By Florence Sullivan, MSc student GEMM lab

Over the past few months I have been slowly (and I do mean SLOWLY – I don’t believe I’ve struggled this much with learning a new skill in a long, long time) learning how to work in “R”.  For those unfamiliar with why a simple letter might cause me so much trouble, R is a programming language and free software environment suitable for statistical computing and graphing.

My goal lately has been to interpolate my whale tracklines (i.e. smooth out the gaps where we missed a whale’s surfacing by inserting artificial locations).  In order to do this I needed to know (1) How long does a gap between fixes need to be to identify a missed surfacing? (2) How many artificial points should be used to fill a given gap?

The best way to answer these queries was to look at a distribution of all of the time steps between fixes.  I started by importing my dataset – the latitude and longitude, date, time, and unique whale identifier for each point (over 5000 of them) we recorded last summer. I converted the locations into x & y coordinates, adjusted the date and time stamp into the proper format, and used the package adehabitatLT  to calculate the difference in times between each fix.  A package known as ggplot2 was useful for creating exploratory histograms – but my data was incredibly skewed (Fig 1)! It appeared that the majority of our fixes happened less than a minute apart from each other. When you recall that gray whales typically take 3-4 short breathes at the surface between dives, this starts to make a lot of sense, but we had anticipated a bimodal distribution with two peaks: one for the quick surfacings, and one for the surfacings between 4-5 minutes dives. Where was this second peak?

Sometimes, calculating the logarithm of one of your axes can help tease out more patterns in your data  – particularly in a heavily skewed distribution like Fig. 1. When I logged the time interval data, our expected bimodal distribution pattern became evident (Fig. 2). And, when I back-calculate from the center of the two peaks we see that the first peak occurs at less than 20 seconds (e^2.5 = 18 secs) representing the short, shallow blow intervals, or interventilation dives, and that the second peak of dives spans ~2.5 minutes to  ~5 minutes (e^4.9 = 134 secs, e^5.7 = 298 secs). Reassuringly, these dive intervals are in agreement with the findings of Stelle et al. (2008) who described the mean interval between blows as 15.4 ± 4.73 seconds, and overall dives ranging from 8 seconds to 11 minutes.

So, now that we know what the typical dive patterns in this dataset are, the trick was to write a code that would look through each trackline, and identify gaps of greater than 5 minutes.  Then, the code calculates how many artificial points to create to fill the gap, and where to put them.

One of the most frustrating parts of this adventure for me has been understanding the syntax of the R language.  I know what calculations or comparisons I want to make with my dataset, but translating my thoughts into syntax for the computer to understand has not been easy.  With error messages such as:

Error in match.names(clabs, names(xi)) :

names do not match previous names

Solution:  I had to go line by line and verify that every single variable name matched, but turned out it was a capital letter in the wrong place throwing the error!

Error in as.POSIXct.default(time1) :

do not know how to convert ‘time1’ to class “POSIXct”

Solution: a weird case where the data was in the correct time format, but not being recognized, so I had to re-import the dataset as a different file format.

Error in data.frame(Whale.ID = Whale.ID, Site = Site, Latitude = Latitude,  :   arguments imply differing number of rows: 0, 2, 1

Solution: HELP! Yet to be solved….

Is it any wonder that when a friend asks how I am doing, my answer is “R is kicking my butt!”?

Science is a collaborative effort, where we build on the work of researchers who came before us. Rachael, a wonderful post-doc in the GEMM Lab, had already tackled this time-based interpolation problem earlier in the year working with albatross tracks. She graciously allowed me to build on her previous R code and tweak it for my own purposes. Two weeks ago, I was proud because I thought I had the code working – all that I needed to do was adjust the time interval we were looking for, and I could be off to the rest of my analysis!  However, this weekend, the code has decided it doesn’t work with any interval except 6 minutes, and I am lost.

Many of the difficulties encountered when coding can be fixed by judicious use of google, stackoverflow, and the CRAN repository.

But sometimes, when you’ve been staring at the problem for hours, what you really need is a little praise for trying your best. So, if you are an R user, go download this package: praise, load the library, and type praise() into your console. You won’t regret it (See Fig. 4).

Thank you to Rachael who created the code in the first place, thanks to Solene who helped me trouble shoot, thanks to Amanda for moral support. Go GEMM Lab!

Why do pirates have a hard time learning the alphabet?  It’s not because they love aaaR so much, it’s because they get stuck at “c”!

Stelle, L. L., W. M. Megill, and M. R. Kinzel. 2008. Activity budget and diving behavior of gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) in feeding grounds off coastal British Columbia. Marine mammal science 24:462-478.

## Smile! You’re on Camera!

By Florence Sullivan, MSc. Student, GEMM Lab

Happy Spring everyone!  You may be wondering where the gray whale updates have been all winter – and while I haven’t migrated south to Baja California with them, I have spent many hours in the GEMM Lab processing data, and categorizing photos.

You may recall that one of my base questions for this project is:

Do individual whales have different foraging strategies?

In order to answer this question, we must be able to tell individual gray whales apart. Scientists have many methods for recognizing individuals of different species using tags and bands, taking biopsy samples for DNA analysis, and more. But the method we’re using for this project is perhaps the simplest: Photo-Identification, which relies on the unique markings on individual animals, like fingerprints.  All you need is a camera and rather a lot of patience.

Bottlenose dolphins were some of the first cetaceans to be documented by photo-identification.  Individuals are identified by knicks and notches in their fins. Humpback whales are comparatively easy to identify – the bold black and white patterns on the underside of their frequently displayed flukes are compared.  Orcas, one of the most beloved species of cetaceans, are recognized thanks to their saddle patches – again, unique to each individual. Did you know that the coloration and shape of those patches is actually indicative of the different ecotypes of Orca around the world? Check out this beautiful poster by Uko Gorter to see!

Gray whale photo identification is a bit more subtle since these whales don’t have dorsal fins and do not show the undersides of their fluke regularly.  Because gray whales can have very different patterns on either side of their body, it is also important to get photos of both their right and left sides, as well as the fluke, to be sure of recognizing an individual if it comes around again.   When taking photos of a gray whale, it’s a good idea to include the dorsal hump, where the knuckles start as it dives, as an easy indicator of which side of the body you are looking at when you’re trying to match photos.  Some clues that I often use when identifying an individual include the placement of barnacles, and patterns of pigmentation and scars.  You can see that patience and a talent for pattern recognition come in handy for this sort of work.

While we were in the field, it was important for my team to quickly find reference features to make sure we were always tracking the same whale. If you stopped by to visit our field station, you may have heard use saying things like “68 has white on both fluke-tips”, “70 has a propeller scar on the left side”,  “the barnacles on 54’s head looks like a polyp”, or “27 has a smiley face in front of the first knuckle left side.” Sometimes, if a trait was particularly obvious, and the whale visited our field station more than once, we would give them a name to help us remember them.  These notes were often (but to my frustration, not always!) recorded in our field notebook, and have come in handy this winter as I have systematically gone through the 8000+ photos we took last summer, identifying each individual, and noting whenever one was a repeat visitor. With these individuals labeled, I can now assess their level of behavioral and distribution consistency within and between study sites, and over the course of the summer.

Why don’t you try your luck?  How many individuals are in this photoset? How many repeats?  If I tell you that my team named some of these whales Mitosis, Smiley, Ninja and Keyboard can you figure out which ones they are?

Keep scrolling for the answer key ( I don’t want to spoil it too easily!)

There are 7 whales in this photoset. Smiley and Keyboard both have repeat shots for you to find, and Smiley even shows off both left and right sides.

1. Whale 18 – Mitosis
2. Whale 70 -Keyboard
3. Whale 23 -Smiley
4. Whale 68 – Keyboard
5. Whale 27 -Smiley
6. Whale 67
7. Whale 36 -Ninja
8. Whale 60 – “60”
9. Whale 38 – has no nickname even if we’ve seen it 8 times! Have any suggestions? leave it in the comments!
10. Whale 55 – Smiley

## Gray whale field work wrap-up; sea you later

Hello everyone,

Florence here with an update about the final numbers from this summer’s gray whale field season.

For folks just hearing about the project, my team of interns and I spent the summer alternating between study sites at Depoe Bay and Port Orford to conduct fine-scale focal follows of gray whales foraging in near-shore Oregon waters using a theodolite.  That is to say, we gathered 10,186 ‘marks’ or ‘locations’ where whales came to the surface, and by connecting the dots, we are able to create tracklines and analyze their movement patterns.  The idea is to document and describe gray whale foraging behavior in order to answer the questions: Are there patterns in how the whales use the space? Is there a relationship between foraging success and proximity to kelp beds? Do behaviors vary between individuals, location, or over time during the season?

While at our study sites, we often received questions about vessel disturbance on the whale’s behavior. Over the course of the summer, we saw whales completely ignore boats, approach boats, and actively avoid boats. Therefore, we documented these vessel interactions in order to ask questions such as: Does vessel disturbance alter behavior? How close is too close? Does the potential for vessel disturbance vary depending on (1) size of motor, (2) speed of approach, (3) type of vessel, i.e. kayak, fishing boat, tour boat, (4) the number of vessels already in the area, (5) amount of time a vessel has been following a whale, (6) time of season, (7) the presence of a calf or other whales? The end goal, once the data have been analyzed, is to bring our results to local vessel operators (commercial and recreational) and work together to write reasonable, effective, and scientifically informed guidelines for vessel operations in the presence of gray whales.

And now, the numbers you’ve all been waiting for, here is the tally of our data collection this summer:

 Boiler Bay Graveyard Point Humbug Mountain Whales total 80 73 28 Boats total 307 105 7 Total survey time (HH:MM:SS) 122:22:41 72:49:17 50:22:35 Total survey time with whales (HH:MM:SS) 64:47:54 80:39:57 22:59:00 Total Marks 4744 4334 1108

Table 1. Summary of survey effort for gray whale foraging ecology field season summer 2015

So, what does this all mean?  Well, the unsatisfying answer is of course: we don’t know yet. However, it is my job to find out!  I will spend the fall and winter processing data, writing and running behavioral models, communicating my successes and frustrations, and finally presenting my results to the community.

The human eye is well adapted to pick out patterns. Test yourself – what trends can you see in these images?  Are there areas that the whales seem to prefer over other areas?  In the Port Orford images with Keyboard & our kelp patches, does our theory of a relationship between whale presence and kelp patches seem valid?

This field season would not have been possible without the help of some truly excellent people.  Thank you Cricket and Justin and Sarah for making up the core of Team Ro”buff”stus. It was a pleasure working with you this summer.  Thank you to guest observers and photographers Era, Steven, Diana, Cory, Kelly, Shea and Brittany for filling in when we needed extra help! Thank you to our support network down in Port Orford: Tom, Tyson and the team at the Port Orford Field Station – we appreciate the housing and warm welcome, and to Jim and Karen Auborn and the Port of Port Orford for allowing us access to such a fantastic viewing location. Thank you to Oregon State Parks for allowing us access to the field sites at Boiler Bay and Humbug. Finally, thank you to Depoe Bay Pirate Coffee Company for keeping us warm and caffeinated on many foggy, cold early mornings. This work was funded by the William and Francis McNeil Fellowship Award, the Wild Rivers Coast Alliance, and the American Cetacean Society: Oregon Chapter.

Fair winds,

Florence

## Not Everyday is Gray (just most of them)

As Amanda explains quite nicely in her previous blog post, research is not always glamorous, and we don’t always see the species we’ve come out to the field to study.  However, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t other cool species out there to spot!  Here are some common (and uncommon) visitors to some of our research sites this summer.

Also, if you continue to the bottom, we’ve included some cool videos of (1) gray whale sharking behaviour, (2) Gray whale swimming (top down full body view), and what it looks and sounds like when we’re doing one of our close-in focal follows. Enjoy!

If you remember a few weeks ago, we shared photos of gray whale “sharking” behaviour.  Well, now we have video!  Enjoy:

Here’s what it looks like from the top of Graveyard Bluff when a whale swims by below us!

We get really excited by this behavior because its positive proof that the whales are successfully foraging!

and here is a fluke!

We’ll be back soon with more updates from Port Orford.

Fair winds,

Florence & the rest of Team Ro”buff”stus

## We need all the “Kelp” we can get!

Hello from Hatfield Marine Science Center! This is Justin bringing you the latest and greatest in Gray Whale news. But first, let me fill you folks in with some info about me.  I am an undergraduate student, transitioning into my senior year, with Oregon State University’s Fisheries and Wildlife Department. In addition to my major, I am also minoring in statistics; crazy right? I have hopes and dreams of working in Marine Ecology, and I believe working on this Gray Whale project is a fine start! Which means, this summer, I have had the fortunate opportunity to work alongside the lovely Florence van Tulder, the mastermind behind the project, as well as Cricket and Sarah, the other two charismatic interns.

As we were wrapping up our two week stint in Port Orford, We observed the Gray Whales exhibiting some interesting behavior; they seemed to move from kelp patch to kelp patch, almost as if they were searching for something. What could be hiding under the luscious stands of Nereocystis luetkeana, otherwise known as bull kelp? Well, with the presence of defecation ( whale droppings) left behind from diving whales near many of the floating kelp patches, one culprit came to mind- mysid shrimp. Mysid shrimp are believed to be a primary prey source of the Gray whales.

Naturally, my curiosity got the best me and I ended up spending hours on end conducting literature searches and looking for bathymetry maps, thanks to Florence. All joking aside, I asked Florence if we could use our fancy Theodolite to assess or roughly map the distribution of the kelp patches. We would create polygonal shapes of the kelp on a map and observe how the whales move with respect to the kelp. The idea being, to get a better of picture of the relationship between the whales and the kelp, if any relationship exists at all. It is still a work in progress, due to our survey sites getting all kinds of “fogged” up. When the kinks are worked out and we have some useful visual data, we will post an awesome photo.

Port Orford didn’t just bring us sweet whales, it brought the heat! Temperatures were up to almost the nineties the last week in July! We beat the heat with plenty of hydration and sun block and the predicable wind patterns became a savior on those sweltering days giving us temporary relief.  The heat seemed to tease out other critters as well. We saw a variety of birds, from turkey vultures, Peregrine Falcons, Ospreys, Bald Eagles, and even Egrets!  In the water we saw baby Harbor seals, and some bonus River Otters.

In more recent news, August 8th marked our first full month of surveying between our two whale hotspots. However, the term “hotspot” doesn’t always seem to be fitting. This past week has been a tough one for the team and I up in Boiler Bay due to less than optimal weather conditions and our survey site has been exposed to an abnormal cycle of fog. Our friendly “neighborhood” grays have been a bit sparse, and yet, we have had Humpback Whales grace us with their presence and these whales have been spotted during several survey days this week! ( In the tradition of opportunistic data, we even tracked one of them.)

This summer has been very fun because not only do we get to watch whales every day, but when we are in Boiler Bay, we have the opportunity to meet fascinating people from all over the world! The positive support for the project coming from the community is quite a nice touch to our days in the field. If you are ever in the neighborhood, stop by and say hello, maybe share a whale’s tale or two!

## Gray Whale Goofs

Hello there!  Florence here, signing in from Newport.  We had a fantastic trip south to Port Orford, and tracked another 53 whales bringing our season total up to 117 so far! This morning, we were back out at Boiler Bay and spent 5 hours staring at empty water – in keeping with the theme of this post, field work does not always go as planned.

Our two study areas couldn’t be more different.  At the Boiler Bay State Wayside, we are approximately 18 meters off the water.  In Port Orford, we are perched on the side of a 63 meter tall cliff. This extra height greatly increases our range and accuracy as well as changing the angle of our photography and the type of photo analysis we can do.  We’re quite excited to have a top down view of our whales, because the photos we are capturing will allow us to use certain photogrammetry techniques to measure the length and girth of the individuals.  With luck, when we compare the photos from the beginning of the season (now) to the end of our study (September) we may be able to see a change in the height of the post-cranial fat deposit, which would indicate a successful foraging season.  Gray whales do not eat from the beginning of their southward migration, through the breeding and calving season, until they reach productive foraging grounds at the end of their northward migration.  This means that all their sustenance for 6+ months is derived from their summer foraging success.  Did you know that they even generate their own water through an oxidation reaction which creates ‘metabolic water’ from their blubber stores?  So it will be rather fantastic if we manage to measure the change in whale body condition over the course of the summer – particularly if we are able to spot any mother-calf pairs who will have had an especially grueling journey north.

So, while our photo database is advancing nicely, technical difficulties are to be expected when you’re in the field, and sometimes, troubleshooting takes longer than you would like it to.  This evening, let me introduce you to the elusive species known as ‘the Chinese land whale.’  It is a very rare breed which spontaneously generates itself from misaligned computer files.

When the theodolite beeps as we ‘mark’ a whale, a pair of horizontal and vertical angles are getting sent from the machine to a program called ‘Pythagoras’ on the laptop. Given our starting coordinates and a few other variables, the program auto-calculates for us the latitude and longitude of that whale.  While we hoped it would be a simple matter to upload these coordinates to Google Earth to visualize the tracklines, it turns out that Pythagoras stores the East/West hemisphere information in a separate column, so if we just plot the raw numbers, our whale tracks end up in the middle of a field in rural China! Hence, the rare ‘Chinese land whale’.  Now that we know the trick, it is not so difficult to fix, but we were quite surprised the first time it happened!

Of course, that is not the only thing that has gone wrong with visualizing the tracklines.  When we first got to Graveyard Point survey site, it turns out that we had set our azimuth (our reference angle) the wrong direction from true north, so all our whales seemed to be foraging near the fish and chips restaurant in the middle of town.

After discovering that in order to rotate something 180degrees, you simply need to alter the azimuth angle by 90degrees, (we’re still not sure why this is working), the whales left the fish and chips to us and returned to the harbor.  Anyways, now that we’ve figured out these glitches, we can focus on identifying individual whales, and figuring out which track-lines might be repeat visitors.

In other outreach news, the OSU media department came out to the field and interviewed us a few weeks ago (on a day that the theodolite and computer were refusing to talk to each other due to a faulty connector cable – which is always delightful when one is trying to showcase research in progress). The resulting article has been posted should you wish to take a look:

http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2015/aug/researchers-studying-oregon%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cresident-population%E2%80%9D-gray-whales

Until next time,

Team Ro”buff”stus

## Familiar Flukes and Faces

Greetings fellow marine enthusiasts! My name is Cricket, and I am one of the interns working on Florence’s Gray Whale project! I’m preparing to graduate from Oregon State University in a couple of months with a Bachelors of Science in Biology with the marine option. Before I graduate, I wanted to get some extra experience in the field this summer, which is how I ended up here with Florence, Justin, and Sarah, having surprisingly crazy whale adventures along the Oregon coast!

Today marks the end of our first week in Port Orford. We weren’t sure what we were going to get when we switched sites, though of course we had a few fears: No whales, low visibility, bad weather, etc. Depoe Bay had been good to us so far, and we were slightly worried about the transition. In actuality, Port Orford has been amazing!

Day one was foggy, and we only visited the site briefly to figure out a good location for the theodolite. One of our sites is located on a terrifyingly high cliff, but the view is stellar. We were only there for about an hour and we saw two whales, one of which came up into the cove just beneath us. In fact, one of our concerns with this site is that the whales actually get too close to view through the theodolite. What an unexpected problem to have!

From our vantage point, we can get some incredible photos of these whales. Photo identification is a breeze if the whale decides to come into the cove closest to us. We can watch them under the water, as opposed to in Depoe Bay where we could only really observe them when they surface.

We all get particularly excited when we see the same whale more than once. In Depoe Bay, we had at least four different whales appear on multiple days. We can verify this using the photos we manage to get of the whales, and comparing them between days.

For example, in Port Orford, we spotted a whale on the 20th with a particularly large white spot on the fluke. This spot made the whale easily identifiable, so we were able to get a good focal follow (because we could track this whale amongst other whales with confidence that we were tracking the same one the entire time), which in turn allowed us to create a track line of this whale’s dive patterns. This whale happened to be whale sixty (the 60th whale we’ve seen since the start of our data collection).

Then, days later, we spotted another whale. This was whale 78, and after a few surfaces, we realized this whale had the same white spot! We hesitantly referred to this whale as “sixty” but couldn’t be sure until we compared photos from the days before. And sure enough, it was!

I am particularly enthusiastic about our whale resights, and actively enjoy going through the photos and comparing each one to previous whales to try and identify individuals. It’s tedious, but rewarding when we can begin to learn individuals and identify them in the field. As a sort of rough guide to help us when scrounging through photo ID, I’ve put some of our good comparative photos into a google doc to use as reference. Here’s an example of some of the repeat whales we’ve seen:

Tomorrow will be day two at our second Port Orford site. Today was day one, and we managed to spot two whales, which is definitely promising. We hope we have as much luck finding and tracking whales there as we did on our cliffside!

Have a nice Gray!
Cricket

## A Week-Full of Whales

Hello and greetings from the sort of sunny Oregon Coast! Sarah reporting in to offer an update on Florence’s Gray Whale study now that we’re about ten days into sampling. If you’re new to our blog you can read up on the preliminary field season right here.

Before I get to the project though, let me introduce myself a bit further. As I said, my name’s Sarah – one of the three interns on our whale surveying team. I got my Bachelor of Science in Oceanography at the University of Washington a few years back and have since worked as a lab tech at UW’s Friday Harbor Labs and as an Americorps volunteer serving as a teacher’s aide. Eventually I plan to become a science teacher, but thought a little more field work this summer would be a nice break after two years of service.

Thus, I moved to Newport last week just in time to catch the first day of our main surveying season. And what a season it’s been. We’ve tracked 48 whales since I’ve arrived, averaging about six a day. Of course, those aren’t all 48 different whales. If we lose sight of a whale for longer than 20 minutes, we assume it has left our study area and pronounce it lost, and unless we can identify the next sighting as the same whale based on markings (which we’re getting pretty good at), we give it a new number to keep track. We also give whales we’ve already seen new numbers when we see them on a different day.

You might be wondering how we can tell gray whales apart when they’re mostly, well, gray and underwater. And the short answer is we have a pretty difficult time doing so at first sight. Gray whales aren’t like orcas, whose saddle patch just behind the dorsal fin serves as a fingerprint, nor are they humpbacks, whose patterned flukes are cataloged for easy matching. Gray whales have more of a dorsal hump than a fin, followed by five or six ridges we call knuckles. They aren’t famous for showing their flukes above water either, so unless you get several views of a particular whale’s sides, dorsal, and, if you’re lucky, fluke, it’s hard to have a positive ID for the whale. The good news is, that part of our sampling equipment is a camera with a massive zoom lens, so we can take photos of most of the whales we track with the theodolite (see the previous post to learn about theodolites). From those photos (at least 400 a day) we can look at scars from barnacles and killer whales, pigmentation spots that are part of the whales’ coloring, and parasites like barnacles and amphipods to recognize whales we’ve seen before. Eventually we’ll send all the photos we take to the Cascadia Research Group in Olympia, Washington, that keeps a database of all identified gray whales.

Anyways, thanks for keeping with me to the bottom of the page. It’s been a fun first week-or-so and I’m excited to be heading to our second study site in Port Orford tomorrow after surveying. We’ll be there for 15 days, so next time you hear from us, we’ll be a bit further down the coast.

Best Fishes!

Sarah

## Gray Whales of the Oregon Coast; Preliminary field season!

Hello all, Florence here with an update from the field!  Its high time that I tell you a little bit about the rather exciting project getting started here at the GEMM lab.  Concerning the foraging ecology of the Pacific Coast feeding aggregation of gray whales, and conveniently having a high potential to improve local conservation practices, my team and I are hoping to (1) document and describe fine-scale foraging behavior of gray whales, (2) assess the impact of vessel disturbance on foraging behavior, and (3) work with local communities, stakeholders, and whale watch operators to create sustainable, scientifically informed guidelines for vessel operations in the presence of gray whales.

As with many things, collaboration is the key to success, and for the past month, I have teamed up with Miche Fournet of the ORCAA lab to run a theodolite-for-marine-mammals training camp.  What is a theodolite you may ask?  A theodolite is a precision surveying instrument used to measure angles in the horizontal and vertical planes.  You may have seen one in use by a road crew or property surveyor. The instrument has also been adapted to marine mammal work because by knowing your own altitude and position, that of a secondary point, and using the telescopic sight to focus on a whale, one is able to calculate the exact location of that whale.   Do this every time the whale comes up to breathe, and pretty soon, you have a fine scale track-line of exactly where that whale has been, for how long, and what it was doing.  It was quite fun to learn the tricks of the trade with Miche and her Acoustic Spyglass crew, and we wish them a successful field season with the Humpbacks up in Glacier Bay, Alaska.

Now we all know that a battle plan never survives the first engagement with the enemy, and a new scientific protocol is much the same.  Spring Quarter is finished, and two of my interns, Cricket and Justin arrived here at the GEMM lab on Monday. Together, we have been field testing our new equipment, getting used to working as a team day in and day out and most of all, finding all the little kinks in the survey plans and computer program we are using to log our data.  So far, we’ve seen 8 whales over the course of 4 days, improved our reflexes in scanning the horizon and “fixing” on our targets, managed to misplace a day’s worth of data in the confusion of computer programming, gotten faster at setting up all our equipment, talked with curious passer-bys and spent a lot of time staring at the blue horizon.  And you know what? It’s been brilliant.  This week was specifically set aside to figure out everything that could possible go wrong while there aren’t too many whales around yet.  Now, we’ll be ready to hit the ground running when the real fun starts in July!

Until next time, Fair Winds!

## Sharing the Science! Outreach at the GEMM Lab

Hello Everyone,

My name is Florence, and I’m here to update you on all the amazing outreach activities that the GEMM lab has participated in this past month!

We started on April 11, with the HMSC-wide Marine Science Day celebrations.  This year was particularly exciting because the Hatfield Marine Science Center is turning 50 years old! Along with the rest of our colleagues at the Marine Mammal Institute, we presented posters detailing our projects, had a few hands on activities such as ‘spot the whale’ – a bit of a scavenger hunt designed to give people a taste of how difficult it can be to spot marine mammals, and answered questions about our work.  It was quite a success!

On April 19, I went down to Port Orford, OR to participate in “Redfish Rocks on the Docks”  an outreach event showcasing all the exciting research being done in conjunction with the Redfish Rocks Marine Reserve near Port Orford.  I presented a poster about my thesis project: Assessment of vessel disturbance to foraging gray whales on the Oregon Coast to promote sustainable ecotourism, and answered questions while leading folks through our ‘stay warm like a whale’ blubber glove activity.  It was a beautiful sunny day, but so windy that at times we joked that our tables looked more like geology presentations than marine biology due to all the rocks holding everyone’s papers, photos, and flyers down! Many of the folks who I will be collaborating with over the course of this project also had their own informational booths; South Coast Tours, Redfish Rocks Community Team, and the Oregon Marine Reserves Program. The Surfrider Foundation and CoastWatch also had interesting activities and information to share about marine debris and conservation of our oceans.  My favorite moment of the day was when I was explaining to a little girl how gray whales need to eat a lot of mysid shrimp in order to maintain their blubber to stay warm in the frigid ocean – and she intuitively made the jump from the blubber glove to the wetsuit she uses to go swimming!  It was wonderful to see her thinking critically about the different strategies for heat retention in water.

Finally, yesterday, almost the entire lab gave presentations at the Northwest Student Society of Marine Mammals Annual Meeting.  The meeting was attended by ~80 interested students and researchers from a number of outstanding universities including; Western Washington University, University of Washington, Portland State, Stanford University and of course, Oregon State University.  The day began with an excellent introductory presentation by Dr. Ari Friedlander of our sister BTBEL Lab, and then it was on to student presentations.  Courtney and I presented in the ‘Human Dimensions’ forum on the possibilities of citizen science in marine mammal research and gray whale foraging ecology respectively.  At lunch, our valiant leader, Leigh, took part in a discussion panel and fielded questions from the audience concerning current advances in technology and possible applications to field work as well as giving professional development advice.  A few take away messages; Technology can provide wonderful insights, but one should not use a tool just to use a tool.  Rather, it is important to first ask your question, and then build your methodology and choose your tools in a manner most precisely able to answer the questions at hand.  In regards to professional development, do not discount the benefit of getting international experience – A broad perspective on possible solutions, and strong international collaborations will be necessary to solve many of the management issues facing our oceans today.  During the ‘Bioacoustics’ session, Amanda presented her work concerning harbor porpoise spatial distribution. Finally, Solène presented her work on Maui’s dolphins during the ‘Space and Time’ Session, and walked out having earned the ‘Best Presentation’ Award!!  Over the past few months that she has been visiting us, she has been a dedicated colleague and a wonderfully cheerful presence in the lab, and it was fantastic to see all her hard work being recognized in this public forum.  Overall, this NWSSMM conference was a great opportunity to see what other students in the Pacific Northwest region are working on, opened doors for future collaborations and gave us ideas for future projects.