73

ISSN 0001-4370, Oceanology, 2009, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 73–82. © Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2009.Original Russian Text © V.V. Andrianov, V.M. Bel’kovich, L.R. Lukin, 2009, published in Okeanologiya, 2009, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 79–89.

INTRODUCTION

According to Ostroumov’s [9] well-known point ofview, Onega Bay of the White Sea is inhabited by a sub-species of the white whale

Delphinapterus

leucas

maris

-

albi

. On the other hand, Klumov [4] believed that thesouthern areas of the White Sea (the basin and Dvina,Onega, and Kandalaksha bays) are inhabited by thewhite whale

Delphinapterus freimani

. In the summer,white whales perform foraging migrations from onefeeding ground to another, being unevenly spreaddepending on the distribution of the foraging fields.According to the results of observations in Onega Bayin July 1933 made from coastal stationary observationsites near Lesnaya Osinka Island, a total of 4200 whitewhale individuals were seen passing and 5300 individ-uals were recorded near Golyi Sosnovets Island. At that,observers recorded the “passage of large schools (aroundseveral hundred individuals in each school)” [4].

At the end of the 20th century, V.M. Bel’kovitch for-mulated a new conception of the structure of the whitewhale population hypothesizing that the resident(White Sea) population of white whales is divided intosettled and migratory parts during the summer. Themigrating part of the population consists of schools ofmales of varying abundance that regularly enter theWhite Sea to forage and participate in reproduction.The settled part are local schools based on “family”

groups and females with calves of different ages and“aunts.” Each of them has a distinctive area of summerhabitation, and the numerical composition of theselocal schools remains constant from year to year [2].Based on systematic route and aviation observations(1996–2001), several areas of white whale concentra-tions in the southern part of the White Sea were found:in Dvina Bay (near the Zimniy coast and Letniy coast)and in Onega Bay (close to Myagostrov Island and inthe southern part of the bay close to Cape Glubokiy)[10]. In Dvina Bay, two schools were found in the fol-lowing areas: Cape Kerets, Mud’yug and Syuz’maIsland, Una Bay, and Lopshen’ga. One more site oflocal habitation of a white whale school in the summerperiod was found in Mezen’ Bay in 2001 [6].

Special aerial surveys were organized by the UtrishDolphinarium on July 9–12 of 2002. White whale spot-ting was performed from an L-410 airplane from aheight of 300 m. The observers were as follows:V.M. Bel’kovich and A.D. Chernetsky (IO RAS),A.V. Abramov (Utrish Dolphinarium), L.R. Lukin(IEPN UrS RAS), and G.N. Ognetov (SevPINRO). Thematerials of these observations showed that there werearound 500 white whales in the coastal zone of the sea;85% of the animals were encountered in dispersedaggregations with different age structures and abun-dances. In Dvina Bay, 3 aggregations were found in the

MARINE BIOLOGY

White Whale (

Delphinapterus leucas

) Distribution in Onega Bay of the White Sea in the Summer

V. V. Andrianov, V. M. Bel’kovich, and L. R. Lukin

Ecological Problem of the North Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Arkhangelsk, RussiaP.P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow

E-mail: vbelkov@inbox.ru; VVAndrianov@yandex.ru; lrlukin@mail.ru

Received April 8, 2008; in final form June 11, 2008

Abstract

—Data on the white whale distribution in Onega Bay of the White Sea obtained during route and sta-tionary observations in the summer of 2003–2006 are given. The presence of three regions of summer habitationof local “nonmigratory” white whale reproductive schools is confirmed. The minimum abundance of the“zhizhginskoe” (northeastern) school is 60 individuals, and the minimum abundance of the “myagostrovskoe”(western) is 50 individuals. The abundance of the best studied “southern” school is close to 120–130 individuals.One more region of white whale concentration (with an abundance of up to 40 individuals) (the eastern one;Cape Letniy Orlov–Cape Chesmenskiy) was found. The localization of single reproductive schools (RS) is dueto a number of factors: the morphometry of the shores and bottom, the hydrological regime, and the characterof the coastal tidal currents. The white whale distribution in the southern part of Onega Bay in the summer(June–July) is of discontinuous character with concentrations near cape Glubokiy and some other adjacent parts.The coefficient of the white whale attendance in the Cape Glubokiy area varied from 42.5 to 67.4% during theyears of the studies (2003–2006). The character of the distribution, the direction of the relocations, and the ani-mals' behavior peculiarities indicate that the white whales of the southern part of Onega Bay of the White Seaform a rather stable school community of a few (5–6) locally distributed small family groups during the sum-mer

.

DOI:

10.1134/S0001437009010093

74

OCEANOLOGY

Vol. 49

No. 1

2009

ANDRIANOV

et al

.

following areas: Solza–Nenoksa (I, around 40 individ-uals), Una Bay (II, 50–70 individuals), and Mud’yugisland (III, 80–85 individuals). In Onega Bay, 4 aggre-gations were in the following areas: Cape Glubokiy (IV,around 50–60 individuals), Cape Chesmenskiy (V, 25–30 individuals), Myagostrov island (VI, 30–50 individ-uals), and at the boundary of Onega Bay and the basinnear the Solovetskie Islands close to Cape Belushiy(VII, 15–20 individuals). One aggregation was found inMezen’ Bay in the mouth of the Kuloy River (VIII, 30–35 individuals). Other encountered white whales (65individuals in total) were distributed along the coastseither singularly or in small groups of 2–6 individuals(Fig. 1). The results of these observations allowed us tosingle out 8 local reproductive schools in the White Seain 2002 [10], and their basic number is still preserved[3].

The main aim of the present work is to thoroughlycharacterize the white whale distribution in Onega Bayof the White Sea during the summer in the period of2003–2006 based upon the materials we collected

along ship routes and from stationary observationpoints.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Observations along fixed routes were performedfrom the yacht Belukha (captain L.A. Dmitriev) in2001, 2004, and 2006 in the second half of June to theend of July. A total of 8 stages of observations withdurations from several days to 2 weeks were per-formed. Apart from the route observations, short-termcoastal stationary observations from Cape Chesmen-skiy (17–20 of June) and Cape Veynavolok (1–2 ofJuly) were performed. The following data wererecorded during the route observations: the date, thetime of the observation, the meteorological conditions,the speed, the bearing and coordinates of the ship, thetime of the white whale group detection, the distance tothe detected group, the quantitative and qualitativecomposition of the groups, and the character of the ani-mals' behavior.

32

°

34

°

36

°

38

°

40

°

42

°

44

°

64

°

65

°

66

°

67

°

68

°

N

E

Kandalaksha

Terskii C

oast

Cape Svyatoi Nos

Voronka

Cap

e K

onus

hins

kiy

Mor

zhov

ezh

Isla

nd

Mezen’

Gorlo

Zimny

i Coast

Basein

DvinaBay

Arkhangelsk

Zhizhgin Isl

and

Solovetskie Islands

Onega

Bay

Pomorskii Coast

Onega

Bay

Kandalaksha Bay

Mezen’

III III

IV

V

VI

VII

VIII

1

2

3

4

5

I

Fig. 1.

White whales' distribution in the White Sea: 09.07.02–12.07.02. According to the data of the aerial survey: 1–routes offlights; 2–aggregations of mixed groups; 3–mixed (with calves) group of white whales; 4–group of adult white whales (white col-ored); 5–solitary adult white whales (white colored).

OCEANOLOGY

Vol. 49

No. 1

2009

WHITE WHALE (

Delphinapterus leucas

) DISTRIBUTION 75

Stationary observations were performed fromcoastal lookouts (LO). In the southern area, the LOswere organized in 2004 on L. Osinki Island. In thewestern part of Onega Bay, lookouts were organized onMyagostrov Island in 2004 and 7 kilometers away fromthis island on Golyi Sosnovets Island in 2005. Theobservations were performed in the period from thesecond half of June to the end of July with a durationfrom two weeks to one and a half months. LOs wereorganized on elevated sites 30–50 m from the shorelinewith the observation sectors into the sea being equal to

240°–270°

. Observations were performed continuouslyin the bright time of the day with the exception ofstormy weather using binoculars and field telescopes(30

×

50). The Number of animals, their coloration, thetime of their presence in the field of view, the characterof their behavior and interactions, and the direction oftheir translocations were recorded during the observa-tions. The distance to the white whales was determinedvisually using reference point floats set from the yachtusing GPS. They ran from the coast to the sea andranged from 500 m to 3000 m. The weather and seaconditions and the phases of the tidal phenomena wererecorded.

Diagrams of the white whales' presence in the areaof the observations were constructed based on theresults of the studies (Fig. 2). The data obtained in sucha way were used to evaluate the white whale distribu-tion indices. One of such indices was the coefficient ofthe white whale presence (C

pr

): C

pr

= (

t

pr

/

t

ob

) · 100%,where

t

pr

is the time during which the white whaleswere present in the zone of the observations, and

t

ob

isthe overall time of the observations.

The abundance of the white whales inhabiting theobserved area was evaluated using a number of auxil-iary indices.

The presence in the area of the white whales may beexpressed as A

i

=

n

i

·

t

i

, where

n

i

is the number of ani-mals present in the area studied at the time

t

i

. For theoverall period of the observations (

T

), which includesthe absence of white whales, the summary attendanceof the area is

The average abundance of the animals observedduring this period (N

av

) may be calculated using these

estimates by the formula N

av

= A

tot

/

T

=

In order to characterize the obtained value of theaverage abundance, the last expression may be repre-sented as N

av

·

T

= It is seen that, at thewhite whale abundance N

av

and their persistent pres-ence in the observed area during the whole period of theobservations (

T

), the attendance is equal to the sum-mary attendance actually found for this period. In otherwords, N

av

is the number of white whales with persis-tent presence in the area.

Atot ni ti⋅( ).∑=

ni ti⋅( )/T .∑

ni ti⋅( ).∑

Let us consider Fig. 2 as example. It shows a dia-gram of the white whale presence in the period from17:00 to 20:00 on July 8, 2006. The indices for thisperiod are C

pr

= 70% and N

av

= 3.6 ind. The directions in which the animals arrived and left,

the peculiarities of their behavior, the interactionsbetween the whales, and a number of other indices wereconsidered as auxiliary indices of the white whale hab-itat characteristics.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Location and abundance of the white whaleschools

. According to the results of the route observa-tions partially represented in Fig. 3, there are four areaswithin the coastal zone of Onega Bay where “settled”white whale schools meet.

One area

is at the boundary of Dvina and Onegabays (northeastern) close to Cape Lopshen’gskiy andZhizhginskaya Salma Strait and L. Zolotitsa Bay(Fig. 3A). It is possible that this territory is inhabited bytwo adjacent schools and the boundary separating themlies close to Zhizhginskaya Salma strait. Here, thewhite whales were encountered as dispersed smallgroups consisting of white (adult) individuals or groupsof animals of various ages (including calves) over theroute of the observations in 2003, 2004, and 2006. Thebiggest number of animals was encountered in this areain 2004. Two dispersed aggregations—one consistingof 11 small groups (36–37 individuals in total, includ-ing 3 calves) and another of 4 small groups (20–21 indi-viduals in total, including 2 calves)—were registeredhere. Therefore, the overall abundance of the whitewhales inhabiting this area is approximately 60 individ-uals.

The second area (eastern)

is the northeastern partof the Summer coast from Cape Letniy Orlov to Cape

N, ind.10

5

N

av

3.6

17 18 19 20

í

, hours

1 2 3

Fig. 2.

Diagram of the white whales' presence near capeGlubokiy over the period from 17.00 to 20.00 on08.07.2006 in Onega Bay of the White Sea. Y-axis—time ofobservations, X-axis—number of animals present in agegradations:

1

—adults,

2

—immature,

3

—calves.

76

OCEANOLOGY

Vol. 49

No. 1

2009

ANDRIANOV

et al

.

Chesmenskiy (Fig. 3B). In the same years (2003, 2004,and 2006), white whales were encountered in smallgroups and their number was not constant. The largestnumber of animal groups (11, with an overall abun-dance of 36–50 individuals) was observed in July of2003; 11 groups were also observed in July 2004 withan overall abundance of 39–41 ind., including 2–3calves. According to our data, the maximum abundanceof the white whale group inhabiting this area is around40 individuals. However, it is uncertain whether thisgroup is a separate local school.

The third area (western)

is in the western part ofOnega Bay near the Pomor Coast from Myagostrov Islandto Golyi Sosnovets and Roganka islands (Fig. 3C). A dis-persed aggregation of small white whale groups with anoverall abundance of 20–30 individuals was observedhere during routes in July of 2003, 2004, and 2006. Sta-

tionary observations performed in July of 2004 onMyagostrov Island and Golyi Sosnovets Island in Julyof 2005 have confirmed that, during the summer, a localreproductive white whale school consisting of no lessthan three “family” groups inhabits a stretch of coastalwaters 7–10 km long and 3–5 km wide. The overallabundance of the school was estimated to be equal to 50individuals. This value is generally in accordance withthe data of the aviation observations performed in thisarea on July 9, 2002 [7]. The location of “family”groups near the coast and the separate routes of theirtranslocations give evidence for the presence of pre-dominantly constant adjacent areas of habitation foreach group in this region.

The fourth area is situated in the southern part

ofthe bay in the area near Lyamtsy Settlement, CapeGlubokiy, and Uhta Bay (Fig. 3D). Here, white whales

Zhizhgin Island

Cape Gorbolukskiy

Cape L

opshen’gskiy

Cape Letniy Orlov

Cape Chesmenskiy

Onega Bay

Areas

of schools'localization

White Sea

Roganka Island

Golyi SosnovetsIsland

Cape B

eluga

Myagostrov Island

Onega

Bay

Lyamtsa

Cape G

lubo

kiy

Purnema

Purluda Islands

Osinki Islands

Kondostrov Island

Ä

C

D

1 2 3 4 5

B

Fig. 3.

Areas of local reproductive white whale schools' habitation in Onega Bay of the White Sea in the summer: A—northeastern;B—eastern; C—western; D—southern.

1

—area of reproductive school habitation;

2

and

3

—stationary and temporary shore look-outs, respectively;

4

—mixed (with calves) group of white whales;

5

—aggregations of white whale mixed groups.

OCEANOLOGY

Vol. 49 No. 1 2009

WHITE WHALE (Delphinapterus leucas) DISTRIBUTION 77

of different ages were repeatedly encountered singu-larly or in groups (of up to 25 individuals) in 2003–2006 during ship and coastal observations with themajority of the encounters taking place near CapeGlubokiy. In addition, groups of whales of differentages with from 8 to 24 individuals were encountered inthis period near Osinki and Purluda Islands.

During stationary observations near L. OsinkaIsland, a small group of white whales (up to 8–11 indi-viduals) consisting of females with calves accompaniedby white males was noted visiting this area daily(Cpr=10.2%) [8].

An aggregation of white whales consisting of two“family” groups inhabiting adjacent sites was almostdaily registered in the coastal area of Cape Glubokiyduring stationary observations in June and July of2003–2006. The overall abundance of this aggregationof different age whales was 25 individuals. Apart fromthis aggregation, small groups of white whales wereregistered at a significant distance from the LO (2–4 km) in the direction of Lyamtsy Settlement, PurnemySettlement, Uhta Bay, and Osinki and Purluda Islands.The common arrival of all these groups to the CapeGlubokiy area was observed on July 21, 2005. Here, a

dispersed aggregation of groups and single whitewhales with an overall abundance equal to 85 individu-als was spread over a small area with a 3–4 km radiusduring an hour with groups settling at sites that theypreviously occupied according to our preceding obser-vations (Fig. 4). The abundance of the animals' aggre-gation was estimated to be equal to 120–130 individu-als (calves and immature animals were not counted dueto their distance). According to our observations, thisaggregation is an association of all the white whale“family” groups inhabiting local sites in Onega Bayand composing the “southern” local reproductiveschool [1].

Transitive white whales. Apart from the “settled”reproductive schools of white whales, we also encoun-tered small schools of transitive white whales in OnegaBay. A total of 4 cases of passage of transitive schoolsin Onega Bay were recorded during the whole period ofthe observations in 2003–2006. Three such cases wereregistered near cape Glubokiy (June 28–30, 2004). Inall these cases, the schools passed in an ebb current tothe northwest forming a column stretching 3–4 km long0.5, 1.5, and 3 km from the shore consisting of 16–20 white animals exclusively (apparently males). In the

64.4°

37.2° 37.7°

64.1°

Lyamtsa

Cape Glubokiy

Purnema

Osinki Islands

Purluda Island

N

E

1 2 3 4

Fig. 4. Place of a mass white whale aggregation (1) near Cape Glubokiy on 21.07.2005. 2–direction of the combined white whaletranslocation; 3–directions of the white whale groups' (families) separation; 4—LO.

78

OCEANOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 1 2009

ANDRIANOV et al.

columns, the white whales were grouped as 1–5 indi-viduals swimming head to tail. During the passage ofthe “transitive” whales, the white whales inhabiting thearea near Cape Glubokiy disappeared from the field ofview; they were probably hiding very close to the shore.

One more “transitive” column with from 17 to22 white and light grey (large) white whales, whichstretched from 3 to 4 km with groups of 1, 3, and 5 indi-viduals, was observed on July 14, 2006, abeam of CapeChesmenskiy 7 km off shore. All these white whaleswere passing southwards into the bay.

A different type of behavior was repeatedlyobserved for a group of 5–8 white whales in the coastalarea of Cape Glubokiy. These whales arrived and left ina dense group, changed their direction of movement,and stayed in single parts of the area for long time inorder to change formation due to the appearance ofhierarchical tournament fights that resembled a gamefrom the shore. Such lengthy tournament fights of smallmale groups were observed by V.M. Bel’kovich earlierin the areas of Solovetskoe and Zhizhginskoe for thelocal schools inhabitation these areas both in the pres-ence of females and without them.

Features of the white whale distribution in thesouthern part of Onega Bay. The results of the routeobservations show that the white whale distribution inthe southern part of Onega bay is of a discrete character(Fig. 3D). White whales are registered regularly alongthe Onega coast from Lyamtsa Settlement to Uhta Bay,including the adjacent areas near Osinki and Purludaislands with the center being situated close to CapeGlubokiy. The white whale encounters were sporadic30–50 km in the northern, southern, or western direc-tions from this area.

The stationary observations allowed revealing somepeculiarities of the white whale distribution in thesouthern part of Onega Bay. Thus, a characteristic ofthe white whale habitat in the Cape Glubokiy area wasthat there was a 1 km radius zone where the whitewhales stayed for a long time and they passed as closeto the shore as 100–250 m (Fig. 5). On the basis of thewhite whales' registration in this zone, calculation ofthe indices that characterize the white whale habitat in

the area of Cape Glubokiy was performed. The whitewhales that were observed for a long time (from onehour and longer) at a distance greater than 1 km fromthe LO (usually 2–4 km) rarely approached CapeGlubokiy. Such registrations were considered remote.They are viewed separately as ones characterizingwhite whale habitats at sites adjacent to Cape Glubokiy.

Characteristics of the white whale habitat in theCape Glubokiy area. The four seasons of stationaryobservations at Cape Glubokiy have shown that thewhite whale presence coefficient (Cpr) in this arearanged from 42.5 to 67.4% (average 48%). The meanabundance (Nav) throughout the years varied from1.8 to 6.0 individuals with the average abundance being3.1 individuals throughout all the seasons of the obser-vations (Table 1).

The high values of Cpr and Nav are mostly due to thelengthy (from 1 to 5 hours and more) animal presencein the observation area (Table 2).

The rather small fluctuations of Cpr indicate that thisarea is annually chosen by white whale “families” forsummer habitation due to a number of factors: the pres-ence of food (launce, navaga, and flounder); the sandybottom; the coast morphometry protecting them fromunfavorable winds; and the features of the tidal cur-rents, which are used by some animals to move alongthe shoreline. The significant interannual fluctuationsof the animals' mean abundance (Nav) are to someextent determined by some other factors: in 2004, bythe high level of the coastal waters and the pollutionwith black oil after the accident of September 1, 2003[8]; in 2005, by the birth rate peak (probably); and, in2006, by the frequent and strong winds of northwesternand western direction, which caused strong and lengthywind waves. In addition, the fluctuations between theyears (Nav) may be linked with the short-term characterof the observations, as it has been shown (Bel’kovich et al.,2006) that the terms of the biological processes (con-finement and mating) are subject to seasonal and inter-annual variability in a local school. This fact inevitablyinfluences the area’s usage in our case.

The discontinuity of the white whale distribution inthe southern part of Onega Bay was determined not

Table 1. Coefficient of the presence (Cpr) and average abundance (Nav) of white whales near cape Glubokiy in June–July of2003–2006 in Onega Bay of the White Sea

Year

Observation duration Time and white whale presence coefficient White whales' average abundance Nav (ind.)

Days Hours Hours Cpr (%) In single days (max)

In all the period of the observations

2003 18 240.8 107.9 44.8 10.7–11.2 3.8

2004 12 201.0 89.2 44.4 2.8–2.9 1.8

2005 17 260.3 175.4 67.4 10.0–10.1 6.0

2006 37 643.9 273.8 42.5 4.3–4.5 2.0

2003–2006 84 1346.0 646.3 48.0 10.7–11.2 3.1

OCEANOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 1 2009

WHITE WHALE (Delphinapterus leucas) DISTRIBUTION 79

64.4°

37.2° 37.7°

64.2°

Lyamtsa

Cape Glubokiy

Purnema

Osinki Islands

Purluda Island

N

E

1 2 3 4

Fig. 5. Directions of white whales' translocations near Cape Glubokiy and L. Osinka Island in the summer of 2003–2006.1—LO; 2—closest (up to 1 km) coastal zone; 3—directions of the white whales' arrivals and departures; 4—paths of the whitewhales' translocations in the farther (over 1 km) zone.

Table 2. Time of the white whales presence (in gradations of longevity) in the Cape Glubokiy area (Onega Bay) in June–July of 2003–2006

Duration of the white whales' presence (hours)

Summary time of the observation of the white whales (in years)

2003 2004 2005 2006 2003–2006

hours % hours % hours % hours % hours %

0.0–0.5 13.2 12.2 22.5 25.2 50.2 28.6 76.0 27.8 161.9 25.1

0.6–0.9 11.2 10.4 16.5 18.5 25.0 14.3 40.7 14.9 93.4 14.5

1.0–1.5 17.7 16.4 29.0 32.5 55.1 31.4 67.9 24.8 169.7 26.3

1.6–2.9 22.1 20.5 14.4 16.1 35.3 20.1 37.3 13.6 109.1 16.9

3.0–4.9 20.3 18.8 – – 9.8 5.6 30.2 11.0 60.3 9.3

5.0 and > 23.4 21.7 6.8 7.6 – – 21.7 7.9 51.9 8.0

Total 107.9 100 89.2 100 175.4 100 273.8 100 646.3 100

80

OCEANOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 1 2009

ANDRIANOV et al.

only by the duration of the animals presence in localareas but also by the direction of their migrations. Thus,the directions of the white whales' translocations nearCape Glubokiy correspond to the white whale distribu-tion revealed by the route observations. In general, thedirections of the white whales' arrivals and departuresin the areas of the studies have not revealed a singlepreferential direction of the white whales' relocationthat corresponds to migrations (Tables 3, 4, Fig. 5).

The characteristic white whale habitats at sitesadjacent to Cape Glubokiy. While the white whalepresence coefficient (Cpr) for 2003–2006 for the areadirectly encompassing Cape Glubokiy was 48%(Table 1), this index was 56% for the whole observedarea (also considering the whales registered at remotesites 2–4 km from the LO). Therefore, approximately8% of the overall time, the whales were registered onlyat remote sites adjacent to Cape Glubokiy. The index ofremote registrations should actually be higher, because,if white whales appeared close to the LO, the observa-tions of distant whales could not be continued (exceptfor single cases). The sites of the remote registrationsinclude the coastal areas on the western (from theLyamtsy Settlement side) and eastern (from thePurnema Island side) sides of the observed area, as wellas parts of the open sea from Purluda and OsinkiIslands (Fig. 5). Small groups of animals were regis-tered most frequently, but, in some cases, the groupsconsisted of 10–20 individuals. In the open part of thesea, the white whales were either moving from the eastwestwards, from the west eastwards, or migrating alongroutes connecting Purluda and Osinki Islands withUhta Bay and the coastal areas on the Lyamtsy Settle-

ment side. First appearing at distant coastal sites, whitewhales first approached Cape Glubokiy then movedaway performing local migrations not reaching CapeGlubokiy, which corresponds to feeding behavior.

The indices of the remote registrations showed sig-nificant fluctuations over the period of the studies.Thus, in 2003 and 2004, remote registrations consti-tuted only 1–2% of the overall time of the observations,while they constituted 10% and 12.5% in 2005 and2006, respectively. Apparently, this is related to the for-mation of reproductive aggregations (RA) of whitewhales in 2005, in which the family groups from all theadjacent sites participated. In 2006, the white whalespreferred to stay in the territories adjacent to CapeGlubokiy due to the bad weather; perhaps this alsoexplains the low index of the average abundance (Nav)near Cape Glubokiy in this year.

Therefore, the white whale registrations at sitesadjacent to Cape Glubokiy show that the whales notonly inhabit these sites locally but also that their groupsinteract. This is new data concerning the activity of thewhite whales of the local schools in the summer.

White whale identification. Some data indicatethat the same animals were repeatedly observed in thesouthern part of Onega Bay. Thus, in the period of thestudies of 2004, two white animals swam close toOsinki island for two days and one of them had a blackmark on the frontal upper part of its body. However,animals with such marks were not observed later. Apossible explanation for this is that this mark was in facta black oil spot and it quickly disappeared due to thewhite whale’s ecdysis taking place in the summer. In

Table 3. Directions in which the white whales arrived and left the area near Cape Glubokiy in Onega Bay of the White Seain June–July of 2003–2006

Year

Time of the observations

Number of registrations of white whales' arrivals and departures (n)

Arrival DepartureDirection not

identified Totaldays hours from

the westfrom

the eastfrom

the sea total to the west

to the east

into the sea total

2003 18 240.8 11 7 6 24 6 9 4 19 81 1242004 12 201.0 13 17 6 36 11 13 5 29 84 1492005 17 260.3 22 32 27 81 28 23 17 68 131 2802006 37 643.9 37 61 28 126 39 26 31 96 253 4752003–2006

84 1346.0 83 117 67 267 84 71 57 212 549 102831% 44% 25% 100% 40% 33% 27% 100%

Table 4. Directions in which white whales arrived and left the area near Lesnaya Osinka Island in June–July of 2003

Timeof the observations

Number of registrations of white whales' arrivals and departures (n)

arrival departuretotal

days hours from the WNW from the SSE from the NE total to the WNW to the SSE to the ESE total

12 258 7 11 8 26 6 10 12 28 5427% 42% 31% 100% 21% 36% 43% 100%

OCEANOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 1 2009

WHITE WHALE (Delphinapterus leucas) DISTRIBUTION 81

another case, apparently the same group of whitewhales was seen from different LOs. Thus, a densegroup of 7 white whale adults (white) and 4 calves wasseen near the L. Osinka Island and Cape Glubokiy areaswithin a 9-hour interval. The direction in which theyleft the first site and the peculiarities of the group’sstructure indicate that the observers registered the samegroup.

In addition, the changes of the mean abundance(Nav) in the area of the two lookouts were synchronizedin 2004, i.e., if the animals' abundance decreased in onearea it would rise in the other. Thus in the L. OsinkiIsland area, the Nav value fluctuated within 0.2–0.5individuals on June 25 to July 3 and later it increased to0.7–1.0 individuals on July 4–5. In the Cape Glubokiyarea, this index was 2.0–2.9 in the same period (June 25to July 2) and later (July 3–5) it decreased to 0.4–0.8 individuals.

Structure of the southern school. Convincing evi-dence of the all white whales' integration into a unitedschool was provided by the observations (July 9, 2002and July 21, 2005) of a mass white whale aggregation afew kilometers eastwards of Cape Glubokiy. Accordingto V.M. Bel’kovich, this is the site of “socialization”that all the schools have, where all the animals gather inorder to realize social contacts on all levels. It was pos-sible to track the movement of single groups of animalsin the direction of their habitation sites (Fig. 4) [1]. Ofthe 85 animals (the precise counting of the calves wascomplicated due to the distance) comprising the aggre-gation, two groups that included 15 and 20 adults(white colored) went in the direction of Lyamtsy Settle-ment. Another 10 adults went in the direction of theOsinki Islands, and 6 white-colored whales went east-wards to Uhta Bay. The other 34 white whales split intotwo groups: one of them approached Cape Glubokiy,while the other went in the direction of Purnemy Settle-ment. So, the whole school split into 5 or 6 familygroups. All of our observations indicate that all the fam-ily groups have approximately the same compositionand size. The family group living in the Cape Glubokiyarea most of the time includes 25 white whales with upto 6 calves and 3 immature individuals (juveniles) [7].The other (4–5) family groups have roughly the samesize and composition, which conforms well with theresults of the RA observations performed in this regionfrom a plane in 2002 and with the our estimate of thewhole southern school’s size (120–130 individuals) [1].

Therefore, the features of the white whales' distribu-tion in the southern part of Onega Bay in the summertime, as well as the peculiarities of the behavior of theanimals inhabiting this area, provide evidence for thepresence of a stable white whale community (localschool) in this period of the year.

The locations of the separate schools, as well astheir very presence, are further confirmed by the com-parison of the route and stationary observation resultsthat were performed almost simultaneously. Thus,

small groups of white whales of different ages fre-quently entering and leaving the area close to the LOnear Cape Gkubokiy (and Myagostrov Island) wereregistered regularly during one day’s observations.Overall, the number of registrations was 100–150 andeven 200 individuals. It is seen from Table 1 that theaverage abundance of the observed white whalesreached 10–11 individuals on single days (and thesewere whole periods). The average duration of the whitewhales' presence (Tav) in the area near Cape Glubokiyover 4 seasons of observations was Tav = Tob/n (numberof sightings) = 643.6/514 = 1.25 h. The number ofsightings here is half of the overall number of whitewhales' arrival and departure registrations (Table 3). Atthe same time, the animals may be entering and leavingthe area up to 15 times during a day of observations(18 h), when the average duration of the white whales'presence is equal to 1.25 h. That is why the overallnumber of registered white whales may be 150–165 individuals over a day of observations. However,we were unable to find such a number white whales inOnega Bay the during route observations. During amultiple route observation of Onega Bay, the number ofencountered white whales ranged from a few tens (dur-ing 2–3 days of route observations) to 119–136 individ-uals (during a 10-day special study). It is obvious thatthe high number of registrations of white whales withcalves is nothing else than constant registration of thefamily groups that inhabit this area in the summer. Thelocal translocations of these groups are determined bythe tidal phenomena and by a number of other factorsincluding their food.

It becomes clear why the white whale abundancenear the shores of Onega Bay in June–July of 2003–2006 was tens of times lower than the one determinedby the VNIRO expedition in 1933. The researcherscounted 4200 and 5300 white whales in approximatelysame period of observations in the 1930s from shoreLOs in Onega Bay. At the same time, they believed thatthe same individuals were registered twice [3]. Our LOobservations show repeated white whale registrationstaking place daily, and the whales often swim to the leftand to the right multiple times during one day. There-fore, the old data on the white whale abundance inOnega Bay are erroneous due to the incomprehensionof the habits of the white whales inhabiting this bay inthe summer. It may be added that we did not encounterwhite whale schools comprising of hundreds of individ-uals during the whole period of the route and stationaryobservations in Onega Bay in the summer.

CONCLUSIONS

The data of the route and stationary observations ofthe white whale distribution in Onega Bay of the WhiteSea during the summer of 2003–2006 confirm the pres-ence of three areas of summer habitation of local “set-tled” reproductive schools. It is considered that theabundance of white whales' local reproductive schools

82

OCEANOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 1 2009

ANDRIANOV et al.

found in the White Sea is approximately the same andequal to 150 individuals (V.M. Bel’kovich) accordingto the data of the ship surveys and the aerial observa-tions. The minimum registered abundance of the “jij-ginskoe” (the northwestern) school is no less than60 individuals, and that of the “myagostrovskoe” (thewestern) school no less than 50 individuals. The abun-dance of the best studied “southern” school was closeto 120–130 individuals. One more area where whitewhales were observed to concentrate (up to 40 individ-uals) was near Cape Letniy Orlov and Cape Chesmen-skiy (the eastern one). It is situated at the junction ofthree local schools' territories: the solovetskoe, jijgin-skoe, and southern. The present observations do notallow for precise determination of its function: whetherit is a site of reproduction or foraging. It is alsounknown how long lasting this formation is.

Apart from the marked “settled” reproductiveschools of white whales in Onega Bay, small schoolsconsisting of 15–20 individuals of “transitive” maturewhite whales (males, apparently) are rarely but regu-larly observed.

The white whale distribution in the southern part ofOnega Bay in the summer (June–July) has a discontin-uous character with concentrations in the CapeGlubokiy area and at a few adjacent sites. The coeffi-cient of the white whales' presence in the CapeGlubokiy area fluctuated in the range of 42.5%–67.4%in the years of the studies (2003–2006); the averageabundance was from 1.8 to 6.0 individuals. The charac-ter of the distribution, the direction of the transloca-tions, and a number of features of the animals' behaviorindicate that the white whales of the southern part ofOnega Bay of the White Sea form a stable communityof 5–6 family groups with 20–30 individuals in eachone during the summer.

The selection of coastal areas for reproduction is notaccidental in white whales. First of all, this is related tothe necessity of providing the most favorable condi-tions for new-born calves and their gradual adaptationto the environment as they develop. Thus, a white whalereproduction site has to have parts protected fromstrong wind waves (storm): capes protruding far outinto the sea, shallows, stony “korgi” or bays, and firthsrunning into the mainland. There have to be rather shal-low sites where females can teach calves the primaryskills of diving and hunting, and the bottom morphom-etry should allow for exiting into the area’s deep partduring a complete ebb. There also have to be the whitewhales' food objects. The presence of all these factorscontrols the locations of the summer habitation sites of“settled” white whale reproductive schools.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful to L.A. Dmitriev, A.L. Lukin,A.A. Lebedev, R.A. Belikov, G.N. Ognetov, G.A. Osipov,N.G. Pletenets, and I.A.Rogozina for their help in the con-duction of the stationary and route observations of whitewhales.

REFERENCES

1. V. V. Andrianov, L. R. Lukin, V. M. Bel’kovich, andA. V. Agafonov. 2006. Assessment of the numbers of thesouthern and western stocks of the beluga whale (Del-phinapterus leucas) in Onega Bay of the While Sea in2005, pp. 46–49 in Marine mammals of Holarctic. Col-lection of Scientific Papers. Saint Petersburg.

2. V. M. Bel’kovich. 1995, Investigation of the White seabeluga population, pp. 10–11 in Proceedings of theInternational Conference on Study and Conservation ofMarine Mammals. Moscow, MMC.

3. V. M. Bel’kovich. 2006. Biology of white whale (Del-phinapterus leucas) of the White Sea. Recent investiga-tions, pp. 580–583 in Marine Mammals of Holarctic.Collection of Scientific Papers. Saint Petersburg.

4. S. K. Klumov, “Belukha Sovetskogo severa (Syr’evayabaza i promysel),” in Trudy VNIRO. T. XII (Krasnoeznamya, Moscow, 1939) [in Russian].

5. A. A. Kuznetsov and V. M. Bel’kovich. 2006 Compara-tive analysis of structure in the summer population’sSolovetsky stock of belugas (Delphinapterus leucas),pp. 289–292 in Marine Mammals of Holarctic. Collec-tion of Scientific Papers. Saint Petersburg.

6. L. R. Lukin, “Struktura i chislennost' gruppirovkibelukhi (Delrhinarterus leusas), obitayushchei v Mezen-skom zalive Belogo morya,” in Geografiya evropeiskogosevera. Sb. nauchnykh statei (PGU, Arkhangel’sk,2002), pp. 212–220 [in Russian].

7. Lukin L. R. and Andrianov V. V. 2007. Distribution of thewhite whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in the Onega GulfWhite Sea in the summer, pp. 149–154 in Priceedings ofthe Xth International Conference: “The study, sustain-able use and natural resources conservation of the WhiteSea.” Arkhangelsk.

8. L. R. Lukin, V. V. Andrianov, A. A. Lebedev, andN. V. Neverova. 2006. Influence of mineral oil on behaviorof local reproductive groups of white whale (Delrhinarterusleusas), pp. 328–3301 in Marine Mammals of Holarctic.Collection of Scientific Papers. Saint Petersburg.

9. N. A. Ostroumov, “K sistematike i razmeshcheniyubelukhi Evropeiskogo Severa i Karskogo morya,” Zh.“Za Rybnuyu Industriyu Severa”, No. 11, 28–35 (1936).

10. A. D. Chernetsky, V. M. Bel’kovich and V. V. Krasnova2002. New data on population structure of white whalesin the White Sea, pp. 279–282 in Marine Mammals ofHolarctic. Abstracts of the conference presentations.Moscow. KMK.