Marine Mammal ScienceVolume 39, Issue 1 p. 311-321 NOTE Predation on ringed seals in subnivean lairs in northwest Alaska during spring 1983 and 1984 Donna D. W. Hauser, Corresponding Author Donna D. W. Hauser [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0001-8236-7372 International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska Correspondence Donna D. W. Hauser, 2160 Koyukuk Drive, Fairbanks, AK 99775. Email: [email protected] Contribution: Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, ​Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editingSearch for more papers by this authorKathryn J. Frost, Kathryn J. Frost Alaska Department of Fish and Game (retired), Kailua, Hawaii Contribution: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, ​Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Validation, Writing - review & editingSearch for more papers by this authorJohn J. Burns, John J. Burns Living Resources, Fairbanks, Alaska Contribution: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, ​Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing - review & editingSearch for more papers by this author Donna D. W. Hauser, Corresponding Author Donna D. W. Hauser [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0001-8236-7372 International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska Correspondence Donna D. W. Hauser, 2160 Koyukuk Drive, Fairbanks, AK 99775. Email: [email protected] Contribution: Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, ​Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editingSearch for more papers by this authorKathryn J. Frost, Kathryn J. Frost Alaska Department of Fish and Game (retired), Kailua, Hawaii Contribution: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, ​Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Validation, Writing - review & editingSearch for more papers by this authorJohn J. Burns, John J. Burns Living Resources, Fairbanks, Alaska Contribution: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, ​Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing - review & editingSearch for more papers by this author First published: 12 August 2022 https://doi.org/10.1111/mms.12969 Funding information: North Pacific Research Board, Grant/Award Number: 1811; Outer Continental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program, Grant/Award Number: NA-81-RAC-00045 Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume39, Issue1January 2023Pages 311-321 RelatedInformation

The first dedicated aerial surveys for beluga whales in the Norton Sound/Yukon Delta region of Alaska were flown during May, June and September 1992. During May 1992 surveys, all of the survey area was covered with pack ice and only a few belugas were seen. In June 1992, many whales were seen in the region of Pastol Bay and the Yukon River Delta, with a few animals seen in eastern Norton Sound. In September 1992, whales were more dispersed and occurred both off the Yukon Delta and in coastal waters of northern Norton Sound. Based on those results, subsequent surveys were flown in June 1993–95 and 1999–2000. In all years except 1999 when there was extensive sea ice in the area, belugas were common off the Yukon Delta and in southern Norton Sound. In most years they were also seen in central Norton Sound. Density and abundance were estimated from the 2000 survey as it represented the most recent data and had the most complete and systematic coverage of the area. In June 2000, belugas were rare in the northern portion of Norton Sound, so the study area was reduced to central and southern Norton Sound and the Yukon Delta, which was divided into four strata by latitude. The density that was estimated with the model that received most Akaike Information Criterion support was 0.121 belugas km–2 and the number of belugas at the surface in the study area was estimated to be 3,497 (CV = 0.37). A generally accepted correction factor for availability of 2.0 was applied, resulting in an abundance estimate for the eastern Bering Sea beluga stock in June 2000 of 6,994 (95% confidence interval 3,162–15,472). This estimate is likely to be conservative. There are no previous abundance estimates for this region, so a population trend cannot be determined. The available evidence suggests that the current Alaska Native subsistence harvest from this stock is sustainable. Beluga consumption of prey populations is likely significant in the regional ecosystem and may have a particular impact on some stocks of Pacific salmon.

Four stocks of beluga or white whales (Delphinapterus leucas) are hunted by Alaska Natives in northern and western Alaska. These are the Beaufort Sea, eastern Chukchi Sea, eastern Bering Sea and Bristol Bay stocks. Since 1987, the Alaska Beluga Whale Committee has monitored the subsistence harvests of belugas from these stocks. During this 20 year period, the total landed harvest for the four stocks combined (adjusted for years with missing data) ranged from 208 in 1995 to 494 in 1988, with a 20 year average of 323 per year. For individual stocks the average annual landed harvests for 1987–2006 were: Beaufort Sea – 41; Chukchi Sea – 62; eastern Bering Sea – 191; and Bristol Bay – 20. There was no significant longterm trend (p>0.05) in the rate of harvesting for any stock from 1987–2006. Average landed harvests relative to estimated stock size were: 0.1% for the Beaufort Sea (0.4% including belugas harvested from the Beaufort Sea stock by Canadian hunters); 1.7% for the eastern Chukchi Sea; 1.1% for the eastern Bering Sea; and 1.1% for Bristol Bay. The success of beluga harvest monitoring in Alaska is due to the cooperation of beluga hunters from more than 40 small coastal communities who report their harvests to the Alaska Beluga Whale Committee (ABWC). Through the ABWC, beluga hunters have been able to formalise their role in managing their subsistence resources.

Thirty-eight aerial surveys of beluga or white whales (Delphinapterus leucas) were conducted in Bristol Bay, Alaska, during six different years between 1993 and 2005. Belugas were sighted mainly close to shore in the upper parts of Nushagak and Kvichak bays, as well as along the coast between these bays and in the lower parts of major rivers. Data from 28 complete counts made in good or excellent survey conditions were analysed for trend. Counts ranged from 264 to 1,067. The estimated rate of increase over the 12-year period was 4.8%/year (95% CI = 2.1%-7.5%). Such a rate of increase suggests that either the population was below the environmental carrying capacity in the early 1990s or, alternatively, that factors that had been limiting population increase were alleviated after that time. A review of possible changes in human-caused mortality, predation and prey availability did not reveal a single likely cause of the increase. Among the factors that could have played a role are recovery from research kills in the 1960s, a modest decline in subsistence removals and a delayed response to increases in Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) abundance in the 1980s. The positive growth rate for this population shows that in recent years there has been no substantial negative impact of human or natural factors, acting either alone or in combination, and there is no need for changes to the current management regime.

Prior to 1984, belugas (Delphinapterus leucas) were seen in large numbers during spring and summer in Kotzebue Sound, Alaska, and provided an important subsistence resource to coastal residents. Sightings and harvest declined sharply beginning in 1984: the average annual harvest dropped from 84/yr (1977–1983) to 16/yr (1984–2021). To examine the current seasonal and spatial occurrence of belugas in Kotzebue Sound, passive acoustic moorings were deployed in summer 2013 and year-round in 2014–2016. Three moorings were deployed off Cape Krusenstern, northwestern Kotzebue Sound, to monitor cetaceans traveling nearshore. A mooring was also deployed near Chamisso Island, southeastern Kotzebue Sound. We used automatic detectors to process the recordings for echolocation and tonal signals, and all detections were manually validated. Belugas, harbor porpoises (Phocoena), and transient killer whales (Orcinus orca) were detected in both areas, primarily from June to November. Detections extended into early winter for belugas, and sporadic detections were confirmed for porpoises from January to March. Belugas were detected on a total of 20 days, killer whales on 96 days, and porpoises on 179 days. All beluga detections were echolocation signals; the absence of social signals likely reflects an anti-predator response to transient killer whales and possibly to subsistence hunters. Killer whale detections were composed of echolocation signals, limited to very short click trains, double clicks, and single clicks, a known cryptic acoustic behavior used when targeting prey. Killer whales also emitted high frequency whistles (17–51 kHz) providing the first evidence of these types of signals for transients. Our results suggest transient killer whales in predation mode scouting harbor porpoise and beluga habitat, concurrent with belugas in silent anti-predation mode. This anti-predation acoustic behavior by belugas was also evident when killer whales were not present, conveying a continued perception of predation risk for this habitat. The combined natural and anthropogenic predation pressure in Kotzebue Sound could be playing an important role in the continued low occurrence of belugas.

Aim Identify hotspots and areas of high species richness for Arctic marine mammals. Location Circumpolar Arctic. Methods A total of 2115 biologging devices were deployed on marine mammals from 13 species in the Arctic from 2005 to 2019. Getis-Ord G(i)* hotspots were calculated based on the number of individuals in grid cells for each species and for phylogenetic groups (nine pinnipeds, three cetaceans, all species) and areas with high species richness were identified for summer (Jun-Nov), winter (Dec-May) and the entire year. Seasonal habitat differences among species' hotspots were investigated using Principal Component Analysis. Results Hotspots and areas with high species richness occurred within the Arctic continental-shelf seas and within the marginal ice zone, particularly in the "Arctic gateways" of the north Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Summer hotspots were generally found further north than winter hotspots, but there were exceptions to this pattern, including bowhead whales in the Greenland-Barents Seas and species with coastal distributions in Svalbard, Norway and East Greenland. Areas with high species richness generally overlapped high-density hotspots. Large regional and seasonal differences in habitat features of hotspots were found among species but also within species from different regions. Gap analysis (discrepancy between hotspots and IUCN ranges) identified species and regions where more research is required. Main conclusions This study identified important areas (and habitat types) for Arctic marine mammals using available biotelemetry data. The results herein serve as a benchmark to measure future distributional shifts. Expanded monitoring and telemetry studies are needed on Arctic species to understand the impacts of climate change and concomitant ecosystem changes (synergistic effects of multiple stressors). While efforts should be made to fill knowledge gaps, including regional gaps and more complete sex and age coverage, hotspots identified herein can inform management efforts to mitigate the impacts of human activities and ecological changes, including creation of protected areas.

There has been significant sea ice loss associated with climate change in the Pacific Arctic, with unquantified impacts to the habitat of ice-obligate marine mammals such as ringed seals (Pusa hispida). Ringed seals maintain breathing holes and excavate subnivean lairs on sea ice to provide protection from weather and predators during birthing, nursing, and resting. However, there is limited baseline information on the snow and ice habitat, distribution, density, and configuration of ringed seal structures (breathing holes, simple haul-out lairs, and pup lairs) in Alaska. Here, we describe historic field records from two regions of the eastern Chukchi Sea (Kotzebue Sound and Ledyard Bay) collected during spring 1983 and 1984 to quantify baseline ringed seal breeding habitat and map the distribution of ringed seal structures using modern geospatial tools. Of 490 structures located on pre-established study grids by trained dogs, 29% were pup lairs (25% in Kotzebue Sound and 33% in Ledyard Bay). Grids in Ledyard Bay had greater overall density of seal structures than those in Kotzebue Sound (8.6 structures/km(2) and 7.1 structures/km(2)), but structures were larger in Kotzebue Sound. Pup lairs were located in closer proximity to other structures and characterized by deeper snow and greater ice deformation than haul-out lairs or simple breathing holes. At pup lairs, snow depths averaged 74.9 cm (range 37-132 cm), with ice relief nearby averaging 76 cm (range 31-183 cm), and ice deformation 29.9% (range 5-80%). We compare our results to similar studies conducted in other geographic regions and discuss our findings in the context of recent declines in extent and duration of seasonal cover of landfast sea ice and snow deposition on sea ice. Ultimately, additional research is needed to understand the effects of recent environmental changes on ringed seals, but our study establishes a baseline upon which future research can measure pup habitat in northwest Alaska.

We investigate the recent history and stock identity of beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in Kotzebue Sound in the Chukchi Sea, a region long frequented by large numbers of belugas in summer until their near disappearance in the 1980s. Wide variation in numbers since then suggests a complex recent history that hinders recovery efforts. Analysis of teeth sampled during the historical (pre-decline) era using ancient DNA (aDNA) methods found that the original Kotzebue Sound whales were differentiated for mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from other summering concentrations across the Pacific Arctic revealing a demographically distinct subpopulation where long-established migratory culture likely facilitated population divergence. Analysis of microsatellite (nDNA) and mtDNA markers in belugas from the contemporary (post-decline) era revealed that whales from other stocks likely visited Kotzebue Sound, including during two low ice years when relatively large numbers of whales were present. Some mtDNA lineages were found only in Kotzebue Sound, with one recorded in both the historical and contemporary eras. Exclusion tests found a number of whales in Kotzebue Sound during the contemporary era that had nDNA genotypes unlikely to arise in other contemporary stocks in the Pacific Arctic. Our findings indicate that the Kotzebue Sound belugas comprised a unique stock of which a few remnants likely still co-occur with belugas from other larger stocks. We recommend that the US government work through the co-management process to greatly reduce or eliminate the taking of belugas, especially adult females, likely to belong to the Kotzebue Sound stock, until they recover.

The Alaska Beluga Whale Committe (ABWC) was formed in 1988 to conserve beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) and manage beluga subsistence hunting in western and northern Alaska in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). When the ABWC was formed, there was no consistently funded research or management programme for belugas in Alaska, and co-management was a new concept. The ABWC brought together representatives from beluga hunting communities; federal, state, tribal and local governments; and beluga researchers to develop and implement a programme to manage belugas. With funding from NMFS and others, the ABWC has collected data necessary for informed management decisions including the following: harvest data; aerial surveys of belugas in Bristol Bay and the eastern Bering and Chukchi seas; beluga tracking studies, including training hunters to attach transmitters; a pioneering genetics study of beluga stock identity that has facilitated collection of >2000 beluga skin samples; and a genetics-based mark–recapture study to estimate beluga abundance in Bristol Bay and validate aerial survey estimates. The ABWC is currently engaged in regional management planning in Kotzebue Sound and the eastern Bering Sea. It produces results that are scientifically valid, locally accepted and cost-effective and is an example of what can be achieved when Native hunters, scientists and managing agencies respect and listen to one another and work together. However, the current NMFS co-management funding process has fundamentally altered the relationship between NMFS and ABWC, with NMFS now acting more like a funding agency than a partner.

Marine Mammal ScienceVolume 36, Issue 1 p. 354-358 NOTE Unexpected mid-winter presence of harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in Kotzebue Sound, Alaska Alex Whiting, Corresponding Author alex.whiting@qira.org orcid.org/0000-0003-0664-490X Native Village of Kotzebue, Kotzebue, Alaska Correspondence Alex Whiting, Native Village of Kotzebue, 600 Fifth Avenue, Kotzebue, AK 99752. Email: alex.whiting@qira.orgSearch for more papers by this authorManuel Castellote, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean (JISAO), University of Washington and Marine Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Seattle, WashingtonSearch for more papers by this authorRobert J. Small, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AlaskaSearch for more papers by this authorKathryn J. Frost, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AlaskaCurrent affiliation: Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, Barrow, AlaskaSearch for more papers by this authorRobert Suydam, North Slope Borough Department of Wildlife Management, Barrow, AlaskaSearch for more papers by this author Alex Whiting, Corresponding Author alex.whiting@qira.org orcid.org/0000-0003-0664-490X Native Village of Kotzebue, Kotzebue, Alaska Correspondence Alex Whiting, Native Village of Kotzebue, 600 Fifth Avenue, Kotzebue, AK 99752. Email: alex.whiting@qira.orgSearch for more papers by this authorManuel Castellote, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean (JISAO), University of Washington and Marine Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Seattle, WashingtonSearch for more papers by this authorRobert J. Small, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AlaskaSearch for more papers by this authorKathryn J. Frost, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AlaskaCurrent affiliation: Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, Barrow, AlaskaSearch for more papers by this authorRobert Suydam, North Slope Borough Department of Wildlife Management, Barrow, AlaskaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 11 September 2019 https://doi.org/10.1111/mms.12641 Funding information: North Slope Borough-Shell Baseline Studies Program; Northwest Arctic Borough Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume36, Issue1January 2020Pages 354-358 RelatedInformation

DAY 1 | TUESDAY, MARCH 12 *Presenting Author Keynote Presentations: GLOBAL ADVANCES AND NEEDS FOR BELUGA RESEARCH AND CONSERVATION 9:30-10:00am | Global Review of the Conservation Status of Monodontid Stocks Roderick C. Hobbs1, Randall R. Reeves2*, Jill S. Prewitt3, Geneviève Desportes3, Kaitlin BretonHoneyman4, Tom Christensen5, John J. Citta6, Steven H. Ferguson7, Kathryn J. Frost8, Eva Garde9, Maria Gavrilo10, Maha Ghazal11, Dmitri M. Glazov12, Jean-Francois Gosselin13, Mike Hammill13, Rikke G. Hansen9, Lois Harwood14, Mads Peter Heide-Joergensen9, Gerald Inglangasuk15, Kit M. Kovacs16, Vera V. Krasnova17, Daria M. Kuznetsova12, David S. Lee18, Véronique Lesage13, Dennis I. Litovka19, Eline Lorenzen20, Lloyd F. Lowry8, Christian Lydersen16, Cory J. D. Matthews7, Ilya G. Meschersky12, Arnaud Mosnier13, Gregory O’Corry-Crowe21, Lianne Postma7, Lori T. Quakenbush6, Olga V. Shpak12, Mikkel Skovrind20, Robert S. Suydam22, and Cortney A. Watt7 1North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission, Sykehusveien 21-23, N-9294, Tromsø, Norway ; 2Okapi Wildlife Associates, Hudson, Quebec, J0P 1H0, Canada; 3North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission, Sykehusveien 2123, N-9294, Tromsø, Norway; 4Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board, Nunavik, Quebec, JOM 1MO, Canada; 5Aarhus University and Arctic Council’s Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program, Akureyri, 600, Iceland; 6Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fairbanks, Alaska, 99701, USA; 7Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 2N6, Canada; 8Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, Utqiagvik, Alaska, 99723, USA; 9Greenland Institute of Natural Resources c/o Greenland Representation, København K, Copenhagen, MHQJ+8H, Denmark; 10Association Maritime Heritage, Icebreaker Museum Krassin, Saint-Petersburg, 199106, Russia; 11Government of Nunavut, Pangnirtung, Nunavut, Canada; 12Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution of Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119071, Russia; 13Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Maurice Lamontagne Institute, Mont-Joli, Quebec, G5H 3Z4, Canada; 14Oceans Program, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, X1A 1E2, Canada; 15Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, Inuvik, Northwest Territories, X0E 0T0, Canada; 16Norwegian Polar Institute, Fram Centre, 9296, Tromsø, Norway; 17Shirshov Institute of Oceanology of Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 117997, Russia; 18Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, Department of Wildlife and Environment, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 5E7, Canada; 19Marine Mammal Laboratory, ChukotTINRO, Anadyr, Chukotka, 689000, Russia; 20University of Copenhagen, Section for Evolutionary Genomics, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen, 1350, Denmark; 21Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, Florida Atlantic University, Fort Pierce, Florida, 34946, USA; 22North Slope Borough Department of Wildlife Management, Utqiagvik, Alaska, 99723, USA Abstract Monodontids, belugas, Delphinapterus leucas and narwhals, Monodon monoceros, are found in much of the Arctic and in some subarctic areas. They are hunted by indigenous subsistence users, and in theMonodontids, belugas, Delphinapterus leucas and narwhals, Monodon monoceros, are found in much of the Arctic and in some subarctic areas. They are hunted by indigenous subsistence users, and in the past, some populations were substantially reduced by commercial hunting and culling. More recently, some populations have declined due to uncontrolled subsistence hunting and environmental degradation.

The Alaska Beluga Whale Committee co-manages three western Alaska beluga whale Delphinapterus leucas, stocks with the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, and has conducted studies on stock identity, distribution, abundance, and subsistence harvests. Studies of mitochondrial DNA revealed substantial differentiation among belugas that use summering areas in Bristol Bay, the eastern Bering Sea, and the eastern Chukchi Sea, and there is little overlap in their seasonal distributions. The Bristol Bay stock summers in bays in inner Bristol Bay and winters in outer Bristol Bay. Abundance estimates from aerial surveys increased by more than 4% per year during 1994–2005. Survey counts in 2016 were similar to 2004– 2005 indicating that the population may now be stable. Survey results and a genetics mark-recapture study indicate a population of approximately 2,000 whales. The average annual Alaska Native subsistence harvest over the past decade (23) is below the calculated potential biological removal (PBR; 39-43). The eastern Bering Sea beluga stock concentrates in summer off the Yukon River Delta and in Norton Sound and in winter moves offshore in the eastern Bering Sea. Abundance has been estimated at approximately 9,242 based on aerial survey data collected in 2017. The average annual subsistence harvest, plus the estimated number of struck and lost belugas, is 215 and exceeds the PBR calculated from this abundance estimate (201), but the abundance estimate is thought to be biased low and local and traditional knowledge does not indicate any decrease in abundance or availability. The eastern Chukchi Sea stock is migratory, wintering in the northern Bering Sea, moving north through the eastern Chukchi Sea in spring, and summering in the Beaufort Sea and Arctic Ocean. It is large, estimated at approximately 20,000 animals based on 2012 aerial surveys. The average annual subsistence harvest (57) is well below PBR (293). Few significant threats to persistence of western Alaska beluga stocks have been identified, although climate warming and declines in sea ice and industrial activities related to resource development and increases in commercial shipping are of concern and could pose challenges in the future. Continued monitoring of population size and trend, subsistence harvest, and health of western Alaska belugas is warranted. Introduction Beluga whales, Delphinapterus leucas (also called white whales), are a conspicuous and important component of the marine mammal fauna of western Alaska. Early reports indicated regular spring, summer, and fall occurrences of belugas in the Bering Sea in Bristol Bay (Brooks et al.1; Len1Brooks, J. W., A. S. Mossman, and H. Z. Hansen. 1955. Predator control and investigation: beluga investigation. In 1955 annual report, p. 98–106. Alaska Fish. Board, Alaska Dep. Fish., Rep. 7, Juneau (avail. at http://www.arlis.org/ docs/vol1/A/31110164etc/31110164etc-1955. pdf#page=97). sink2), Norton Sound and the Yukon Delta (Nelson, 1887; Zagoskin, 1967), and in the Chukchi Sea in Kotzebue Sound and along lagoons near Point Lay (Nelson, 1887; Foote and Williamson, 1966; Childs3). Traditional knowledge of Alaska Natives indicat2Lensink, C. J. 1961. Status report: beluga studies. Alaska Dep. Fish Game, Div. Biol. Res., Unpubl. Rep., Juneau (avail. at http://www.adfg. alaska.gov/static/home/library/pdfs/wildlife/research_pdfs/status_report_beluga_studies_1961. pdf). 3Childs, H. E., Jr. 1969. Birds and mammals of the Pitmegea River Region, Cape Sabine, northwestern Alaska. Biol. Pap. No. 10, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks, 76 p. (avail. at https://scholarworks. alaska.edu/handle/11122/1432). ed that these occurrences represented long established migration routes and summer concentration areas, and that belugas were an important subsistence resource harvested at many coastal villages (Huntington et al., 1999; Neakok et al.4; Chythlook and Coiley5). Research on belugas in Alaska initially focused on competition with commercial fisheries but later included potential impacts of proposed oil and gas leasing. Belugas in Bristol Bay were the subject of early scientific attention mostly because the largest commercial sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka, fishery in the world occurs there (Jones et al.6) and 4Neakok, W., D. Neakok, W. Bodfish, D. Libbey, E. S. Hall, Jr., and the Point Lay elders. 1985. To keep the past alive: the Point Lay cultural resource site survey. North Slope Borough, Barrow, AK, 111 p. 5Chythlook, M., and P. Coiley 1994. The subsistence use of beluga whale in Bristol Bay by Alaska Natives, 1993. Tech. Paper No. 231. Alaska Dep. Fish Game, Div. Subsistence, Juneau, AK, 29 p. 6Jones, M., T. Sands, S. Morstad, P. Salomone, G. Buck, F. West, C. Brazil, and T. Krieg. 2013. 2012 Bristol Bay area annual management report. Alaska Dep. Fish Game, Fish. Manage.

—Beluga whales, (Delphi- napterus leucas), of the Bristol Bay stock were counted from 7 to 11 July 2016, during aerial surveys in Bristol Bay, Alaska. These surveys were a follow-up of surveys flown in Bristol Bay in 1993, 1994, 1999, 2000, 2004, and 2005, and used the same methods. Nine surveys were flown during 7–11 July. The total count of belugas per survey ranged from 484 to 1,024 (= 660; CV = 0.26). Cor-recting the average count for the number of belugas that are diving and not available to be sampled (2.62) and the proportion of calves (1.18) that cannot be seen from the aircraft suggests there are ~2,040 belu- gas (660 × 2.62 × 1.18) in Bristol Bay. The mean and range of counts made in 2016 is similar to those in 2004 and 2005 suggesting that the population growth observed during 1993–2005 has slowed or ceased. The great-est challenge with how belugas are surveyed within Bristol Bay is the difficulty in counting large groups. Separate counts of large groups had high variance and we suggest future surveys consider photo-documenting groups to determine if groups of belugas can be counted more consistently or using video to adjust for beluga behavior in real-time.

Changing environmental conditions in the Pacific Arctic are expected to affect ice-adapted marine food webs. As such, understanding ringed seal ( Pusa hispida ) dive and haul-out behavior is vital to understanding if and how these environmental changes affect seal foraging behavior. Working with Alaska Native subsistence hunters, we tagged 14 adult and 20 subadult ringed seals with satellite-linked data recorders in Kotzebue Sound, Alaska, during late-September and October 2007–2009. Information about dive and haul-out behavior in the Bering and Chukchi seas was collected for 12–297 days. We analyzed indices of dive depth, duration, and rate, and haul-out probability using a model selection framework for adults during fall (late-September–November) and winter (December–March) and for subadults during fall, winter, and also spring (April–June). We found differences by season and time of day, but not by sex. Where subadults and adults occurred together, they dove to similar depths; although subadults were commonly located in deeper waters where they generally dove deeper than adults. Both age classes dove longer during winter and subadults tended to make a few more (~3.5) dives per hour than adults. Both age classes hauled out less and dove deeper, longer, and more frequently during midday than at other times of day. We suspect that seals dive deeper during midday because their prey migrates deeper. Dive and haul-out behaviors of ringed seals are influenced by a combination of factors, including prey distribution and abundance, sea ice, and seal diving physiology.

We analyzed how juvenile bearded seals Erignathus barbatus use and move through sea ice and consider how future ice conditions might affect bearded seal distribution and behavior. In October 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2009, we tagged 29 (16 female and 13 male) juvenile (0−2 yr old) bearded seals with Argos satellite transmitters in Kotzebue Sound, Alaska, USA, who then freely moved through the Chukchi and Bering Seas. Movement data were initially analyzed using behavior discriminating state-space models. These results were subsequently analyzed with mixedeffects models to relate inferred behavioral state to environmental variables (sea ice, water depth, season, distance to ice edge) and then with a modified resource selection function using the same environmental variables. Sea ice concentration was highly predictive of use, but had a non-linear effect, with seals preferring intermediate concentrations and areas closer to the ice edge (defined here as 15% sea ice concentration). Behavior was also affected by sea ice and other environmental conditions. When seals were in dense sea ice, they were likely to express an encamped movement pattern; when in open water or sparse ice, they tended to express transiting behavior. The seasonal migratory behavior of bearded seals, at least in juveniles, appears to result from tracking the sea ice edge as it seasonally expands and recedes over the Bering and Chukchi continental shelves. The association with the ice edge suggests that bearded seal habitat will shift as the climate warms.

Spotted seals (Phoca largha) occur primarily in seasonally ice-covered seas of the North Pacific Ocean. Breeding populations occur in the Bering Sea, Sea of Okhotsk, Yellow Sea, and Sea of Japan. This species is closely related to the harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). However, these sibling species have adapted very differently to their environments; spotted seals primarily breed and molt on sea ice and harbor seals on land.

The first year of life is typically the most critical to a pinniped's survival, especially for Arctic phocids which are weaned at only a few weeks of age and left to locate and capture prey on their own. Their seasonal movements and habitat selection are therefore important factors in their survival. During a cooperative effort between scientists and subsistence hunters in October 2004, 2005, and 2006, 13 female and 13 male young (i.e., age <2) bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus) were tagged with satellite-linked dive recorders (SDRs) in Kotzebue Sound, Alaska. Shortly after being released, most seals moved south with the advancing sea-ice through the Bering Strait and into the Bering Sea where they spent the winter and early spring. The SDRs of 17 (8 female and 9 male) seals provided frequent high-quality positions in the Bering Sea; their data were used in our analysis. To investigate habitat selection, we simulated 20 tracks per seal by randomly selecting from the pooled distributions of the absolute bearings and swim speeds of the tagged seals. For each point in the observed and simulated tracks, we obtained the depth, sea-ice concentration, and the distances to sea-ice, open water, the shelf break and coastline. Using logistic regression with a stepwise model selection procedure, we compared the simulated tracks to those of the tagged seals and obtained a model for describing habitat selection. The regression coefficients indicated that the bearded seals in our study selected locations near the ice edge. In contrast, aerial surveys of the bearded seal population, predominantly composed of adults, indicated higher abundances in areas farther north and in heavier pack ice. We hypothesize that this discrepancy is the result of behavioral differences related to age. Ice concentration was also shown to be a statistically significant variable in our model. All else being equal, areas of higher ice concentration are selected for up to about 80%. The effects of sex and bathymetry were not statistically significant. The close association of young bearded seals to the ice edge in the Bering Sea is important given the likely effects of climate warming on the extent of sea-ice and subsequent changes in ice edge habitat.