolated from the dura of pygmy
sperm whales. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial Conference on the Biology
of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, 1987, Miami, FL. Society for Marine
Mammalogy.
11. Dawson, S.M., S. Whitehouse and M. Williscroft. 1985. A mass strand-
ing of pilot whales in Tryphena Harbour, Great Barrier Island. Investi-
gations on Cetacea 17: 165-173.
12. Dudok van Heel, W.H. 1962. Sound and cetacea. Netherlands Journal
of Sea Research 1: 407-507.
13. Dudok van Heel, W.H. 1966. Navigation in Cetacea, p. 597-606.
In K.S. Norris [ed.] Whales, dolphins and porpoises. University
of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
14. Early, G.A. (New England Aquarium, Boston, MA). 1992. Personal
communication.
 References ... 271

Chapter 7 (continued)
15. Fehring, W.K. and R.S. Wells. 1976. A series of strandings by a single
herd of pilot whales on the west coast of Florida. Journal of Mammal-
ogy 57: 191-194.
16. Fowler, C.W. 1984. Density dependence in cetacean populations, p.
373-379. In W.F. Perrin, R.L. Brownell, Jr. and D.P. DeMaster [eds.]
Reproduction in whales, dolphins and porpoises. Report of the Inter-
national Whaling Commission, Special Issue 6. International Whaling
Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
17. Geraci, J.R. 1978. The enigma of marine mammal strandings. Oceanus
21(2): 38-47.
18. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1977. Mass stranding of the long-
f i n n e d p i l o t w h a l e, Globicephala melaena, on S abl e Isl and,
Nova Scotia. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 34:
2196-2199.
19. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1979. Stranding workshop summary
report: analysis of marine mammal strandings and recommendations
for a nationwide stranding salvage program, p. 1-33. In J.R. Geraci
and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals: insights through
strandings. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
NTIS PB-293 890.
20. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1987. Effects of parasites on marine
mammals. International Journal for Parasitology 17: 407-414.
21. Geraci, J.R., D.J. St. Aubin and G.A. Early. 1987. Cetacean mass
strandings: the study of stress and shock. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial
Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, 1987,
University of Miami, Miami, FL. Society for Marine Mammalogy.
22. Geraci, J.R., S.A. Testaverde, D.J. St. Aubin and T.H. Loop. 1978. A
mass stranding of the Atlantic white-sided dolphin ( Lagenorhynchus
acutus): a study into pathobiology and life history. National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, VA. NTIS PB-289 361.
23. Gilmore, R.M. 1957. Whales aground in Cortés Sea. Pacific Discovery
10(1): 22-27.
24. Gilmore, R.M. 1959. On the mass strandings of sperm whales. Pacific
Naturalist 1(10): 9-16.
25. Gould, J.L. 1985. Are animal maps magnetic?, p. 257-268. In
J.L. Kirschvink, D.S. Jones and B.J. MacFadden [eds.] Magnetite
biomineralization and magnetoreception in organisms. Plenum Press,
New York, NY.
26. Gresson, R.A.R. 1968. White-sided dolphins, Lagenorhynchus
acutus (Gray) stranded at Ventry Harbor, Co. Kerry. Irish Naturalist
Journal 16: 19-20.
27. Guiler, E.R. 1978. Whale strandings in Tasmania since 1945 with
notes on some seal reports. Papers and Proceedings Royal Society of
Tasmania 112: 189-213.
28. Hall, N.R. and R.D. Schimpff. 1979. Neuropathology in relation to
strandings: mass stranded whales, p. 236-241. In J.R. Geraci
and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals: insights
through strandings. National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA. NTIS PB-293 890.
272

Chapter 7 (continued)
29. Herman, L.M. and W.N. Tavolga. 1980. The communication systems of
cetaceans, p. 149-209. In L.M. Herman [ed.] Cetacean behavior:
mechanisms and functions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York and
Toronto.
30. Irvine, A.B., M.D. Scott, R.S. Wells and J.G. Mead. 1979. Stranding of
the pilot whale, Globicephala macrorhynchus, in Florida and
South Carolina. Fishery Bulletin 77: 511-513.
31. Jenner, C., M.N. M-Jenner and P.H. Forestell. 1989. Repeated behav-
ioral observation of six photo-identified adult pygmy killer whales
during one month prior to stranding by three members of the group.
Abstracts of the 8th Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine
Mammals, Dec. 7-11, Pacific Grove, CA. Society for Marine Mammal-
ogy.
32. Johnson, C.S. 1986. Dolphin audition and echolocation capacities, p.
115-136. In R.J. Schusterman, J.A. Thomas and F.G. Wood [eds.]
Dolphin cognition and behavior: a comparative approach. Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, NJ.
33. Kellogg, W.N., R. Kohler and H.M. Morris. 1953. Porpoise sounds as
sonar signals. Science 117: 239-243.
34. Kirschvink, J.L., A.E. Dizon and J.A. Westphal. 1986. Evidence from
strandings for geomagnetic sensitivity in cetaceans. Journal of Experi-
mental Biology 120: 1-24.
35. K i r s c h v i n k , J . L . , D . S . J o n e s a n d B . J . M a c F a d d e n . 1 9 8 5 .
Magnetoreception and magnetic minerals in living organisms, p. 255-
256. In J.L. Kirschvink, D.S. Jones and B.J. MacFadden
[eds.] Magnetite biomineralization and magnetoreception in
organisms. Plenum Press, New York, NY.
36. Klinowska, M. 1985. Cetacean live stranding sites relate to geomag-
netic topography. Aquatic Mammals 1: 27-32.
37. Klinowska, M. 1986. Cetacean live stranding dates relate to geomag-
netic disturbances. Aquatic Mammals 11: 109-119.
38. Klinowska, M. 1986. The cetacean magnetic sense: evidence from
strandings, p. 401-432. In M.M. Bryden and R.J. Harrison [eds.]
Research on dolphins. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
39. Lambertsen, R.H., B. Birnir, and J.E. Bauer. 1986. Serum chemistry
and evidence of renal failure in the north Atlantic fin whale population.
Journal of Wildlife Diseases 22: 389-396.
40. Leahy, T.M. 1977. The mystery of the beached mammals. NOAA
Magazine, April: 4-8.
41. Leatherwood, S., C.L. Hubbs and M. Fisher. 1979. First records of
Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) from the Gulf of California
with detailed notes on a mass stranding. Transactions of the San
Diego Society of Natural History 19: 45-52.
42. Marsh, H. and T. Kasuya. 1986. Evidence for reproductive senescence
in female cetaceans, p. 57-74. In G.D. Donovan [ed.] Behavior of
whales in relation to management. Report of the International Whaling
Commission, Special Issue 8. International Whaling Commission,
Cambridge, U.K.
 References ... 273

Chapter 7 (continued)
43. McBride, A.F. 1956. Evidence for echolocation by cetaceans. Deep-
Sea Research 3: 153-154.
44. McManus, T.J., J.E. Wapstra, E.R. Guiler, B.L. Munday and D.L.
Obendorf. 1984. Cetacean strandings in Tasmania from February
1978 to May 1983. Papers and Proceedings Royal Society Tasmania
118: 117-135.
45. Mead, J.G. 1979. An analysis of cetacean strandings along the east
coast of the United States, p. 54-68. In J.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin
[eds.] Biology of marine mammals: insights through strandings. Na-
tional Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA. NTIS PB-293
890.
46. Mead, J.G., D.K. Odell, R.S. Wells and M.D. Scott. 1980. Observations
on a mass stranding of spinner dolphins, Stenella longirostris,
from the west coast of Florida. Fishery Bulletin 78: 353-360.
47. Mell, D. 1988. An operational perspective of the rescue of false killer
whales, Pseudorca crassidens, stranded at Augusta in July 1986, p.
43-57. In M.L. Augee [ed.] Marine mammals of Australasia: field
biology and captive management. Royal Zoological Society of New
South Wales, Special Publication, Sydney, New South Wales.
48. Mitchell, E. 1975. Porpoise, dolphin and small whale fisheries of the
world. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources, London, Monograph No. 3. 129 p.
49. Morimitsu, T., T. Nagai, M. Ide, H. Kawano, A. Naichuu, M. Koono and
A. Ishii. 1987. Mass stranding of Odontoceti caused by parasitogenic
eighth cranial neuropathy. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 23: 586-590.
50. Munday, B.L., R.H. Green and D.L. Obendorf. 1982. A pygmy right
whale Caperea marginata (Gray, 1846) stranded at Stanley, Tasma-
nia. Papers and Proceedings Royal Society of Tasmania 116: 1-4.
51. Nachtigall, P.E. 1986. Vision, audition, and chemoreception in dol-
phins and other marine mammals, p. 79-113. In R.J.
Schusterman, J.A. Thomas and F.G. Wood [eds.] Dolphin cognition
and behavior: a comparative approach. Lawrence Erlbaum Associ-
ates, Inc., Hillsdale, NJ.
52. Nicol, D.J. 1985. Oceanographic features that may influence cetacean
strandings around Tasmania. Whale Stranding Programme, Environ-
mental Studies Research Project No. 25, Research Report No. 1.
Centre for Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart. 46
p.
53. Nishiwaki, M. 1967. Distribution and migration of marine mammals in
the North Pacific area. Ocean Research Institute, University of Tokyo,
Bulletin No. 1. 64 p.
54. Norris, K.S. 1966. Some observations on the migration and orientation
o f m a r i n e m a m m a l s , p . 1 0 1 - 1 2 5 . In A n i m a l o r i e n t a t i o n a n d
navigation. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Biology Colloquium,
Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR.
55. Norris, K.S. and T.P. Dohl. 1980. The structure and functions of
cetacean schools, p. 211-261. In L.M. Herman [ed.] Cetacean behav-
ior: mechanisms & functions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York and
Toronto.
274

Chapter 7 (continued)
56. Odell, D.K., E.D. Asper, J. Baucom and L.H. Cornell. 1980. A recurrent
mass stranding of the false killer whale, Pseudorca crassidens,
in Florida. Fishery Bulletin 78: 171-177.
57. Odell, D.K., D.M. Burn, D.B. Olson and E.D. Asper. 1985. Strandings
of dwarf and pygmy sperm whales (Kogia spp.) on the east
coast of Florida. Abstracts of the 6th Biennial Conference
on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Nov. 22-26, Vancouver, B.C.
Society for Marine Mammalogy.
58. Phillips, S.S. 1988. Observations on a mass stranding of Pseudorca
crassidens at Crowdy Head, New South Wales, p. 33-41. In
M.L. Augee [ed.] Marine mammals of Australasia: field biology
and captive management. Royal Zoological Society of New South
Wales, Special Publication, Sydney, New South Wales.
59. Popper, A.N. 1980. Sound emission and detection by delphinids,
p. 1-52. In L.M. Herman [ed.] Cetacean behavior: mechanisms
and functions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York and Toronto.
60. Porter, J.W. 1977. Pseudorca stranding. Oceans 10: 8-15.
61. Rancurel, P. 1974. (Mass stranding of cetaceans Peponocephala
electra in the New Hebrides). Biological Conservation 6: 232-234.
62. Ridgway, S.H. and M.D. Dailey. 1972. Cerebral and cerebellar involve-
ment of trematode parasites in dolphins and their possible role in
stranding. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 8: 33-43.
63. Robinson, G., F. Koster and J. Villa. 1983. Stranding of Cuvier’s
beaked whales on Baltra. Noticias de Galapagos 38: 16-17.
64. Robson, F.D. 1984. Strandings: ways to save whales. Science Press,
Johannesburg. 124 p.
65. Robson, F.D. and P.J.H. van Bree. 1971. Some remarks on a mass
stranding of sperm whales, Physeter macrocephalus Linnaeus,
1758, near Gisborne, New Zealand, on March 18, 1970. Zeitschrift
fuer Saeugetierkunde 36: 55-60.
66. Rumage, W.T., G. Early and H. Lind. 1987. Modeling of current and
meteorological parameters associated with mass strandings of pilot
whales in Wellfleet Bay. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial Conference on
the Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, 1987, Miami, FL. Society for
Marine Mammalogy.
67. Scammon, C.M. 1874. The marine mammals of the northwestern coast
of North America. Dover Publications Inc., New York. 319 p.
68. Scott, E.G.O. 1942. Records of Tasmanian Cetacea: No. 1. Notes on
the various strandings near Stanley, northwestern Tasmania. Records
of the Queen Victoria Museum 1: 27-51.
69. Sergeant, D.E. 1982. Mass strandings of toothed whales (Odontoceti)
as a population phenomenon. Scientific Reports of the Whales Re-
search Institute (Tokyo) 34: 1-47.
70. Sergeant, D.E. and H.D. Fisher. 1957. The smaller Cetacea of eastern
Canadian waters. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada
14: 83-115.
71. Sergeant, D.E., A.W. Mansfield and B. Beck. 1970. Inshore records of
Cetacea for Eastern Canada, 1949-1968. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 27: 1903-1915.
 References ... 275

Chapter 7 (continued)
72. Sergeant, D.E. 1979. Ecological aspects of cetacean stranding.
In J.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine
mammals: insights through strandings. National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, VA. NTIS PB-293 890.
73. Sheldrick, M.C. 1979. Cetacean strandings along the coasts of the
British Isles 1913-1977, p. 35-53. In J.R. Geraci and D.J.
St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals: insights through
strandings. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
NTIS PB-293 890.
74. Thomas, J.A., W.W.L. Au, C.W. Turl and J.L. Pawloski. 1989. Sensory
systems of false killer whales. Abstracts of the 8th Biennial Confer-
ence on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 7-11, Pacific Grove, CA.
Society for Marine Mammalogy.
75. Tomilin, A.G. 1957. Cetacea. Mammals of the U.S.S.R. and adjacent
countries, Vol. IX. Translated from Russian by Israel Program for
Scientific Translations, Jerusalem, 1967. 717 p.
76. van Bree, P.J.H. 1977. On former and recent strandings of cetaceans
on the coast of the Netherlands. Zeitschrift fuer Saeugetierkunde 42:
101-107.
77. Walker, M.M., J.L. Kirschvink and A.E. Dizon. 1985. Evidence that fin
whales ( Balaenoptera physalus) migrate in areas of low geo-
magnetic field gradient. Abstracts of the 6th Biennial Conference
on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Nov. 22-26, Vancouver, B.C.
Society for Marine Mammalogy.
78. Walker, M.M., J.L. Kirschvink and A.E. Dizon. 1985. Associations
between cetacean live strandings and geomagnetic field parameters.
Abstracts of the 6th Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine
Mammals, Nov. 22-26, Vancouver, B.C. Society for Marine Mammalogy.
79. Walker, W.A. and D.F. Cowan. 1981. Air sinus parasitism and pathol-
o g y i n f r e e - r a n g i n g c o m m o n d o l p h i n s (D e l p h i n u s d e l p h i s)
in the eastern tropical Pacific. National Marine Fisheries Service,
Southwest Fisheries Center Administrative Report No. LJ-81-23C. 19 p.
80. Walsh, M.T., D.O. Buesse, W.G. Young, J.D. Lynch, E.D. Asper, D.K.
Odell. 1991. Medical findings in a mass stranding of pilot whales,
G l o b i c e p h a l a m a c r o r h y n c h u s, i n F l o r i d a , p . 7 5 - 8 3 . I n J . E .
Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the
United States: proceedings of the second marine mammal
stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical
Report NMFS 98.
81. Walsh, M.T., D.K. Odell, G. Young, E.D. Asper, and G. Bossart. 1990.
Mass strandings of cetaceans, p. 673-683. In L.A. Dierauf [ed.]
Handbook of marine mammal medicine: health, disease, and rehabili-
tation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
82. Walsh, M.T. (Sea World Inc., Orlando, FL.). 1992. Personal communi-
cation.
83. Warneke, R.M. [ed.]. 1986. Victorian whale rescue plan: a contingency
plan for strandings of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) on
the Victorian coastline. Fisheries and Wildlife Service, Department of
Conservation, Forests and Lands, Victoria. 75 p.
276

Chapter 7 (continued)
84. Wood, F.G. 1979. The cetacean stranding phenomenon: an hypoth-
esis, p. 129-188. In J.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of
marine mammals: insights through strandings. National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, VA. NTIS PB-293 890.
85. Zoeger, J., J.R. Dunn and M. Fuller. 1981. Magnetic material in the
head of the common Pacific dolphin. Science 213: 892-894.

Chapter 8.
1. Ackerman, B.B. 1992. Ongoing manatee aerial survey programs - a
progress report [abstract], p. 14-15. In T.J. O’Shea, B.B. Ackerman
and H.F. Percival [eds.] Interim report of the technical workshop on
manatee population biology. Manatee Population Research Report
No. 10. Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Univer-
sity of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
2. Ackerman, B.B., S.D. Wright, R.K. Bonde, D.K. Odell and D.J. Banowetz.
1992. Trends and patterns in manatee mortality in Florida, 1974-1991
[abstract], p. 22. In T.J. O’Shea, B.B. Ackerman and H.F. Percival
[eds.] Interim report of the technical workshop on manatee population
biology. Manatee Population Research Report No. 10. Florida Coop-
erative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL.
3. Asper, E.D. and S.W. Searles. 1981. Husbandry of injured and or-
phaned manatees at Sea World of Florida, p. 121-127. In R.L.
Brownell, Jr. and K. Ralls [eds.] The West Indian manatee in Florida:
proceedings of a workshop held in Orlando, FL, 27-29 March 1978.
Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL.
4. Baugh, T.M., J.A. Valade and B.J. Zoodsma. 1989. Manatee use of
Spartina alterniflora in Cumberland Sound. Marine Mammal Science
5: 88-90.
5. Beck, C.A. and N.B. Barros. 1991. The impact of debris on the Florida
manatee. Marine Pollution Bulletin 22: 508-510.
6. Beck, C.A., R.K. Bonde and G.B. Rathbun. 1982. Analyses of propeller
wounds on manatees in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 46:
531-535.
7. Beck, C.A. and D.J. Forrester. 1988. Helminths of the Florida mana-
t e e , T r i c h e c h u s m a n a t u s l a t i r o s t r i s, with a discussion and
summary of the parasites of sirenians. Journal of Parasitology 74: 628-637.
8. Beck, C.A. and J.P. Reid. 1992. An automated photo-identification
catalog for manatee life history studies [abstract], p. 18-19. In
T.J. O’Shea, B.B. Ackerman and H.F. Percival [eds.] Interim report of
the technical workshop on manatee population biology. Manatee Popu-
lation Research Report No. 10. Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife
Research Unit, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
9. Best, R.C. 1981. Foods and feeding habits of wild and captive Sirenia.
Mammal Review 11: 3-29.
10. Bonde, R.K. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver Wildlife Research
Center, Gainesville, FL). 1992. Personal communication.
11. Bonde, R.K., T.J. O’Shea and C.A. Beck. 1983. Manual of procedures
for the salvage and necropsy of carcasses of the West Indian Manatee
 References ... 277

Chapter 8 (continued)
( T r i c h e c h u s m a n a t u s) . S i r e n i a P r o j e c t , U . S . F i s h a n d
Wildlife Service, Gainesville, FL. 175 p.
12. Bossart, G. (Miami Seaquarium, Miami, FL). 1991. Personal commu-
nication.
13. Buergelt, C.D. and R.K. Bonde. 1983. Toxoplasmic meningoencepha-
litis in a West Indian manatee. Journal of the American Veterinary
Medical Association 183: 1294-1296.
14. Buergelt, C.D., R.K. Bonde, C.A. Beck and T.J. O’Shea. 1984. Patho-
logic findings in manatees in Florida. Journal of the American Veteri-
nary Medical Association 185: 1331-1334.
15. Buergelt, C.D., R.K. Bonde, C.A. Beck and T.J. O’Shea. 1990. Myx-
omatous transformations of heart valves in Florida manatees
( T r i c h e c h u s m a n a t u s l a t i r o s t r i s) . J o u r n a l o f Z o o a n d
Wildlife Medicine 21: 220-227.
16. Campbell, H.W. and A.B. Irvine. 1977. Feeding ecology of the West
Indian manatee Trichechus manatus Linnaeus. Aquaculture 12: 249-
251.
17. Campbell, H.W. and A.B. Irvine. 1981. Manatee mortality during the
unusually cold winter of 1976-77, p. 86-91. In R.L. Brownell, Jr.
and K. Ralls [eds.] The West Indian manatee in Florida: proceedings
of a workshop held in Orlando, FL, 27-29 March 1978. Florida Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL.
18. Florida Department of Natural Resources. 1991. Unpublished statistics.
19. Gunter, G. and G. Corcoran. 1981. Mississippi manatees. Gulf Re-
search Reports 7: 97-99.
20. Ha r t m a n , D. S. 1 9 79. E col ogy and behavi or of the manatee
( T r i c h e c h u s m a n a t u s) i n F l o r i d a . A m e r i c a n S o c i e t y o f
Mammalogists, Special Publication No. 5. 153 p.
21. Hernandez, P., J.E. Reynolds III, H. Marsh and M. Marmontel. 1992.
Age and seasonality in spermatogenesis of Florida manatees [ab-
stract], p. 17. In T.J. O’Shea, B.B. Ackerman and H.F. Percival
[eds.] Interim report of the technical workshop on manatee population
biology. Manatee Population Research Report No. 10. Florida Coop-
erative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL.
22. Howell, A.B. 1930. Aquatic mammals: their adaption to life in the
water. Charles C Thomas, Baltimore. 338 p.
23. Irvine, A.B. 1983. Manatee metabolism and its influence on distribu-
tion in Florida. Biological Conservation 25: 315-334.
24. Irvine, A.B. and H.W. Campbell. 1978. Aerial census of the West Indian
manatee, Trichechus m a n a t u s, in the southeastern
United States. Journal of Mammalogy 59: 613-617.
25. Irvine, A.B., F.C. Neal, P.T. Cardeilhac, J.A. Popp, F.H. White and R.L.
Jenkins. 1980. Clinical observations on captive and free-ranging West
Indian manatees, Trichechus manatus, in Florida. Aquatic Mammals
8: 2-10.
26. Irvine, A.B. and M.D. Scott. 1984. Development and use of marking
techniques to study manatees in Florida. Florida Scientist 47: 12-26.
27. Marmontel, M. 1992. Age and reproductive parameter estimates in
278

Chapter 8 (continued)

female Florida manatees [abstract], p. 16. In T.J. O’Shea, B.B.

Ackerman and H.F. Percival [eds.] Interim report of the technical
workshop on manatee population biology. Manatee Population Re-
search Report No. 10. Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research
Unit, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
28. Medway, W., D.J. Black and G.B. Rathbun. 1982. Hematology of the
West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus). Veterinary Clinical
Pathology 11: 11-15.
29. Medway, W., M.L. Bruss, J.L. Bengtson and D.J. Black. 1982. Blood
chemistry of the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus).
Journal of Wildlife Diseases 18: 229-234.
30. Moore, J.C. 1956. Observations of manatees in aggregations. Ameri-
can Museum Novitates 1811: 1-24.
31. Odell, D.K. 1982. West Indian manatee, p. 828-831. In
J.A. Chapman and G.A. Feldhamer [eds.] Wild mammals of North
America: biology, management and economics. Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity Press, Baltimore, MD.
32. Odell, D. K. and J.E. Reynolds. 1979. Observations on manatee
mortality in south Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 43: 572-577.
33. O’Shea, T.J. 1988. Manatee research efforts under way on Florida’s
east coast. Endangered Species Technical Bulletin 13: 3-4.
34. O’Shea, T.J. 1988. The past, present, and future of manatees in the
southeastern United States: realities, misunderstandings, and enig-
mas, p. 184-204. In R.R. Odom, K.A. Riddleberger and J.C. Ozier
[eds.] Proceedings of the Third Southeastern Nongame and Endan-
gered Wildlife Symposium. Georgia Department of Natural Resources,
Game and Fish Division, Social Circle, GA.
35. O’Shea, T.J. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Ecology Re-
search Center, Fort Collins, CO). 1992. Personal communication.
36. O’Shea, T.J., C.A. Beck, R.K. Bonde, H.I. Kochman and D.K. Odell.
1985. An analysis of manatee mortality patterns in Florida, 1976-1981.
Journal of Wildlife Management 49: 1-11.
37. O’Shea, T.J., G.B. Rathbun, E.D. Asper and S.W. Searles. 1985.
Tolerance of West Indian manatees to capture and handling. Biologi-
cal Conservation 33:335-349.
38. O’Shea, T.J., G.B. Rathbun, R.K. Bonde, C.D. Buergelt and D.K.
Odell. 1991. An epizootic of Florida manatees associated with a
dinoflagellate bloom. Marine Mammal Science 7: 165-179.
39. Powell, J.A. and G.B. Rathbun. 1984. Distribution and abundance of
manatees along the northern coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Northeast
Gulf Science 7: 1-28.
40. Powell, J.A. and J.C. Waldron. 1981. The manatee population in Blue
Spring, Volusia County, Florida, p. 41-51. In R.L. Brownell, Jr.
and K. Ralls [eds.] The West Indian manatee in Florida: proceedings
of a workshop held in Orlando, FL, 27-29 March 1978. Florida Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL.
41. Rathbun, G.B., R.K. Bonde and D. Clay. 1982. The status of the West
Indian manatee on the Atlantic coast north of Florida, p. 152-165.
 References ... 279

Chapter 8 (continued)

In R.R. Odom and J.W. Guthrie [eds.] Proceedings of the

Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Symposium, August 13-14, 1981,
Athens, GA. Georgia Department of Natural Resources Game
and Fish Division, Technical Bulletin WL 5.
42. Rathbun, G.B., J.P. Reid, R.K. Bonde and J.A. Powell. 1992. Repro-
d u c t i o n i n f r e e - r a n g i n g W e s t I n d i a n m a n a t e e s (T r i c h e c h u s
m a n a t u s) [ a b s t r a c t ] , p . 1 9 - 2 0 . I n T . J . O ’ S h e a , B . B .
Ackerman and H.F. Percival [eds.] Interim report of the
technical workshop on manatee population biology. Manatee
Population Research Report No. 10. Florida Cooperative Fish and
Wildlife Research Unit, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
43. Rathbun, G.B., J.P. Reid and G. Carowan. 1990. Distribution and
m o v e m e n t p a t t e r n s o f m a n a t e e s (T r i c h e c h u s m a n a t u s) i n
northwestern peninsular Florida. Florida Marine Research Publication
No. 48. 33 p.
44. Reid, J.P. and T.J. O’Shea. 1989. Three years operational use of
satellite telemetry on Florida manatees: tag improvements based on
challenges from the field, p. 217-232. In Proceedings of the
1989 North American Argos Users Conference. Service Argos, Inc.
Landover, MD. 361 p.
45. Reid, J.P., G.B. Rathbun and J.R. Wilcox. 1991. Distribution patterns
of individually identifiable West Indian manatees (Trichechus
manatus) in Florida. Marine Mammal Science 7: 180-190.
46. Reynolds, J.E., III. 1981. Behavior patterns in the West Indian mana-
tee, with emphasis on feeding and diving. Florida Scientist 44: 233-
241.
47. Reynolds, J.E., III. 1981. Manatees of Blue Lagoon Lake, Miami,
Florida: biology and effects of man’s activities, p. 25-32.
In R.L. Brownell, Jr. and K. Ralls [eds.] The West Indian manatee
in Florida: proceedings of a workshop held in Orlando, FL,
27-29 March 1978. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahas-
see, FL.
48. Reynolds, J.E., III. 1981. Aspects of the social behavior and herd
structure of a semi-isolated colony of West Indian manatees, Trichechus
manatus. Mammalia 45: 431-451.
49. Reynolds, J.E., III and C.J. Gluckman. 1988. Protection of West Indian
manatees (Trichechus manatus) in Florida. Final Report to the Marine
Mammal Commission, contracts MM4465868-3 and MM3309741-7.
Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, DC. 85 p.
50. Reynolds, J.E., III and J.R. Wilcox. 1985. Abundance of West Indian
manatees (Trichechus manatus) around selected Florida power
plants following winter cold fronts, 1982-1983. Bulletin of Marine
Science 36: 413-422.
51. Scholander, P.F. and L. Irving. 1941. Experimental investigations on
the respiration and diving of the Florida manatee. Journal of Cellular
and Comparative Physiology 17: 169-191.
52. Shane, S.H. 1983. Abundance, distribution, and movements of mana-
280

Chapter 8 (continued)

t e e s ( T r i c h e c h u s m a n a t u s) i n B r e v a r d C o u n t y , F l o r i d a .
Bulletin of Marine Science 33: 1-9.
53. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1989. Florida manatee (T richechus
manatus latirostris) r e c o v e r y p l a n . P r e p a r e d b y t h e F l o r i d a
Manatee Recovery Team for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Atlanta, GA. 98 p.
54. Walsh, M. (Sea World, Inc., Orlando, FL). 1992. Personal communica-
tion.
55. Watson, A.G. and R.K. Bonde. 1986. Congenital malformations of the
flipper in three West Indian manatees, Trichechus manatus,
and a proposed mechanism for development of ectrodactyly and cleft
hand in mammals. Clinical Orthopaedics 202: 294-301.
56. White, J.R., Harkness, D.R., Isaacks, R.E. and Duffield, D.A. 1976.
Some studies on blood of the Florida manatee Trichechus manatus
latirostris. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 55A: 413-417.

Chapter 9.
1. Ames, J.A., R.A. Hardy and F.E. Wendell. 1986. A simulated translo-
cation of sea otters, Enhydra lutris, with a review of capture,
transport, and holding techniques. California Department of Fish and
Game, Marine Resources Technical Report No. 52. 17 p.
2. Bayha, K. 1990. USFWS guidelines for capturing and handling sea
otters, p. 170-176. In T.M. Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter
rehabilitation program: 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. International
Wildlife Research.
3. Bodkin, J.L. and R.J. Jameson. 1991. Patterns of seabird and marine
mammal carcass deposition along the central California coast, 1980-
1986. Canadian Journal of Zoology 69: 1149-1155.
4. Costa, D.P. 1982. Energy, nitrogen, and electrolyte flux and sea water
d r i n k i n g i n t h e s e a o t t e r E n h y d r a l u t r i s. P h y s i o l o g i c a l
Zoology 55: 35-44.
5. Costa, D. and G.L. Kooyman. 1982. Oxygen consumption, thermoregu-
lation, and the effect of fur oiling and washing on the sea otter
Enhydra lutris. Canadian Journal of Zoology 60: 2761-2767.
6. Davis, R.W. 1990. Facilities and organization, p. 3-58. In
T.M. Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter rehabilitation program:
1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. International Wildlife Research.
7. Davis, R.W., T.M. Williams, J.A. Thomas, R. Kastelein and L.H.
Cornell. 1988. The effects of oil contamination and cleaning on sea
otters (Enhydra lutris). II. Metabolism, thermoregulation, and behav-
ior. Canadian Journal of Zoology 60: 2782-2790.
8. DeGange, A.R. and M.M. Vacca. 1989. Sea otter mortality at Kodiak
Island, Alaska, during summer 1987. Journal of Mammalogy 70: 836-
838.
9. Estes, J.A., R.J. Jameson and A.M. Johnson. 1981. Food selection
and some foraging tactics of sea otters, p. 606-641. In J.A.
Chapman and D. Pursley [eds.] Proceedings of the worldwide
furbearers conference, 1980, Frostburg, MD. Vol. 1.
 References ... 281

Chapter 9 (continued)
10. Estes, J.A., R.J. Jameson, and E.B. Rhode. 1982. Activity and prey
selection in the sea otter: influence of population status on community
structure. American Naturalist 120: 242-258.
11. Faurot, E.R. 1985. Haulout behavior of California sea otters,
Enhydra lutris. Marine Mammal Science 1: 337-339.
12. Garshelis, D.L. and J.A. Garshelis. 1984. Movements and manage-
ment of sea otters in Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Management 48: 665-
678.
13. Garshelis, D.L., J.A. Garshelis, and A.T. Kimker. 1986. Sea otter time
budgets and prey relationships in Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Manage-
ment 50: 637-647.
14. Geraci, J.R. and T.D. Williams. 1990. Physiologic and toxic effects on
sea otters, p. 211-221. In J.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Sea
mammals and oil: confronting the risks. Academic Press, Inc., San
Diego, CA.
15. Gerrodette, T. 1983. Review of the California sea otter salvage pro-
gram. Marine Mammal Commission Report No. MMC-83/02, Marine
Mammal Commission, Washington, DC. 23 p.
16. Hill, K.A., F. Weltz, T.P. Monahan and R.W. Davis. 1990. Capture
operations, p. 59-81. In T.M. Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter
rehabilitation program: 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. International
Wildlife Research.
17. Howard, L.D. 1973. Muscular anatomy of the forelimb of the sea otter
( Enhydra lutris). Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences
(Series 4) 39: 411-500.
18. Howell, A.B. 1930. Aquatic mammals: their adaption to life in the
water. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, IL. 338 p.
19. Hubbs Marine Research Institute. 1986. Introduction, p. 1-4. In
Sea otter oil spill mitigation study. U.S. Department of Interior, Miner-
als Management Service, OCS Study MMS 86-0009.
20. Jameson, G.L. 1986. Trial systematic salvage of beach-cast sea otter,
Enhydra lutris, carcasses in the central and southern portion of the sea
otter range in California. National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA. NTIS PB87-108288. 60 p.
21. Jameson, R.J. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Simeon, CA).
1991. Personal communication.
22. Jameson, R.J. 1989. Movements, home range, and territories of male
sea otters off central California. Marine Mammal Science 5: 159-172.
23. Jameson, R.J., K.W. Kenyon, S. Jeffries and G.R. VanBlaricom. 1986.
Status of a translocated sea otter population and its habitat in Washing-
ton. Murrelet 67: 84-87.
24. Jameson, R.J., K.W. Kenyon, A.M Johnson, and H.M. Wright. 1982.
History and status of translocated sea otter populations in North
America. Wildlife Society Bulletin 10: 100-107.
25. Kenyon, K.W. 1969. The sea otter in the eastern Pacific Ocean. North
American Fauna, No. 68. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington,
DC. 352 p.
26. MacAskie, I. 1987. Updated status of the sea otter, Enhydra lutris,
in Canada. Canadian Field Naturalist 101: 279-283.
282

Chapter 9 (continued)
27. McBain, J. (Sea World, Inc., San Diego, CA). 1992. Personal commu-
nication.
28. Monnett, C. and L.M. Rotterman. 1988. Movement patterns of adult
female and weanling sea otters in Prince William Sound, Alaska, p.
133-161. In D.B. Siniff and K. Ralls [eds.] Population status
of sea otters. U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Management
Service, OCS Study MMS 88-002.
29. Morejohn, G.V., J.A. Ames and D.B. Lewis. 1975. Post mortem studies
of sea otters, Enhydra lutris L., in California. California Department
of Fish and Game, Marine Resources Technical Report No. 30. 82 p.
30. Osborn, K. and T.M. Williams. 1990. Postmortem examination of sea
otters, p. 134-146. In T.M. Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter
rehabilitation program: 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. International
Wildlife Research.
31. Payne, S.F. and R.J. Jameson. 1984. Early behavioral development of
the sea otter, Enhydra lutris. Journal of Mammalogy 65: 527-531.
32. Rathbun, G.B., R.J. Jameson, G.R. VanBlaricom, and R.L. Brownell,
Jr. 1990. Reintroduction of sea otters to San Nicholas Island, Califor-
nia: preliminary results for the first year, p. 99-113. In P.J. Bryant and
J. Remington [eds.] Endangered wildlife and habitats in southern
California. Memoirs of the Natural History Foundation of Orange
County, Newport Beach, CA. Vol. 3.
33. Riedman, M.L. and J.A. Estes. 1990. The sea otter: behavior, ecology,
and natural history. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Reports
90(14): 1-126.
34. Rotterman, L.M. and T. Simon-Jackson. 1988. Sea otter, Enhydra
lutris, p. 237-275. In J.W. Lentfer [ed.] Selected marine mammals
of Alaska: species accounts with research and management recom-
mendations. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
NTIS PB88-178462.
35. Siniff, D. and Ralls, K. 1991. Reproduction, survival and tag loss in
California sea otters. Marine Mammal Science 7: 211-229.
36. Stullken, D.E. and C.M. Kirkpatrick. 1955. Physiological investigation
of captivity mortality in the sea otter (Enhydra lutris). Transactions
of the North American Wildlife Conference 20: 476-494.
37. Thomas, J.A., L.H. Cornell, B.E. Joseph, T.D. Williams and S.
Dreischman. 1987. An implanted transponder chip used as a tag for
sea otters (Enhydra lutris). Marine Mammal Science 3: 271-274.
38. Tuomi, P. 1990. Husbandry, p. 118-133. In T.M. Williams and
R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter rehabilitation program: 1989
Exxon Valdez oil spill. International Wildlife Research.
39. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Southern sea otter recovery plan.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, CO. 66 p.
40. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. Administration of the Marine
Mammal Protection Act of 1972: annual report January 1, 1989-
December 31, 1989. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
54 p.
 References ... 283

Chapter 9 (continued)
41. Wild, P.W. and J.A. Ames. 1974. A report on the sea otter, Enhydra
lutris L., in California. California Fish and Game Marine Resources
Technical Report No. 20. 93 p.
42. Williams, T.D. 1990. Sea otter biology and medicine, p. 625-648.
In L. Dierauf [ed.] CRC handbook of marine mammal medicine:
health, disease, and rehabilitation. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL.
43. Williams, T.M. and R.W. Davis. 1990. Summary and recommenda-
tions, p. 147-153. In T.M. Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter
rehabilitation program: 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. International
Wildlife Research.
44. Williams, T.M., R.K. Wilson, T. Tuomi and L. Hunter. 1990. Critical
care and toxicological evaluation of sea otters exposed to crude oil, p.
82-100. In T.M. Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter rehabil-
itation program: 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. International Wildlife
Research.
45. Wilson, R.K., P. Tuomi, J.P. Schroeder and T.D. Williams. 1990.
Clinical treatment and rehabilitation of oiled sea otters, p. 101-117.
In T.M. Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter rehabilitation pro-
gram: 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. International Wildlife Research.
46. Yohe, E.R. and R.W. Davis. 1986. Transport and temporary holding of
sea otters, p. 14-20. In Hubbs Marine Research Institute, Sea otter oil
spill mitigation study. U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Manage-
ment Service, OCS Study MMS 86-0009.
47. Yohe, E.R. and R.W. Davis. 1986. Release of rehabilitated sea otters,
p. 107-108. In Hubbs Marine Research Institute, Sea otter oil
spill mitigation study. U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Manage-
ment Service, OCS Study MMS 86-0009.
48. Yohe, E.R., R.W. Davis and J.A. Thomas. 1986. Capture methods for
sea otters, p. 5-13. In Hubbs Marine Research Institute, Sea otter
oil spill mitigation study. U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Man-
agement Service, OCS Study MMS 86-0009.

Chapter 10.
1. Aguilar, A. 1985. Compartmentation and reliability of sampling proce-
dures in organochlorine pollution surveys of cetaceans. Residue Re-
views 95: 91-114.
2. Baden, D. (University of Miami, Miami, FL). 1991. Personal communi-
cation.
3. Barabash-Nikiforov, I.I., V.V. Reshetkin and N.K. Shidlovskaya. 1947.
The sea otter (Kalan). (Translated by the Israel Program for Scientific
Translations.) National Technical Information Service, Springfield,
VA. Rep. No. OTS 61-31057.
4. Becker, P.R., S.A. Wise, B.J. Koster and R. Zeisler. 1988. Alaska
marine mammal tissue archival project: a project description including
collection protocols. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau
of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD. NBSIR 88-3750. 46 p.
5. Becker, P.R., S.A. Wise, B.J. Koster and R. Zeisler. 1991. Alaska
marine mammal tissue archival project: revised collection protocol.
284

Chapter 10 (continued)
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and
Technology, Gaithersburg, MD. NISTIR 4529. 33 p.
6. Bonde, R.K., T.J. O’Shea, and C.A. Beck. 1983. Manual of procedures
for the salvage and necropsy of carcasses of the West Indian manatee
( Trichechus manatus). Sirenia Project, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Gainesville, FL. 175 p.
7. Buck, J.D. and S. Spotte. 1986. The occurrence of potentially patho-
genic vibrios in marine mammals. Marine Mammal Science 2: 319-324.
8. Calambokidis, J. (Cascadia Research Collective). 1990. Draft report.
Recommended guidelines for sampling marine mammal tissue for
chemical analyses in Puget Sound. Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.
9. Carter, G.R. and J.R. Cole Jr. [eds.]. 1990. Diagnostic procedures in
veterinary bacteriology and mycology. 5th ed. Academic Press, Inc.
620 p.
10. Cotter, S.M. and J. Blue. 1985. The bone marrow, p. 1199-1204.
In D.H. Slatter [ed.] Textbook of small animal surgery. W.B.
Saunders Co., Philadelphia, PA.
11. Dailey, M.D. and W.G. Gilmartin. 1980. Diagnostic key to the parasites
of some marine mammals. NOSC Technical Document 295. Naval
Oceans Systems Center, San Diego, CA. 37 p.
12. Deiter, R.L. 1991. Recovery and necropsy of marine mammal car-
casses in and near the Point Reyes National Seashore, May 1982 -
March 1987, p. 123-141. In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine
mammal strandings in the United States: proceedings of the second
marine mammal stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987.
NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
13. Delyamure, S.L. 1968. Helminthofauna of marine mammals (ecology
and phylogeny). Akademii Nauk SSSR, Moscow, 1955. (Translated
from Russian) U.S. Department of Interior and National Science Foun-
dation, Washington, DC. 522 p.
14. Dierauf, L.A., D.J. Vandenbroek, J. Roletto and M. Koski. 1985. An
epizootic of leptospirosis in California sea lions. Journal of the Ameri-
can Veterinary Medical Association 187: 1145-1148.
15. Domingo, M., L. Ferrer, M. Pumarola, A. Marco, J. Plana, S. Kennedy,
M. McAliskey and B.K. Rima. 1990. Morbillivirus in dolphins. Nature
348: 21.
16. Domning, D.P. and A.C. Myrick, Jr. 1980. Tetracycline marking and the
possible layering rate of bone in an Amazonian manatee (T richechus
inunguis), p. 203-207. In W.F. Perrin and A.C. Myrick, Jr. [eds.]
Age determination of toothed whales and sirenians. Report of the
International Whaling Commission, Special Issue 3. International
Whaling Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
17. Fay, F.H., L.M. Shults and R. A. Dieterich. 1979. A field manual of
procedures for postmortem examination of Alaskan marine mammals.
Institute of Marine Science and Institute of Arctic Biology, University of
Alaska, Fairbanks. 51 p.
18. Galloway, S.B. (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisher-
ies Science Center, Charleston, SC). 1992. Personal communication.
 References ... 285

Chapter 10 (continued)
19. Garshelis, D.L. 1984. Age estimation of living sea otters. Journal of
Wildlife Management 48: 456-463.
20. Geraci, J.R. 1981. Marine mammal care. 2nd ed. University of Guelph,
Guelph, Ont. 98 p.
21. Geraci, J.R. 1989. Clinical investigation of the 1987-88 mass mortality
of bottlenose dolphins along the U.S. central and south Atlantic coast.
Final report to National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Navy (Office of
Naval Research) and Marine Mammal Commission. 63 p.
22. Geraci, J.R., D.M. Anderson, R.J. Timperi, D.J. St. Aubin, G.A. Early,
J.H. Prescott and C.A. Mayo. 1989. Humpback whales ( Megaptera
novaeangliae) fatally poisoned by dinoflagellate toxin. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46: 1895-1898.
23. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1979. Stranding workshop summary
report: analysis of marine mammal strandings and recommendations
for a nationwide stranding salvage program, p. 1-33. In J.R.
Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin [eds.] Biology of marine mammals:
insights through strandings. National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA. NTIS No. PB-293-890.
24. Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1987. Effects of parasites on marine
mammals. International Journal of Parasitology 17: 407-414.
25. Geraci, J.R., D.J. St. Aubin, I.K. Barker, R.G. Webster, V.S. Hinshaw,
W.J. Bean, H.L. Ruhnke, J.H. Prescott, G. Early, A.S. Baker, S.
Madoff, and R.T. Schooley. 1982. Mass mortality of harbor seals:
pneumonia with influenza A virus. Science 215: 1129-1131.
26. Geraci, J.R., D.J. St. Aubin and G.A. Early. 1987. Cetacean mass
strandings: the study of stress and shock. Abstracts of the 7th Biennial
Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Dec. 5-9, 1987,
University of Miami, Miami, FL. Society for Marine Mammalogy.
27. Geraci, J.R. and S. Ridgway. 1991. On disease transmission between
cetaceans and humans. Marine Mammal Science 7: 191-194.
28. Griner, L.A. 1987. Autopsy procedure for pinnipeds and small ceta-
ceans. Appendix G. In W.G. Gilmartin, Hawaiian monk seal die-off
response plan: a workshop report. National Marine Fisheries Service,
Southwest Fisheries Center Administrative Report H-87-19.
29. Hare, M.P. and J.M. Mead. 1987. Handbook for determination of
adverse human-marine mammal interactions from necropsies. Na-
tional Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Cen-
ter Processed Report 87-06. 35 p.
30. Harwood, J. and P. Reijnders. 1988. Seals, sense and sensibility. New
Scientist 120: 28-29.
31. Helle, E., M. Olsson and S. Jensen. 1976. PCBs correlated with
pathological changes in seal uteri. Ambio 4: 261-263.
32. Hofman, R.J. 1991. History, goals, and achievements of the regional
marine mammal stranding networks in the United States, p. 7-15.
In J.E. Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings
in the United States: proceedings of the second marine mammal
stranding workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical
Report NMFS 98.
286

Chapter 10 (continued)
33. Jones, T.C., R.D. Hunt and H.A. Smith. 1983. Veterinary pathology.
5th ed. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia. 1792 p.
34. Klevezal’, G.A. and S.E. Kleinenburg. 1967. Age determination of
mammals by layered structure in teeth and bone. (Translated from
Russian by the Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem,
1969.) 128 p.
35. Laws, R.M. and R.J.F. Taylor. 1957. A mass mortality of crabeater
seals (Lobodon carcinophagus Gray). Proceedings of the Zoological
Society of London 129: 315-325.
36. Lennette, E.H., A. Balows, W.J. Hausler Jr. and H.J. Shadomy [eds.].
1985. Manual of clinical microbiology. American Society for Microbiol-
ogy, Washington, DC. 1149 p.
37. Lynch, J. (Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Guelph, Ont.).
1991. Personal communication.
38. Margolis, L. and H.P. Arai. 1989. Synopsis of the parasites of verte-
brates of Canada: parasites of marine mammals. Alberta Agriculture
Publication. Edmonton, Alberta. 26 p.
39. Margolis, L. and M.D. Dailey. 1972. Revised annotated list of parasites
from sea mammals caught off the west coast of North America. NOAA
Technical Report NMFS SSRF-647, Seattle, WA. 23 p.
40. McBain, J. (Sea World, Inc., San Diego, CA). 1992. Personal commu-
nication.
41. Norris, K.S. 1961. Standardized methods for measuring and recording
data on the smaller cetaceans. Journal of Mammalogy 42: 471-476.
42. Odell, D.K., E.D. Asper, J. Baucom and L.H. Cornell. 1980. A recurrent
mass stranding of the false killer whale, Pseudorca crassidens,
in Florida. Fishery Bulletin 78: 171-177.
43. Omura, H. 1963. An approved method for collection of ear plugs from
baleen whales. Norsk Hvalfangst-tidende 52: 279-283.
44. Perrin, W.F. and A.C. Myrick, Jr. [eds.]. 1980. Report of the workshop,
p. 1-50. In Age determination of toothed whales and sirenians. Report
of the International Whaling Commission, Special Issue 3. Interna-
tional Whaling Commission, Cambridge, U.K.
45. Perrin, W.F. and J.E. Powers. 1980. Role of a nematode in natural
mortality of spotted dolphins. Journal of Wildlife Management 44: 960-
963.
46. Pritchard, M.H. and G.O.W. Kruse. 1982. The collection and preserva-
tion of animal parasites. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NB.
141 p.
47. Rausch, R.L. 1953. Studies on the helminth fauna of Alaska XIII:
disease in the sea otter, with special reference to helminth parasites.
Ecology 34: 584-604.
48. Reijnders, P.H. 1984. Man-induced environmental factors in relation
to fertility changes in pinnipeds. Environmental Conservation 11: 61-
65.
49. Rommel, S. 1982. Unpublished anatomical drawings of Tursiops
truncatus.
50. Rommel, S. 1990. Unpublished anatomical drawings of Phoca
vitulina and Tursiops truncatus.
 References ... 287

Chapter 10 (continued)
51. Scheffer, V.B. 1967. Standard measurements of seals. Journal of
Mammalogy 48: 459-467.
52. Scheffer, V.B. and B. Kraus. 1964. Dentition of the northern fur seal.
Fishery Bulletin 63: 293-342.
53. Smith, A.W., N.A. Vedros, T.G. Akers and W.G. Gilmartin. 1978.
Hazards of disease transfer from marine mammals to land mammals:
review and recent findings. Journal of the American Veterinary Medi-
cal Association 173: 1131-1133.
54. Soulsby, E.J.L. and H.O. Monnig. 1982. Helminths, arthropods and
protozoa of domesticated animals. 7th ed. Lea & Febiger, Philadel-
phia. 809 p.
55. Stoskopf, M.K. and D.H. Herbert. 1990. Selected anatomical features
of the sea otter (Enhydra lutris). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine
21: 36-47.
56. Sweeney, J.C. 1990. Surgery in marine mammals, p. 215-233.
In L.A. Dierauf [ed.] CRC handbook of marine mammal medicine:
health, disease, and rehabilitation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
57. Van Bressem, M.F., I.K.G. Visser, M.W.G. Van De Bildt, J.S. Teppema,
J.A. Raga and A.D.M.E. Osterhaus. 1991. Morbillivirus infection in
Mediterranean striped dolphins (S t e n e l l a c o e r u l e o a l b a) .
Veterinary Record 129: 471-472.
58. Walsh, M.T., D.O. Beusse, W.G. Young, J.D. Lynch, E.D. Asper and
D.K. Odell. 1991. Medical findings in a mass stranding of pilot whales
( Globicephala macrorhynchus) in Florida, p. 75-83. In J.E.
Reynolds and D.K. Odell [eds.] Marine mammal strandings in the
United States: proceedings of the second marine mammal stranding
workshop, Miami, FL, Dec. 3-5, 1987. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 98.
59. Webster, R.G., J.R. Geraci, G. Petursson and K. Skirnisson. 1981.
Conjunctivitis in human beings caused by influenza A virus of seals.
New England Journal of Medicine 304: 911.
60. White, B.N. (Department of Biology, McMaster University, Hamilton,
Ont.). 1992. Personal communication.
61. Wilcock, B. (Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph,
Ont.). 1992. Personal communication.
62. Wilkinson, D.M. (U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of
Protected Resources, Silver Spring, MD). 1991. Personal communica-
tion.
63. Williams, T. 1990. Sea otter biology and medicine, p. 625-648.
In L.A. Dierauf [ed.] CRC handbook of marine mammal medicine:
health, disease, and rehabilitation. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL.
64. Williamson, G.R. 1973. Counting and measuring baleen and ventral
grooves of whales. Scientific Reports of the Whales Research Institute
(Tokyo) 25: 279-292.
65. Winchell, J.M. 1990. Field manual for phocid necropsies (specifically
M o n a c h u s m o n a c h u s) . N O A A T e c h n i c a l M e m o r a n d u m
NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-146. 55 p.
288

Chapter 11.
1. Barry, D. 1991. Moby Yuck, pp. 21-24. In Dave Barry Talks Back.
Crown Publications, Inc., New York, NY.
2. Best, P.B. (Marine Mammal Research Institute, University of Cape
Town, Cape Town, South Africa). 1992. Personal communication.
3. Bonde, R.K. (National Ecology Center, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Gainesville, FL). 1992. Personal communication.
4. Brownell, R.L., Jr. 1992. (U.S. State Department, Washington, D.C.).
Personal communication.
5. Early, G.A. (New England Aquarium, Boston, MA). 1992. Personal
communication.
6. Heyning, J.E. (Section of Birds and Mammals, Natural History Museum
of L.A. County, Los Angeles, CA). 1992. Personal communication.
7. Lopez, B. 1989. A presentation of whales, pp.117-146. In Crossing
Open Ground. Vantage Books, New York, NY.
8. Marsh, H. (College of Biological Sciences, James Cook University of
N. Queensland, Queensland, Australia). 1992. Personal communica-
tion.
9. Mead, J.G. (Section of Marine Mammals, Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, DC). 1992. Personal communication.
10. Murphy, T. (South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Depart-
ment, Charleston, SC). 1992. Personal communication.
11. Odell, D.K. (Sea World, Inc., Orlando, FL). 1992. Personal communi-
cation.
12. Perrin, W. F. (U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest
Region, La Jolla, CA). 1992. Personal communication.
13. Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. 1985. Report
of stranded whale workshop: a practical and humanitarian approach.
R.S.P.C.A., Horsham (U.K.). 64 p.
14. Smith, T.G. (Pacific Biological Station, Department of Fisheries and
Oceans, Nanaimo, B.C.). 1992. Personal communication.
15. Stein, D.L. 1988. A whale of a tale: George H. Newton and the cruise
of the Inland Whaling Association. The Log of Mystic Seaport. Vol.
40(2): 39-49. Mystic Seaport Museum, Inc., Mystic, CT.
16. Wilkinson, D.M. 1991. Report to: Assistant Administrator for Fisheries.
Program review of the marine mammal stranding networks. U.S. Dept.
Commerce, NOAA. 171 p.

Chapter 12.
1. Anon. 1992. EPI North: The Northwest Territories Epidemiology News-
letter 4(7): 1-4.
2. Bangs, C. and M.P. Hamlet. 1983. Hypothermia and cold injuries,
p. 27-63. In P.S. Auerbach and E.C. Geehr [eds.] Management of
wilderness and environmental emergencies. Macmillan Publishing
Company, New York, NY.
3. Beck, B. and T.G. Smith. 1977. Letter: Seal finger: an unsolved
medical problem in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal
115: 105-106.
4. Buck, C.D. and J.P. Schroeder. 1990. Public health significance of
marine mammal disease, p. 163-173. In L.A. Dierauf [ed.] Handbook of
 References ... 289

Chapter 12 (continued)
marine mammal medicine: health, disease, and rehabilitation. CRC
Press, Boca Raton, FL.
5. Cates, M.B., L. Kaufman, J.H. Grabau, J. Pletcher and J.P. Schroeder.
1986. Blastomycosis in an Atlantic bottlenose dolphin, Journal of the
American Veterinary Medical Association 189: 1148.
6. Dierauf, L.A., D.J. Vandenbroek, J. Roletto, M. Koski, L. Amaya and
L.J. Gage. 1985. An epizootic of leptospirosis in California sea lions.
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 187: 1145-
1148.
7. Early, G.A. (New England Aquarium, Boston, MA). 1991. Personal
communication.
8. Flowers, D.J. 1970. Human infection due to Mycobacterium
marinum after a dolphin bite. Journal of Clinical Pathology (London)
23: 475-477.
9. Geraci, J.R. and S.H. Ridgway. 1991. On disease transmission be-
tween cetaceans and humans. Marine Mammal Science 7: 191-194.
10. Hayward, J.S. 1983. The physiology of immersion hypothermia, p. 3-
19. In R.S. Pozos and L.E. Wittmers [eds.] The nature and treat-
ment of hypothermia. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.
11. Hicks, B.D. and G.A.J. Worthy. 1987. Sealpox in captive grey seals
( Halichoerus grypus) and their handlers. Journal of Wildlife Diseases
23: 1-6.
12. Howard, E.B., J.O. Britt, Jr., G.K. Matsumoto, R. Itahara and C.N.
Nagano. 1983. Bacterial diseases, p. 69-118. In E.B. Howard [ed.]
Pathobiology of marine mammal diseases. Vol. 1. CRC Press, Inc.,
Boca Raton, FL.
13. Madoff, S., K. Ruoff and A.S. Baker. 1991. Isolation of a
Mycoplasma species from a case of Seal Finger. American
Society for Microbiology, Abstracts of the 91st Meeting.
14. Marine Mammal Center. 1987. Public health guidelines for the Califor-
nia Marine Mammal Center. Unpublished protocol for handling of
stranded animals. Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito, CA. 5 p.
15. Nakajima, M. and I. Takikawa. 1961. Swine erysipelas in the dolphins
(translated from Japanese). Journal of the Japanese Association of
Zoological Gardens and Aquariums 3: 69-73.
16. Odegaard, O.A. and J. Krogsrud. 1981. Rabies in Svalbard: infection
diagnosed in arctic fox, reindeer and seal. Veterinary Record 109:
141-142.
17. Smith, A.W., D.E. Skilling, J.E. Barlough and E.S. Berry. 1986. Distri-
bution in the North Pacific Ocean, Bering Sea, and Arctic Ocean of
animal populations known to carry pathogenic caliciviruses. Diseases
of Aquatic Organisms 2: 73-80.
18. Smith, A.W., N.A. Vedros, T.G. Akers and W.G. Gilmartin. 1978.
Hazards of disease transfer from marine mammals to land mammals:
review and recent findings. Journal of the American Veterinary Medi-
cal Association 173: 1131-1133.
19. Suer, L.D. and N.A. Vedros. 1988. Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae.
I. Isolation and characterization from pinnipeds and bite/abrasion
wounds in humans. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 5: 1-5.
290

Chapter 12 (continued)

20. Symmers, W. St. C. 1983. A possible case of Lobo’s disease acquired

i n E u r o p e f r o m a b o t t l e n o s e d o l p h i n (T u r s i o p s t r u n c a t u s) .
Bulletin de la Société de Pathologie Exotique 76: 777-784.
21. Webster, R.G., J. Geraci and G. Petursson. 1981. Conjunctivitis in
human beings caused by influenza A virus of seals. New England
Journal of Medicine 304: 911.
 Appendix A
Suggested Field Equipment
Animal Relief Marine Mammal Fact sheets ( see
Zinc oxide Fig. 3.1)
Blankets and towels
Emergency Medical Supplies
Shovel (to dig pits for fins and tail)
I.V. fluids and infusion sets (droppers,
Ice packs (to keep extremities cool)
10 & 60 drop/min.)
Tarpaulins
Stimulants
Foam mattresses
Tranquilizers
Water sprayers
Adrenalin
Inflatable rafts
Antibiotics
Thermal “Space” blankets (for warming
Steroids
or cooling)
Tranquilizer dart pistol (for restraint)
Blood and Fluid sampling
Euthanasia
Syringes:
Customized needles for whales (see
5, 10, 20, 60 ml disposable
6.12)
Syringe needles:
Euthanasia solutions
14, 18, 22, 25 gauge bevel tip
Other euthanasia equipment (see 5.11
1", 1.5", 2", 3" (2.5, 4, 5, 7.5 cm)
and 6.12)
needles
Vacutainer needle holders Forceps
Vacutainer needles 4 1/2" (11 cm) tissue
Blood tubes: 4 1/2" (11 cm) fine splinter
EDTA 5 1/2" (14 cm) straight Kelly (serrated
Heparin jaws, box lock joint)
Plain Jeweler’s
Microhematocrit
Screw cap vials for plasma/serum
Gloves
Latex dish gloves
Pasteur pipettes, 6" (15 cm)
Disposable surgical
Wood application sticks
Heavy leather
Pre-soaked alcohol swabs
Powder-free (for toxicology)
Flexible tubing (extension sets)
Microscope slides and covers Hooks
5 1/2" (14 cm) shank bailing
Buckets (numerous)
Long handle logging
For washing, rinsing, carrying speci-
mens and materials Knives
Container for used needles and blades 6" (15 cm) blade steel boning
(plastic bleach bottle) 6" (15 cm) titanium
Check lists Marking/Labeling
Telephone Labels for sample jars
Equipment Markable waterproof labels for placing
Task outlines (see 2.4) in jars with preserved tissues
This Field Guide

287
288

Suggested Field Equipment (continued)

Marking/Labeling (continued) Restraint/Transport (continued)
Colored plastic tape for animal Plastic tags (“Roto tags”) and pliers
identification, triage, etc. (for tagging small cetaceans through
String, for attaching labels dorsal fin and pinnipeds and otters
through flipper web)
Measuring Equipment
Logging chain with hooks or heavy
Tapes, 10 m (30 ft) and 30 m (100 ft)
rope (for towing)
waterproof, non-metallic
Ruler, rigid 12" (30 cm) (to measure Saws
blubber thickness) 25" (64 cm) butcher hand saw
12" (30 cm) hacksaw
Microbiology
Spare blades
Alcohol, 70 % dilution
Culture vials - bacterial Scalpel
Culture vials - viral Handles, sizes 3 & 4
Swabs, sterile Blades, #10 & #22
Bacterial transport medium
Scissors
Viral transport medium
5 1/2" (14 cm) straight blade operating
Spatula and butane lighter, for searing
(sharp and blunt tip)
tissue surfaces
6" (15 cm) straight blade dissecting
Personal (sharp and blunt tip)
First-Aid kit 7" (18 cm) straight blade doyen
Hand soap & towels (abdominal)
Protective wear (“foul-weather” gear)
Sharpeners
Hats and boots
14" (36 cm) round steel
Surgical masks
Oil stones, coarse and fine
Disposable coveralls
Chemical lights (“Cyalumes”) Shears
Flashlights, extra batteries 1 1/8" blade cartilage and bone
Refreshments Long handle pruning
Recording Spring scales
Metal clipboards 100 g, 1 kg, 10 kg
Life history forms
Collection protocol forms
Storing/Preserving
Gross preservation:
Waterproof markers
Formaldehyde, 37 % (dilute on-site
Camera and film in waterproof carrier
to a 10 % formalin solution)
Restraint/Transport/Tagging Histopathology:
Kennels (for immobilizing or transport- 10 % neutral buffered formalin
ing small pinnipeds or sea otters) Glycerin (5%) in 70 % Ethanol
Nets 70 % Ethanol (see 10.8)
Stretchers (for transporting small AFA Fixative (see Fig. 10.33)
cetaceans) Formol-urea or saturated NaCl (see
“Cap-chur” dart pistol (for restraint) 10.8)
 289

Suggested Field Equipment (continued)

Storing/Preserving (continued)
Cooler for sample refrigeration
Ice packs
Jars, for organ sample storage
Aluminum foil (for toxicology)
Whirlpack or Zip-Lock 12 x 18" (30 x
46 cm) plastic bags
Heavy duty garbage or leaf bags for
disposal
Toxicology (Only for National In-
stitute of Standards and Technol-
ogy [NIST] Collection)
Titanium forceps & knife
Teflon bags (6 x 8" [15 x 20 cm]) and
jars (500 ml)
Teflon coated tongs and forceps
Additional:
 Appendix B
Sample Necropsy Report Form
Field Number: _______ Accession Number: ____ Date: _________
Species: ___________ Sex: ________________ Length: _______
Weight: _______ Age: ____ Prosectors: ____________________

Brief History: (Date of Death: ____________________ )

Tentative Diagnosis

Final Diagnosis

MEASUREMENTS (cm unless indicated) * = Required

CETACEANS
* Snout to melon: _________________________
Snout to angle of mouth _________________________
* Snout to blowhole _________________________
Snout to center of eye _________________________
Snout to fin tip: _________________________
• Snout to fluke notch: _________________________
Snout to caudal end of ventral grooves: ________________________
* Snout to center of anus: _________________________
Snout to center of genital aperture: _________________________
* Snout to ant. insertion of flipper: _________________________
Snout to ant. insertion of fin: _________________________
* Flipper length: _________________________
* Flipper width: _________________________
* Fin Height: _________________________

290
 291

Sample Necropsy Report Form (continued)

MEASUREMENTS (cm unless indicated) * = Required

PINNIPEDS DIAGRAM
* Standard length ________________
Curvilinear length ________________
* Ant. length, front flipper ________________
* Ant. length, hind flipper ________________

Girth: *Axillary ________ Max (location) _____ Anal __________

Blubber Thickness (excluding epidermis) location __________________

Dorsal _____________ Lateral __________ *Ventral _________

Baleen / Tooth Counts

UL _________ LL _________ UR _________ LR _________

CONDITION: Alive / Freshly dead / Moderately Decomposed / Extremely

Decomposed / Other

EXTERNAL EXAMINATION
General condition: (lesions, deformities, appearance)
Parasites:
Mouth / Teeth:

PRIMARY INCISION
Blubber:
Thorax:
Abdomen:

MUSCULOSKELETAL
Muscle:
Skeletal:
Vertebral epiphyses:
open _______ mm /closed, visible _____ /closed, invisible_______
292

Sample Necropsy Report Form (continued)

RESPIRATORY
Upper:
Lower:
Cranial Sinuses:

CIRCULATORY
Heart:
Great Vessels:
Blood:

LYMPHATIC
Spleen:
L.N.:
Thymus:

URINARY
R. Kidney:
L. Kidney:
Bladder: (empty / full / urine saved)

ENDOCRINE
R. Adrenal:
L. Adrenal:
Thyroid:
Pituitary:

DIGESTIVE
Stomach:
Stomach contents:
Intestines: (Length M)
Fecal exam:
Liver:
Pancreas:
Gall bladder / Hepatopancreatic duct:
 293

Sample Necropsy Report Form (continued)

REPRODUCTIVE
R. Gonad:
L. Gonad:
Sperm / Corpora:
Penis:
Uterus: (vaginal mucus: Y N )
R. Mammary: (milk saved Y N )
L. Mammary: (milk saved Y N )
Reproductive Condition:
Pregnant / Fetus: (Sex = , Weight = , Length = )
Lactating:

NERVOUS / SENSORY
Eyes:
Spinal cord:
Peripheral:
Brain:
Ear sinuses: (parasites)
 294

Sample Necropsy Report Form (continued)

Tissue Sample Checklist

Samples Chem Biol Histo Life Photos Parasit Serol Voucher Bact Virol Measur
Tox Tox Hist
Skin
Blubber
Blood
Muscle
Thyroid
Thymus
Heart
Lung
Lymph
Node
Adrenal
Liver
Pancreas
Kidney
Bladder
Gonads
Uterus
Mammary
Stomach
Stomach
Contents
Spleen
Brain
Pituitary
Teeth
Skull
Skeleton
Voucher
specimens
Other
 Appendix C
Sample Telephone Directory for Strandings
1. Local Police:

2. Local Stranding Network and/or Aquatic Animal Care

Facility:

3. Regional Office of National Marine Fisheries Service /

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/State Fish and Game/
Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Canadian):

4. Regional Level Agencies (State Parks or Seashores):

5. Local Hospital or Veterinary Clinic:

6. Coast Guard:

7. Media contacts (only persons with specialized training in

media relations should be assigned to this task):

8. Local landfill or dump-site:

295
296
 Subject Index 1
Age determination. See Life history Communications, 18, 295
Anatomy Contaminants
cetacean, 71-73, 73, 195, 199, 203 effects of, 43, 78
manatee, 145, 146, 193 protocol for sample collection, 205-
pinniped, 35-36, 37, 192 211, 207, 209
sea otter, 160, 194 Coordinators, roles of, 17-18, 20, 22,
Approaching stranded animals, 47, 24, 138-139, 244
83, 154, 165-166 Criteria
for making decisions, 28-32, 29
Baleen, counting and measuring, 202,
for release, 32, 54, 56, 99-100,
203 140-141, 157, 173
Beaching vs. stranding, 2-3
Crowd management, 22-23
Biology
adaptations to aquatic environ- Data collection
ment, 1-2 after the event, 245-246
of cetaceans, 71-75, 104-131 in mass strandings, 141-143
of manatees, 145-149 requirements, 5, 175-176, 177-178
of pinnipeds, 35-38, 57-69 Decomposition of carcass, 182-184
of sea otters, 159-162 Disease
Biotoxins and natural mortality, 41-42, 77,
mortality from, 41, 77, 150, 152, 81, 150, 163
153, 163 need for quarantine, 54
sample collection, 205-211, 210 transmissible, 239, 240-241
Blood sampling, 157, 176, 178, 179, Dissection, 187-199, 192, 193, 194,
180, 181, 200-201 195, 199. See also Carcass
protocol for specimen collection, examination.
200-201 Distribution in U.S. and adjacent waters
Blubber cetacean, 75-76, 104-131
functions of, 2 manatee, 146-149, 147
measuring thickness, 190, 202 pinniped, 38-40, 57-69
samples for biotoxin analysis, 208, sea otter, 162-163, 161
210 DNA analysis, samples for, 203, 204
samples for contaminant analysis,
Education, 11-12, 20, 21
206, 207, 209
Endangered Species Act of 1973, 44,
sampling procedure, 208
80, 151, 164
Capture. See Handling Entanglement, 43, 77-78, 151, 163
Carcass disposal, 229-238 Environmental conditions
Carcass evaluation, codes for as criteria for making decisions,
specimen collection, 182-184 30-31
Carcass examination, 187-199, 290-294 effects on stranded cetaceans, 85-87
external, 187-190, 191 and natural mortality, 40, 77, 150,
internal, 190-199, 192, 193, 194, 163
195, 199, 218 Equipment. See Logistic support
Coast Guard, role of, 9 Euthanasia
attitudes and issues, 23, 33-34,
1Boldface entries indicate figures; en- 100-101
tries in italics indicate tables. of cetaceans, 100-103, 141-142

297
298

of manatees, 157 Hypothermia

as an option, 33-34 in personnel, 241-242, 244
of pinnipeds, 56 in strandlings, 30-31, 84, 86, 87,
of sea otters, 174 156, 157, 170, 170, 171
Evaluating the event
criteria for making decisions, 28- Identification of marine mammal
32, 29 species, 57-69, 104-131, 149, 162
need for intervention, 27-28, 45, Injuries to team members. See Health
and Safety
80-82, 152-154, 165
Legislation protecting marine mam-
options, 28, 29, 32-34, 140-141
Exposure. See Hyperthermia; mals, 5, 7-8, 44-45, 79, 151-152,
Hypothermia 164
Life history. See also Carcass
Financial responsibility, 246 examination
First aid - determining condition protocol for sample collection, 202-
of cetaceans, 80, 83-84, 140 205
of manatees, 152-154, 156-157 samples for, 177, 186, 196, 197,
of pinnipeds, 50, 52 198, 199
of sea otters, 169-170, 170 Logistic support
First aid - supportive care as criteria for making decisions, 29
of cetaceans, 84-88, 85, 94-95, 98- equipment, 13-14, 45, 47, 82-83,
99, 140 154, 165, 287-289
of manatees,156-157 for lifting and moving cetaceans,
of pinnipeds, 50, 52-54 88, 91, 92, 96-97, 140
of sea otters, 170-172 planning for safety, 243-244
Fish and Wildlife Service, jurisdiction, for working in water, 241-242, 243,
8, 45, 149, 152, 164 244
Gross and histopathology Marine Mammal Commission, 5
protocol for sample collection, 216- Marine Mammal Protection Act of
218, 218, 219 1972, 5, 7, 44, 79-80, 151, 164
Mass die-off, definition of, 3
Handling. See also Transport Mass strandings, 133-144
cetaceans, 88-92, 89, 90, 91, 140 definition of, 2-3, 133
in the water, 81, 94-97, 94, 96, 98,
Measurements. See Morphometrics
139, 140-141 Media relations, 18, 23-25, 247
ease, as criteria for making Microbiology
decisions, 32 protocol for sample collection, 211-
manatees, 154, 155, 158 216, 213, 214, 215
pinnipeds, 47-50, 48, 49 samples from live animals, 176,
sea otters, 165-168, 169 178, 186-187
Health and safety of response team, 30- Monitoring released animals, 54-56,
31, 47, 83, 154, 166, 176, 239-244 55, 92-94, 93, 97, 143-144, 157,
Health of stranded animals. See also 173
First Aid
Morphometrics, 187, 188, 189, 190,
as criteria for making decisions, 194
31-32
protocol, 201-202
Herding cetaceans, 95-96
Mortality - natural
Hyperthermia
of cetaceans, 76-77
protecting personnel from, 241 of manatees, 149-150
in stranded animals, 30, 52, 85-87,
of pinnipeds 40-42
156, 170, 171
of sea otters, 163
 Subject Index ... 299

Mortality - human-related Predation, 41, 163

of cetaceans, 77-78 Protocols for specimen and data
examining for signs of, 187, 189 collection
of manatees, 150-151 blood studies, 179-181, 200-201
of pinnipeds, 42-43 contaminants and biotoxins, 205-
of sea otters, 163 211, 207, 209, 210
examining the carcass, 187-199
National Biomonitoring Specimen
general considerations, 175-176,
Bank, 206, 207, 208-209, 211 177-178, 178, 185, 186-187
National Institute of Standards and gross and histopathology, 191,
Technology, 6, 206 216-218, 219
National Marine Fisheries Service life history, 202-205
administrative regions, 6, 7, 8 microbiology, 211-216, 213, 214
jurisdiction, 8, 45, 79 morphometrics, 188, 189, 190,
Necropsy. See Carcass examination 194, 201-202
Nutrition during rehabilitation, 53, 99,
packaging and shipping, 225-228
157, 172
parasitology, 218, 220-224, 225,
Oil spills 226
effects on marine mammals, 43, sample necropsy form, 290-294
78, 163, 172 skeletal preparations, 223
rehabilitation of oiled otters, 30, Public attitudes, 3-5, 19, 22-23, 25,
172-173 34, 79, 247
Operations Center, role and responsi- Public health. See Health and safety
bilities, 9-10 Regulatory authorities, 5-6, 7-9, 14-
Organizing, 7-18 16, 44-45, 79, 151-152, 164
the media, 23-24 Rehabilitation
the operations center, 9-10 of cetaceans, 98-99
the response, 14-18, 138-139 of manatees, 156-157
the response team, 10-12 as an option, 33
specimen and data collection at of pinnipeds, 52-54
mass strandings, 142-143 of sea otters, 171-173
Packaging and shipping samples, Release
225-228, 227, 228. See also effects on populations, 4
Biotoxins; Contaminants; Gross following recovery, 54-56, 99-100,
and histopathology; Life history; 157, 173
Microbiology; Parasites. immediate, 32-33, 51, 92-97, 140-
Parasites 141, 157, 173
of cetaceans, 72, 77, 81, 136, 222, Response team
223 protecting health and safety of,
of manatees, 150, 224 239-244
of pinnipeds, 41, 54, 220, 221 responsibilities, recruiting and
protocol for sample collection 218- training, 11-12
222, 225, 226
Safety. See Health and safety
of sea otters, 224 Samples. See also Packaging and
Pathology. See Gross and histopa- shipping; Protocols for specimen
thology
and data collection
Photographs. See also Data collection
organizing and tracing, 142-143,
for identification catalogues, 148- 246
149, 176, 187
Sampling. See Protocols for specimen
300

and data collection; Specimen pinnipeds, 43-44, 57-69

collection sea otters, 165
Shock. See Stress and shock Stranding networks, development and
Skeletal specimens, 198, 223 goals, 5-6, 7
Smithsonian Institution, 4, 6 Stranding theories, 133-138
Social needs of strandlings Strandings, scientific value of, 3-4
during rehabilitation, 98, 99, 141, Stress and shock, 2, 31, 41, 87-88,
171-172 99, 156, 163, 165-166, 171, 172
for release, 92, 139, 140-141 and restranding, 138
Social organization, as factor in
stranding, 136-138 Tagging, 55, 56, 92-94, 93, 97, 140,
Specimen collection. See also 157, 173
Protocols for specimen and data natural marks, 94, 176, 187
collection Towing cetaceans, 95-96, 81, 96
and carcass quality, 183-184 Toxicology. See Contaminants;
Biotoxins
during dissection, general proce-
Training, 11-12, 243-244
dures, 185, 186-187, 187-199
from live animals, 176, 178 Transport
in mass strandings, 142-143 of cetaceans, 91, 96-98, 141
Stomach contents, collection of, 196, of manatees, 155, 156, 158
204-205 of pinnipeds, 51-52
Stranding, definition of, 2-3 of sea otters, 168, 171
Stranding, measures to avert, 80, 81, Volunteers, 11-12, 19-20, 139
139-140
Stranding patterns Weight, estimating, 46, 82
cetaceans, 78-79, 104-131 Zoogeographic regions, 7, 8
manatees, 153-154 stranding patterns in, 57-69, 104-
131, 149, 162
 Species Index
Arctocephalus townsendi. See seal
Guadalupe fur seal Cape fur seal (Arctocephalus
Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella pusillus), 41
frontalis), 131, 131, 133 Cetacea, 71, 104
Atlantic white-sided dolphin Clymene dolphin (Stenella clymene),
(Lagenorhynchus acutus), 75, 79, 129, 129
125, 125, 133 Common dolphin (Delphinus
delphis), 77, 81, 98, 128, 128, 133
Baird’s beaked whale (Berardius Crabeater seal (Lobodon
bairdii), 114, 114 carcinophagus), 42
Balaena mysticetus. See Bowhead Cuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius
whale cavirostris), 95, 102, 113, 113
Balaenidae, 104 Cystophora cristata. See Hooded
Balaenoptera borealis. See Sei seal
whale
Balaenoptera musculus. See Blue Dall’s porpoise ( Phocoenoides dalli),
whale 120, 120
Balaenoptera physalus. See Fin Delphinapterus leucas. See Beluga
whale whale
Balaenoptera acutorostrata. See Delphinidae, 121
Minke whale Delphinus delphis. See Common
Balaenoptera edeni.See Bryde’s whale dolphin
Balaenopteridae, 107 Dwarf sperm whale ( Kogia simus),
Beaked whales, 75, 113 73, 75, 112, 112
Bearded seal ( Erignathus barbatus),
36, 38, 39, 67, 67, 199
Enhydra lutris. See Sea otter
Beluga whale (Delphinapterus
Erignathus barbatus.See Bearded seal
leucas), 75-76, 77, 79, 88, 118, Eschrichtiidae, 106
118, 137 Eschrichtius robustus. See Gray whale
Berardius bairdii. See Baird’s beaked Eubalaena glacialis. See Northern
right whale
whale
Blainville’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon
Eumetopias jubatus. See Steller sea
densirostris), 116, 116 lion
Blue whale (Balaenoptera muscu- False killer whale (Pseudorca
lus), 76, 108, 108, 235 crassidens), 74, 94, 122, 122, 133,
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops 136
truncatus), 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 81, Feresa attenuata. See Pygmy killer
83, 84, 88, 97, 98, 99, 127, 127, whale
133, 134-135, 136 Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus),
Bowhead whale (Balaena 75, 76, 84, 101, 108, 108, 230-231
mysticetus), 75, 76, 77, 105, 105 Fraser’s dolphin (Lagenodelphis
Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera hosei), 126, 126
borealis), 80, 110, 110
Galapagos fur seal (Arctocephalus
California sea lion (Zalophus galapagoensis), 40
californianus), 4, 27, 38, 41, 43, Galapagos sea lion ( Zalophus
53, 60, 60, 241 californianus wollebaeki), 40, 42
Callorhinus ursinus. See Northern fur Gervais’ beaked whale (Mesoplodon

301
302

europaeus), 117, 117 Lagenorhynchus albirostris. See

Ginko-toothed beaked whale White-beaked dolphin
(Mesoplodon ginkodens), 118 Lagenorhynchus obliquidens. See
Globicephala macrorhynchus. See Pacific white-sided dolphin
Short-finned pilot whale Lissodelphis borealis. See Northern
Globicephala melas. See Long- right whale dolphin
finned pilot whale Long-finned pilot whale (Globicephala
Grampus griseus. See Risso’s melas), 21, 75, 79, 123, 123, 133
dolphin
Gray seal (Halichoerus grypus), 38,
Megaptera novaeangliae. See
40-41, 48, 50, 66, 66 Humpback whale
Manatee. See West Indian manatee
Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus),
Melon-headed whale (Peponocephala
23, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 106, 106,
135
electra), 123, 123
Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus Mesoplodon spp., 115
townsendi), 45, 62, 62 Mesoplodon bidens. See Sowerby’s
beaked whale
Halichoerus grypus. See Gray seal Mesoplodon carlhubbsi. See Hubb’s
Harbor porpoise (Phocoena beaked whale
phocoena), 73, 74, 75, 78, 94, 99, Mesoplodon densirostris. See
119, 119, 133 Blainville’s beaked whale
Harbor seal ( Phoca vitulina), 4, 36, Mesoplodon europaeus. See
37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 63, 63 Gervais’ beaked whale
Harp seal (Phoca groenlandica), 38, Mesoplodon ginkodens. See Ginko-
39, 40, 42, 43, 50, 65, 65 toothed beaked whale
Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus Mesoplodon hectori. See Hector’s
schauinslandi), 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, beaked whale
68, 68 Mesoplodon mirus. See True’s
Hawaiian spinner dolphin. See beaked whale
Spinner dolphin Mesoplodon stejnegeri. See
Hector’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon Stejneger’s beaked whale
hectori), 116 Minke whale (Balaenoptera
Hooded seal (Cystophora cristata), 2, acutorostrata), 76, 80, 109, 109,
36, 37, 38, 43, 48, 50, 51, 68, 68 234, 235
Hubb’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon Mirounga angustirostris. See
carlhubbsi), 115, 115 Northern elephant seal
Humpback whale (Megaptera Monachus schauinslandi. See
novaeangliae), 75, 76, 78, 79, Hawaiian monk seal
107, 107, 135, 176, 229, 232, 233 Monodon monoceros. See Narwhal
Hyperoodon ampullatus. See Monodontidae, 118
Northern bottlenosed whale Mysticeti, 71, 104
Killer whale ( Orcinus orca), 75, 76, Narwhal (Monodon monoceros), 75,
121, 121, 230 77, 119, 119
Kogia breviceps. See Pygmy sperm Northern bottlenosed whale
whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), 114,
Kogia simus. See Dwarf sperm whale 114
Northern elephant seal (Mirounga
Lagenodelphis hosei. See Fraser’s angustirostris), 36, 38, 39, 40, 41,
dolphin 43, 69, 69
Lagenorhynchus acutus. See Northern fur seal (Callorhinus
Atlantic white-sided dolphin
 Species Index ... 303

ursinus), 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 39, 40, 41, 43, 64, 64, 241
61, 61, 240, 241 Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus),
Northern right whale (Eubalaena 75, 124, 124, 230
glacialis), 75, 76, 78, 80, 105, 105, Rough-toothed dolphin (Steno
176, 231, 237 bredanensis), 76, 128, 128, 133
Northern right whale dolphin
(Lissodelphis borealis), 78, 127, 127 Sea otter (Enhydra lutris), 8, 27, 30,
31, 32, 33, 159-173, 160, 162, 181,
Odobenidae, 35, 58 190, 194, 197, 199, 224
Odobenus rosmarus. See Walrus Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis),
Odontoceti, 71, 111 76, 109, 109
Orcinus orca. See Killer whale Short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala
Otariidae, 35, 36, 37, 37, 59 macroryhnchus), 75, 76, 124, 124
Sowerby’s beaked whale
Pacific white-sided dolphin
(Mesoplodon bidens), 117
(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), Sperm whale ( Physeter catodon), 2,
78, 125, 125 74, 75, 77, 80, 102, 111, 111, 133,
Pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella 135, 230, 236
attenuata), 76, 77, 78, 130, 131, 133 Spinner dolphin (Stenella
Peponocephala electra. See Melon- longirostris), 74, 75, 76, 78, 129,
headed whale 129, 137
Phoca fasciata. See Ribbon seal Spotted dolphin. See Atlantic spotted
Phoca groenlandica. See Harp seal dolphin; Pantropical spotted
Phoca hispida. See Ringed seal dolphin
Phoca largha. See Spotted seal Spotted seal (Phoca largha), 39, 64,
Phoca spp., 63 64
Phoca vitulina. See Harbor seal Stejneger’s beaked whale
Phocidae, 35, 36, 37, 63 (Mesoplodon stejnegeri), 115
Phocoena phocoena. See Harbor Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus),
porpoise 38-39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 59, 59
Phocoena sinus. See Vaquita Stenella attenuata. See Pantropical
Phocoenidae, 119 spotted dolphin
Phocoenoides dalli. See Dall’s Stenella clymene. See Clymene
porpoise dolphin
Physeter catodon. See Sperm whale Stenella coeruleoalba. See Striped
Physeteridae, 111 dolphin
Pilot whales, 21, 30, 31, 74, 77, 84, Stenella frontalis. See Atlantic
88, 99, 101, 103, 135, 231, 232, spotted dolphin
239 Stenella longirostris. See Spinner
Pinnipedia, 35, 58 dolphin
Pseudorca crassidens. See False Stenella spp., 98, 129
killer whale Steno bredanensis. See Rough-
Pygmy killer whale (Feresa toothed dolphin
attenuata), 76, 122, 122, 133 Striped dolphin (Stenella
Pygmy sperm whale (Kogia coeruleoalba), 77, 95, 130, 130,
breviceps), 72, 73, 112, 112, 133 133, 135
Ribbon seal (Phoca fasciata), 36, 38, Trichechus manatus. See West
39, 65, 65 Indian manatee
Right whale. See Northern right whale True’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon
Ringed seal (Phoca hispida), 37, 38, mirus), 117
304

Tursiops truncatus. See Bottlenose

dolphin
Vaquita (Phocoena sinus), 75, 78, 80,
120
Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus), 8, 35,
36, 37, 38, 39, 40-41, 43, 44, 58,
58, 199
West Indian manatee, 8, 27, 30, 33,
145-158, 146, 149, 181, 189, 193,
197, 199, 206, 208, 209, 224, 233
White-beaked dolphin
(Lagenorhynchus albirostris), 77,
126, 126, 133
White-sided dolphin. See Atlantic
white-sided dolphin; Pacific white-
sided dolphin
Zalophus californianus. See California
sea lion
Ziphiidae, 113
Ziphius cavirostris. See Cuvier’s
beaked whale
 About the Authors
A native of Massachusetts, Joseph R. Geraci received a Bachelor of Science
degree from Suffolk University, a V.M.D. from the University of Pennsylvania, and
a Ph.D. from McGill University. His investigations on marine mammal health have
spanned arctic and eastern Canada, the United States, Europe and South America.
He has received numerous honors, including the New England Aquarium David B.
Stone Award for the Environment, and the Comparative Medicine Scholar of the
Year award from Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine. He has served as
marine mammal health advisor for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S.
Department of Justice, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the
Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans. A former member of the Committee
of Scientific Advisors to the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission, he is currently a
member of the NMFS and the United Nations Environmental Plan task forces on
marine mammal mortality. He was the founding editor of the journalMarine Mammal
Science. Dr. Geraci is a Professor in the Pathology Department, Ontario Veterinary
College, University of Guelph.
Valerie J. Lounsbury, born in Maine and raised in Massachusetts, received a
Bachelor’s degree in biology from New College of the University of South Florida.
She was library associate at the University of Guelph before joining the Marine
Mammal Laboratory at the Department of Pathology as research associate and
technical illustrator. Over the past 14 years Ms. Lounsbury’s writings and illustra-
tions have appeared in numerous scientific papers and books on marine mammals.

305
1. Information Update: The Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response
Program
Marine Mammal stranding networks (for cetaceans and pinnipeds except walruses) in the United
States make up one facet of a comprehensive National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) program
called the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program (MMHSRP). This program was
established in the late 1980s in response to concern about marine mammal strandings along U.S.
shorelines. The MMHSRP goals are to: 1) facilitate collection and dissemination of data, 2) assess
health trends in marine mammal populations, 3) correlate health with available data on physical,
chemical, environmental, and biological parameters, and 4) coordinate effective responses to
unusual mortality events (Becker et al. 1994).
Volunteer stranding networks, authorized through Letters of Authority from the NMFS regional
offices, have been established in all coastal states. NMFS oversees, coordinates, and authorizes
stranding response activities through a National Coordinator and five regional coordinators
(Wilkinson 1996).
In response to a coastal bottlenose dolphin die-off in 1987-88, NMFS established a Working
Group on Unusual Marine Mammal Mortality Events to: 1) establish criteria for determining when
an unusual mortality event is underway and 2) provide guidance for responding to such events.
The National Contingency Plan (Wilkinson 1996), as well as regional and species-specific plans,
have also been developed to help organize effective response efforts and investigations.

References
Becker, P., D. Wilkinson and T.I. Lillestolen. 1994. Marine Mammal Health and Stranding
Response Program: Program development plan. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS-OPR- 94-2. 35 p.
Wilkinson, D.M. 1996. National contingency plan for response to unusual marine mammal mortality
events. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-9. 118 p.

2. Reminder: Communication among stranding networks

An effective stranding response program requires good communication between neighboring
stranding networks and, in the U.S., between neighboring jurisdictions through communication
between NMFS (or FWS) regional coordinators. On a broader scale, open lines of communication
between neighboring countries can be vital to a successful investigation. Unusual events
associated with environmental conditions or infectious disease may result in strandings or illness
over a broad geographic range. Long after the investigation has concluded, return of
rehabilitated animals to suitable habitat may involve release in foreign waters. Ideally, agreements
for cooperation between networks and government agencies, national and international, should
be in place beforehand. Staying informed of developments in neighboring regions is especially
vital to the recognition and investigation of unusual events.
3: Reminder: Unusual marine mammal mortality events
In the United States, regional stranding network members are required to report observations of
unusual numbers of injured or dead marine mammals to the Regional (NMFS) or Species (FWS)
stranding coordinator, who then notifies the Office of Protected Species. The Office of Protected
Species gathers relevant information and consults the Working Group on Unusual Marine Mammal
Mortality Events (WGUMMME). This group advises NMFS or FWS on whether or not the event
should be declared unusual and serves in an advisory capacity once an event has been
declared. WGUMMME has established the following criteria to help recognize an unusual event
(Wilkinson 1996):
1. There is a marked increase in the number or frequency of strandings as compared to prior
years. This must be weighed against other knowledge, including percent effort in comparison
years. As a practical measure, an increase in strandings over an area or period of time that
strains the capacity of the Stranding Network to respond should be cause for concern.
2. Animals are stranding at time of year when strandings are unusual for the area or the
species.
3. An increase in strandings is occurring in a very localized area (possibly suggesting a
localized problem), is occurring throughout the geographic range of the species/population,
or is spreading geographically with time.
4. The species, age or sex composition of the stranded animals is different than that of animals
that normally strand in the area at that time of year.
5. Stranded animals exhibit similar or unusual pathologic findings, or the general physical
condition (e.g., blubber thickness) of stranded animals is different from what is normally
seen.
6. Mortality is accompanied by unusual behavior patterns in individuals in the wild, such as
occurrence in unusual habitats or abnormal patterns of swimming and diving.
7. Critically endangered species are stranding. Stranding of three or four right whales, for
example, may be cause for great concern, whereas stranding of a similar number of fin
whales may not.

Reference
Wilkinson, D.M. 1996. National contingency plan for response to unusual marine mammal mortality
events. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-9. 118 p.
4. Information Update: Environmental conditions
Unusual oceanographic conditions off the coast of southwestern Africa during much of 1993
and 1994 resulted in reduction or disappearance of fish stocks important as prey for Cape fur
seals (Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus) in this region (Roux in UNEP 1995). By mid 1994, all sex
and age groups had suffered record mortality; approximately 120,000 pups had died, and a high
rate of abortion was observed among surviving females. Although evidence of exposure to
morbillivirus was found, the primary cause of death of pups was chronic starvation (Anselmo et
al. 1995, Roux in UNEP 1995, Geraci et al. in press).
Unusual numbers of pinniped deaths and strandings were also observed in the Eastern Pacific in
1997/98 in conjunction with the strongest El Ni–o on record. In late 1997, the numbers of dead or
stranded northern fur seals and California sea lions found along the California coast rose
dramatically (Marine Mammal Commission 1998). Mortality of northern elephant seal pups at some
California rookeries during early 1998 exceeded 85%; pups were washed away by storms, high
tides and elevated sea levels (up to 18 inches) and, in one area, were battered by debris from a
wrecked pier (pers. comm., Sarah Allen, Senior Scientist, National Park Service, Point Reyes,
CA). Abnormal weather patterns persisted through the spring of 1998. Although determining the
overall effects on Eastern Pacific pinniped populations will take many months, the 1997/98 El
Ni–o, like the 1983/83 event (Trillmich et al. 1991), will likely have the greatest impacts on pup
production and first-year survival.

References
Anselmo, S., P. 't Hart, H. Vos, J. Groen and A. D. M. E. Osterhaus. 1995. Mass mortality of Cape fur
seals Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus in Namibia, 1994. Seal Rehabilitation and Research Centre
Publication. Pieterburen, Netherlands. 9 p.
Geraci, J.R., J. Harwood and V.J. Lounsbury. In press. Marine mammal die-offs: causes,
investigations, and issues, chapter 19. In J.R. Twiss and R.R. Reeves [eds.] Marine Mammals, vol. 1.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Marine Mammal Commission. 1998. Annual report to Congress 1997. Marine Mammal
Commission, 4340 East-West Highway, Room 905, Bethesda, Maryland 20814.
Trillmich, F., K.A. Ono, D.P. Costa, R.L. DeLong, S.D. Feldkamp, J.M. Francis, R.L. Gentry, C.B.
Heath, B.J. Le Boeuf, P. Majluf and A.E. York. 1991. The effects of El Ni–o on pinniped
populations in the Eastern Pacific, p. 247-270. In F. Trillmich and K.A. Ono [eds.] Pinnipeds and
El Ni–o: responses to environmental stress. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 1995. Marine mammal/fishery interactions:
analysis of cull proposals. UNEP(OCA)/MM.SAC.3/1. United Nations Environment Programme,
Nairobi.
5. Information Update: Toxic algal blooms
In May to June 1997, half to two-thirds of the largest remaining breeding colony of the highly
endangered Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) (estimated at less than 300
animals in 1996) died at Cap Blanc, Mauritania. The cause of this die-off has yet to be
established. Investigations have focused on two potential causes: a virus and a biotoxin.
Although the seals showed evidence of exposure to morbillivirus (Osterhaus et al. 1997), the
presence of a local toxic dinoflagellate bloom, the pattern of mortality, clinical signs and lung
pathology are more suggestive of biotoxin poisoning (Hernandez et al. 1998).
Another die-off involving an endangered pinniped population occurred in January to February
1998. New Zealand sea lion (Phocarctos hookeri) pup mortality in the Aukland Islands was at
least three times normal, and mortality of adults appeared unusual. There was no evidence to
support an infectious agent as the primary cause of this event. Circumstantial evidence, including
observations of neurologic impairment in some adults and toxic blooms associated with human
illness and the death of fish, sea birds and fur seals in other areas around New Zealand,
suggests that biotoxin exposure, perhaps in conjunction with malnutrition subsequent to El Ni–o-
related prey depletion, might have increased the sea lionsÕ susceptibility to opportunistic
pathogens (Madie et al., unpublished report).

References
Hern‡ndez, M., I. Robinson, A. Aguilar, L.M. Gonz‡lez, L.F. L—pez-Jurado, M.I. Reyero, E. Cacho,
J. Franco, V. L—pez-Rodas and E. Costas. 1998. Nature 393(6680): 28-29.
Madie, P., P. Duignan, J. Hunter, M. Alley, K. Thompson, J. Meers, S. Fenwick, N. Gibbs, N. Gales
and S. Childerhouse. New Zealand sea lion epidemic, January-February 1998. Preliminary report,
May 1998. Massey University Cetacean Investigation Centre and Department of Conservation,
Private Postal Bag 11222, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Osterhaus, A., J. Groen, H. Niesters, M. van de Bildt, B. Martina, L. Vedder, J. Vos, H. van Egmond,
B.A. Sidi and M.E.O. Barham. 1997. Morbillivirus in monk seal mass mortality. Nature 388: 838-
839.
6. Information Update: Morbilliviruses in pinnipeds
Studies since the 1988 epizootic in European harbor seals have shown that morbillivirus infection
(PDV [phocine distemper], CDV [canine distemper]), often without recognized illness, is common
in many pinniped populations, including those of most North Atlantic species (Dietz et al. 1989;
Duignan et al. 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997). Serological studies on the Antarctic crabeater seal
population (Bengtson et al. 1991) now tentatively link the 1955 die-off to morbillivirus (CDV),
perhaps transmitted from sled dogs. The 1988 outbreaks of disease in European seals may have
been the result of PDV, perhaps introduced by infected migrating harp seals, entering previously
unexposed populations that were dense enough to support virus transmission (Heide-J¿rgensen
et al. 1992; Geraci et al., in press). Evidence of exposure to morbillivirus has also been reported
in Cape fur seals (Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus) (Anselmo et al. 1995) and Mediterranean
monk seals (Monachus monachus) (Osterhaus et al. 1997) from the Atlantic coast of Africa.
There has been no documented evidence of exposure to morbillivirus in pinnipeds from the west
coast of North America.

References
Anselmo, S., P. 't Hart, H. Vos, J. Groen and A. D. M. E. Osterhaus. 1995. Mass mortality of Cape fur
seals Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus in Namibia, 1994. Seal Rehabilitation and Research Centre
Publication. Pieterburen, Netherlands. 9 p.
Bengtson, J.L., P. Boveng, U. FranzŽn, P. Have, M.P. Heide-J¿rgensen and T.J. HŠrkšnen. 1991.
Antibodies to canine distemper virus in Antarctic seals. Marine Mammal Science 7: 85-87.
Dietz, R., C.T. Ansen, P. Have and M.P. Heide-J¿rgensen. 1989. Clue to seal epizootic? Nature
338: 627.
Duignan, P.J., S. Sadove, J.T. Saliki and J.R. Geraci. 1993. Phocine distemper in harbor seals
(Phoca vitulina) from Long Island, New York. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 29: 465-469.
Duignan, P. J., J. T. Saliki, D. J. St. Aubin, J. A. House and J. R. Geraci. 1994. Neutralizing
antibodies to phocine distemper virus in Atlantic walruses (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) from
Arctic Canada. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 30: 90-94.
Duignan, P.J., J.T. Saliki, D.J. St. Aubin, G. Early, S. Sadove, J.A. House, K. Kovacs and J.R.
Geraci. 1995. Epizootiology of morbillivirus infection in North American harbor (Phoca vitulina) and
gray seals (Halichoerus grypus). Journal of Wildlife Diseases 31: 491-501.
Duignan, P.J., O. Nielsen, C. House, K.M. Kovacs, N. Duffy, G. Early, S. Sadove, D.J. St. Aubin,
B.K. Rima, and J.R. Geraci. 1997. Epizootiology of morbillivirus infection in harp seals, hooded
seals, and ringed seals from the Canadian Arctic and western Atlantic. Journal of Wildlife Diseases
33: 7-19.
Geraci, J.R., J. Harwood and V.J. Lounsbury. In press. Marine mammal die-offs: causes,
investigations, and issues, chapter 19. In J.R. Twiss and R.R. Reeves [eds.] Marine Mammals, vol. 1.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Heide-J¿rgensen, M.-P., T. HŠrkšnen, R. Dietz and P.M. Thompson. 1992. Retrospective of the
1988 European seal epizootic. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 13: 37-62.
Osterhaus, A., J. Groen, H. Niesters, M. van de Bildt, B. Martina, L. Vedder, J. Vos, H. van Egmond,
B.A. Sidi and M.E.O. Barham. 1997. Morbillivirus in monk seal mass mortality. Nature 388: 838-
839.
7. Information Update: Oil spills
There were few documented reports of pinniped deaths due to oil exposure prior to the Exxon
Valdez spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska, in 1989. This spill demonstrated the risks of
exposure to volatile fractions of oil. These toxic compounds damage the lungs and enter the
circulation, where they can attack the liver, nervous system, and blood-forming tissues (St.
Aubin and Geraci 1994). An estimated 3,500 to 5,500 sea otters and about 300 harbor seals
died. Many seals had degenerative lesions of the brain, probably resulting from inhalation of
vapors from fresh oil (Spraker et al. 1994).
In February 1997, an oil spill from the tanker San Jorge contaminated South American fur seal
(Arctocephalus australis) and sea lion (Otaria flavescens) rookeries on Isla de Lobos, Uruguay.
Fur seal pup mortality reached 60-70% on two heavily oiled rookeries, compared with 7-10% in
lightly oiled areas. This suggests that oil may have killed about 3,200 pups, or about 10% of the
total number of pups born on the island rookery (Levine et al. 1997, Ponce de Leon 1997).

References
Levine, E., A.J. Mearns and T.R. Loughlin. 1997. Emergency assistance in assessing and
investigating environmental impacts of the San Jorge oil spill. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA/ORCA
Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division, NOAA/NMFS National Marine Mammal
Laboratory, June 1997.
Ponce de Le—n, A. 1997. Evaluation of the damages associated with the oil spill from the ship San
Jorge on Isla de Lobos, Uruguay: report on activities to achieve recovery of the affected areas and
effects on the population of the South American fur seal, Arctocephalus australis. Prepared for the
Director General, Instituto Nacional de Pesca, Ministerio de Ganaderia, Agricultura y Pesca,
Constituyente 1497 -CP 11200, Montevideo, Uruguay. 42 p.
St. Aubin, D.J. and J.R. Geraci. 1994. Summary and conclusions, p. 371-376. In T.R. Loughlin
[ed.] Marine mammals and the Exxon Valdez. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego and London.
Spraker, T.R., L.F. Lowry and K.J. Frost. 1994. Gross necropsy and histopathologic lesions found in
harbor seals, p. 281-311. In T.R. Loughlin [ed.] Marine mammals and the Exxon Valdez. Academic
Press, Inc., San Diego and London.
8. Information Update: Morbilliviruses in cetaceans
On the heels of the 1987-88 outbreaks of CDV and PDV in European seals, a third morbillivirus
(porpoise morbillivirus) caused the deaths of a few harbor porpoises in waters off Ireland
(Kennedy et al. 1988). Between 1990 and 1992, the same or a closely related virus (dolphin
morbillivirus) killed thousands of striped dolphins in the Mediterranean Sea (references in text).
The immunosuppressive effect of these viruses led to development of secondary, often
overwhelming infections by bacteria, fungi, and other viruses.
Studies since 1988 indicate that morbillivirus infection, often without recognized illness, is
common in many cetacean populations (Duignan et al. 1995a,b) and was, in fact, present in at
least some northwestern Atlantic populations of pilot whales and bottlenose dolphins prior to the
European epidemics (Geraci 1989; Duignan et al. 1995b, 1996). Retrospective studies indicate
that outbreaks have occurred sporadically in southeastern U.S. coastal bottlenose dolphin
populations since the early 1980s (Duignan et al. 1996) and that this virus may have played an
important role in the 1987-88 U.S. central Atlantic coast dolphin die-off (Lipscomb et al. 1994,
Duignan et al. 1995a).
Morbillivirus infection, unassociated with illness, also appears to be common in small cetaceans
in the southeastern Pacific (Van Bressem et al. 1998). In populations in which the virus is
endemic, infection is presumably widespread but of little consequence, since the animals
develop immunity through frequent exposure (Duignan et al. 1995a,b). Outbreaks of illness are
more likely to follow the introduction of the virus into ÒnaiveÓ (previously unexposed) populations.
The role of factors such as malnutrition or exposure to contaminants and biotoxins in disease
outbreaks is poorly understood.

References
Duignan, P.J., C. House, J.R. Geraci, N. Duffy, B.K. Rima, M.T. Walsh, G. Early, D.J. St. Aubin, S.
Sadove, H. Koopman and H. Rinehart. 1995a. Morbillivirus infection in cetaceans of the western
Atlantic. Veterinary Microbiology 44: 241-249.
Duignan, P.J., C. House, J.R. Geraci, G. Early, H. Copland, M.T. Walsh, G.D. Bossart, C. Cray, S.
Sadove, D.J. St. Aubin and M. Moore. 1995b. Morbillivirus infection in two species of pilot whales
(Globicephala sp.) from the western Atlantic. Marine Mammal Science 11: 150-162.
Duignan, P.J., C. House, D.K. Odell, R.S. Wells, L.J. Hansen, M.T. Walsh, D.J. St. Aubin, B.K. Rima
and J.R. Geraci. 1996. Morbillivirus infection in bottlenose dolphins: evidence for recurrent
epizootics in the western Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. Marine Mammal Science 12: 499-515.
Geraci, J.R. 1989. Clinical investigation of the 1987-88 mass mortality of bottlenose dolphins along
the U.S. central and south Atlantic coast. Final Report to the National Marine Fisheries Service,
U.S. Navy (Office of Naval Research) and Marine Mammal Commission. 63 p.
Kennedy, S., J.A. Smyth, P.F. Cush, S.J. McCullough, G.M. Allan and S. McQuaid. 1988. Viral
distemper now found in porpoises. Nature 336: 21.
Lipscomb, T.P., F.Y. Schulman, D. Moffett and S. Kennedy. 1994. Morbilliviral disease in Atlantic
bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from the 1987-1988 epizootic. Journal of Wildlife Diseases
30: 567-571.
Van Bressem, M.-F., K. Van Waerebeek, M. Fleming and T. Barrett. 1998. Serological evidence of
morbillivirus infection in small cetaceans from the Southeast Pacific. Veterinary Microbiology 59:
89-98.
9. Information Update: North Atlantic right whales
Human-related mortality is considered the greatest threat to the survival of the North Atlantic right
whale population, which is currently estimated at about 300 animals. This population has a low
annual recruitment rate--between 1982 through 1995, an average of less than 12 births were
documented each year. From 1991 through 1996, 9 of 16 (56%) observed deaths were
attributed to human causes: eight to ship strikes and one to entanglement in fishing gear. Taking
into account the likelihood that many deaths are unobserved, there is concern that annual
mortality in recent years may exceed the recruitment rate (Marine Mammal Commission 1997).

Reference
Marine Mammal Commission. 1997. Annual report to Congress 1996. Marine Mammal
Commission, 4340 East-West Highway, Room 945, Bethesda, MD.

10. Reminder: Commercial fisheries interactions with marine mammals

Most commercial fishing vessels do not carry marine mammal observers. Thus evidence of
fisheries interactions on animals may provide the first clue that a particular commercial fishery is
having an impact on a specific marine mammal population. For this reason, signs of fishery
interactions in stranded animals (Kuiken 1996) should be well-documented with photographs
and/or videotapes. In the United States, such incidents are reported to the NMFS regional
stranding coordinators or FWS species coordinators. Detailed records on the animals should be
kept for NMFS (or FWS) review.

Reference
Kuiken, T. [ed.] 1996. Diagnosis of by-catch in cetaceans: proceedings of the second European
Cetacean Society workshop on cetacean pathology, Montpellier, France, 2 March 1994. European
Cetacean Society Newsletter No. 26 - Special Issue. 43 p.
11. Information Update: Tuna fishery/dolphin interactions in the Eastern Tropical
Pacific Ocean
In 1992, the La Jolla Agreement placed voluntary limits on the maximum number of dolphins that
could be killed annually in the tuna fishery and lowered the annual yearly maximum to zero after
seven years. The signing nations agreed that, if the United States made provisions in the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) for those countries participating in an international dolphin
conservation program, they would enter into a binding international agreement for continued
protection of dolphins and the Eastern Tropical Pacific (ETP) ecosystem. The U.S. Congress
passed the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act in 1997, amending the MMPA to
provide exception to import prohibitions for those nations participating in this program. The
Panama Declaration, signed in 1995, established species/stock-specific annual dolphin mortality
limits and constituted another important step toward reducing bycatch in commercial fisheries
and in sound ecosystem management.

12. Information Update: Ingestion of debris

Some marine mammals ingest various types of discarded items and trash that enter the oceans--
mostly from land sources (Faris and Hart 1994). Sperm whales, pygmy sperm whales, rough-
toothed dolphins, and Cuvier's beaked whales share a tendency to ingest plastics (Laist 1987).
Some of these items may block or perforate the gastrointestinal tract, leading to slow starvation
or sudden death. A young pygmy sperm whale, rescued from a New Jersey (U.S.) beach in
1993, for example, was found to have an assortment of trash, mostly plastic, in her stomach
(Whitaker et al. 1994). Eventually, the material was removed and the whale was fitted with a
radio tag and released off the coast of Florida. Although she was tracked successfully for a
few days, concerns for her long-term health remained--would she be any more successful in
the future in discriminating between plastics and prey?

References
Faris, F. and K. Hart. 1994. Sea of debris: a summary of the third international conference on
marine debris, 8-13 May, Miami, FL. Alaska Fisheries Science Center, NOAA/NMFS, Seattle, WA.
54 pp.
Laist, D.W. 1987. Overview of the biological effects of lost and discarded plastic debris in the
marine environment. Marine Pollution Bulletin 18(6B): 319-326.
Whitaker, B.R., J.R. Geraci and A. Stamper. 1994. The near-fatal ingestion of plastic by a pygmy
sperm whale, Kogia breviceps. Proceedings of the International Association for Aquatic Animal
Medicine 25: 108.
13. Information Update: Gray whale status
NMFS has determined that, after years of protection, the Eastern North Pacific stock of the gray
whale (Eschrichtius robustus) "...has recovered to near its estimated original population size
and is neither in danger of extinction through all or a significant portion of its range, nor likely to
again become endangered within the foreseeable future..." (Federal Register 1993). The gray
whale was officially removed from the Endangered Species List in 1994.

Reference
Federal Register Volume 58 No. 4, Thursday, January 7, 1993.

14. Reminder: Live entanglements

Working with entangled whales poses risks to the team and to the animal. Well-equipped, trained
teams have been designated in areas of the U.S. where the likelihood of these incidents is high.
Untrained persons should not attempt to disentangle live animals.

15. Information Update: Beluga whales, Alaska

Beluga whales do mass strand in Cook Inlet, Alaska, due to tides. In 1996, three mass strandings
of about 100 beluga whales in total occurred in this area, apparently in association with late runs
of Coho salmon in Tournagain Arm.

Reference
National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Protected Resources. 1997. Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972, Annual Report, January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996. U.S. Dept.
Commer., NOAA, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources.

16. Information Update: ÒChessieÓ

In late summer and early autumn 1994, a Florida manatee was sighted in Chesapeake Bay, far
north of the usual summer range of this species along the U.S. Atlantic coast. By October,
concerned that the manatee would not survive the winter, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
requested assistance from Sea World of Florida, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources,
and the National Aquarium in Baltimore (NAIB) to capture the manatee (Andrews et al. 1995).
After a few days spent eating lettuce at NAIB, the 650-kg male was flown back to Florida, fitted
with a radio-tracking device, and released into a more appropriate habitat. ÒChessieÓ traveled
even farther northward the following summer but returned to Florida without any assistance.

Reference
Andrews, C., R. Krussman and D. Schofield. 1995. Reaching out: conservation activities at the
National Aquarium in Baltimore. International Zoo Yearbook 34: 30-36.
17. Information Update: Florida manatee population
A February 1996 survey yielded a minimum population of 2,639 manatees. In spite of a record
number of deaths in 1996, which included the loss of 283 manatees from FloridaÕs west coast
population, the state-wide winter survey in January 1997 yielded a count of 2,229. This included
the largest number of manatees (1,329) ever recorded on the west coast (Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, unpublished data; Marine Mammal Commission 1998).
Reference
Marine Mammal Commission. 1998. Annual report to Congress 1997. Marine Mammal
Commission, 4340 East-West Highway, Room 945, Bethesda, MD.

18. Information Update: Manatee mortality and red tides

Red tides in the eastern Gulf of Mexico originate about 10-40 miles offshore from the central
west coast of Florida--usually in late summer or early fall, and typically last into January
(Anderson and White 1989). Inshore movement is associated with intrusion of oceanic water
into coastal areas (Steidinger and Haddad 1981) or other conditions that result in salinities >27
o/oo. Little is known of the conditions that precipitate Gymnodinium breve blooms or contribute to
their toxicity. This dinoflagellate produces at least nine toxins, which may vary in relative
proportion during different stages of growth (Pierce et al. 1990, Roszell et al. 1990).
Between March 5 and late April 1996, about 150 manatees died along an 80-mile stretch of the
southwestern Florida coast in association with a strong red tide. This event occurred in the
same area as the biotoxin-related deaths in 1982. Studies indicated that some manatees died
rapidly, others after chronically ingesting and inhaling toxic compounds (Bossart et al. 1998). In
November 1997, 16 manatees died in a less severe red tide in the same area (Marine Mammal
Commission 1998). These events demonstrate the serious risk of red tides, particularly those that
persist into March and April, to FloridaÕs west coast manatee population.

References
Anderson, D.M. and A.W. White 1989. Toxic dinoflagellates and marine mammal mortalities.
Proceedings of an expert consultation held at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution May 8-9,
1989. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute Technical Report 89-36. 65 p.
Bossart, G.D., D.G. Baden, R.Y. Ewing, B. Roberts and S.D. Wright. 1998. Brevetoxicosis in
manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris) from the 1996 epizootic: gross, histologic and
immunohistochemical features. Toxicologic Pathology 26: 276-282.
Marine Mammal Commission. 1998. Annual report to Congress 1997. Marine Mammal
Commission, 4340 East-West Highway, Room 945, Bethesda, MD.
Pierce, R.H., M.S. Henry, L.S. Proffitt and P.A. Hasbrouck. 1990. Red tide toxin (brevetoxin)
enrichment in marine aerosol, p. 397-402. In E. Graneli, B. Sundstrom, L. Edler and D.M. Anderson
[eds.] Toxic marine phytoplankton. Proceedings of the fourth international conference on toxic
marine phytoplankton, June 26-30, Lund, Sweden. Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc., New
York, NY.
Roszell, L.E., L.S. Schulman and D.G. Baden. 1990. Toxin profiles are dependent on growth stages
in cultures of Ptychodiscus brevis, p. 403-406. In E. Graneli, B. Sundstrom, L. Edler and D.M.
Anderson [eds.] Toxic marine phytoplankton. Proceedings of the fourth international conference on
toxic marine phytoplankton, June 26-30, Lund, Sweden. Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc.,
New York, NY.
Steidinger, K.A. and K.D. Haddad. 1981. Biologic and hydrographic aspects of red tides.
Bioscience 31: 814-819.
19. Information Update: Manatee programs
The Florida Department of Natural Resources is now part of the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP). The agency has state responsibility for manatee protection and
conservation and, under permit from FWS, undertakes routine rescue and salvage operations.
The Florida DEPÕs research activities are coordinated through the Florida Marine Research
Institute and include population assessment and the manatee carcass salvage program, which is
conducted by the Florida DEPÕs Marine Mammal Pathobiology Laboratory in St. Petersburg. In
response to increasing rehabilitation needs, FWS has authorized several additional facilities in
Florida to provide critical or long-term care and has also authorized a number of U.S. aquariums
outside Florida to house manatees that are unreleasable. The FWS Manatee Recovery Program
(Jacksonville, FL) coordinates manatee rescue and rehabilitation programs.
Following the 1996 die-off, the FWS released a contingency plan for unusual events involving
manatees (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1997). As the agency responsible for routine
operations and for planning state response to unusual events, the Florida DEP drafted a more
detailed plan (Geraci and Lounsbury 1997), which includes:
• background information on Florida manatee distribution, patterns and causes of mortality, and
federal, state, and other agency involvement in existing programs;
• guidelines for establishing the roles and responsibilities of FWS and state on-site
coordinators, and for developing and training response teams;
• criteria and procedures for initiating a response effort, and guidelines for organizing a
response to various types of unusual events;
• recommendations for inter-agency communications and public relations;
• protocols for collecting data and tissue samples; and
• information on local and regional resources, agencies, organizations and institutions involved
in manatee programs, diagnostic laboratories and expert consultants.

References
Geraci, J.R. and V.J. Lounsbury. 1997. The Florida manatee: contingency plan for health-related
events. Final draft, prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of
Marine Resources, Florida Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL. 101 p. + appendices.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Contingency plan for catastrophic manatee rescue and
mortality events. Prepared by the Manatee Recovery Program, Jacksonville, Florida, Field Office
for Southeast Region USFWS, Atlanta, Georgia. 37 p.
20. Information Update: Exxon Valdez sea otter mortality
Between 3,500 to 5,500 sea otters were estimated to have died from the combined effects of
inhalation of volatile fractions, ingested oil, hypothermia and shock (Osborn and Williams 1990,
Lipscomb et al. 1994). Of the approximately 360 sea otters treated in rescue centers, more than
one-third died, despite intensive medical treatment. See Loughlin (1994) for a review of this
event.

References
Lipscomb, T.P., R.K. Harris, A.H. Rebar, B.E. Ballachey and R.J. Haebler. 1994. Pathology of sea
otters, p. 265-279. In T.R. Loughlin [ed.] Marine mammals and the Exxon Valdez. Academic Press,
Inc., San Diego and London.
Loughlin, T. R. [ed.]. 1994. Marine mammals and the Exxon Valdez. Academic Press, Inc., San
Diego and London.
Osborn, K. and T.M. Williams. 1990. Postmortem examination of sea otters, p. 134-146. In T.M.
Williams and R.W. Davis [eds.] Sea otter rehabilitation program: 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.
International Wildlife Research.

21. Permits and Forms: Level A data

A sample form for collecting level A data (ÒMarine Mammal Stranding ReportÓ) is included in the
Forms folder.

22. Information Update: Sample collection and preservation

• Collect blood for DNA studies in Vacutainer¨ with anticoagulant (e.g., EDTA or citrate, not
heparin); refrigerate and ship to laboratory. (See Note p. 204.)
• For specialized studies of contaminants, collect bile and 10 ml each whole blood and milk.
Freeze at -70°C in dark, cleaned glass containers.
• For biotoxin analysis, collect blood (refrigerate whole blood; freeze serum). Collect samples
of brain, lung and upper respiratory tract, spleen, lymph nodes and kidney; preserve in 10%
neutral buffered formalin. Collect and freeze urine. (See Note p. 208.)

23. Techniques Update: Collection of samples for hematology

9a: Collect samples for hematology in EDTA tubes. Collect blood samples for clinical chemistry in
serum separation or heparin tubes, and in EGTA tubes.

24. Information Update: References

Additional references for marine mammal necropsy:

Dierauf, L.A. 1994. Pinniped forensic, necropsy and tissue collection guide. U.S. Dept. Commerce,
NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-94-3. 80 p.
Kuiken, T. and M.G. Hartmann [eds.]. 1991. Proceedings of the first European Cetacean Society
workshop on cetacean pathology: dissection techniques and tissue sampling, Leiden, The
Netherlands, 13-14 September 1991. European Cetacean Society Newsletter No. 17 - Special
issue. 39 p.
25. Reminder: Collecting evidence of human-related trauma
Human-related injuries vary from gunshot wounds and boat strikes to those caused by nets or
propellers. Some injuries are obvious externally; others may require a detailed examination of
both soft and bony tissues.
NMFS has developed a human interactions data form designed to help managers and
enforcement officers evaluate the nature and importance of these events. This form should be
completed in full and accompanied by other types of documentation, such as photographs or
videotapes. These records are important for agency management and policy decisions and may
serve as vital evidence in cases involving legal action. A human-related injury data form is
included in the Forms folder.

26. Reminder: Internal examination

At every step of the necropsy, note organ position and color and any noticeable smells.

27. Techniques Update: Removal of ears

If high pressure (blast) is considered a possible cause of death, the bullae should be properly
removed and sent for analysis. A protocol for this procedure, included in the Other Documents
folder, is available in:
Blaylock, R.A., B.G. Mase and C.P. Driscoll [eds.]. 1995. Final report on the workshop to coordinate
large whale stranding response in the southeast U.S. U.S. Dept. Commerce, NOAA, National
Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Charleston Laboratory, Charleston,
South Carolina. SEFSC Contributions MIA-96/97-43. 38 p.

28. Techniques Update: Collection of blood and bone for DNA studies
Collect at least 10 ml blood for DNA studies from Code 1 and Code 2 animals (immediately after
death). Collect samples in Vacutainer¨ with anticoagulant (e.g., EDTA or citrate, not heparin);
refrigerate and ship to laboratory using cold packs. If blood has coagulated, collect clotted
material and freeze; send frozen (in Blaylock et al. 1995). Bone samples collected for DNA
studies can be air-dried.
Reference
Blaylock, R.A., B.G. Mase and C.P. Driscoll [eds.]. 1995. Final report on the workshop to coordinate
large whale stranding response in the southeast U.S. U.S. Dept. Commerce, NOAA, National
Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Charleston Laboratory, Charleston,
South Carolina. SEFSC Contributions MIA-96/97-43. 38 p.

29. Permits and Forms: National Biomonitoring Specimen Bank Collection Form
A National Biomonitoring Specimen Bank collection form is included in the Forms folder.
30. Techniques Update: Samples for biotoxin analysis
Collect at least 100-125g samples each of liver and blubber and stomach contents for biotoxin
analysis. For manatees, also collect up to 1 liter of the liquid phase by pressing the stomach
contents.
Collect at least 10 ml blood from Code 1 and 2 animals (immediately after death) in heparinized
¨
syringe or Vacutainer . Separate serum by centrifugation; store frozen* for shipment. If
centrifugation is not possible, refrigerate and ship whole blood using cold packs (in Blaylock et
al. 1995).
Immunoperoxidase testing allows visible detection of biotoxins in histologically prepared tissues
(Bossart et al. 1998). Collect and preserve, according to guidelines for samples for
histopathology, samples of brain, lung and upper respiratory tract, spleen, lymph nodes and
kidney.
Using a syringe and needle, aspirate as much urine from the bladder as possible (minimum 3 ml;
freeze* for shipment.

References
Bossart, G.D., D.G. Baden, R.Y. Ewing, B. Roberts and S.D. Wright. 1998. Brevetoxicosis in
manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris) from the 1996 epizootic: gross, histologic and
immunohistochemical features. Toxicologic Pathology 26: 276-282.
Blaylock, R.A., B.G. Mase and C.P. Driscoll [eds.]. 1995. Final report on the workshop to coordinate
large whale stranding response in the southeast U.S. U.S. Dept. Commerce, NOAA, National
Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Charleston Laboratory, Charleston,
South Carolina. SEFSC Contributions MIA-96/97-43. 38 p.

*Ideal: freeze at -70¼C. Practical: freeze at -20¼C.

31. Information Update: Quality assurance

The Analytical Quality Assurance aspect of the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response
Program provides control or standard reference materials and coordinates inter-laboratory
comparisons. The National Institute of Standards and Technology coordinates this effort for
NMFS and FWS.

Reference
Wise, S.A. 1993. Quality assurance of contaminant measurements in marine mammal tissues, p.
2531-2541. In O.T. Magoon, W.S. Wilson, H. Converse and L.T. Tobin [eds.] Coastal zone 93:
proceedings of the 8th symposium on coastal and ocean management (New Orleans, LA), vol. 3.
ASCE, New York, NY.
32. Techniques Update: Collection of tissue samples for morbillivirus testing by RT-
PCR
Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is an excellent technique for
detection of morbillivirus in tissue samples. The specific strain of morbillivirus can often be
determined. While formalin-fixed tissues can be used for morbillivirus RT-PCR, frozen tissues are
preferred. The best tissues to submit are lung and lung-associated lymph node. Samples (~2-cm
cubes of tissue) should be collected using sterile instruments and placed in sterile containers
¨
such as sterile Whirl-pack bags. Only one sample should be placed in each container. The
samples should be frozen (preferably at -80¼C) and sent on dry ice by overnight mail to the
laboratory performing the test. (Provided by T.P. Lipscomb, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology,
Department of Veterinary Pathology, Washington, D.C.)

33. Permits and Forms: Scientific permits

For information on how to obtain NMFS permit applications for scientific research, visit the
National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Protected Resources website at:
http://www.nmfs.gov/prot_res.

34. Supplementary Protocol: Environmental assessment and sampling

Stranding events may be influenced or caused by a variety of environmental conditions. The
collection of basic data, e.g., general weather and ocean conditions, is always recommended
(Level B data). When the cause of the event is unknown, a wide range of environmental factors
must be evaluated. These include:
• water temperature;
• air temperatures over the previous 4-6 weeks;
• patterns of winds or currents;
• salinities in affected areas;
• occurrence and distribution of algal blooms (species identification, cell counts and toxin
concentrations);
• possible spills or discharges of toxic chemicals; and
• the health of other animal species in the affected area.
All water and other environmental samples must be clearly and securely labeled, and
sufficient data recorded both on the label and in the field log to provide positive sample
identification at a later date (American Public Health Association 1995). This includes:
• the collectorÕs name;
• date, hour and exact GPS location;
• depth, water temperature; and
• any other relevant data (e.g., salinity, dissolved oxygen, tide stage, weather conditions,
wind direction and velocity, post-sample handling).

Sources of Environmental Data

In addition to possible relationships to the stranding event, environmental factors also have an
impact on the actions and safety of the stranding response team. The team should be aware of
current conditions and forecasts before initiating the response and must be informed of
predicted changes in environmental conditions. Current information on U.S. and global weather
and oceanographic conditions can be found on a number of internet websites. These include the
following:
• National Weather Service, Internet Weather Service:
http://weather.noaa.gov/weather/curcond.html
 • NOAA National Weather Service Interactive Marine Observations:
http://www.nws.fsu.edu/buoy/
• NOAA National Ocean Service Oceanographic Products and Services Division:
http://www.opsd.nos.noaa.gov/
• Intellicast: http://www.intellicast.com/weather/
• The Weather Channel: http://www.weather.com
Also, many local TV stations have active World Wide Web sites that offer constantly updated
weather reports.

Geographic Information Systems Technology (GIS )

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) develop and manipulate spatial data. The term GIS
encompasses a broad range of data and products from simple mapping to complex spatial
modeling.
In the past few years, there have been dramatic changes in Geographic Information Systems
technology, especially in the areas of simple desktop mapping on personal microcomputers and
network-based mapping over the World Wide Web (WWW). The explosion of GIS capabilities has
had direct effects in emergency response situations. Now it is common for responders such as
firefighters and hazardous spill managers to be in the field with portable computers equipped
with a full suite of electronic mapping capabilities.
The Internet also offers a range of geographic data from aerial photos to digital shorelines that
can be used directly in stranding events. Aerial photographs, which may be vital for the study of
large-scale die-offs, are now available on-line from several federal and state agencies. The
National Ocean Service of NOAA and the U.S. Geological Survey of the Department of Interior,
for example, both have World Wide Web sites that offer thousands of recent aerial photographs.
These sites have map-based search engines for high resolution selection.
Portable computers equipped with simple desktop mapping applications, such as MapInfo and
ArcView, can be used on-site for detailed mapping of the stranding location. Most of these
applications allow direct electronic input of GPS-based data.
These changes provide new opportunities and tools to manage individual stranding events and,
perhaps more importantly, to begin to develop a worldwide spatial database of strandings that
can be accessed universally over the Internet.

Reference
American Public Health Association. 1995. Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater. 19th edition. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C.
35. Supplementary Protocol: Environmental samples for biotoxin analysis
Water samples for biotoxin analysis should be collected:
• from suspected bloom areas and from areas in which distressed or dead animals are
found;
• every two days if possible, but at least weekly until cell counts drop to <10,000 cells/liter.
The species of phytoplankton must be identified and the sample analyzed to determine both cell
count and toxin concentration (methods provided by K. Steidinger, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL; and P. Tester, NMFS, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Beaufort,
NC).
1. For cell counts, collect surface water samples (from depth of approximately 0.5 m) in
clean containers that have been rinsed with seawater from the sample location.
2. Carefully pour some sample water into the storage bottle and rinse. Pour out rinse water
and carefully refill without creating bubbles. (Some dinoflagellates, such as Gymnodinium
breve, are fragile; handle gently to prevent lysing.) When bloom conditions are obvious,
250 ml samples are sufficient; for monitoring purposes, collect 500 ml to 1 liter samples.
3. Wrap bottles in wet paper; place in cooler for transport. Do not place live samples on ice.
4. If samples can be processed within 24 hr of collection, use live samples for counts of G.
breve or other toxic dinoflagellates.
5. If live material cannot be processed within 24 hr, add UtermohlÕs solution at the rate of 5 ml
per 1 liter of water at the time of sample collection. This will preserve cells for up to 6
months. Store under cool conditions.

UtermohlÕs solution: 142.9 g KI (potassium iodide)

71.4 g I2 (elemental iodine)
71.4 g NaC2H3O2 3H2O
(or 43 g NaC2H3O2 anhydrous)
Add to a 1 liter volumetric flask. Add approximately 800 ml distilled water and stir
overnight. Remove stirring bar and bring to 1 liter. Decant into dark plastic storage
bottle. This will keep for 1 year.

Collect samples for biotoxin concentration determination as above.

1. Pour measured volume of whole water for which cell count is known through a gravity
fiber filter (~0.45 µm pore size). Only gentle vacuum, if any, should be used on the filters
(>5 inches [100 mm] Hg vacuum) to protect cells from breaking apart; use gravity filtration if
time allows.
2. Freeze and send for analysis.
3. Alternatively, freeze the whole water sample for toxin analysis.
Samples from other animal species can provide evidence to support toxins as a cause of
marine mammal illness or death.
• Filter-feeding fish and invertebrates can accumulate and retain biotoxins for weeks or
months after a bloom has disappeared. Species from areas subject to blooms should be
analyzed to provide background biotoxin levels. During an unusual event, collect enough
specimens of a species to provide a wet weight of at least 110 g per sample. Place whole
or live invertebrates in a clean container without water, seal with tape, and store in double
plastic bags. Double bag shucked meat in plastic freezer bags; place label between the
bags and freeze immediately (-70°C preferred). Ship the container in a cooler to the
laboratory within 24 hr. Do not use ice with whole animals; use dry ice for frozen samples
(K. Steidinger, Florida Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL, pers. comm.).
• Collect both dead and healthy fish when possible from areas of fish kills. Double bag
individual fish and freeze (-70°C preferred); use dry ice for shipment.
 • Contact local wildlife rehabilitation facilities to obtain information on other species of
animals (e.g., fish-eating birds) brought in for care; carcasses and/or necropsy reports on
such animals could aid investigations.

36. Supplementary Protocol: Environmental samples for contaminant analysis

Water samples for contaminant analysis must be collected with care to avoid
contamination.
• Collect samples (minimum size 1 liter) of water for organic contaminant analysis in brown
glass jars (with Teflon¨-lined lids) that have been washed with pesticide-residue-grade
solvent.
• Collect (minimum 500 ml) samples of water for heavy metals analysis in acid-washed and
rinsed plastic jars.
1. When opening or closing the container and during sampling, allow nothing but the water
sample to contact the inside of the jar or lid.
2. Avoid contamination during sampling; e.g., collect water from the upstream side of the boat
or upstream from the samplerÕs hands; avoid debris.
3. Immerse jar just below the surface; fill twice and empty; then fill and save contents.
4. Close lid tightly and pack in cooler with gel freezer packs for transport to laboratory; keep
in the dark and do not freeze.
Note: Organic analytes may change because of bacterial degradation. Water samples for
organic pesticide analyses should be held for a maximum of 7 days before extraction.

Sediment samples for contaminant analysis must be collected with the same care.
1. Collect samples in a cleaned (minimum size 250 g) wide-mouth glass jar for organic
contaminants and in a plastic jar for metals (prepared as above).
2. Fill jar 3/4 full by scraping jar mouth along top 1 cm of sediment; use jar lid to help secure
sample if necessary. Only the sediment sample should contact the inside of the jar or lid.
3. Place tightly closed jars in cooler with gel freezer packs for transport to laboratory. Freeze
samples if not shipped within 24 hr.

Reference
American Public Health Association. 1995. Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater. 19th edition. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C..
37. Supplementary Protocol: Water samples for microbiological analysis
Water samples for microbiological analysis should be collected when the cause of death
or illness is unknown or of suspected microbial origin. A variety of pathogenic organisms may be
present in water contaminated by wastewater; some of these can multiply in the presence of
sufficient nutrients (American Public Health Association 1995).
• Collect samples for microbiological examination in wide-mouth bottles with a capacity of at
least 120 ml that have been cleaned and rinsed carefully, rinsed with distilled water, and
then sterilized. If necessary, samples may be collected in pre-sterilized plastic bags.
1. Keep bottle closed until it is filled. Do not touch inner surface of cap or neck of bottle.
2. Obtain samples from beneath the surface and from the upstream side of a boat. Avoid
contact with shorelines, bottom sediments, debris, etc.
3. Fill container without rinsing, leaving at least a 2.5-cm air space; replace cap immediately.
4. Place samples in cooler with gel freezer packs to minimize changes in types and numbers
of bacteria.
5. Transport to laboratory for analysis as soon as possible.

Reference
American Public Health Association. 1995. Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater. 19th edition. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C..

38. Information Update: U.S. laboratories

A list of laboratories with experience in analysis of marine mammal blood and tissues and
environmental samples associated with stranding events is included in the Other Documents
folder.

39. Information Update: Transmissible diseases

Several viral and bacterial diseases normally associated with humans or domestic animals are
appearing spontaneously or increasing in occurrence in marine mammal populations. Some
organisms, such as Salmonella sp., have been implicated in disease but also have been isolated
from apparently healthy animals (Gilmartin et al. 1979, Stroud and Roelke 1980, Banish and
Gilmartin 1992, Baker et al. 1995). Evidence of infection by bacteria representing an apparently
new strain or species of Brucella has been found in harbor and gray seals and in several
species of odontocetes from around the coasts of England and Wales (Ross et al. 1994, Jepson
et al. 1997) and in at least one species from the U.S. Pacific coast (Ewalt et al. 1994). The
pathogenic potential of Brucella in marine mammals is unknown, but infection in domestic and
other terrestrial animals commonly leads to abortion. Mycobacteria of the complex associated
with tuberculosis (M. bovis, M. tuberculosis) are also of concern. An outbreak in a captive
colony of New Zealand fur seals (Arctocephalus forsteri) and Australian sea lions (Neophoca
cinerea) (Forshaw and Phelps 1991) was the first indication that this disease, subsequently
found in free-ranging pinnipeds from Western Australia (Cousins et al. 1993) and Tasmania
(Woods et al. 1995) may be endemic in certain wild populations. More recently, infection has
been reported in southern sea lions (Otaria flavescens) and South American fur seals
(Arctocephalus australis) from Argentina (Bernardelli et al. 1996).
References
Baker, J.R., A. Hall, L. Hiby, R. Munro, I. Robinson, H.M. Ross and J.F. Watkins. 1995. Isolation of
salmonellae from seals from UK waters. Veterinary Record 136: 471-472.
Banish, L.D. and W.G. Gilmartin. 1992. Pathological findings in the Hawaiian monk seal. Journal of
Wildlife Diseases 28: 428-434.
Bernardelli, A., R. Bastida, J. Loureiro, H. Michelis, M.L. Romano, A. Cataldi and E. Costa. 1996.
Tuberculosis in sea lions and fur seals from the south-western Atlantic coast. Revue Scientifique et
Technique (International Office of Epizootics) 15(3): 985-1005.
Cousins, D.V., S.N. Williams, R. Reuter, D. Forshaw, D. Chadwick, D. Coughran, P. Collins and N.
Gales. 1993. Tuberculosis in wild seals and characterisation of the seal bacillus. Australian
Veterinary Journal 70: 92-97.
Ewalt, D.R., J.B. Payeur, B.M. Martin, D.R. Cummins and W.G. Miller. 1994. Characteristics of a
Brucella species from a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic
Investigation 6: 448-452.
Forshaw, D. and G.R. Phelps. 1991. Tuberculosis in a captive colony of pinnipeds. Journal of
Wildlife Diseases 27: 288-295.
Gilmartin, W.G., P.M. Vainik and V.M. Neill. 1979. Salmonellae in feral pinnipeds off the southern
California coast. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 15: 511-514.
Jepson, P.D., S. Brew, A.P. MacMillan, J.R. Baker, J. Barnett, J.K. Kirkwood, T. Kuiken, I.R.
Robinson and V.R. Simpson. 1997. Antibodies to Brucella in marine mammals around the coast of
England and Wales. Veterinary Record 141: 513-515.
Ross, H.M., G. Foster, R.J. Reid, K.L. Jahans and A.P. MacMillan. 1994. Brucella species infection
in sea-mammals. Veterinary Record 134: 359.
Stroud, R.K. and M.E. Roelke. 1980. Salmonella meningoencephalomyelitis in a northern fur seal
(Callorhinus ursinus) in a captive colony of pinnipeds. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 16: 15-18.
Woods, R., D.V. Cousins, R. Kirkwood and D.L. Obendorf. 1995. Tuberculosis in a wild Australian fur
seal (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus) from Tasmania. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 31: 83-86.

40. Permits and Forms: Sample Necropsy Form

An expanded version of this form is available in the Forms folder.

Note 41. Information Update: About the Authors

Joseph Geraci is currently Senior Director of Biological Programs at the National Aquarium in
Baltimore, and Research Professor of Pathology and Comparative Medicine at the University of
Maryland School of Medicine.

Valerie Lounsbury joined the staff of the National Aquarium in Baltimore in January 1998, as
Science Resource Manager, Department of Biological Programs.
$25.00
TAMU-SG-93-601

Cover 4