BELUGA IMPORT PROJECT

1

CONTENTS

GEORGIA AQUARIUM – BELUGA IMPORT PROJECT

FACING EXTINCTION 7 In less than 40 years, beluga whales will be extinct in North American aquariums – here’s what we can do

SEARCHING THE GLOBE 8 In order to sustain the North American population, we began looking for options worldwide

POPULATION STUDY 10 A five-year population study was commissioned to ensure that this project would have no negative impact

UTRISH MARINE STATION 11 After reviewing many inadequate Russian facilities, an appropriate temporary facility was found

THE PERMIT PROCESS 12 Georgia Aquarium then applied for the permit – and what should have been months turned into years

DIFFICULT DECISIONS 13 After the permit denial, we were tasked with a series of decisions for the future of beluga whales

UNCERTAIN FUTURE 14 Beluga whales in North America now face a future with no clear outcome

CONSERVATION 15 See how we have committed to this unique species – and always will

EXPERT BIOS 17 Biographies of our leading beluga whale and zoological experts

SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS ON MARINE MAMMAL RELEASE 36 Analysis from our Chief Veterinary Officer on the realities of whale and dolphin release

RESPONSES TO ROAST BEEF PRODUCTIONS 42 Read the entire correspondence between Georgia Aquarium and the filmmakers

A flash drive has been provided for you. On this drive you will find:

Photos and video taken by Georgia Aquarium zoological team while at Utrish Marine Station

Photos and video of Georgia Aquarium animal care teams and beluga whales

A digital version of this media kit

A link to belugaimportproject.org – a website completely dedicated to this project

About belugaimportproject.org

This site is dedicated solely to detailing the complexities of our beluga import project in a format that’s

easy to understand. Here you will find videos, photos, and information on Georgia Aquarium and its 12-

year commitment to this project and beluga whales.

2

GEORGIA AQUARIUM

BELUGA IMPORT PROJECT – OVERVIEW

The population of beluga whales in accredited North American zoological facilities is dwindling. Today,

more than 23 million guests and more than one million students have been inspired by beluga whales at

Georgia Aquarium in its ten years. Georgia Aquarium’s commitment to this majestic species has been

ongoing prior to its opening in 2005. When faced with the reality that millions of people may never have

the opportunity to witness these unique Arctic mammals, ever, in North America – Georgia Aquarium

acted.

Georgia Aquarium’s mission for the beluga import project was to ensure a sustainable population of

beluga whales in accredited North American facilities. Maintaining a healthy population of belugas in

human care is essential to this goal and serves to help the conservation of beluga whales worldwide.

This required adding new whales to the current population in human care to increase the number and

the genetic diversity.

Throughout this guide you will have the opportunity to follow along the entire 12-year process. From

studying the remote region of Far East Russia, applying for the import permit, leading into the years the

permit decision-making languished in court. You will land at the permit denial and the difficult decisions

that followed. Throughout the entire

process we believed we acted morally,

ethically, and acted in the best interest

of these whales.

In the past few weeks we have been

made aware of a crowd-funded film

that casts severe allegations at Georgia

Aquarium and its beluga import project.

While we have not been able to view

the film, we believe the film to have a

host of inaccuracies. We will continue

to address these allegations head-on.

Although these beluga whales will never

come to the U.S. to receive the highest standard of care anywhere in the world, Georgia Aquarium

remains committed to this species. As we look into the uncertain future of beluga whales not only in

North America, but across the globe, Georgia Aquarium continues to protect beluga populations

through research, education, and inspiring millions of people to care for them.

Georgia Aquarium, its partners, and its beluga whale experts committed over 12 years to this project to

sustain a population of beluga whales that needs our help. This guide will detail the complexities of the

project that is so important to us – this is our story.

3

Beluga Import Project Timeline

2004: Georgia Aquarium searches zoological facilities worldwide for beluga whales to acquire. Search concludes no whales available with one exception. Two male whales, originally sourced in Russia, at a facility under a roller coaster in Mexico City, were in guarded condition and in need of rescue. Additionally, a zoological expert from Georgia Aquarium was sent to eastern Russia, Chkalov Island, to explore potential for acquisition of whales from a company that sources whales from the Sea of Okhotsk. Results of the trip indicated collection from this population could be possible but a population abundance study would be necessary to ensure compliance with Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA).

2005: Georgia Aquarium rescues two beluga whales from Mexico City and acquires three female whales on breeding loan from a partner facility. Evaluation of the existing collection at Georgia Aquarium and at accredited partner facilities in North America indicates the population of whales will not sustain due to low number of animals and lack of genetic diversity.

2007: Georgia Aquarium provides funding along with SeaWorld, Ocean Park Corp. of Hong Kong; Mystic Aquarium in Mystic, Conn.; and Kamogawa Sea World of Japan for scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution to conduct a comprehensive population abundance and genetics study of the population of beluga whales in the Western Sea of Okhotsk (in the Sakhalin-Amur region of far East Russia). A second Georgia Aquarium zoological expert was sent to the far east of Russia, Chkalov Island to observe collection and release of whales for the beluga population abundance and satellite tagging study. The official confirms the process and techniques witnessed were similar to the methods used by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/Fisheries and other researchers and agencies during cetacean tagging and health assessments; methods that are common in wildlife biology and determined to be humane (i.e. required Institutional Animal Care and Use review of protocols as regulated by the U.S. Animal Welfare Act).

2008: Georgia Aquarium continues funding along with SeaWorld, Ocean Park Corp. of Hong Kong; Mystic Aquarium in Mystic, Conn.; and Kamogawa Sea World of Japan for an independent population abundance and genetics study of beluga whales in the Western Sea of Okhotsk.

2009: Georgia Aquarium begins dialogue with NOAA Fisheries permits division regarding the draft of an import permit to acquire beluga whales from Russia. NOAA encourages Georgia Aquarium to apply to import an appropriate number of whales to achieve a sustainable population in human care in North America. This approach would mitigate the need to import beluga whales in the future.

4

2010: A third Georgia Aquarium zoological expert was sent to Chkalov Island in the Russian far east, to observe beluga whale collection and release of whales for beluga tagging and population abundance study. The official also confirms the process and techniques witnessed were similar to the methods used by NOAA Fisheries and other researchers and agencies during cetacean tagging and health assessments; methods that are common in wildlife biology and determined to be humane. The Russian Academy of Sciences A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution concludes five years of population abundance research on the wild population of beluga whales in the Western Sea of Okhotsk. The research concludes that this population of belugas is stable and that acquiring a limited number from this population will have no negative impact on its sustainability. Georgia Aquarium informs Russians of intent to import 18 whales so animals can be identified for Georgia Aquarium’s import permit application. Georgia Aquarium establishes partnership with a zoological park in Asia, Ocean Park Hong Kong, and develops plan to move whales identified for import permit to contemporary facilities at that park while waiting for permit approval.

2011: The highly respected, International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), formed an independent scientific review panel, led by the Chair of the IUCN Species Specialists Group for Cetaceans, to assess the sustainability of live capture removals of beluga whales from Sakhalin-Amur region of the Sea of Okhotsk. The assessment was peer-reviewed and validated the removal of the whales would have no detrimental impact on this beluga whale population. IUCN’s assessment is later published and made available to the public. Georgia Aquarium and others are all listed as participants in the study. Georgia Aquarium prepares to move the whales identified for import to a contemporary facility at Ocean Park Hong Kong. Days before transport, Ocean Park Hong Kong backs out of the project due to pressure from the animal extremist community. With this change in plans, Georgia Aquarium invests in infrastructure at Utrish Marine Station to establish appropriate animal management options for the Russian team to care for the whales during the permit application review process. This investment included building larger pools, food, and animal care staff, veterinary medicine and supplies and our zoological experts and veterinarians visiting the station. Additionally, Georgia Aquarium executes contract agreement for the Russians to provide care for the whales while they are managed at the Utrish Marine Station and establishes routine schedule of Georgia Aquarium officials to visit Utrish Marine Station to monitor well-being of animals and provide feedback to Russian team.

2012: Georgia Aquarium filed a permit application with NOAA Fisheries to import to the United States 18 beluga whales that had previously been collected from the Sea of Okhotsk in 2006, 2010 and 2011.

5

Georgia Aquarium takes part in a hearing that allowed public comment on the import permit application. More than 15 scientific, academic, conservation, and animal welfare experts speak to support Georgia Aquarium’s permit request.

2013: Despite already completing its extensive permit application review process, issuing an environmental assessment report and drafting the approval letter for the permit, NOAA Fisheries suddenly changed direction and denied the Aquarium’s permit application. Georgia Aquarium reviews the denial letter and disagrees with NOAA’s reason for denying the permit and files a complaint in a U.S District Court in Georgia against NOAA Fisheries and the Department of Commerce seeking to overturn the permit denial. Taking the decision to court was the only option for the Aquarium.

Summer 2013: The first of four unfortunate losses occurs. Cause of death is not fully understood because necropsies were not conducted and Georgia Aquarium staff was not present.

August 2014: Georgia Aquarium files a motion to supplement the record, asking the court to require the release of more than 20 documents deliberately withheld by NOAA Fisheries from consideration by the court. These records pertain to NOAA Fisheries’ early indications to approve the import, the preparation of the import and a complete environmental assessment showing that issuance of the permit complied with the law. In addition, the records pertain to any meetings and discussions that then led to the sudden reversal and denial of the permit, and NOAA’s research papers that showed their population counting methods were arbitrary, and have never been used before or since.

November 2014: The second of four unfortunate losses occurs. Cause of death is not fully understood because necropsies were not conducted and Georgia Aquarium staff was not present.

December 2014: The motion to supplement the record is denied. Georgia Aquarium files a motion with the court arguing that -- based on the facts before NOAA -- their permit denial was arbitrary, capricious and not in accordance with law. Georgia Aquarium asks the judge to invalidate the permit denial and to order that the permit to import the whales be issued.

Summer 2015: The final two of four unfortunate losses occurs. Cause of death is not fully understood because necropsies were not conducted and Georgia Aquarium staff was not present.

August 14, 2015: Georgia Aquarium participates in oral arguments to ask the court to uphold the MMPA and its strong support of zoological institutions, and order issuance of a permit to bring the belugas into the U.S. as soon as possible.

6

September 2015: SeaWorld backs out of beluga import project publically and will no longer take any of the beluga whales destined for U.S. accredited facilities upon pending NOAA permit approval.

September 28, 2015: The U.S District Court issues a 100-page document denying the permit application and giving Georgia Aquarium 60 days to decide if they want to appeal that decision.

November 2015: Out of concern for the welfare of the animals, Georgia Aquarium makes the difficult decision not to appeal the court decision

April 2016: Although Georgia Aquarium had no legal obligation to continue sending support or supplies after the permit decision, the Aquarium continued to send funds for veterinary supplies and food in its last six months. The Aquarium sent support through the end of April of 2016.

7

Facing Extinction

Beluga whales in accredited zoological facilities are ambassadors for their species. These whales live in

the Arctic; it is cold, remote and expensive to travel to. Seeing beluga whales in person, up close brings

marine mammals and conservation education to life for millions of people. These individuals inspire

people to care about environmental concerns and become involved in the preservation of the natural

world.

Currently in the U.S., there are fewer than 30 beluga whales in accredited facilities.

These whales are aging, and the population as a whole exhibits poor genetic diversity. In as little as 40

years, there will be no beluga whales in human care in North America. This effectively means that the

only belugas millions of children will ever see will be on television or computer screens.

Seeing living beluga whales in person has the potential to inspire a generation of people to care about

the natural world – and it is this end that aquariums strive to achieve.

Without adding new beluga whales to the mix, the dwindling population in human care will become

extinct.

Georgia Aquarium is deeply committed to both the conservation of beluga whales and providing future

generations with the inspiring, educational opportunities that create a culture of preservation.

8

Searching the Globe

Even prior to opening in 2005, Georgia Aquarium has been committed to provide engaging and

transformative experiences that evoke conservation for species. Beluga whales are one such species

that need our help more than ever with less than 30 whales in accredited U.S. facilities. In order to

increase the number of beluga whales in North America, Georgia Aquarium started the process of

searching for unrelated, genetically diverse beluga whales.

Mexico City

In our efforts to bolster the dwindling population of

beluga whales in accredited North American facilities,

Georgia Aquarium began to research other countries

and their resident beluga whales. This search first led

us to an amusement park in Mexico City, where two

mature beluga whales were held in a habitat beneath a

roller coaster. At this point, the search became a

rescue project. Knowing full well one of the Mexican

beluga whales was in ill health, Georgia Aquarium

transferred them to Atlanta in 2005 to provide better

care. Unfortunately, due to their age and already

compromised physical condition, they did not live long.

Why Russia?

Looking at the different populations of beluga whales residing

in the Arctic, it seemed most reasonable to seek out areas that had a robust number of whales, were

accessible from a climatology perspective and had historical successes by collectors. Using these

parameters, Georgia Aquarium, in collaboration with SeaWorld, Ocean Park Corp. of Hong Kong; Mystic

Aquarium in Mystic, Conn.; and Kamogawa Sea World of Japan, chose to begin a population abundance

study in Russia. The search continued in Eastern Russia, and Georgia Aquarium sent zoological experts to

Chkalov Island where beluga whales are being acquired from the Sea of Okhotsk for marine parks and

facilities in Asia. It is important to note that Russia allows an annual catch quota of whales based on the

abundance. It was here that our zoological experts also witnessed collection methodologies used by the

teams in Russia and these were consistent with those used by NOAA in beluga whale health

assessments.

The Russian Population of Beluga Whales

Russia has more than one stock (population) of beluga whales residing in different bodies of water. The

population from which the animals were selected was defined as robust by scientific review. This

population will continue to grow, even with the removal of individuals.

Before applying for the permit to import these animals, Georgia Aquarium partnered with SeaWorld,

Ocean Park Corp. of Hong Kong; Mystic Aquarium in Mystic, Conn.; and Kamogawa Sea World of Japan

to conduct an extensive five-year research project on the population abundance and genetic makeup of

beluga whales inhabiting the Western Sea of Okhotsk in Russia.

The exhibit beneath a roller coaster in

Mexico City.

9

This research was peer-reviewed and validated in 2011 by the International Union for Conservation of

Nature (IUCN), which concluded that the acquisition of these belugas would have no detrimental impact

on the existing population.

This was a very important and necessary milestone in the project.

10

Beluga Whale Population Assessment (2007-2012)

Before even applying for a permit to import beluga whales from Russia, Georgia Aquarium wanted to

ensure that the population that collections were occurring was stable, and there would be no

detrimental impact.

To provide accurate and comprehensive information regarding this region of the world that had not

been extensively studied before, Georgia Aquarium, in collaboration with SeaWorld, Ocean Park Corp. of

Hong Kong; Mystic Aquarium in Mystic, Conn.; and Kamogawa Sea World of Japan, commissioned a five-

year population study of the Sea of Okhotsk. Funding was provided for scientists from the Russian

Academy of Sciences A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution to conduct this population

abundance and genetic study of the beluga whales in the Western Sea of Okhotsk in the Sakhalin-Amur

region of Far East Russia.

Ensuring Humane Handling of Animals During Study

Zoological experts from Georgia Aquarium were sent to Chkalov Island in Eastern Russia to observe

collection and release of beluga whales as part of the population abundance and satellite tagging study.

The process and techniques witnessed were similar to the methods used by the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/Fisheries and other agencies during cetacean field research studied

in North America.

Study Concludes Population is Stable

After five years of study, the Russian Academy of Sciences A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and

Evolution concluded the population of beluga whales in the Sea of Okhotsk was stable. Thus, acquiring a

limited number from the population would have no negative impact on its sustainability.

International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Validates Study

Another important step in this process was having the entire study peer-reviewed. The internationally-

recognized authority of wildlife conservation, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature

(IUCN), formed an independent scientific review panel. This was led by the Chair of the IUCN Species

Specialists Group for Cetaceans, all to peer-review this extensive and comprehensive research.

Once the research was reviewed, the IUCN panel concluded the acquisition of 18 beluga whales from

the Sea of Okhotsk would have no detrimental impact on the existing population.

Georgia Aquarium then set out to apply for an import permit with NOAA Fisheries to bring the beluga

whales to the U.S.

11

Utrish Marine Station

Following the results of the Sea of Okhotsk population abundance study, we felt confident to move

forward with plans to acquire 18 beluga whales, knowing that such an acquisition would have no

detrimental impact on the population. We began working with Utrish Marine Station, located on the

Russian coast of the Black Sea, as a temporary care facility for the whales. The station had a lagoon with

sea pens, a rectangular pool and a

knowledgeable animal care team. The plan

was to house the beluga whales there for a

few months before moving them to more

contemporary facilities at our accredited

partner facility, Ocean Park Hong Kong while

we awaited approval to import them to the

United States.

Georgia Aquarium did not collect these

animals. Georgia Aquarium worked to ensure

that collection methodologies were done with

recognized, professional and humane

standards. Our zoological experts witnessed

collections in Russia as part of the permit

process with NOAA and noted significant similarities between their collection

methodologies and those used in NOAA’s standards during beluga whale

health assessments.

The Aquarium collaborated with Utrish Marine Station to care for the 18 beluga whales identified for

potential importation to the United States, but does not own the animals, nor does it have any influence

related to any other animals managed or cared for at the marine station. There are other marine

mammals there for a variety of purposes and they are kept separate from the beluga whales identified

for import to the U.S. During our visits to the station activities related to other animals housed there

were kept discrete as they involved other affiliates of Utrish unrelated to Georgia Aquarium.

Even though Georgia Aquarium does not own the belugas – and never has - we invested heavily in their

care. Georgia Aquarium invested approximately $6.5 million, not including legal fees, sending members

of our zoological and veterinary teams to Russia an average of twice a year to check on the wellbeing of

the animals and to bring additional material support, such as medical supplies and vitamins.

Although we decided not to appeal our permit denial in 2015, we continued to support UMS with

medical supplies, food, and vitamins for the beluga whales for six months following the project’s end.

One of the pools at Utrish

Marine Station

12

Permit Process

March 2011: The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) peer-reviews and validates

five years of research confirming that the acquisition will have no detrimental impact on the population

of beluga whales in the Sea of Okhotsk.

June 2012: Georgia Aquarium applies for a permit with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA Fisheries) to import beluga whales previously collected from the Sea of Okhotsk

to the United States.

October 2012: Georgia Aquarium participates in a hearing that allows public comment on the import

permit application. More than 15 scientific, academic, conservation and animal welfare experts speak in

favor of Georgia Aquarium’s permit request.

August 2013: Despite already completing its extensive permit application review process, issuing an

environmental assessment report and drafting the permit approval, NOAA Fisheries suddenly changed

course and denied the permit application.

September 2013: Committed to educating the public about this species, Georgia Aquarium files a

complaint in a U.S District Court in Georgia against NOAA Fisheries and the Department of Commerce,

seeking to overturn the permit denial.

August 2014: Georgia Aquarium files a motion to supplement the record, asking the court to require the

release of more than 20 documents deliberately withheld by NOAA Fisheries. These records pertain to

NOAA Fisheries’ original decision to approve the import and a complete environmental assessment

showing that issuance of the permit complied with the law. The records also include accounts of

meetings and discussions that led to the sudden reversal and denial of the permit, and NOAA’s research

showing their population counting methods were arbitrary and have never been used before or since.

December 2014: The motion to supplement the record is denied. Georgia Aquarium files a motion with

the court arguing that -- based on the facts placed before NOAA -- their permit denial was arbitrary,

capricious and not in accordance with the law. Georgia Aquarium asks the judge to invalidate the permit

denial and to order that the permit to import the whales be issued.

August 14, 2015: Georgia Aquarium participates in oral arguments to ask the court to uphold the MMPA

and its strong support of zoological institutions, and order issuance of a permit to bring the belugas into

the U.S. as soon as possible.

September 2015: SeaWorld backs out of beluga import project publically and will no longer take any of

the beluga whales destined for U.S. accredited facilities upon pending NOAA permit approval.

September 28, 2015: The U.S District Court issues a 100-page document denying the permit application

and allowing Georgia Aquarium 60 days to decide whether to appeal that decision.

November 17, 2015: Out of concern for the welfare of the animals, Georgia Aquarium makes the

difficult decision not to appeal the court decision.

April 2016: Georgia Aquarium continued to send infrastructure, veterinary supplies, food, and additional

support even without any legal obligation to do so.

13

Difficult Decisions

Throughout this process, we’ve had to make many difficult decisions, but we’ve always done what’s

right for the animals.

Ocean Park Hong Kong backs out.

Early in the project, within days of the beluga whales being scheduled to transfer from the temporary

facilities at Utrish Marine Station, Ocean Park Hong Kong in Asia backed out of the project due to

extremist pressure.

The decision by them to withdraw from the project meant the beluga whales would now be staying at

Utrish much longer than anticipated. With this change in plans, and the animals’ wellbeing the highest

priority, Georgia Aquarium invested approximately $6.5 million, not including legal fees, providing for

their care, including building larger pools, food and animal care staff, veterinary medicine and supplies,

and our zoological experts and veterinarians visiting the station an average of twice a year to monitor

their care, and provide feedback to the Russian team. We maintained regular contact with Russian team

throughout the process.

If we didn’t fight to bring them to the U.S. where they would receive the highest standard of care,

their fate would be uncertain.

NOAA Fisheries violated their longstanding interpretation of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which

specifically stresses the importance of caring for animals at zoos and aquariums in order to not only

advance science, but to encourage conservation and awareness in the millions of guests who visit these

organizations. We feel strongly we were doing what was right and lawful. However, at each point in the

legal process, and as we fought their wrongful decision we had to determine whether or not to continue

with our appeal. Especially as the animals were being kept longer in what was supposed to only be a

temporary location, we were at a crossroads.

Concern for the animals’ welfare in Russia

The animals’ welfare has always been at the forefront of our minds, and as the legal battle dragged on,

we learned of some unfortunate health and wellness issues affecting a few of the beluga whales

selected for potential import to the U.S. Between 2013 and 2015, there were four unfortunate losses

from a variety of causes that are not fully understood because necropsies were not conducted and our

staff was not present. We believe the health of a couple of these animals were compromised by long

term management of the animals at a temporary facility. The Russian team does not have the

contemporary resources we have at accredited facilities which allow for timely response to health issues

as well as easy separation of animals for medical purposes.

The belugas need a permanent home in quality facilities

After two years of court deliberation, and although we felt strongly we were in the right, we realized any

further legal action would be fruitless. It wasn’t in the best interest of the 15 remaining animals to stay

at the Russian facility for another year or more of litigation. We made the difficult choice to not appeal

the decision, and we accepted the fact that these belugas will never be allowed to live within an

accredited facility here in the United States. But it now means these animals have an uncertain future.

14

An Uncertain Future for the Belugas in Russia

The beluga whales once destined for accredited North American aquariums and marine parks must now

find homes at zoological institutions in other parts of the world. Many will likely end up in areas where

animal care standards are not always as high as those found in the United States. While this is not ideal,

it is the best option still available. But we are doing everything possible to advocate for their relocation

to contemporary, quality facilities where their care and welfare is a priority.

Georgia Aquarium does not own the animals

that reside at Utrish Marine Station, nor have

any economic gain or control over where they

go. But we are doing everything possible to

advocate for their relocation to contemporary,

quality facilities where their care and welfare

is a priority.

The welfare of these animals has been our

utmost priority throughout this entire process.

It is why we spent approximately $6.5 million,

not including legal fees, to care for and support

these animals.

An Uncertain Future for Belugas in North America and Around the World

There are now fewer than 30 beluga whales left in accredited U.S. zoological facilities, and it is

estimated that by 2050 there may not be any. Without adding to this group of whales, the days of

belugas in human care are numbered. Your children and grandchildren may never have a chance to see

these magnificent animals up close. Belugas represent the Arctic – a place most of us will never get to

see, and an area of the world that is drastically changing as the polar icecap melts. Without belugas in

human care to serve as ambassadors for their species, future generations will not have the chance to

create powerful, personal connections with these animals. These connections are critical to inspiring

people to take action toward the preservation of this species and their natural environment.

Beluga whales in human care also provide us many research opportunities that would be impossible to

pursue with belugas in their natural environment. What we learn from belugas in our care helps inform

conservation decisions for beluga whales worldwide. Maintaining a population of belugas in accredited

zoos and aquariums is essential to the conservation of the species in its natural habitat. Georgia

Aquarium will continue our commitment to ensuring a sustainable population of beluga whales in

accredited North American aquariums and marine parks and to protecting and preserving this species

for generations to come.

15

Conservation

The conservation of beluga whales, and all animals, is at the core of Georgia Aquarium’s mission and passion. As a global leader in marine research and conservation, we remain steadfast in our commitment to contribute to wildlife sustainability through:

- Education initiatives inspiring others to conserve the species and its natural habitat - Participating in cooperative breeding and research programs among North America’s accredited

zoological institutions, applying known and successful practices to build a sustainable population

- Conservation and research of animals in human care and their natural environment - Sharing our knowledge and experiences with the international scientific and conservation

community We have supported and funded more than 100 marine conservation programs in ten years, including animal health assessments. Two primary marine mammal conservation programs in which Georgia Aquarium participates include Bristol Bay Beluga Project in Alaska and the Health and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) for Atlantic bottlenose dolphins in Florida. Bristol Bay Beluga Project By studying and observing beluga whales in human care, we are able to create baseline indicators to understand issues threatening beluga whales in the wild. Our animal care team’s daily interaction with our resident beluga whales helps researchers better understand how to approach and interact with whales in the ocean in a controlled way. Our daily work with these animals at the Aquarium makes

assessing, and ultimately helping, wild populations possible. Since 2008, Georgia Aquarium has participated in a collaborative study assessing the health of beluga whales in Bristol Bay, Alaska, where the beluga population faces significant threats to their natural environment. We have gained insight into the effects of underwater sound levels on belugas, how they respond to increasing pathogens and changing water temperatures in the wild, and nutritional needs of belugas that face increasing challenges for food sources.

16

Through the combination of the Bristol Bay Beluga Project and our studies in human care, we provide crucial information to researchers and the zoological community. Our goal is to use this vital information gathered from the Bristol Bay Beluga Project to help identify ways to potentially alleviate threats facing the critically endangered beluga whale population of nearby Cook Inlet in Alaska. Our work doesn’t just end with helping one geographic population – we’re marine mammal advocates; our continued work ensures the protection of beluga whale populations globally. HERA for Atlantic Bottlenose Dolphins Initiated by Georgia Aquarium in 2003, HERA is a comprehensive program that assesses and studies potential environmental and human-induced stressors that may affect the health and long-term viability of bottlenose dolphin populations. This groundbreaking research takes place in the Indian Lagoon River in Florida and the coastal waters of South Carolina, where researchers can gain valuable information concerning zoonotic diseases, contaminant issues and other factors such as antibiotic-resistant bacteria that have huge implications for human health. HERA plays an important role in understanding

the health of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins and the

possible threats facing the lagoon ecosystem.

Applying our expert animal and veterinary care at

the Aquarium into the field helps maximize the

research collected from dolphin health

assessments and ultimately ensure that these

magnificent marine mammals thrive in their

natural environment.

17

GEORGIA AQUARIUM

EXPERT BIOS AND RESEARCH BIBLIOGRAPHIES

DR. GREGORY BOSSART, V.M.D, PH.D., SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, CHIEF VETERINARY OFFICER

ERIC GAGLIONE, VICE PRESIDENT OF ZOOLOGICAL OPERATIONS

18

Dr. Gregory Bossart, V.M.D., Ph.D.

Senior Vice President, Chief Veterinary Officer, Georgia Aquarium

Dr. Gregory Bossart has spent the last 30 years working in clinical domestic, marine mammal and avian

medicine and wildlife pathology on a national and international basis. He has over 135 peer-reviewed

scientific publications focused primarily on the pathologic basis of disease in wild animals.

Dr. Bossart received his doctorate in veterinary medicine from the University of Pennsylvania. He was a

comparative pathology resident and National Institutes of Health fellow in the Department of Pathology

at the University of Miami School of Medicine. In 1995, he completed his Ph.D. in immunology at Florida

International University. He has been in private veterinary practice and is a clinical veterinary consultant

at facilities in the United States, Latin America and Asia.

Presently, Dr. Bossart is Senior Vice President and Chief Veterinary Officer at Georgia Aquarium in

Atlanta, Georgia where he oversees the animal care, research and conservation programs. He is an

Adjunct Professor in the Department of Pathology at the University Of Miami School Of Medicine,

Adjunct Professor in the Department of Pathology at the University Of Georgia College Of Veterinary

Medicine, Research Professor at Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute at Florida Atlantic University

and on the graduate faculty at the Medical University of South Carolina. His recently published research

has documented re-surging and emerging diseases in manatees, whales, dolphins, and birds. He has

helped characterize the first viral disease in manatees and was responsible for developing the first

immunohistochemical technique for diagnosing red tide poisoning in marine mammals and birds. He is

particularly interested in the application of aquatic species as sentinels for the effects of global climate

change, ecosystem and human health.

Dr. Bossart has been presented multiple awards and accolades for his work. Examples of Dr. Bossart’s

research can be found in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, Veterinary

Pathology, Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, Veterinary Record, Journal of Avian Medicine and

Surgery, Toxicologic Pathology, Marine Mammal Science, Experimental and Molecular Pathology,

Aquatic Mammals, Florida Scientist, Journal of Raptor Research, Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic

Investigation, Oceanography, Journal of Wildlife Diseases, Environmental Science & Technology, Journal

of Parasitology, Aquatic Toxicology and Veterinary Microbiology and Nature.

19

Dr. Gregory Bossart V.M.D., Ph.D.

Georgia Aquarium Publications and Abstracts 2006-Present

2007

1. Bossart GD, Hansen L, Goldstein J, Kilpatrick D, Bechdel S, Howells E, Kroell K, de Sieyes M,

Stolen M, Noke Durden W, Reif J, Defran R, and McCulloch S. Pathological findings in a rare mass

stranding of melon-headed whales (Peponcephala electra) in Florida. Aquatic Mammals. 33(2):

235-240, 2007.

2. Bossart GD, Hensley G, Goldstein J, Kroell K, Manire C, Defran R, and Reif J. Cardiomyopathy and

myocardial degeneration in stranded pygmy (Kogia breviceps) and dwarf sperm (Kogia sima)

whales. Aquatic Mammals. 33(2): 214-222, 2007.

2008

3. Adams J, Houde M, Muir D, Speakmand T, Bossart GD, Fair PA. Land use and the spatial

distribution of perfluoroalkyl compounds as measured in the plasma of bottlenose dolphins

(Tursiops truncatus). Marine Environmental Research. 66: 430-437, 2008.

4. Bossart GD, Romano TA, Peden-Adams MM, Rice CD, Fair PA, Goldstein JD, Cammen K, and Reif

JS. Hematological, biochemical and immunological findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins

(Tursiops truncatus) with orogenital papillomas. Aquatic Mammals. 34(2): 166-177, 2008.

5. Fayer R, Fair PA, Bossart GD, Santin M. Examination of naturally exposed bottlenose dolphins

(Tursiops truncatus) for microsporidia, Cryptosporidium, and Giardia. Journal of Parasitology.

94(1): 143-147, 2008.

6. Mazzoil M, Reif JS, Youngbluth M, Murdoch EM, Bechdel SE, Howells E, McColluch SD, Hansen

LJ, Bossart GD. Home Ranges of Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the Indian River

Lagoon, Fl. EcoHealth. 5: 278-288, 2008.

7. Mazzoil MS, Kilpatrick DS, Murdoch ME, Mase-Guthrie B, Odell DK, Bossart GD. Radio-tracking

and survivorship of two rehabilitated bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the Indian

River Lagoon. Aquatic Mammals. 34(1): 54-64, 2008.

8. Montie EW, Fair PA, Bossart GD, Mitchum GB, Houde M, Muir DCG, Letcher RJ, McFee WE,

Starczak VR, Stegeman JJ, Hahn ME. Cytochrome P4501A1 expression, polychlorinated biphenyls

and hydroxylated metabolites, and adipocyte sixe of bottlenose dolphins from the southeast

United States. Aquatic Toxicology. 86: 397-412, 2008.

9. Murdoch ME, Reif JS, Mazzoil M, McCulloch SD, Fair PA, Bossart GD. Lobomycosis in bottlenose

dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from the Indian River Lagoon, Florida: Estimation of prevalence,

temporal trends, and spatial distribution. EcoHealth. 5: 289-297, 2008.

10. Rector A, Stevens H, Lacave G, Lemey P, Mostmans S, Salbany A, Vos M, Van Doorslaer K, Ghim

SJ, Rehtanz M, Bossart GD, Jenson AB, Van Ranst M. Genomic characterization of novel dolphin

papillomaviruses provides indications for recombination within the Papillomavairidae. Virology.

378: 151-161, 2008.

20

11. Rehtanz M, Bossart GD, Doescher B, Rector A, Van Ranst M, Fair P, Jenson AB, Ghim S.

Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) papillomaviruses: Vaccine antigen candidates and

screening test development. Veterinary Microbiology. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2008.06.017, 2008.

12. Reif JS, Fair PA, Adams J, Joseph B, Kilpatrick DS, Sanchez R, Goldstein JD, Townsend FI,

McCulloch SD, Mazzoil M, Zolman ES, Hansen LJ, Bossart GD. Evaluation and comparison of the

health status of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins from the Indian River Lagoon, Florida and

Charleston, South Carolina. Journal of the American Veterinary Association. 233: 299-307, 2008.

13. Stavros HCW, Bossart GD, Hulsey TC, Fair PA. Trace element concentrations in blood of free-

ranging bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus): influence of age, sex and location. Marine

Pollution Bulletin. 56: 348-379, 2008.

2009

14. Bechdel SE, Mazzoil MS, Murdoch ME, Howells EM, Reif JS, McCulloch SD, Schaefer AM, Bossart

GD. Prevalence and impacts of motorized vessels on bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in

the Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Aquatic Mammals. 35: 367-377, 2009.

15. Bossart GD. Emerging diseases in marine mammals (Book Chapter). McGraw-Hill Yearbook of

Science and Technology, McGraw-Hill Co., New York. pp: 103-105, 2009.

16. Fair PA, Lee HB, Adams J, Darling C, Pacepavicius MA, Bossart GD, Henry N, Muir D. Occurrence

of triclosan in plasma of wild Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and their

environment. Environmental Pollution. 157: 2248-2254, 2009.

17. Fire SE, Wang Z, Leighfield TA, Morton SL, McFee WE, McLellan WA, Litaker RW, Tester PA, Hohn

AA, Lovewell G, Harms C, Rotstein DS, Barco SG, Costidis A, Sheppard B, Bossart GD, Stolen M,

Durden WN, Van Dolah FW. Domoic acid exposure in pygmy and dwarf sperm whales (Kogia

spp) from southeastern and mid-Atlantic US waters. Harmful Algae. 8: 658-664, 2009.

18. Houde M, Pacepavicius G, Darling C, Fair PA, Alaee M, Bossart GD, Solomon KR, Letcher RJ,

Bergman A, Marsh G, Muir DCG. Polybrominated diphenyl ethers and their hydroxylated analogs

in plasma of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops turncatus) from the United States east coast.

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 28(10): 2061-2068, 2009.

19. Howells EM, Reif JS, Bechdel SE, Murdoch ME, Bossart GD, McCulloch SD, Mazzoil, MS. A novel

case of non-offspring adoption in a free-ranging Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)

inhabiting the Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Aquatic Mammals. 35 (1): 43-47, 2009.

20. Johnson WR, Tarralba M, Fair PA, Bossart GD, Nelson K, Morris PJ. Novel diversity of bacterial

communities associated with bottlenose dolphin upper respiratory tracts. Environmental

Microbiology Reports. 1(6): 55-562, 2009.

21. Mignucci-Giannoni AA, Rosario-Delestre RJ, Alsina-Guerreron MM, Falcón-Matos L, Guzmán-

Ramírez L, Williams EH, Bossart GD, Reidenberg JS. Asphyxiation in a bottlenose dolphin

(Tursiops truncatus) from Puerto Rico due to choking on a black margate (Anisotremus

surinamensis). Aquatic Mammals 35(1): 48-54, 2009.

21

22. Mollenhauer MAM, Carter BJ, Peden-Adams MM, Bossart GD, Fair PA. Gene expression changes

in bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) skin cells following exposure to methylmercury

(MeHg) or perfluorrooctane sulfonate (PFOS). Aquatic Toxicology. 91: 10-18, 2009.

23. Rehtanz M, Bossart GD, Doescher B, Rector A, Van Rast M, Fair PA, Jenson AB, Ghim SJ.

Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) papillomaviruses: Vaccine antigen candidates and

screening test development. Veterinary Microbiology. 133: 43-53, 2009.

24. Reif JS, Peden-Adams MM, Romano TA, Rice CD, Fair PA, Bossart GD. Immune dysfunction in

Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) with lobomycosis . Medical Mycology. 47: 125-

135, 2009.

25. Schaefer AM, Reif JS, Goldstein JD, Ryan CN, Fair PA, Bossart GD. Serological evidence of

exposure to selected pathogens in free-ranging Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)

from the Indian River Lagoon, Florida and Charleston, South Carolina. Aquatic Mammals. 35:

163-170, 2009.

26. Schaefer, AM, Goldstein JD, Reif JS, Fair PA, Bossart GD, Antibiotic-resistant organisms cultured

from Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) inhabiting estuarine waters of Charleston

SC and Indian River Lagoon, Fl. EcoHealth. 6: 33-41, 2009.

27. Schwacke LH, Hall AJ, Townsend FI, Wells RS, Hansen LJ, Hohn AA, Bossart GD, Fair PA, Rowles

TK. Hematologic and serum biochemical reference intervals for free-ranging bottlenose dolphins

(Tursiops truncatus) and variation in the distributions of clinicopathologic values related to

geographic sampling site. American Journal of Veterinary Research. 70(8): 973-985, 2009.

2010

28. Bossart GD, Reif JS, Schaefer AM, Goldstein J, Fair PA, Saliki JT. Morbillivirus infection in free-

ranging Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from the southeastern United States:

Seroepidemiologic and pathologic evidence of subclinical infection. Veterinary Microbiology

143: 160-166, 2010.

29. Fair P, Adams J, Mitchum G, Hulsey T, Reif J, Houde M, Muir D, Wirth E, Wetzel D, Zolman E,

McFee W, Bossart GD. Contaminant blubber burdens in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops

truncatus) from two southeastern US estuarine areas: Concentrations and patterns of PCBs,

pesticides, PBDEs, PFCs, and PAHs. Science of the Total Environment. 408: 1577-1597, 2010.

30. Meegan J, Field C, Sidor I, Romano T, Casinghino S, Smith CR, Kashinsky L, Fair PA, Bossart GD,

Wells R, Dunn JL. Development, validation, and utilization of a competitive enzyme-linked

immunosorbent assay for the detection of antibodies against Brucella species in marine

mammals. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 22: 856-862, 2010.

31. Rehtanz M, Ghim SJ, McFee W, Doescher B, Lacave G, Fair PA, Reif JS, Bossart GD, Jenson AB.

Papillomaviruses antibody prevalence in free-ranging and captive bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops

truncatus). Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 46(1): 136-145, 2010.

32. Staggs L, St. Leger J, Bossart GD, Townsend Jr. FI, Hicks C, Rinaldi M. A novel case of Fusarium

oxysporum infection in an Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Journal of Zoo and

Wildlife Medicine. 41(2): 287-290, 2010.

22

2011

33. Bossart GD, Romano T, Peden-Adams M, Schaefer A, McCulloch S, Goldstein J, Rice C, Saliki J,

Fair P, Reif JS. Clinicoimmunopathologic findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops

truncatus) with positive morbillivirus titers. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 97: 103–112, 2011.

34. Bossart, GD. Marine mammals as sentinel species for oceans and human health. Veterinary

Pathology. 48(3): 676-690, 2011.

35. Dona MG, Rehnatz M, Adimey NM, Bossart GD, Jenson AB, Bnde RK, Ghim SJ. Seroepidemiology

of TmPV1 infection in captive and wild Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris).

Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 47(3): 673-684, 2011.

36. Mazzoil M, Murdoch E, Reif JS, Bechdel SE, Howells E, De Sieyes M, Lawrence C, Bossart GD,

McCulloch SD. Site fidelity and movement of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) on

Florida’s east coast: Atlantic Ocean and Indian River Lagoon estuary. Florida Scientist. 74(1): 25-

37, 2011.

37. Morris PJ, Johnson WR, Pisani J, Bossart GD, Adams J, Reif JS, Fair PA. Isolation of culturable

microorganisms from free-ranging bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from the

southeastern United States. Veterinary Microbiology. 148: 440-447, 2011.

38. Murdoch ME, Mazzoil M, McCulloch S, Bechdel S, O’Corry-Crowe G, Bossart GD, Reif JS,

Lacaziosis in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) along the coastal Atlantic Ocean, Florida

USA. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 92: 69-73, 2011.

39. Schaefer AM, Stavros HCW, Bossart GD, Fair PA, Goldstein JD, Reif JS. Association between

mercury and hepatic, renal, endocrine, and hematological parameters in Atlantic bottlenose

dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) along the eastern coast of Florida and South Carolina. Archives of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 61: 688-695, 2011.

40. Stavros HCW, Stolen M, Durden WN, McFee W, Bossart GD, Fair PA. Correlation and

toxicological inference of trace elements in tissues from stranded and free-ranging bottlenose

dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Chemosphere. 82: 1649-1661, 2011.

2012

41. Bonde RK, Mignucci-Giannoni A, Bossart GD. Sirenian Pathology and Mortality Assessment

(Book Chapter). Sirenian Conservation: Issues and Strategies in Developing Countries. (Hines,

Reynolds, Aragones, Mignucci-Giannoni, Marmontel, eds.). University Press of Florida,

Gainesville, Florida. pp: 148-156, 2012.

42. Bossart GD, Arheart K, Hunt M, Clauss T, Leppert L, Roberts K, McCulloch S, Goldstein JD,

Gonzalez C, Sweeney J, Stone R, Fair PA, Cray C. Protein electrophoresis of serum from healthy

Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Aquatic Mammals. 38(4): 412-417, 2012.

43. Bossart GD, Mignucci-Giannoni AA, Rivera-Guzman AL, Jimenez-Marrero NM, Camus AC, Bonde

RK, Dubey JP, Reif JS. Disseminated toxoplasmosis in Antillean manatees (Trichechus manatus

manatus) from Puerto Rico. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 101: 139-144, 2012.

23

44. Dove ADM, Leisen J, Zhou M, Byrne JJ, Lim-Hing K, Webb HD, Gelbaum L, Viant, MR, Kubanek J,

Fernandez F. Biomarkers of whale shark health: A metabolomic approach. PLoS ONE. 7(11): 1-

10, 2012.

45. Fair PA, Houde M, Hulsey TC, Bossart GD, Adams J, Balthis L, Muir DCG. Assessment of

perflourinated compounds (PFCs) in plasma of bottlenose dolphins from two southeast US

estuarine areas: Relationship with age, sex and geographic locations. Marine Pollution Bulletin.

64: 66-74, 2012.

46. Fair PA, Stavros HC, Mollenhauer M, DeWitt J, Henry N, Kannan K, Yun SH, Bossart GD, Keil K,

Peden-Adams M. Immune function in female B6C3F1 mice is modulated by DE-71, a commercial

polybrominated diphenyl ether mixture. Journal of Immunotoxicology. 9(1): 96–107, 2012.

47. Goldstein JD, Shaefer AM, McCulloch SD, Fair PA, Bossart GD, Reif JS. Clinicopathologic findings

from Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) with cytologic evidence of gastric

inflammation. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine. 43(4): 730-738, 2012.

48. Mazzaro LM, Johnson SP, Fair PA, Bossart GD, Carlin KP, Jensen ED, Smith CR, Andrews GA,

Chavey PS, Venn-Watson S. Iron Indices in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus).

Comparative Medicine. 62(6): 508-515, 2012.

49. McFee WE, Adams JD, Fair PA, Bossart GD. Age distribution and growth of two Bottlenose

dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) populations from capture-release studies in the southeastern

United States. Aquatic Mammals. 38(1): 17-30, 2012.

50. Rehtanz M, Bossart GD, Fair PA, Reif JS, Ghim SJ, Jenson AB. Papillomaviruses and

herpesviruses: Who is who in genital tumor development of free-ranging Atlantic bottlenose

dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)? Veterinary Microbiology. 160: 297-304, 2012.

2013

51. Bossart GD, Hurley W, Biedenbach G, Denny M, Borkowski R, Goricki C, Searcy E, Roberts K, Reif

J. Pathologic findings in stranded cetaceans from northeastern Florida. Florida Scientist. 76(1):

36-50, 2013.

52. Bergfelt DR, Steinetz BG, Reif JS, Schaefer AM, Bossart GD, Mazzoil MS, Zolman E, Fair PA.

Evaluation of single-sample analysis of progesterone in combination with relaxin for diagnosis of

pregnancy in wild bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Aquatic Mammals. 39(2): 198-206,

2013.

53. Cray C, Arheart KL, Hunt M, Clauss TM, Leppert LL, Roberts K, McCulloch SD, Goldstein JD,

Gonzalez C, Sweeney J, Stone R, Fair PA, Bossart GD. Acute phase protein quantitation in serum

samples from healthy Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Journal of Veterinary

Diagnostic Investigation. 25(1): 107-111, 2013.

54. Hickie BE, Cadieux MA, Riehl KN, Bossart GD, Alava JJ, Fair PA. Modeling PCB-bioaccumulaiton

in the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus): Estimating a dietary threshold concentration.

Environmental Science and Technology. DOI: 10.1021/es403166b, 2013.

55. Lee RF, Bulski K, Adams JD, Peden-Adams M, Bossart GD, King L, Fair PA. DNA strand breaks

(comet assay) in blood lymphocytes from wild bottlenose dolphins. Marine Pollution Bulletin.

DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.06.017, 2013.

24

56. Lewis L, Lamb SV, Schaefer AM, Reif JS, Bossart GD, Fair PA. Influence of collection and storage

conditions of Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) measurements in bottlenose dolphins

(Tursiops truncatus). Aquatic Mammals. 39(4): 324-329, 2013.

57. Reif JS, Schaefer AM, Bossart GD. Lobomycosis: Risk of zoonotic transmission from dolphins to

humans. Vector Borne Zoonotic Diseases. 13(10): 689-693, 2013.

58. Richards VP, Greig TW, Fair PA, McCulloch SD, Politz C, Natoli A, Driscoll CA, Hoelzel AR, David V,

Bossart GD, Lopez JV. Patterns of population structure for inshore bottlenose dolphins along the

eastern United States. Journal of Heredity. 104: 765-778, 2013.

59. Wirth JR, Peden-Adams MM, White ND, Bossart GD, Fair PA. In Vitro PFOS exposure on immune

endpoints in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and mice. Journal of Applied Toxicology.

DOI 10.1002/jat.2891, 2013.

2014

60. Bossart GD, Romano T, Peden-Adams M, Schaefer A, McCulloch S, Goldstein J, Fair P, Cray C,

Reif JS. Clinicoimmunopathologic findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)

with positive Chlamydiaceae antibodies. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 2014.

61. Browning NE, McCulloch SD, Bossart GD, Worthy AJ. Fine-scale population structure of

estuarine bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) assessed using stable isotope ratios and fatty

acid signature analyses. Marine Biology DOI 10.1007/s00227-014-2420-z, 2014.

62. Wirth JR, Peden-Adams MM, White ND, Bossart GD, Fair PA. In vitro exposure of DE-71, a penta-

PBDE mixture on immune endpoints in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and B6C3F1

mice. Journal of Applied Toxicology. DOI 10.1002/jat.3008. 2014.

63. Ghim S, Joh J, Mignucci-Giannoni AA, Rivera-Guzman AL, Falcon-Matos L, Alsina-Guerrero MM,

Rodriguez-Villanueva M, Jenson AB, Bossart GD. Genital Papillomatosis Associated with Two

Novel Mucosotropic Papillomaviruses from a Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris).

Aquatic Mammals. 40(20): 189-194. 2014.

64. Mealey BK, Baldwin JD, Parks-Mealey GB, Bossart GD, Forstner MRJ. Characteristics of

mangrove diamondback terrapins (Malaclemys terrapin rhizophorarum) inhabiting altered and

natural mangrove islands. Journal of North American Herpetology. 2014(1): 76-80. 2014.

65. Schaefer AM, Jensen EL, Bossart GD, Reif JS. Hair Mercury Concentrations and Fish

Consumption Patterns in Florida Residents. International Journal of Environmental Research

and Public Health. 11: 6709-6726. DOI:10.3390/ijerph110706709. 2014.

66. Fair PA, Balthis L, Kannan, K, De Silva A, Wu Q, French KM, Houde M, Muir DCG, Daugomah J,

Spencer C, Bossart GD, White ND. Dolphins as sentinels for sediment perflouroalkyl substances

(PFASs) contamination in estuarine areas of Charleston, SC. Poster session: SETAC North

America. 35th Annual Meeting; 2014 November 12; Vancouver, BC Canada.

67. Farquier D, Goldstein T, Colegrove K, Rotstein D, DiGiovanni Jr. RA, McLellan W, Northeast and

Southeast Atlantic Marine Mammal Stranding Network, Habecker P, Coffee L, Howerth EW,

Gottdenker N, Bossart G, St. Leger J, Waltzek TB, Wellehan J, Saliki, JT, Nielsen O, Garron M,

Mase-Guthrie B, Rowles TK. Dolphin Morbillivirus Outbreak and the 2013-2014 Mid-Atlantic

25

Bottlenose Dolphin Unusual Mortality Event. 63rd Annual International Conference of the

Wildlife Disease Association. July 27-August 1, 2014. Albuquerque, New Mexico.

68. Fair PA, Schaefer AM, Romano TM, Bossart GD, Lamb SV, Reif JS. Stress response of wild

bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) during capture-release assessment studies. General

and Comparative Endocrinology. 206: 203-212. 2014.

69. Browning NE, McCulloch SD, Bossart GD, Worthy GAJ. Fine-scale population structure of

estuarine bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) assessed using stable isotope ratios and fatty

acid signature analyses. Marine Biology. DOI 10.1007/s00227-014-2420-z. 2014.

2015

70. Fauquier DA, Goldstein T, Colegrove KM, Rotstein DS, DiGiovanni Jr. RA, McLellan WA, Northeast

and Southeast Marine Mammal Stranding Network, Habecker P, Coffee L, Swist S, Howerth EW,

Gottdenker N, Bossart GD, St. Leger J, Waltzek TB, Wellehan T, Saliki JT, Nielsen O, Garron M,

Mase-Guthrie B, Rowles TK. The 2013-2014 Mid-Atlantic Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops

truncatus) Unusual Mortality Event and Dolphin Morbilivirus. 46th Annual International

Association for Aquatic Animal Medicine Conference. April 6-10, 2015. Chicago, Illinois.

71. Schaefer AM, Murdoch Titcomb E, Jensen EL, Fair PA, Stavros HW, Mazzoil M, Bossart GD, Reif

JS. Mercury concentrations in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) inhabiting the

Indian River Lagoon, Florida and local human residents: Patterns of distribution. 5th Florida

Marine Mammal Health Conference, Gainesville, Fl. June 2015.

72. Fauquier DA, Goldstein T, Colegrove KM, Rotstein DS, DiGiovanni Jr. RA, McLellan WA, Northeast

and Southeast Atlantic Marine Mammal Stranding Network, Rosel P, Wilcox L, Stolen M, Urian K,

Habecker P, Coffee L, Swist S, Howerth EW, Gottdenker N, Bossart G, St. Leger J, Waltzek TB,

Wellehan JFX, Saliki JT, Nielsen O, Morris SE, Zelner J, Grenfell BT, Garron M, Mase-Guthrie B,

Rowles TK. Dolphin Morbilivirus and the 2013-2015 Mid-Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops

truncatus) Unusual Mortality Event. 21st biennial Conference on Marine Mammals. San

Francisco, CA. December 13-18, 2015.

73. McCulloch SD, Goldstein JD, Walsh M, Pelton C, Bossart GD. Cost, Benefits and Solutions An

Overview of Planning and Executing Marine Mammal Health and Environmental Risk

Assessments and Interventions. 5th Florida Marine Mammal Health Conference. Gainesville, FL.

June 2-4, 2015.

74. Bossart GD, Schaefer AM, McCulloch S, Goldstein J, Fair PA, Reif JS. Mucocutaneous lesions

from free-ranging Atlantic bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, from the southeastern

United States. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 115:175-184. 2015.

75. Reif JS, Schaefer AM, Bossart GD. Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) as a sentinel

for exposure to mercury in humans: closing the loop. Veterinary Sciences. (2)407-422:

doi:10.3390/vetsci2040407. 2015.

26

76. Schaefer AM, Titcomb EM, Fair PA, Stavros HC, Mazzoil M, Bossart GD, Reif JS. Mercury

concentrations in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) inhabiting the Indian River

Lagoon, Florida: Patterns of spatial and temporal distribution. Marine Poll Bull. 97: 544-547.

2015.

77. Jaing C, Thissen JB, Gardner S, McLoughlin K, Slezak T, Bossart GD, Fair PA. Pathogen

surveillance in wild bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms.

116:83-91. 2015

78. Cray, C., Rodriguez, M., Field, C., McDermott, A., Leppert, L., Clauss, T., Bossart, G.D. Protein and

cholesterol electrophoresis of plasma samples from captive cownose ray (Rhinoptera bonasus).

Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 27(6): 688-695. 2015.

27

Eric Gaglione

Vice president of zoological operations, Georgia Aquarium

Eric Gaglione began his career in 1984 as a sea lion and dolphin trainer at the Aquarium of Niagara Falls

while also earning degrees in Zoology and Wildlife Management at the State University of New York’s

Empire State College. He assumed the role of Curator of Marine Mammals in 1990 and spent five years

overseeing the aquarium’s animal training and behavioral enrichment programs.

In 1995 he joined the Mystic Aquarium as Curator of Marine Mammals & Birds. While at Mystic he

gained valuable experience with beluga whales and a variety of marine mammals and birds including

bottlenose dolphins, California sea lions, Steller sea lions, Northern fur seals, harbor seals, grey seals,

Pacific walrus and African penguins. He was also responsible for the on-site animal care of Mystic’s

stranded marine mammal program and cared for a variety of seal and cetacean species including but not

limited to pilot whales, Risso’s dolphins, common dolphins, harbor porpoise, hooded seals, harp seas

and harbor seals.

In 2005, Gaglione joined the Georgia Aquarium and initially managed the Cold Water Quest Gallery

where he assisted the start-up of the one the largest aquariums in the world. Gaglione has continued to

specialize in beluga whale management, training and care and further diversified his experience with

marine animals including whale sharks. He has served in numerous capacities in the zoological division

and is currently Vice President of Zoological Operations. He is responsible for the management, training

and care of the mammal and bird collections in the aquarium exhibit galleries which currently include

beluga whales, bottlenose dolphins, California sea lions, harbor seals, southern sea otters, Asian otters

and African penguins.

Gaglione has an extensive history caring for beluga whales for the past twenty-one years. He has also

participated in field research projects and health assessments involving beluga whales in the Hudson

Bay Nelson River estuary and St. Lawrence River, Canada as well as Bristol Bay, Alaska.

He is involved with several groups and associations related to the care of marine animals. He has been

and continues to be a representative for Georgia Aquarium with the Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks

and Aquariums (AMMPA). He is a Professional Associate of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums

(AZA) and is member of AZA’s Marine Mammal Taxon Advisory Group Steering Committee. He has been

a member of the International Marine Animal Trainers’ Association (IMATA) since 1985 and served on

the board for six years including Vice President (2010) and President (2013).

28

Chapter 88 Measuring Hearing in Wild Beluga Whales

T. Aran Mooney , Manuel Castellote , Lori Quakenbush , Roderick Hobbs ,Caroline Goertz ,

and Eric Gaglione

Abstract We measured the hearing abilities of seven wild beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) during

a collection-and-release experiment in Bristol Bay, AK. Here we summarize the methods and initial data

from one animal and discuss the implications of this experiment. Audiograms were collected from 4 to

150 kHz. The animal with the lowest threshold heard best at 80 kHz and demonstrated overall good

hearing from 22 to 110 kHz. The robustness of the methodology and data suggest that the auditory

evoked potential audiograms can be incorporated into future collection-and-release health assessments.

Such methods may provide high-quality results for multiple animals, facilitating population-level

audiograms and hearing measures in new species.

Keywords Anthropogenic noise • Sensory • Marine mammal • Cetacean •Odontocete • Arctic

T. A. Mooney

Biology Department , Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution ,

266 Woods Hole Road, MRF MS50 , Woods Hole , MA 02543 , USA

e-mail: amooney@whoi.edu

M. Castellote

National Marine Mammal Laboratory , Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service

, Seattle , WA 98115 , USA

North Gulf Oceanic Society , Homer , AK 99603 , USA

e-mail: manuel.castellote@noaa.gov

L. Quakenbush

Alaska Department of Fish and Game , Fairbanks , AK 99701 , USA

e-mail: lori.quakenbush@alaska.gov

R. Hobbs

National Marine Mammal Laboratory , Alaska Fisheries Science Center,

National Marine Fisheries Service , Seattle , WA 98115 , USA

C. Goertz

Alaska SeaLife Center , Seward , AK 99664 , USA

e-mail: rod.hobbs@noaa.gov

E. Gaglione

Georgia Aquarium , 225 Baker Street NW , Atlanta , GA 30313 , USA

e-mail: egaglione@georgiaaquarium.org

29

1 Introduction

Hearing is the primary sensory modality for odontocete marine mammals. They are generally considered

to have sensitive hearing and may detect a broad range of frequencies. Relying on hearing can be

particularly adaptive in the marine environment where light and other cues are often limited and

natural sounds are frequently abundant. Yet these sensitive auditory abilities may also be easily

impacted by anthropogenic noise.

Human use of the Earth’s oceans has steadily increased over the last century, resulting in an increase in

anthropogenically produced noise (e.g., National Academy of Sciences 2003 ). The Arctic is no exception

to this increase (Blackwell and Greene Jr 2003 ). Reductions in polar sea ice and the opening of the

Northwest

Passage presumably will open up habitats for many top predators. Yet this decrease in sea ice provides

greater human access to a high-latitude environment, and such a change is poised to transform a

relatively pristine environment into one saturated with human activities and associated noise. Sources

are varied and include naval exercises, boundary definitions, shipping/movement along Alaska’s North

Slope, seismic resources exploration, and the construction of an infrastructure needed to support it

(Wang and Overland 2009 ; Titley and St. John 2010 ). These changes encompass the habitats of

Delphinapterus leucas (beluga whales) and other top predators. Despite this obvious overlap of human-

natural interests, there is a poor understanding of influences of these sound-associated changes. To

estimate the impacts of this noise, it is crucial to evaluate the natural hearing abilities and the variation

with marine mammal populations.

Yet a primary challenge is that audiograms of odontocete marine mammals have most often been

estimated from stranded animals or nonwild individuals (for a review, see Mooney et al. 2012 ). In many

instances, these records have produced valuable data that are otherwise unavailable. For example,

hearing in several stranded beaked whale species have helped define what these sound-sensitive

animals hear (Finneran et al. 2009 ; Pacini et al. 2011 ). The audiogram of a stranded infant Risso’s

dolphin helped redefine what the species actually detects (Nachtigall et al. 2005 ). Work with trained

odontocetes provides scientific data that are likely unique to those settings and can address how

animals hear or how they may be protected from anthropogenic noise (Nachtigall and Supin 2008 ). Yet,

in many instances, health compromised stranded animals may not have normal auditory abilities and

thus are not necessarily representative of wild populations. Furthermore, without baselines for wild

individuals, it is difficult to put differences and results of nonwild individuals in a relative context.

Clearly, there is value in increasing the number of animals within a species measured for hearing

capabilities whenever possible.

Here we describe the methods and initial results for measuring the hearing of wild D. leucas (Castellote

et al. 2014 ). The goal of this study was to determine hearing sensitivity in wild Bristol Bay D. leucas

during a planned collection-and-release operation. Monitoring of D. leucas has been recommended in

recent years because this species is likely to be negatively impacted by climate change and because such

a broadly dispersed, high-trophic feeder can serve as an effective sentinel of the ecosystem(s) in which it

lives (Moore 2008 ; Moore and Huntington 2008 ; Simpkins et al. 2009 ). Because noise may impact D.

leucas in a variety of ways, it is essential to determine what these animals hear.

30

In view of the expected changes in the Arctic acoustic environment, expanding our knowledge of D.

leucas hearing is of central importance for an appropriate conservation management framework. One of

the five distinct stocks of D. leucas whales that are currently recognized in US waters, the Cook Inlet D.

leucas population is endangered and efforts for its recovery to date have not been successful. The

impact of anthropogenic noise has been identifi ed as a serious threat, potentially impeding recovery

(NMFS 2008 ). On the contrary, the Bristol Bay D. leucas population is increasing and is considered to be

a healthy population (NMFS 2008 ). The acoustic environment in Bristol Bay is different; many of the

chronic anthropogenic sources typically found in the Cook Inlet D. leucas habitat are essentially absent

or seasonally present at lower intensities in the Bristol Bay habitat. This suggests that Bristol Bay D.

leucas are a valuable asset to evaluate baseline hearing and health measures for comparison to affected

populations such as Cook Inlet D. leucas .

2 Temporary Collection of Beluga Whales and Hearing Test Methods

This study was conducted in September 2012 in Bristol Bay, AK. The audiograms were measured during

an overall health assessment study that required the collection and release of D. leucas . Audiograms

were obtained from seven of seven belugas tested. The procedures were similar to those followed by

Ferrero et al. ( 2000 )and were conducted under National Marine Fisheries Service Marine Mammal

Research Permit No. 14245 and approved by the necessary Institutional Animal Care and Use

Committees. The full results are published elsewhere (Castellote et al. 2014 ); here we provide a

summary of the methods and preliminary results.

Bristol Bay is a generally shallow, muddy-bottomed estuary system that supports a population of D.

leucas. Using three 3.5-m aluminum skiffs and one soft-bodied inflatable boat, we searched for an adult

beluga. When a suitable animal was spotted (Fig. 88.1 ), one of the skiffs would follow and gradually

approach the whale to encourage it to swim into shallow water (<2 m). From one of the boats, a 125-m-

long by 4-m-deep net made of 0.3-m braided square mesh was deployed around the whale. Once the

deployment boat and net encircled the whale, the inflatable boat approached the outside of the net and

three handlers placed a soft tail rope around the whale’s peduncle. The rope’s other end was fixed to

the inflatable boat to secure the whale.

The large net was gradually recalled while a “belly-band” stretcher was placed under the D. leucas.

Handholds in this stretcher facilitated adjusting the whale’s position as the water depth changed with

the tide. The animal was then positioned parallel to the small inflatable boat. The D. leucas’s head

typically rested on or was just above the soft mud bottom, keeping the lower jaw and primary hearing

pathways below the water surface. The animal’s blowhole was generally above the surface.

31

Fig. 88.1 (a) Spotting a Delphinapterus leucas from the aluminum skiff. (b) Auditory evoked potential

(AEP) audiogram setup. Arrows, recording, reference, and ground electrodes from posterior to anterior

(right to left). A measure of breath is also being taken concurrently. (c) AEP system in its case. (d) AEP

system in the soft inflatable boat during data recording

This setup was consistent for all animals, except one for which the water level was too low and this test

was conducted partly out of the water. Animals were maintained in this position for the audiogram and

health exam. The auditory evoked potential test equipment was outfitted in a ruggedized case; both it

and the operator sat in the small inflatable boat beside the D. leucas during the hearing tests (Fig. 88.1 ).

Hearing was tested using auditory evoked potential methodology following methods generally described

elsewhere (e.g., Nachtigall et al. 2007). Sound stimuli, generated in a custom program, consisted of

amplitude-modulated tone-pip stimuli, 20 ms in duration, and presented at a modulation rate of 1 kHz

and 20 s −1 . Tones were presented through a suction-cup transducer attached to the tip of the lower

jaw.

Evoked potential data were recorded for 30 ms, starting concurrently with tone stimuli. Responses were

bandpass filtered from 300 to 3,000 Hz. Five hundred sweeps were averaged per single record by the

custom program and stored on a semirugged laptop computer. Thresholds were determined taking the

fast Fourier transform-based frequency spectra of each envelope following responses (EFRs), and

plotting those microvolt peaks relative to their respective sound pressure. A best-fi t regression line was

fit to these peak data points. A sound level value where the regression line theoretically generated a 0-

μV response was taken as the threshold for that frequency.

32

3 Results and Discussion

Audiograms were successfully collected from all seven adult D. leucas whales temporarily collected and

tested. Evoked response waveforms and EFRs were generally easily identifiable and distinct from the

background electrophysiological noise. The inset in Fig. 88.2 shows an EFR that was recorded using

stimuli of ~20 dB around the hearing threshold of 32 kHz. Such a measurement would take ~30 s to

collect. Thus, overall thresholds at a particular frequency were obtained in 3–5 min. This relatively rapid

threshold measurement facilitated collecting multiple thresholds per animal but also minimizing the

“with-animal” time. For example, the audiogram of animal 7 consisted of 12 frequencies tested. Two of

these (4 and 150 kHz) did not induce measureable AEPs. The entire dataset was collected in 55 min,

which included multiple breaks for other measurements such as obtaining blood samples or

repositioning the animal. Records were collected in concert with a suite of other measurements, with no

discernible impact on the physiological noise. This allowed for a relatively efficient data collection when

compared with behavioral methods that require significant time to train animals and conduct

experiments. It is also relatively quick for other AEP audiograms that make take multiple days (sessions).

Here we collected seven audiograms over 6 field days (including 1 day with poor weather conditions

when no whales were sighted).

Despite the potential challenges of the experiment (cold conditions, electrophysiology close to the

water, confined spaces, concurrent measurements potentially introducing noise, and the safety and

welfare of the people and animals), the audiograms were of very good quality. They are of equal quality

to the field-based collection- release audiometric data of Cook et al. ( 2004 ) for bottlenose dolphins

(Tursiops truncates) and of Nachtigall et al. ( 2008 ; see also Mooney et al. 2009 ) for white-beaked

dolphins ( Lagenorhynchus albirostris ) Our success both in the ease and safety of data acquisition and

the quality of the data suggests that the methods could easily be applied to other species in similar

situations.

33

Fig. 88.2 AEP audiogram and waveform (inset) of D. leucas No. 7. This animal had the overall mean

lowest threshold

This is of particular importance for populations where anthropogenic noise is chronic and has been

identified as a potential stressor. Examples are the endangered Cook Inlet D. leucas or the threatened

St. Lawrence D. leucas populations. The prevalence of anthropogenic noise in their habitat and its

cumulative effects might be compromising the survival of both D. leucas populations (NMFS 2008 ; DFO

2012 ). This assertion is based on current knowledge of the level and acuity of anthropogenic noise in

these ecosystems (e.g., Gervaise et al. 2012 ) and our understanding of D. leucas hearing and acoustic

communication. However, because of the inherent difficulties in evaluating the noise impact on

cetaceans, there are no data supporting this hypothesis. Audiograms using the method described here

could be collected in the Cook Inlet and in the St. Lawrence Estuary to measure the hearing of D. leucas

with greater exposure to anthropogenic noise and could then be compared with the baseline audiogram

for Bristol Bay D. leuca .

Acknowledgments Project funding and field support was provided by the Georgia Aquarium and the National Marine

Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center (NMML/AFSC). Field work was also supported by

the National Marine Fisheries Service Alaska Regional Office (NMFS AKR), Woods Hole Oceanographic

Institution (WHOI) Arctic Research Initiative, WHOI Ocean Life Institute, US Fish and Wildlife Service,

Bristol Bay Native Association, Alaska SeaLife Center, the Shedd Aquarium, and the Mystic Aquarium.

Audiogram analyses were funded by Office of Naval Research Award No. N000141210203 (from Michael

Weise).

We also acknowledge the substantial assistance of R. Andrews, G. Biedenbach, B. Long, S. Norman, M.

Keogh, A. Moors, L. Thompson, T. Binder, L. Naples, L. Cornick, K. Royer, K. Burek-Huntington, R.

Hiratsuka, A. Roehl, B. Tinker, and D. Togiak. All work was conducted under NMFS Permit No. 14245 and

in accordance with approval from the NMML/AFSC Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee

(IACUC) Protocol No. AFSC-NWFSC2012-1 and WHOI IACUC Protocol No. BI166330.

References

Blackwell SB, Greene CR Jr (2003) Acoustic measurements in Cook Inlet, Alaska, during August

2001. Greeneridge Report 271-2, Greeneridge Sciences, Inc., Santa Barbara, CA, prepared for the

National Marine Fisheries Service, Anchorage, AK

Castellote M, Mooney TA, Quakenbush L, Hobbs R, Goertz C, Gaglione E (2014) Baseline hearing abilities

and variability in wild beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas). J Exp Biol

217:1682–1691. doi:10.1242/jeb.093252

Cook MLH, Wells RS, Mann DA (2004) Auditory brainstem response hearing measurements in free-

ranging bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). J Acoust Soc Am 116:2504

DFO (2012) Recovery strategy for the beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) St. Lawrence estuary

population in Canada. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO),

Ottawa, ON, Canada

34

Ferrero RC, Moore SE, Hobbs R (2000) Development of beluga, Delphinapterus leucas , capture and

satellite tagging protocol in Cook Inlet, Alaska. Mar Fish Rev 62:112–123

Finneran JJ, Houser DS, Mase-Guthrie B, Ewing RY, Lingenfelser RG (2009) Auditory evoked potentials in

a stranded Gervais’ beaked whale ( Mesoplodon europaeus ). J Acoust Soc Am 126:484–490.

doi:10.1121/1.3133241

Gervaise C, Roy N, Kinda B, Menard N (2012) Shipping noise in whale habitat: characteristics, sources,

budget, and impact on belugas in Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park hub. J Acoust Soc Am 132:76–89

Mooney TA, Nachtigall PE, Taylor KA, Miller LA, Rasmussen M (2009) Comparative auditory temporal

resolution of the white-beaked dolphin ( Lagenorhynchus albirostris ). J Comp Physiol A 195:375–384

Mooney TA, Yamato M, Branstetter BK (2012) Hearing in cetaceans: from natural history to

experimental biology. Adv Mar Biol 63:197–246

Moore SE (2008) Marine mammals as ecosystem sentinels. J Mammal 89:534–540

Moore SE, Huntington HP (2008) Arctic marine mammals and climate change: impacts and resilience.

Ecol Appl 18:S157–S165

Nachtigall PE, Mooney TA, Taylor KA, Miller LA, Rasmussen M, Akamatsu T, Teilmann J, Linnenschidt M,

Vikingsson GA (2008) Shipboard measurements of the hearing of the whitebeaked dolphin,

Lagenorynchus albirostris . J Exp Biol 211:642–647

Nachtigall PE, Mooney TA, Taylor KA, Yuen MML (2007) Hearing and auditory evoked potential methods

applied to odontocete cetaceans. Aquat Mamm 33:6–13. doi:10.1578/AM.33.1.2007.6

Nachtigall PE, Supin AY (2008) A false killer whale adjusts its hearing when it echolocates. J Exp Biol

211:1714–1718. doi:10.1242/jeb.013862

Nachtigall PE, Yuen MML, Mooney TA, Taylor KA (2005) Hearing measurements from a stranded infant

Risso’s dolphin, Grampus griseus . J Exp Biol 208:4181–4188

National Academy of Sciences (2003) Ocean noise and marine mammals. National Academies

Press, Washington, DC

NMFS (2008) Conservation plan for the Cook Inlet beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas ).

National Marine Fisheries Service, Juneau, AK

Pacini AF, Nachtigall PE, Quintos CT, Schofi eld TD, Look DA, Levine GA, Turner JP (2011) Audiogram of a

stranded Blainville’s beaked whale ( Mesoplodon densirostris ) measured using auditory evoked

potentials. J Exp Biol 214:2409–2415. doi:10.1242/jeb.054338

Simpkins M, Kovacs KM, Laidre K, Lowry L (2009) A framework for monitoring Arctic marine mammals.

Findings from a workshop sponsored by the US Marine Mammal Commission and US Fish and Wildlife

Service, Valencia, Spain, 4–6 March 2007. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Circumpolar

Biodiversity Monitoring Program Report No. 16

35

Titley D, St. John C (2010) Arctic security considerations and the U.S. Navy’s roadmap for the Arctic. Nav

War Coll Rev 63:35–48

Wang M, Overland J (2009) A sea ice free Arctic within 30 years. Geophys Res Lett 36:L07502

36

GEORGIA AQUARIUM

BELUGA IMPORT PROJECT

DR. GREGORY BOSSART, V.M.D., PH.D., SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, CHIEF VETERINARY OFFICER

RELEASING CETACEANS

The argument of releasing cetaceans (specifically whales and dolphins) to the oceans following human

care has been brought to the forefront during Georgia Aquarium’s beluga import project, and in

unrelated public news. Georgia Aquarium’s chief veterinary officer has extensive experience working

with cetaceans and provides a unique look into the realities of release.

37

Dr. Gregory Bossart, V.M.D, Ph.D.

Release of Cetaceans

In recent years, the public and media interest of reintroducing cetaceans under human care to the wild

has been a topic of much discussion. Georgia Aquarium staff members have been active in the rescue,

rehabilitation and release of various marine mammal species (including whales and dolphins) that have

been under short-term human care for over 30 years. While scientific protocols for releasing short-term

rescued and rehabilitated cetaceans have been developed to ensure that survivability is optimized, the

scientific literature for releasing cetaceans under long-term human care is sparse and the results of the

few scientifically conducted release projects report widely different results. Issues of concern in long-

term situations include disease transmission between released animals and wild animals; the unwanted

genetic exchange between the released cetacean and wild stocks; the elimination of behaviors

developed in human care that could affect negatively impact survivability; and the ability of the released

animal to adequately forage for itself, defend itself from predators and be integrated into a social group

(Bossart, 1996; Spradlin and Terbush, 1999). Because of many of the above issues, the length of time

under human care becomes an important consideration in any release protocol. Importantly, a study

published regarding reintroduction of US Navy dolphins to the wild concluded that the benefits of

reintroduction to either reintroduced animals or the indigenous populations could neither be predicted

nor adequately quantified and that significant mortality risks existed to both the released animals and

the wild stocks (Brill and Friedl, 1993).

Specifically, the reintroduction of the Russian beluga whales could negatively impact their health for

behavioral and medical reasons. Specifically, many of the emerging and resurging marine mammal

diseases we now see in some free-ranging marine mammal populations are not observed in marine

mammals under human care (see disease references below). Thus, any translocation attempt could

negatively impact the health of the reintroduced whales. Additionally, any translocation attempt could

also inadvertently impact the well-being of the free-ranging beluga whale population in which they are

placed. Free-ranging wildlife populations including marine mammals have developed immunologic

tolerance to a host of microorganisms that now live as commensals in their bodies including in the

respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts. Alternatively, marine mammals under human care have

developed immunologic tolerance to wide range of different microorganisms that now live as

commensals in their bodies. The immunologic tolerance to different microorganisms is obviously

adaptive and evolved slowly over time and is not an uncommon phenomenon in other mammalian

species. Immunologic naivety to these new, different and potentially undefined organisms which in turn

become opportunistic pathogens have the potential to negatively impact the health of the free-ranging

beluga whale population as well as any reintroduced beluga whales. Precedent has been observed with

similar disease outbreaks in humans and other wild animal species that have undergone various aspects

of environmental translocation.

The length of time under human care also becomes a complicating variable for potentiating the health

issues of concern for any successful reintroduction. In this case, the now normal microbial populations in

the beluga whales housed near the Black Sea have microbes common to that geographic region only.

Unfortunately, one additional complicating factor is the limited comparable health data of the free-

38

ranging beluga populations in question. This health data would be critical for understanding disease

transmission potential between both the reintroduced animals and the indigenous populations.

Specific behavioral issues of concern in this case would include that during their time in human care the

beluga whales in question have been largely desensitized to humans and dependent on humans for their

basic functions of life. As in other failed release attempts, released animals no longer have a healthy

inherent fear of humans and engage humans in the search of food. In the worst case scenario, these

animals would be unable to feed themselves and actually search out humans for companionship.

Additionally, the social relationships of the reintroduced animals and the indigenous populations are

difficult to determine and could cause unpredictable social consequences to the detriment of either

group.

Probably the most infamous example of similar behavioral/social difficulties occurred with the failed

tragic release attempt of the killer whale “Keiko”, the star of the movie “Free Willy”. According to Mark

Simmons, noted marine mammal behaviorist and naturalist and the author of ‘Killing Keiko”, the release

of “Keiko” who had been under long-term human care was not successful nor was he ever free

(Simmons, 2014). “Keiko” never acquired skills to survive on his own, continued to seek out human

interaction to his final days, never integrated with wild whales and died from improper and negligent

care. According to Simmons, Keiko’s final years and days were cruel and unusual and constitute perhaps

the most infamous case of animal exploitation and animal abuse in marine zoological history. This

tragedy highlights that we must remember that our generous, human compassion for animals is not

always well-conceived. We need to better understand what our actions actually mean for such animals

as opposed to what they mean for ourselves or our agendas. While returning stranded marine mammals

that have been rehabilitated is usually a compassionate act, there is no reason to abandon animals that

have long depended on human care.

Based on these medical, social and behavioral issues of concern we do not consider the beluga whales in

question to be reintroduction candidates.

References: Bossart GD (2011) Marine mammals as sentinel species of ocean and human health. Vet Pathol 48: 676−690 Bossart GD, Reiderson T, Dierauf L, Duffield D (2001) Clinical pathology. In: Dierauf L, Gulland F (eds) Marine mammal medicine. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 383−436 pp Bossart GD, Ghim S, Rehtanz M, Goldstein J and others (2005) Orogenital neoplasia in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Aquat Mamm 31: 473−480 Bossart GD, Goldstein JD, Murdoch EM, Fair PA, McCulloch S (2006) Health assessment of bottlenose dolphins in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida and Charleston, South Carolina. Harbor Branch Oceanographic Technical Report No. 93. Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, Ft. Pierce, FL

39

Bossart GD, Romano TA, Peden-Adams MM, Rice CD and others (2008) Hematological, biochemical and immunological findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) with orogenital papillomas. Aquat Mamm 34: 166−177 Bossart GD, Romano T, Peden-Adams M, Schaefer A and others (2011) Clinicoimmunopathologic findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus with positive morbillivirus titers. Dis Aquat Org 97: 103−112 Bossart GD (2001) Manatees. In: Dierauf L, Gulland F (eds) Marine mammal medicine. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 939−960 pp Bossart GD (2011) Marine mammals as sentinel species for oceans and human health. Vet Pathol 48: 676−690 Bossart GD, Ewing R, Lowe M, Sweat M and others (2002) Viral papillomatosis in Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris). Exp Mol Pathol 72: 37−48 Bossart GD, Meisner R, Rommel SA, Ghim S, Jenson AB (2003) Pathological features of the Florida manatee cold stress syndrome. Aquat Mamm 29: 9−17 Bossart GD, Meisner R, Rommel SA, Lightsey JA, Varela RA, Defran RH (2004) Pathologic findings in Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris). Aquat Mamm 30: 434−440 Bossart GD, Reif JS, Schaefer AM, Goldstein J, Fair PA, Saliki JT (2010) Morbillivirus infection in free-ranging Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from the southeastern United States: seroepidemiologic and pathologic evidence of subclinical infection. Vet Microbiol 143: 160−166 Bossart GD (1984) A suspected acquired immunodeficiency in an Atlantic bottlenose dolphin with lobomycosis and chronic-active hepatitis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 185:1413–1414, 1984. Bossart GD, Odell DK, Altman NH (1985) Cardiomyopathy in stranded pygmy and dwarf sperm whales. J Am Vet Med Assoc 187:1137– 1140 Bossart GD, Ewing R, Herron AJ, et al (1997) Immunoblastic malignant lymphoma in dolphins: ultrastructural and immunohistochemical features. J Vet Diagn Invest 9:454–458 Bossart GD, Baden DG, Ewing R, et al (1998) Brevetoxicosis in manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris) from the 1996 epizootic: gross, histologic and immunohistochemical features. Toxicol Pathol 26:276–282 Bossart GD, Ewing R, Lowe M, et al (2002) Viral papillomatosis in Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris). Exp Mol Pathol 72:37–48 Bossart GD, Baden DG, Ewing RY, et al: Manatees and brevetoxicosis. In: Molecular and Cell Biology of Marine Mammals, ed. Pfeiffer C, pp. 205–212. Krieger, Melbourne, FL, 2002.

40

Bossart GD, Meisner R, Rommel SA, et al (2003) Pathological features of the Florida manatee cold stress syndrome. Aquatic Mammals 29(1): 9–17 Bossart GD, Meisner R, Varela R, et al (2003) Pathologic findings in stranded Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from the Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Florida Scientist 66(3):226–238 Bossart GD, Meisner R, Rommel SA, et al (2004) Pathologic findings in Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris). Aquatic Mammals 30(3):434–440 Bossart GD, Ghim S, Rehtanz M, et al (2005) Orogenital neoplasia in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Aquatic Mammals 31(4):473–480 Bossart GD (2006) Marine mammals as sentinel species for oceans and human health. Oceanography 19(2):44–47 Bossart GD (2007) Emerging diseases in marine mammals: from dolphins to manatees. Microbe 11(2):544–549 Bossart GD, Hensley G, Goldstein J, et al (2007) Cardiomyopathy and myocardial degeneration in stranded pygmy (Kogia breviceps) and dwarf sperm (Kogia sima) whales. Aquatic Mammals 33(2):214–222 Bossart GD, Romano TA, Peden-Adams, et al (2008) Hematological, biochemical and immunological findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) with orogenital papillomas. Aquatic Mammals 34(2):166–177 Bossart GD, Mignucci-Giannoni Antonio A, Rivera-Guzman Antonio L, Jimenez-Marrero Nilda M, Camus Alvin C, Bonde Robert K, Dubey Jitender P, Reif John S (2012) Disseminated toxoplasmosis in Antillean manatees Trichechus manatus manatus from Puerto Rico. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 101: 139-144 Bossart GD, Reif JS, Schaefer AM, et al (2012) Morbillivirus infection in free-ranging Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from the southeastern United States: seroepidemiologic and pathologic evidence of subclinical infection. Vet Microbiol 143:160–166 Bossart GD, Romano T, Peden-Adams M, Schaefer A, McCulloch S, Goldstein J, Fair P, Cray C, Reif JS (2014) Clinicoimmunopathologic findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus with positive Chlamydiaceae antibody titers. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 108: 71-81 Bossart GD, Schaefer AM, McCulloch S, Goldstein J, Fair PA, Reif JS (2015) Mucocutaneous lesions from

free-ranging Atlantic bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, from the southeastern United

States. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 115:175-184

41

Bossart, G. D., Romano, T. A., Peden-Adams, M. M., Rice, C. D., Fair, P. A., Goldstein, J. D., Cammen, K., and Reif, J. S. (2008) Hematological, biochemical and immunological findings in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) with orogenital papillomas. Aquatic Mammals 34(2): 166-177 Bossart GD, Odell DK and Altman NH. (1985) Cardiomyopathy in stranded pygmy and dwarf sperm whales. J Am Vet Med Assoc 187:1137-1140 Bossart GD, Cray C, Solorzano JL, Decker SJ, Cornell LH and Altman NH (1996) Cutaneous papovaviral-like papillomatosis in a killer whale (Orcinus orca). Marine Mammal Science 12: 274-281 Bossart GD, Hensley G, Goldstein J, Kroell K, Manire C, Defran R, and Reif J (2007) Cardiomyopathy and myocardial degeneration in stranded pygmy (Kogia breviceps) and dwarf sperm (Kogia sima) whales. Aquatic Mammals 33(2): 214-222 Bossart GD (1996). Release of dolphins was inhumane. articles.sun-sentinal.com./1996-07-19/news/9607180251_1_buck-and-luther-atlantic-bottlenose-dolphins-animals Brill RL and Fridel WA (1993) Reintroduction to the wild as an option for managing Navy marine mammals. NCCOSC/NRaD Tech. Report 1549, 86 pp. Fair PA, Houde M, Hulsey TC, Bossart GD, Adams J, Balthis L, Muir DC (2012) Assessment of perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) in plasma of bottlenose dolphins from two southeast US estuarine areas: Relationship with age, sex and geographic locations. Mar Pollut Bull 64: 66-74 Fair P, Adams J, Mitchum G, Hulsey T, Reif J, Houde M, Muir D, Wirth E, Wetzel D, Zolman E, McFee W, and Bossart G (2010) Contaminant blubber burdens in Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from two southeastern US estuarine areas: Concentrations and patterns of PCBs, pesticides, PBDEs, PFCs, and PAHs. Science of the Total Environment 408: 1577-1597 Fair PA, Mitchum G, Hulsey TC, Adams J, Zolman E, McFee W, Wirth E, and Bossart GD. (2007) Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in blubber of free-ranging bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from two southeast Atlantic estuarine areas. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 53: 483–494

42

GEORGIA AQUARIUM

BELUGA IMPORT PROJECT

RESPONSES TO ROAST BEEF PRODUCTIONS

On the following pages you will find a full account of Georgia Aquarium’s correspondence with Roast

Beef Productions – the company producing a crowd-funded film casting allegations on Georgia

Aquarium. You will also find copies of all the letter correspondence between Georgia Aquarium and

Roast Beef Productions on the following pages.

43

Roast Beef Productions and Born to Be Free

Born to Be Free is a crowd-funded film that focuses on the industry of international trade of sea animals

in Russia; specifically beluga whales and dolphins. The film previewed at the Sheffield Film Festival in

South Yorkshire, England on June 13 & 14, 2016. It is produced by British-American production

company, Roast Beef Productions.

Roast Beef Productions contacted Georgia Aquarium for comment regarding the film on several

occasions:

Before the oral arguments for Georgia Aquarium’s permit application, Roast Beef Productions

reached out to Georgia Aquarium for an interview – at this point they had not identified

themselves as the makers of Born to Be Free - Georgia Aquarium did not provide a formal

interview due to the court hearing beginning in a few days’ time.

Roast Beef Productions attended the oral arguments in Atlanta in August of 2015 and were

allowed to record audio of the hearing from inside the court room.

o Roast Beef Productions approached Georgia Aquarium for comment during the hearing.

Georgia Aquarium replied that we are unable to provide specific comments during

ongoing legal proceedings.

o Roast Beef Productions approached Georgia Aquarium for comment following the

hearing outside the Federal courthouse. Georgia Aquarium again replied that we are

unable to provide specific comments during ongoing legal proceedings.

Following Georgia Aquarium’s decision to not appeal in November of 2015, Roast Beef

Productions contacted Georgia Aquarium in February of 2016 for an interview.

o Georgia Aquarium did not conduct any interviews with media following this decision.

We did provide Roast Beef Productions with all information about our decision and the

project as we did to all media.

In May of 2016, Georgia Aquarium received a Right to Respond letter from Roast Beef

Productions highlighting severe allegations against Georgia Aquarium.

o Georgia Aquarium responded within 48 hours and asked to view the film in order to

accurately, efficiently, and truthfully respond to the allegations set forth.

o Roast Beef Productions denied Georgia Aquarium’s request to view the film, but instead

sent an additional letter detailing their allegations.

o Georgia Aquarium responded with a highly detailed response to the allegations outlined

in Roast Beef Productions’ letter and provided a video statement from Chairman and

CEO, Mike Leven to be used in the film, as stated in Roast Beef Productions’

correspondence.

Georgia Aquarium sent representatives to the Sheffield Film Festival to view the film and send

back reports. Upon these reports, it is believed that the film is riddled with inaccuracies about

Georgia Aquarium and its beluga import project.

Following the film’s preview, Georgia Aquarium requested from Roast Beef Productions, to view

the film now that it had made its world premiere. This film is not available in theaters or online

as it has not been made available through distribution channels as of the week of June 20, 2016.

o Roast Beef Productions denied this request and made no offer to share the film in the

future to Georgia Aquarium.

44

45

46

47

48

49

GEORGIA AQUARIUM – BELUGA IMPORT PROJECT

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND CONTACTS

PRESS CONTACTS:

Debbie Campbell, vice president of marketing and communications

e: dcampbell@georgiaaquarium.org p: 404-581-4115

Jessica Fontana, senior manager of communications

e: jfontana@georgiaaquarium.org p: 404-581-4391

Paige Hale, public relations specialist

e: phale@georgiaaquarium.org p: 404-581-4230

Megan Fisher, public relations coordinator

e: mfisher@georgiaaquarium.org p: 404-581-4277

Imogen Farris, public relations coordinator

e: ifarris@georgiaaquarium.org p: 404-581-4294

ASSOCIATION LINKS

The Alliance for Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums

o http://www.ammpa.org/

The Alliance for Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums’ Beluga Whale Fact Sheet

o http://www.ammpa.org/doc_beluga_factsheet.html

The International Union for Conservation of Nature

o http://www.iucn.org/

The International Union for Conservation of Nature: Red List on beluga whales

o http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/6335/0

Association of Zoos and Aquariums

o https://www.aza.org/

BELUGA IMPORT PROJECT ONLINE:

A website solely dedicated to Georgia Aquarium’s beluga import project details the complexities

of the project in an easy to understand, engaging format. Learn more about the entire 12-year

process, the decisions we needed to make, and the uncertain future beluga whales in North

America face – and what we can do to help.

o http://www.belugaimportproject.org