Population Population >5% Fair Good May ≥0% >1-5% stability trend Any (stable or 2017 increase decline per per year year Population Age class and Age Fair Good May structure sex ratios class 2017 tbc* tbc* tbc* /sex ratio even # of calves >10 Fair Good May <5 per 5-10 per success observed 0 per year per 2017 year year year Health <10% Fair Good May ‘Skinniness’ >50% of 25-50% of <25% of (blubber of 2017 whales whales whales thickness) whales # of new scars Fair Good May from >10% of 2017 5-10 % <5% 0 fisheries/vessel whales interaction Fair Good May >30% of of lesions 15-25% <25% 0 2017 adults (TSD) Hormonal Baseline Baseline Baseline Good May levels tbc tbc tbc tbc 2017 Extent of % of effectively Poor Good May critical protected 0% <25% 25-75% >75% 2017 habitat critical habitat Habitat Abundance, Good Good May condition quality and >10% 5-10% <5% No 2017 trend of food decline decline decline Decline sources % of with <10% <40% 40-60% >60% Poor Good May vessel speed 2017 controls # of ship strikes >2 per 1-2 per per 0 per Good May ≤1 year year year year 2017 # of bycaught >2 per 1-2 per per 0 per Poor Good May ≤1 whales year year year year 2017 Habitat Ability to access Fair Good May critical habitats tbc# tbc# tbc# 2017 access * Indicator Ratings to be measured in relation to % population in specified age brackets and % skew in sex ratio The tables above highlight the significant gaps in baseline data that prevent an accurate assessment of the population status throughout its range, but also give a good indication of the progress that has been made regionally on assessing and addressing the ASHW’s conservation status. The commissioning of the assessment report as part of its 2015-2020 Marine strategy demonstrates a considerable investment from EWS-WWF, and a desire to catalyse appropriate research and mitigation actions in the region.
Population stability Population trend Any decline ≥0% (stable or >1-5% increase per year >5% per year Fair Good May 2017 Population structure Age class and sex ratios tbc* tbc* tbc* Age class /sex ratio even Fair Good May 2017 success # of calves observed 0 per year <5 per year 5-10 per year >10 per year Fair Good May 2017 Health ‘Skinniness’ (blubber thickness) >50% of whales 25-50% of whales <25% of whales <10% of whales Fair Good May 2017 # of new scars from fisheries/vessel interaction >10% of whales 5-10 % <5% 0 Fair Good May 2017 of lesions (TSD) >30% of adults 15-25% <25% 0 Fair Good May 2017 Hormonal levels Baseline tbc Baseline tbc Baseline tbc tbc Good May 2017 Extent of critical habitat % of effectively protected critical habitat 0% <25% 25-75% >75% Poor Good May 2017 Habitat condition Abundance, quality and trend of food sources >10% decline 5-10% decline <5% decline No Decline Good Good May 2017 % of with vessel speed controls <10% <40% 40-60% >60% Poor Good May 2017 # of ship strikes >2 per year 1-2 per year ≤1 per year 0 per year Good May 2017 # of bycaught whales >2 per year 1-2 per year ≤1 per year 0 per year Poor Good May 2017 Habitat Ability to access critical habitats tbc# tbc# tbc# access Fair Good May 2017 * Indicator Ratings to be measured in relation to % population in specified age brackets and % skew in sex ratio The tables above highlight the significant gaps in baseline data that prevent an accurate assessment of the population status throughout its range, but also give a good indication of the progress that has been made regionally on assessing and addressing the ASHW’s conservation status. The commissioning of the assessment report as part of its 2015-2020 Marine strategy demonstrates a considerable investment from EWS-WWF, and a desire to catalyse appropriate research and mitigation actions in the region.