SOUTHERN RIGHT WHALE, Eubalaena australis:

A long term study of the population dynamics and identification of Marine

Protected Areas in Uruguay

Costa P.1, 2; Riet-Sapriza F.G.1, 2; Jorge G.T.1,3

1
Proyecto FRANCAAUSTRAL; 2Cetáceos Uruguay; 3Sección Etología, Facultad de Ciencias, UdelaR.

Conservation Status
The Southern right whale (SRW), Eubalaena australis, is considered the rarest of
large whales and the population was driven to the edge of extinction during the XVIII and
XIX centuries due to the whaling activity (Best & Underhill, 1990; Burnell, 2001). This
pressure was too great that by the mid-1840s SRW was considered to be commercially
extinct (Stewart & Todd, 2001). Although protected from hunting by international
agreement since 1935, the population recovery has been slow (Arias & Harris, 1999; Best
et al., 2001; Patenaude & Baker, 2001). However, the SRW is an example of the ability
of whale stock to recover from whaling activity increasing at annual rate of 7-8 % (IWC,
2001). The species is currently listed as low risk/ conservation dependant category
(IUCN, 2003). This designation implies that southern right whales are showing signs of
recovery in some areas, which depends on running conservation programs. If those efforts
are interrupted, in a period of five years the species would be changed to the category of
threatened species (IUCN, 2003).

Distribution

Southern Hemisphere
The SRW is a migratory animal, during the austral summer it is found in high
latitudes in its subantarctic feeding sites (60º S). At the beginning of the austral winter it

1
migrates to middle and low latitudes, looking for template and calm waters for mating
and calving (Payne, 1976; Whitehead et al., 1986; Payne et al., 1990). Courtship, mating
and births occur in shallow bays, being these behaviours easily seen from the shore
(Payne, 1986). Important breeding areas includes Peninsula Valdés in the South western
Atlantic (Payne, 1986; Payne et al., 1990; Bastida & Lichtestein, 1984), South Africa,
(Best, 1970, 1981, 1990; Best & Underhill, 1990; Best & Ruther,1992), Tristán da Cunha
(Best, 1988), Australia (Bannister, 1990) and New Zealand (Patenaude et al., 1998).
Recent research shows that the coasts of Santa Catarina in Brazil are an important
breeding and nursing area for SRW (Palazzo & Flores, 1998). Seven feeding grounds are
recognised, based on sightings and historical records from commercial hunting (IWC,
2001). One feeding ground extends from Brazil/False to Banks/Malvinas Island in
Argentina, considered a corridor offshore Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina, between 30°
and 55°S and west of 40°W (IWC, 2001; Tormosov et al., 1998).

Local
Uruguay is situated between the grades 30º and 35º South, between two important
SRW reproductive sites: the coasts of Santa Catarina State (27º- 25º South, Brazil) and
Peninsula Valdés (42º-43º South, Argentina). The geographic location of Uruguay match
with other reproductive sites in the southern hemisphere: South Africa (30º-35º S) and
The Great Australian Bay (30º-35º S). The main characteristic of this area (30ºS -35ºS) is
being a highly complex hydrographic system due to the convergence of waters from
different origins: subantarctic waters from Falkland’s currents, subtropical waters from
Brazilian currents and fluvial waters from La Plata River. This makes the region highly
productive due to the flux of nutrients originated at the run-off of La Plata River and the
contribution of subantarctic waters from Falkland’s currents (Gali, 2000).
In Uruguay sightings were recorded since the 70’s (Mermoz, 1980), with a
maximum of 10 individuals in July of 1975, near the coasts of the islands of Cabo Polonio
(Costa et al., 2005). Systematic survey from 2001 to 2003 suggested that of the species
was conducted along the Uruguayan coast, to assess the status and habitat Uruguayan
coast could be an important social grounds (Costa et al., 2007).

2
Southern right whale biology

Species Description

Reproduction
Right whales are slow breeders, females have their first calves around 9 years
(Carwardine, 1995; IWC, 2001) and give birth to a single calf every 3 to 5 years
(Carwardine, 1995; Kraus & Hatch, 2001). Post-partum ovulation does not appear to
occur (Burnell, 2001). The length of gestation is estimated to be between 12 and 13
months (Kraus & Hatch, 2001; Best et al., 2003).
Right whales aggregate in large, active groups during which males appear to
compete for access to a single female. Interacting groups, which show behavioural events
such as tail and flipper slaps, spy hopping and belly up have traditionally been associated
with mating groups (Payne, 1986). Hamilton and Mayo (1990), Kraus and Hatch (2001)
and Best et al. (2003) defined surface active groups (SAGs) as groups of two or more
individuals that interact on the surface, less than one body length apart, in which one
focal individual is surrounded by other individuals. The focal animal is usually a mature
female surrounded mostly by males (Best et al., 2003). The female often displayed the
belly-up event, making copulation difficult and thus inciting males to compete (Cassini &
Vila, 1990; Kraus & Hatch, 2001). Males compete at two levels, for access to position
next to a female so they can inseminate her, and via sperm competition (Best et al.,
2003). Right whales have the largest testes (972kg) and penises (averages 14.3% of their
body length) of the baleen whales (Berta & Sumich, 1999; Kraus & Hatch, 2001).

Calf

Right whales nurse their calf in template water and protected coast such as bay. At birth
calf weight about 3 to 4 tonnes and measure 1/3 to 1/4 of their mother length. The
lactation period last one year. Their first migration to the Antarctic occurs when they
separate from their mother on their return to breeding and calving sites (Payne, 1986).

3
Mother give birth every 3 years and have their first calf on average at the age of 8-9 years
( Payne, 1986).

Diet
Planktonic food resources in most habitats where right whales are thought to feed
are dominated by the calanoid copepods Calanus finmarchicus, Pseudocalanus sp. and
Centropages spp. Although a variety of other food organisms including euphausids,
swarming galaethiads and colonial siphonophores have occasionally been reported
worldwide (Mayo et al., 2001). Right whales feed by skimming the surface of the water
collecting prey on the baleen, as water is expelled by the tongue (Berta & Sumich, 1999).
This process requires more energy than the whale would expend by swimming with its
mouth closed because of the additional drag. The number of copepods consumed per unit
time (and hence the amount of energy available in the form of food) varies with the
concentration of copepods in the water. The threshold concentration of copepods estimate
below which it is not energetically favourable for the whale to feed is 4 x 103 copepods
m-3 (Beardsley et al., 1996).

Conservation & Management

Problems and threats

A. The numbers of whales present in Uruguay before or during the whaling industry is
unknown. Furthermore, the records from 1970’s and 1990’s were occasional and cannot
be used to determine population tendencies. For this reason the status of the SRW in our
coast is still unknown. The continuity of a long term project like this is important in order
to estimate population abundance and rates of population growth.

B. There is a gap in the information about the SRW. Research in neighbouring countries
(Argentina and Brazil) has been conducted for 35 years and 22 years, respectively.
Because of the migration movements of SRW between the Argentinean and Brazilian
reproductive sites, and the strategic location of Uruguay (between Argentina and Brazil),

4
we hypothesized the existence of a link between the two mentioned SRW reproductive
sites in the South-western Atlantic. Furthermore, the role of the Uruguayan coast in the
ecology and migratory patterns of the species need to addressed.

C. Management and conservation. In 2002, to attract tourism in the winter season, the
Uruguayan Government started an ecotourism program (vessel and shore based whale-
watching). This program begun without any scientific basis about the impact of
ecotourism on SRW. Biological information obtained from this project will be extremely
important for the welfare and conservation of the species in Uruguay. The information
collected in this project may be used to implement conservation and management plan in
Marine Protected Areas, and for conservation activities in the south-western Atlantic.

5
Project Description

Aims
The data generated from this project will be used:
a) To determine the status of the population of SRW;
b) To identify potential Marine Protected Areas for SRW;
c) To establish conservation and management plans for SRW in Uruguay.

Objectives

1. To determine the importance of the Uruguayan coast in the breeding range and
migratory route for SRW
2. To study the long term population dynamics (spatial and temporal distribution) of
SRW.
3. Create a high-quality of SRW photo-identification catalogue.
4. Compared the Uruguayan SRW photo-identification catalogue with the Brazil’s and
Argentina’s SRW photo-identification catalogue.
5. To study the migratory pattern, permanence time of individuals and the relationship
between the Uruguayan population and the populations in the region.
6. To study the mating, social and mother-calf behaviour of SRW.
7. To increase local people awareness of the role of SRW in the marine ecosystem and
the importance of Marine Protected Areas.

6
MATERIAL AND METHODS

Study area:
Transect aerial surveys will be performed fortnightly (August to November) and along
the coast (250 km) from Punta Ballena (Maldonado Department) to Santa Teresa (Rocha
Department), Uruguay.

Study period:
From August to November 2007

Aerial sightings:
In order to obtain information about the spatial and temporal distribution, and quantitative
data of the individuals in the area, aerial surveys will be performed fortnightly during the
study period. A one-engine Cessna 172 plane will be used, which has high wings, flight
autonomy for 4.5 hours and capacity for 4 passengers including the pilot.
The flights will be conducted following the coastline from a distance of 500 meters and at
a height of 800 feet, under ideal weather conditions: calm sea, no wind and good
visibility. In addition to the number of individuals, geographical position, group
composition and behavioural categories will also be recorded.

7
Photo-identification:
The callosities that are located in different areas on the head of right whales have a
general distribution pattern but are highly variable individually. That makes them very
useful for the identification of individuals (Payne, 1983).
For detecting permanence time and migratory movements it is necessary to create a
national catalogue and then make comparisons with the catalogues available in Argentina
and Brazil.
The photographs will be taken from an airplane at a height of 400 feet, perpendicularly to
the head of the whale, especially in the callosity zone (Payne, 1983) and preferentially
having the sun behind the photographer. The best moment for doing the taken photos is
when the animal emerges for breathing. Photos will be taken with a Nikon D-200 Digital
Camera with a Nikon 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 Lens.

8
1. Aerial Survey
1.1. During the period August-November, four aerial surveys were carried out. The dates
and composition of the team is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Participants and positions in aircraft during flights.

Left Observer- Right
Flight No. Date Annotator Pilot
Photographer Observer
1st. 22/08/2007 M. Campodónico R. Álvarez F. Riet J. Plateiro
2nd. 30/09/2007 M. Campodónico P. Laporta F. Riet L. Guichon
3rd. 08/10/2007 M. Campodónico F.Riet G.T. Jorge E. Jackson
4th. 23/10/2007 M. Campodónico F.Riet G.T. Jorge E. Jackson

1.2. Forty-three was the largest number of individuals observed during an aerial survey
and it was on the 23rd of October. Whereas the lowest number of individuals (n=4)
observed was on the 22nd of August (Table 2). Two mother-calf pairs were observed
twice: on September 30th and on October 23rd.

Table 2. Date and number of individuals counted during the flights.

Date Mother-calf Solitary Individuals Totals
pair individuals in groups
22/08/2007 - 2 1(2) 4
30/09/2007 2 4 1(3) - 1(4) 31
08/10/2007 - 3 3(2) - 3(4) 21
23/10/2007 2 8 8(2) - 5(3) 43

1.3. Distributions of individuals and behaviour from August to November.

1.3.1. In the August flight (22nd August) three whales were observed in zone I and one in
zone II (Fig. 2). The only group seen was in interaction (Fig. 3).

9
 August 22nd, 2007 (n=4)

Nº of whales
2

0
I II III IV
Zones

Fig. 2. Distribution of the southern right whales on the 22nd of August,

2007.
August 22nd, 2007 (n=1)

2
Nº of groups

I
1 D
T

0
1 2 3 4
Group size

Fig. 3. Composition and behavioural categories of group on the 22nd of

August, 2007. Behaviour References; I = Interaction, D = Rest, T =
Travel.

1.3.2. During the 30th September flight the largest number of individuals were observed
in zone IV, the whales were seen in all zones except for zone III (Fig. 4). All groups seen
were in Interaction (Fig. 5).

Se pte mber 30th, 2007 (n=31)

20

15
Nº of whales

10

0
I II III IV
Zones

10
 Fig. 4. Distribution of the southern right whales on the 30th of
September, 2007.

Septem ber 30th, 2007 (n=2)

Nº of groups
I
1 D
T

0
1 2 3 4
Group size

Fig. 5. Composition and behavioural categories of group on the 30th of

September, 2007. Behaviour References; I = Interaction, D = Rest, T =
Travel.

1.3.3. During the 8th October flight the largest number of individuals were observed in
zone IV, and none were observed in zone I and II (Fig. 6). The largest number of groups
were seen in Interaction (Fig. 7).

October 8th, 2007 (n=21)

20

15
Nº of whales

10

0
I II III IV
Zones

Fig. 6. Distribution of the southern right whales on the 8th of October,

2007.

11
 October 8th, 2007 (n=6)

Nº of groups
I
2 D
T
1

0
1 2 3 4
Group size

Fig. 7. Composition and behavioural categories of group on the 8th of

October, 2007. Behaviour References; I = Interaction, D = Rest, T =
Travel.

1.3.4. In the second flight of October (23rd October) the largest number of individuals
were observed in zone III. The whales were observed in all zones except for zone I (Fig.
8). One group was seen in Rest, six in Interaction and six in Travel (Fig. 9).

October 23rd, 2007 (n=43)

35
30
Nº of whales

25
20
15
10
5
0
I II III IV
Zones

Fig. 8. Distribution of the southern right whales on the 23rd of October,

2007.

12
 October 23rd, 2007 (n=13)

6
5

Nº of groups
4 I
3 D
2 T
1
0
1 2 3 4
Group size

Fig. 9. Composition and behavioural categories of group on the 23rd of

October, 2007. Behaviour References; I = Interaction, D = Rest, T =
Travel.

3. General Results
3.1. Temporal distribution
Southern rights whales were seen every month of the season except for November. Bad
weather conditions prevent the realization of the fifth flight. October was the month were
more individuals were observed (n=64) (Fig. 10).

August-October, 2007

70
60
Nº of whales

50
40
30
20
10
0
Aug Sep Oct Nov
Month

Fig. 10. Number of individuals sighted by month. August-October,

2007.

13
3.2. Spatial distribution
The largest number of individuals were seen in zone IV (n = 37) followed by zone III (n
= 33) (Fig. 11.).

August-October, 2007

40
35
30
Nº of whales

25
20
15
10
5
0
I II III IV
Zones

Fig. 11. Distribution of individuals by zones. August- November,

2007.

3.3. Group composition and Behaviour in respect of group size

Groups of two whales were more frequently observed (28.92%), followed by the three
(21.69%) and four individuals group size (19.28%) (Fig.12). Of the total sighted
unaccompanied whales (n=91), behavioural data is available for 74 individuals. The
51.35% of which were seen in interaction (social behaviour), the 37.84% in travel and the
10.81% in rest. The two individuals group size was the one that involved the largest
number of whales (n=24).

August-October, 2007

12
10
Nº of groups

8 I
6 D
4 T
2
0
1 2 3 4
Group size

Fig. 12. Sighting frequency of the different group categories. August –

November, 2007. Behaviour References; I = Interaction, D = Rest, T =
Travel.

14
3.4. Re-identifications in Uruguay
3.4.1. Re-identifications in the same season
Five matches were found, which include two mother-calf pairs. The details of the
matches are show in tables 4 and 5.

Table 4. Unaccompanied rights whale’s re-identifications in the same season.

In the same season
Details 2003 2005 2007
Photo-id 03/09/2003 22/09/2005 22/08/2007
Locality Playa Mansa Playa Mansa Solanas
Rephoto-id 12/10/2003 11/10/2005 08/10/2007
Locality La Paloma Laguna Garzón Valizas- Ag. Dulces
Residency (days) 41 20 48
Movement (km) 80 30

Table 5. Mother-calf pairs rights whale’s re-identifications in

the same season.
In the same season
Details 2004 2007
Photo-id 14/09/2004 30/09/2007
Locality La Pedrera Laguna Rocha
Rephoto-id 23/09/2004 23/10/2007
Locality Cabo Polonio La Paloma
Residency (days) 10 24
Movement (km) 30

3.4.2. . Re-identifications between seasons

Until now three matches were found. In the three cases the location of the 1st sighting was
very close to the location of the re-sighting. The details of the matches are show in the
tables 6.
Table 6. Unaccompanied rights whale’s re-identifications between the
season 2003 and 2005.
Between season
Details
Photo-id 03/09/2003 12/10/2003 11/10/2005
Locality Playa Mansa La Pedrera Calavera-Cabo Polonio
Rephoto-id 22/09/2005 08/10/2006 08/10/2006
Locality Punta Ballena Laguna Rocha Lag. Rocha-Garzón

3.4.3. Matching between Uruguay and Argentina

There are likely 17 individual matched between Argentinean and Uruguayan catalogue.
The analysis is not finished yet, thus the total number of matching between both countries
is still unknown.

15
DISCUSSION

Temporal distribution

Ninety-nine individuals were observed in the 2007 season. This did differs
significantly from the number of whales observed in each season from 2001 to 2005
(2001, n=63; 2002, n=44; 2003, n= 51; 2004, n=50; 2005 and n=48) but is similar to the
number of whales observed in the 2006 season (n=84). Individuals were seen in all
months of the 2007 season except for November (Fig. 10). Whales were more abundant
during the period between September-October with a peak in October (Fig. 10). The 2007
season is consistent with the pattern observed in previous years, with more abundance of
whales in the period August-October. We suggest that in Uruguay there is a period of
abundance that is consistent each year but there is not a peak of abundance, because this,
vary year to year.

The seasonality (abundance period) observed in Uruguay agrees with what has
been observed in Península Valdés, Argentina (Payne, 1986) and Santa Catarina, Brazil
(Palazzo & Flores, 1998).

Spatial distribution

The zone IV presented the largest number of whales in 2007 (Fig. 8). This did
differs from the spatial distribution observed in 2001-2006 seasons, were the zones II and
III concentrated the largest numbers of whales.

The few matches of whales between seasons (Tables 4 and 5) suggest that for
most of the whales, residency in the area does not exceed 30 days. In South Australia, it
has been observed that individuals sometimes leave the coastal zone and move to the
open sea, which may hinder the determination of residence time for individuals in the
area (Burnell and Bryden, 1997). The possibility of something similar happening off
Uruguay cannot be ruled out.
The variability in the distribution of unaccompanied right whales individuals within and
between seasons does not coincide with the behaviors of the mother–calf pair in calving
sites such as Península Valdés (Rowntree et al., 2001), Santa Catarina (Palazzo & Flores,
1998), South Africa (Best, 2000), Australia (Bannister, 1990; Burnell, 2001) and New
Zealand (Patenaude et al., 1996; Patenaude & Baker, 2001), where mainly females with
calves show a preference for certain sites, which are kept for several years.

16
 Three individuals were re-identified in two different years, for the three
whales the location of the 1st sighting was very close to the 2nd sighting, that
suggested a high relative philophatry to the area.

Conservation Priorities: Management action.

We propose to focus the management actions and conservation efforts towards Zones II,
III and IV (Fig 13, areas shaded in red). This area concentrates the largest number of
individuals throughout the years (2001-2007). It’s important to continue this study to
confirm the short scale distributional tendency and to make statistical conclusion/results
more powerful. See Figure 14 for sighting seen in Cerro Verde, proposed Marine
Protected Area.

Brasil

Uruguay

Argentina

Fig.13. Areas shaded in red are proposed areas to which direct southern right whale
management actions and conservation efforts in Uruguay

17
Fig 14. Cerro Verde-Uruguayan Atlantic coast: area with the greatest concentration of
whales in the year 2007. Coast line = green line; blue dot whales sightings.

Mother-calf pairs

Since 2001 mother-calf pairs have been observed between October and
November except in 2003 where they were also observed on August and September.
Neither 2002 nor 2006 mother calf pairs were seen during the season. During the 2007
season two mother-calf pairs were observed twice, on September and October.
One of the calf observed 2007 was half of its mother length, measure that corresponds to
the first two or three months of life, according to Thomas & Taber (1984). Meanwhile
the other calf observed was less than half of their mother length, measure which
corresponds to the first or second months of life (Thomas & Taber, 1984). Since 2001,
80% of the calves observed were half of their mother body length. The two calves
observed with less than half their mother body length were seen in the 2001 and 2005
season. This suggest that these calves could have been born in Uruguayan waters.

However, evidences show the contrary to our predictions. Most births occur in
August (Payne, 1986) and occasionally in October (Whitehead et al., 1986). The duration
of the residence of mothers with calves in an area is of about 30 to 70 days; therefore,
they are re-sighted several times within the same season (Best, 2000; Rowntree et al.,

18
2001). In our study, we only recorded two mother-calf pair duration of residence in 2004
(10 days) and 2007 (24 days). Because most mother-calf pairs were observed only once
and considering the calves’ length, we hypothesized that mother do not give birth in our
coast. Thus suggested a coastal migration of mother calf pairs from calving grounds
further north. Although the migrational pattern of females is still unknown, we suggest
that some females do not migrate directly towards their feeding area at higher latitudes,
but that they use alternative areas, such as Uruguay, to rest and continue their calving. A
possible calving ground could be the Santa Catarina (Brazil) coast, in which a significant
number of mother-small calf pairs are usually present (Palazzo & Flores, 1998). Best et
al., (1993) found that three mothers identified in South Brazil had been identified in
Argentina with different calves in previous years. Our study supports one of the
hypotheses proposed by Best et al., (1993) to explain re-identification: some females
could move between the two calving grounds in the year their calves are born. A female
could give birth in South Brazil and then move south, towards Península Valdés, possibly
as a part of a coastal migration towards higher latitudes as the summer arrives (Best,
1970; 1981). A possible alternative is that females migrate north to Uruguay after calving
in Peninsula Valdes.

Social Behaviour

Most unaccompanied whales were observed in groups of two or more

individuals and the 51.35% of which were observed interacting (social behaviour)
(Fig. 12). The group size which has the largest number of individuals was two.
These results were consistent with the previous year. In all the years, around 75%
of the unaccompanied whales were seen in groups of two or more individuals,
showing the largest number of individuals involved the groups of two, three and
four. This proportion of individuals interacting in a group is higher than the one
found in the calving sites of the South-western Atlantic, in which most individuals
are females with calves (Burnell & Bryden, 1997; Rowntree et al., 2001).
The high proportion of individuals interacting in a group in our coast suggests that
Uruguay could be a socializing area compose mainly of adult and/or young individuals.
Behaviours comparable to those described for this species such as courting and
reproduction have been observed in these groups. It likely that individuals that are not
mother-calf pairs, present higher dispersion, shorter duration of residence and lesser
fidelity to calving areas than females during calving years. The location where these
individuals migrate in winter apart from the calving sites is not. Therefore, to elucidate the
behavioural patterns of these individuals will imply a longer term study compared to
mother-calf pairs in calving areas.

Observations carried out in Rio Grande do Sul State in Brazil show that most
individuals were adults and presented copulation behaviours, whereas mother-calf pairs
were rarely observed (Palazzo and Flores, 1998). This could indicate that group
composition of whales occurring off the Uruguayan coast could be similar to those in Rio

19
Grande do Sul. Taking into account that conception and births happening around mid-
winter (Best et al., 2003; Burnell, 2001; Payne, 1986) and that the behaviours observed in
our study are comparable to those of courtship and breeding already described, this further
support the idea that the Uruguayan coast could be an area of socialization and breeding
for southern right whales. A place exclusively used for reproduction may not exist in the
south-western Atlantic. Thus, individuals could reproduce along a corridor, the
geographical references of which would be the zones with highest concentrations of
females with calves, such as Península Valdés (Argentina) and Santa Catarina (Brazil).
Within this, there could be an alternation of individuals between coastal zones and the
open sea, as well as feeding events.

It is important to continue with photo-identification and with this long-term stud.

In the near future we would like to expand the study area further away from the
Uruguayan Atlantic coast. The social behaviour and mating strategies of SRW need to
addressed and we are aiming to determine biological and/or management stocks by
undertaking studies on population genetic structure gene flow between populations from
Western South Atlantic. Finally, we suggest to conduct a study to test the hypothesis
whether SRW have a feeding habits along the South Western Atlantic.

20
Research Priorities

Data about spatial (distribution) and temporal (e.g. residence) distribution are crucial for
conservation decision-making (1). These information have been collected since 2001 by
survey and photo-identification of southern right whale; however to be able to understand
the migration pattern, residence and fidelity of individuals between years and estimate
abundance, data needs to be collected on a long term basis. Further, the status of the
southern right whale in the Uruguay is still unclear. For instance, Uruguay is considered a
strategic location because of the movements of this species between the Argentina’s and
Brazil’s breeding sites. Preliminary results showed that most individuals were engaged in
social activities indicating that Uruguay could be considered as a breeding ground for
SRW. Notwithstanding the role of the Uruguayan coast in the distribution, migration and
ecology of the species warrants further investigation. Furthermore, the hypotheses that the
SRW in Uruguay constitute an isolate stock or that they are related to the populations of
Brazil and Argentina should be tested with mDNA genetic variation analysis. If the latter
is true, a genetic flow between populations therefore exist, a biological and management
stocks in the South-western Atlantic Ocean could be defined.

Summary of research priorities:

i. Continue with the photo identification program that will allow the application of mark-
recapture mathematical models to estimate abundance and population parameters. These
parameters are extremely important tools for establishing the conservation status of SRW.

ii. Deepen in the photo-grammatical identification of categories of whales in Uruguay.

This will be a real step forward to determine the role of our coast in the ecology of the
species.

21
iii. Work on genetic research. This will contribute to understanding of the geographical
structure and the regional limits between sub populations of the south-western Atlantic
Ocean. Genetic research will be also important in order to understand the relationship
between individuals engaged in social groups.

Acknowledgments
We are indebt with both Matilde Campodonico the photographer and with Juan Platerio
the pilot of Francaaustral Projet and Karumbe Project . We are very grateful to our
funding bodies: Cleveland Metro Zoo Park, Cetacean Society International and BP
Foundation, without them this project could not have been conducted.

22
Bibliography
Arias, A. & G. Harris. 1999. Catálogo de identificación de ballenas francas australes
(Eubalaena australis) en Península Valdés. Boletín Técnico, Fundación Vida
Silvestre, Buenos Aires. 37pp.
Bannister, J. 1990. Southern right whale off western Australia. Reports of the
International Whailing Commission. (Special Issue) 12: 279-288.
Bastida, R. & V. Lichtschein. 1984. Informe preliminar sobre los estudios de ballena
franca austral (Eubalaena australis) en la zona de la Península Valdés (Chubut,
Argentina). Revista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino
Rivadavia” e Instituto Nacional de Investigación de las Ciencias Naturales. ISSN
0373-9066 – Zoología. 13 (21): 197-210.
Berta, A. & J.L. Sumich. 1999. Marine mammals: evolutionary biology. Academia Press,
California.
Best, P. 1970. Explotation and recovery of right whales, Eubalaena australis, off the
Cape Province. Investigational Report of the Division of Sea Fisheries Institute,
South Africa. 80: 1-20
Best, P. 1981. The status of right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) off South Africa, 1969 –
1979. Investigational Report of the Sea Fisheries Institute, South Africa. 123: 1-
44.
Best, P. 1988. Right whales, Eubalaena australis, at Tristán da Cunha. A clue to the “non
recovery” of depleted stocks?. Biological Conservation, 46: 23 - 51.
Best, P. 1990. Natural marking and their use in determining calving intervals in right
whales of South Africa. South African Journal of Zoology. 25: 114-123.
Best, P. B. & L. G. Underhill. 1990. Estimating Population Size in Southern Right Wales
(Eubalaena australis) Using Naturally Marked Animals. Report of the
International Whaling Commission, (Special Issue), 12: 183-198.
Best, P. & H. Ruther. 1992. Aereal fotogrametry of southern right whales, Eubalaena
australis. Journal of Zoology. London 228: 595-614.
Best, P., A. Bandao & D. Butterworth. 2001. Demographic parameters of southern right
whales off South Africa. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. (Special Issue) 2: 161-169.

23
Best, P. B.; C.M. Schaeff; D. Reeb & P. Palsbøll. 2003. Composition and possible
functions of social groupings of Southern right whales in South African waters.
Behaviour, 140: 1469-94.
Beardsley, R., A. Epstein, C. Chen, K. Wishner, M. Macaulayt & R. Kenney. 1996.
Spatial variability in zooplankton abundance near feeding right whales in the
Great South Channel. DeepSea Research II, 43: 1601-1625.
Burnell, S. R. & M. M. Bryden. 1997. Coastal residence periods and reproduction timing
in southern right whales (Eubalaena australis). Journal of Zoology, 241: 613-621.
Burnell, S. R. 2001. Aspects of the reproductive biology, movements and site fidelity of
right whales off Australia. The Journal of Cetacean Research and Management,
(Special Isuue), 2: 89-102.
Cassini, M. H. & B. L. Vila. 1990. Cluster analysis of group types in Southern right
whale (Eubalaena australis). Marine Mammal Science, 6 (1): 17-24.
Costa, P., R. Pradera, M. Piedra & P. Franco-Fraguas. 2005. Sightings of southern right
whales, Eubalaena australis, off Uruguay. The Latin American Journal of
Aquatic Mammals, (4) 2: 157-161.
Costa, P., M. Piedra, P. Franco & E. Paez. 2007. Southern right whales off Uruguay. The
Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 9 (1): 45–51.
Hamilton, P. K. & C. A. Mayo. 1990. Population characteristics of right whales
(Eubalaena australis) observed in Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bays, 1978-1986.
Report of the International Whaling Commission, (Special Issue), 12: 203-2008.
International Whaling Commission. 2001. Report of the workshop on status and trends of
western North Atlantic right whales. The Journal of Cetacean Research and
Management, (Special Issue), 2:61-87.
Kraus, S. D. & J. J. Hatch. 2001. Mating strategies in North Atlantic right whale
(Eubalaena glacialis). The Journal of the Cetacean Research and Management,
(Special Issue), 2: 237-244.
Mayo, C., B. Letcher & S. Scott. 2001. Zooplankton filtering efficiency of the baleen of
North Atlantic right whale, Eubalaena glacialis. The Journal of the Cetacean
Research and Management, (Special Issue), 2: 225-230.

24
Mermoz, J. 1980. Preliminary report on the Southern right whale in the Southwestern
Atlantic. Reports of the International Whailing Commission, 30: 1-8.
Payne, R. 1976. At home with right whales. National Geographic, 149: 322-339.
Payne, R. 1986. Long term behavioral studies of southern right whale (Eubalaena
asutralis). Report of the International Whaling Commission, (Special Issue), 10:
161-168.
Payne, R., V. Rowntree, J. S. Perkins, J. G. Cooke & K. Lankester. 1990. Population size,
trends and reproductive parameters of right whales (Eubalaena australis) off
Peninsula Valdes, Argentina. Report of the International Whaling Commission,
(Special Issue) 12: 271-278.
Palazzo, J. & A. Flores. 1998. Right whales Eubalaena australis in southern Brazil: a
summary of currents knowledge and researchs needs. Reports of the International
Whailing Commission, pp.1-7.
Patenaude, N., C. Baker & N. Gales. 1996. Observations of southern right whales on
New Zealand’s subantarctic wintering grounds. Marine Mammals Science, 14 (2):
350-355.
Patenaude, N. J., C. S. Baker & N. J. Gales. 1998. Observations of southern right whales
on new Zealand’s subantarc4tic wintering grounds. Marine Mammal Science, 14
(2): 350-355.
Patenaude, N. & C. Baker. 2001. Population status and habitat use of southern right
whales in the sub-Antartic Auckland Islands of New Zealand. The Journal of
Cetacean Research and Management, (Special Issue), 2: 111-116.
Rowntree, V., R. S. Payne & D. M. Schell. 2001. Changing patterns of habitat use by
southern right whales (Eubalaena australis) on their nursery ground at Península
Valdés, Argentina, and in their long-range movements. The Journal of Cetacean
Research and Management, (Special Issue), 2: 133-143.
Stewart, R. & B. Todd. 2001. A note on observations of southern right whales at
Campbell Island, New Zealand. The Journal of Cetacean Research and
Management, (Special Issue), 2: 117-120.
Thomas P. O. & S. M. Taber 1984 Mother-infant interaction and behavioural
development in southern right whales, Eubalaena australis. Behaviour 88:42-60.

25
Tormosov, D. D., Y. A. Mikhalev, P. B. Best, V. A. Zemsky, K. Sekiguchi & R. L.
Brownell Jr. 1998. Soviet catches of southern right whales, Eubalaena australis,
1951-1971; biological data and conservation implications. Biol. Conserv. 86 (2):
185-197.
IUCN, 2003. 2003 IUCN Red list of threatened specie. www.redlist.org. Downloaded on
12 October 2004.
Whitehead, H., R. Payne & M. Payne. 1986. Populations estimate for the right whale off
Península Valdés, Argentina, 1971 – 76. Reports of the International Whaling
Commission. (Special Issue) 10: 169- 71.

26