TRW Phase 193 Science Report

South Tenerife, Canary IslandsPeters, J.

1st July - 31st September 2019

Assisted by:Vivian Telleria, Gemma Hoogenstrijd, JazminWard and Eleanor Hainess

Contents

1 Introduction 21.1 Frontier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2 Tenerife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.3 Tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.4 Cetaceans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.4.1 Sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.4.2 Risso’s dolphins (grampus griseus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.4.3 Common Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncates) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.4.4 Shortfin pilot whales (Globicephala melas) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.4.5 Shortbeaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.4.6 Atlantic spotted dolphins (Stenella frontalis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

1.5 Aims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91.5.1 Gaps in knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2 Threats to cetaceans 102.1 Tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102.2 Disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102.3 Plastics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102.4 Noise pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3 Methodology and training 123.1 Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.2 Briefing sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.2.1 General Introduction to the TRW project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.2.2 Risk Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.2.3 Cetaceans in Tenerife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.3 Fieldwork training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.4 Survey Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143.5 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

3.5.1 Materials and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153.5.2 Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4 Results 164.1 Abundance and distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.2 Behavioural response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

5 Conclusion 26

6 Reference 27

1

1 Introduction

1.1 Frontier

Frontier was established in 1989 starting its life as a non-profit conservation project and over the next30 years evolving into a non-governmental organisation (NGO). Working on protecting and conservingthe environment for future generations. Through its many efforts multiple projects have seen a highamount of success, one such example being that of a partnership with WWF which allowed for thecreation of the Tanzania marine park within Mafia island in 1989, which became the first of its kindwithin a developing country, showcasing the potential for long lasting and sustainable projects. Sincethis revolutionary project Frontier has grown substantially, now boasting a wide array of projects within70 countries covering all continents except that of Antarctica (Frontier, 2018).

The official mission statement of Frontier is ‘To conserve the world’s most endangered wildlife and threat-ened habitats and to build sustainable livelihoods for marginalised and under resourced communities inthe world’s poorest countries. To create solutions that are apolitical, forward-thinking, community-driven, and innovative and which take into consideration the long-term needs of low income communities(Frontier, 2018).

The newly founded project ‘Tenerife Whale & Dolphin Conservation’ aims to expand the current modelinto eco-tourism, looking at established areas with high tourism rates which could potentially increaseanthropogenic pressures on fundamentally vital areas for biodiversity such as that of the Canary CurrentLarge Marine Ecosystem (CCLME).

1.2 Tenerife

Tenerife is situated off the African continental plate within the Canary island archipelago, being themost populous of the islands as well as the largest. Tenerife has a total land area of 2,034.38km2 withthe latest survey (2019) showing a population of 904,713 inhabitants (Wikipedia, 2019).

The previously mentioned CCLME plays a large part of everyday Tenerife life, with the island receivinga large amount of income from the increase biodiversity, through fishing and tourism. The CCLMEprovides the island with a nutrient source through what is known as upwelling, upwelling occurs along acoastline when a deep colder water is allowed to displace the warm nutrient lacking surface water, suchas that of volcanic islands with a strong wind current.

Upwelling creates isolated areas of high marine biodiversity, first by increasing the amount of primaryproduction which in then encourages higher trophic organisms to be drawn to the area for foraging.Upwelling, coupled with nearby deep ocean levels of 2500m ( Spanish Institute of Oceanography, 2007)which maintain a population of cephalopods, the primary food source of pilot whales and sperm whales,allow the recreational whale watching industry to be profitable within the island.

The CCLME, however, is not immune to human influence however, during the period of 1982- 2013 therewas a mean warming of 0.28◦ C per decade (Velez-Belchi & Gonzalez-Carballo, 2015). If this trend isallowed to continue, the system may undergo changes that could see a decline to the marine mammalpopulation (Hernadez-Guerra & Espino-Falcon, 2017).

1.3 Tourism

Tourism causes conflict within the island, there is no denying it is paramount to the financial pros-perity of the island. With five million tourists visiting Tenerife per annum for recreational, sport andecotourism. With the sports tourism industry growing in recent years, sports tourism in Tenerife isprimarily focused around Sailing, Wind surfing, Kite surfing and Jet skiing, all of which interfere withthe smaller eco-tourism industry of the island. In order to have a more sustainable eco-tourism model,like that of other volcanic marine mammal rich countries such as Iceland, sport tourism will need to beaddressed and more policies put into place.

2

1.4 Cetaceans

The conditions of Tenerife’s nutrient rich water column and provides near perfect conditions for cetaceans. providing permanent residence to four odontocete (toothed whale) cetacean species, the sperm whalePhysete macrocephalus, Risso’s dolphin Grampus griseus, short-finned pilot whale Globicephala macrorhynchusandcommon bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncates(Francisco & Ortega, 2009). Alongside these four resi-dent species there are also 18 migratory species found within Tenerife, although within our research areaonly two of these are regularly sighted; the spotted dolphin(Stenella attenuats) and the striped dolphin(Stenella coeruleoalba). While no Mysticeti whales have been seen within our research area, there is anoted presence of them around the island.

1.4.1 Sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus)

Mature Male sperm whales ( Physete macrocephalus) are the largest odontocetes within the ocean, weigh-ing up to 45 tons with a length of 16 meters. While females are still large, they are the most sexuallydimorphic cetaceans, weighing in at less than 40% of the body mass of the male counterpart at around15 tons and being only 11 meters long (Whitehall, 2018).

Figure 1: Diagram of Male and Female Sperm Whales, showing sexual dimorphism(Illustrations by Uko Gorter from Jefferson, Webber & Pitman (2015).

The sperm whale’s morphology sets it apart from all other cetaceans, the large head merging into a thickbody giving the whale a unique appearance. A slightly curved blow hole on the sperm whale is situatedat the front end of said head, on the left- hand side. The sperm whale has thick and triangular flukes:these flukes have a large surface area to allow maximum propulsion when feeding at depth. Anotherunique feature of the sperm whale is the lack of any dorsal fin, instead having they present a multitudeof bumps and ridges, with one of these bumps being significantly larger, this bump can often be misiden-tified as a dorsal fin (Fais & Lewis, 2016).

The defining feature of sperm whales is the large nasal complex located above the lower jar, at the frontof cranium. This complex houses the spermaceti organ, the primary function of which is to create apowerful echolocation feature, which is used for both social situations and locating prey. The evolutionof the spermaceti organ has permitted the mammal efficient access to prey, previously allowing the spermwhale to approach carrying capacity within most areas they inhabit (Whitehall, 2018).

3

Sperm whales adhere to the definition of a K-selected mammal:, through evolution, this has led to lowbirth rate, slow growth, slow maturation all of which are offset by a high survival rate. The gestationperiod is 16 months and only one individual is birthed at a time,. Aa female sperm whale gives birthevery 4-6 years on average, although this is variable. Females of the species have a major growth decayafter reaching sexual maturity at the age of nine,while the male counterpart continues to grow well intotheir thirtieth year of life, creating the vast sexual dimorphism (Whitehall, 2018).

At the start of the 18th century, the whaling industry within New England starteding a period of rapidexpansion, peaking in 1846 with 736 whaling vessels registered to the area. The focus of these whalingboats was to hunt sperm whales for the oil found within spermaceti organ, which was used to furtherthe industrial revolution:, at this time, 5000 sperm whales being killed each year (Ellis, 2011). Prior tothis event the sperm whale population was estimated to be around 1.1million, although the amount ofwhaling on these cetaceans has decreased dramatically. Wwithin the last century, the population remainsat an estimated 360,000 individuals (Whitehead, 2002). Despite the populationpopulations recovery, theIUCN still classes the sperm whale as vulnerable.

1.4.2 Risso’s dolphins (grampus griseus)

Within the family Delphinidae, the Risso’s dolphin (grampus griseus) is the fifth largest member, withpeak weight of 500kg and measuring between 3.6-4m when fully matured. Receiving their common namefrom Antoine Risso, who published ‘Ichthyologie de Nice (1810)’ and whose description was edited to bethe first public description of the cetacean by Georges Cuvier in 1812. Genetically, they are most closelyrelated to false killer whales (Pseudorca crassiden), melon-headed whale(Peponocephala electra), pygmykiller whales (Fresa attenuata), and pilot whales (Globicephala spp).

Figure 2: Showing two Risso’s Dolphins and the prominent scaring (Illustrationsby Uko Gorter from Jefferson, Webber & Pitman (2015)).

4

A distinct characteristic of Risso’s dolphin is the self-induced colour variation within individuals:, theprogression of a Risso’s dolphin starts with the calf being born a light grey colour, which darkens as thedolphin matures until as a sub-adult it is a dark brown or even black. During the cycle of this naturalcolour change, Risso’s dolphins participate in social interactions which involve the teeth of Risso’s dol-phins leaving scars on the skin around the body and dorsal fin of other individuals. This reduced skinpigmentation causes prominent white scars., Iin some cases, of mature male Risso’s dolphins the wholebody of mature male Risso’s dolphins may be white. These patterns can be used for identification as theyare entirely unique for each dolphin (Reno, Dimauro, & Labate, 2019). Not dissimilar to fingerprintswithin humans, the only purpose of the Risso’s dolphin’s teeth is for the creation of this marks:, theseteeth are non-functional for feeding (Hartman, 2018). In comparison to other dolphins, the Risso has amuch larger dorsal fin, often misidentified as that of an Orca, the Risso’s dolphin body is stereotypicallydolphin shaped with a much more bulbous head compared to that of normal dolphin, having a lessprotruding beak (Hartman, 2018).

Information around the lifecycle and reproduction of the species is currently limited, with Amano andMiyazaki (2004) concluding sexual maturity is reached at ten years old, with males sometimes taking afew years more. Taking samples from bycatch the gestation period is suggested to be at 14 months;, onceborn, the calving period can be anywhere between two years and four months to four years (Hartman etal., 2014) and a life expectancy of forty-five years (Hartman et al., 2016).

Risso’s dolphins are generally shy, and have a low amount of human interaction and they are seldom seenperforming common human interactions such bow riding and approaching boats. In rare cases, Risso’sdolphins have been observed interacting with longline fishing boats, using them as a source of food:however, as a result of these interactions there have been recorded fatalities of the dolphins. Currently,passive interaction with humans such as ghost nets, resource depletion, noise pollution and indigestionof plastics currently pose a much larger threat to the species. A study done by Visser et al. (2011)has shown that the species spend statistically significantly less time resting and socialising after fivewhale watching vessels had encountered them. These encounters could potentially be depleting the dailyenergy budget of the dolphins leading to declining reproductive success, the IUCN considers them ofleast concern.

1.4.3 Common Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncates)

The common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates), often just termed ‘bottlenose dolphins’, areamongst the most well-known of all cetaceans. With the species being abundant circum-tropically andnot opposed to human interaction, they are the often the species most associated with the word ‘dolphin’.

Bottlenose dolphins have a generalised appearance with no outstanding features, identifiable by the ridgearound the short rostrum, with most of the body being a dark grey with some countershading occurringon the underside of the main portion of the body (Wells & Scott, 2018). Rather than the size beingdetermined by the sex of the individual, with bottlenose dolphins it is instead determined by whetherit’s pod is coastal or offshore (Mead & Potter, 1990), with those that reside by the coast growing to2.5meters, while the offshore variant of the same species can grow to 3.8meters.

Female bottlenose dolphins reach sexual maturity at the earliest of five years, while within the maleit occurs at between nine and fourteen year with a gestation period of about 12.5 months (O’Brien& Robeck, 2012). The calf then relies on the mothers lactation for a year, with the transition to fullindependence taking a further four years., the life expectancy of the dolphin has a high variance amonggenders, with the male potentially living to 50 years and the female 65 (Wells & Scott, 2018). Bottlenosedolphins use human activities for their own gain, often seen bow-riding to conserve energy in a similarway they would naturally use waves in the past, feeding off discarded fish from trawlers and they havebeen known to steal fish from the netsfrom nets in use. The species is prevalent in captivity, used forentertainment, andwhile the number of individuals in captivity is hard to determine: it is estimatedto be in the thousands (Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, 2012), and they are classed as leastconcern by the IUCN.

5

Figure 3: Figure showing difference in size between offshore and coastal BottlenoseDolphins (Illustrations by Uko Gorter from Jefferson, Webber, & Pitman (2015)).

1.4.4 Shortfin pilot whales (Globicephala melas)

Within the ‘Delphinidae’ family, , two species of pilot whale are recognized: Globicephala melas(long-finned pilot whale) and Globicephala macrorhynchus(short-finned pilot whale). Only the Short-finnedpilot whale is found in the waters around Tenerife, with the long-finned pilot whale preferring colderhabitats (SOURCE).

The head of the short-finned pilot whale is bulbous with no noticeable beak at the anterior, the dorsalfins has a wide base and starts in line with the posterior of the pectoral fin. The species is predomi-nantly a dark shade of grey, sometimes a lighter patch may be observed behind the dorsal fin and linearlight shading above the eye extending to the front of the dorsal fin. To distinguish between the twogenders, we look at the size; with males arebeing larger, haveing a more bulbous head and haveing acomparatively larger dorsal fin. Like the Risso’s dolphin’s markings, each short-finned pilot whales haveslightly different dorsal fin ridges, and while harder to recognise individuals in person, a software hasbeen developed towhich allows for identification (Olson, 2018).

The life of a short-finned pilot whale is similar to that of the sperm whale, and other K selected mam-mals: Extended life spans, late maturity and only nursing a single calf at a time. Females of the speciesreach sexual maturity at 9 years, the male taking a considerable time longer (at between 13-16 years).The gestation period is 15 months, after this, the short-finned pilot whale have the longest birth intervalof any cetacean, with the lactation period lasting 3 years. The life span expectedly changes between thetwo genders, males lasting to a maximum of 45 years, whileon the other hand females have been observedto last past the age of 60.

Pilot whales are exposed to multiple anthropogenic expansion side effects and direct exploitation. An-thropogenic side effects include an increase in chemical contaminants, noise pollution being caught asbycatch and being subjected to unethical tourism boats. Direct exploitation stems from the short-finnedpilot whales cohesive social structure, creating an opportunity for whole pods to be harvested at onetime for meat, blubber and oil, both the Faroe Islands and Japan catch hundreds of pilot whales peryear (Olson, 2018) and, for such reasons, they are classed as least concern by the IUCN.

6

Figure 4: Short-finned pilot whale, notice the size and dorsal difference betweenthe genders(Illustrations by Uko Gorter from Jefferson, Webber & Pitman (2015)).

1.4.5 Shortbeaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis)

Delphinus delphis, the short-beaked common dolphin, is recorded as the most abundant species of dolphinwithin off-shore tropical waters. Short-beaked common dolphins seem to act ‘friendly’ towards humans,often exhibiting behaviour such as bow-riding and breaching when in proximity of humans (Saavedra &Gerrodette, 2018).

In a similar fashion to other common dolphins, the short-beaked common dolphin are slender cetaceans,with a long beak sharply extending from the melon, the dorsal fin of the short-beaked common dolphinis high and triangular. Short-beaked common dolphins are identifiable by the four-part pattern on eachside of the body. This four part pattern is comprised of the lower margin of the dorsal overlay passes highanteriorly and dips to cross the ventral margin of the lowriding cape, the dark grey to black uppermostportion or spinal field , buff to pale yellow anterior portion, light to medium grey posterior portion orflank parch and a white abdominal field.

7

Little data has been gathered on the life cycles of the short-beaked common dolphin, estimations of sexualmaturity range from 2-4 years, changing based on location, gestation in Delphinus delphis is estimatedat 10–11.7 months (Westgate & Read, 2007 ) and the calving interval varies from about 1 to 3 years.,both genders have an estimated life expectancy of 30 years.

While some short-beaked common dolphin interactions with humans may be considered friendly, theseinteractions have taken a toll on the population. A notable mention would be interactions with tunapurse seines with 24,307 fatalities in the year of 1986 (IATTC, 2006). Efforts have been made to reducethe amount of fatalities within tuna fishing, with advancement in the industry, such as the introductionof pingers, leading to a drastic reduction in the amount of deathsamount deaths. Further research isneeded in order to establish if the era before the introduction of pinger technology has any long-termimpacts (Carrillo, 2010), the short-beaked common dolphin is classed as least concern by the IUCN.

Figure 5: Figure 5 Short-beaked common dolphin (Illustrations by CETUS)

1.4.6 Atlantic spotted dolphins (Stenella frontalis)

Although referred to as the Atlantic Spotted dolphin,Stenella frontalis is not always spotted. A largersized form exists which can be so heavily spotted that, from a distance, the spots blend together, leadingthe individual to appear nearly all white. While there are some pods found between the north Atlanticand the gulf stream which are smaller in size and can have no spots or very light spotting (Perrin, 2018),only recently have these two variations have beenvariations been shown to be the same species. As thename would suggest, this species is endemic to the tropical and sub tropic Atlantic sea, a closely relatedspecies, the pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuate)is found within the pacific and Indian ocean.

The shape of the Atlantic spotted dolphin is similar to that of both the bottlenose dolphin and the short-beaked common dolphin, with an extended rostrum in comparison and, with a beak size in between thatof the other two species. There is a sweeping lighter grey colour on the bottom half of the dolphin withthe upper region being a shade of brown., the spots in which the species gains its common name occurfrom the back of the beak to the front of the tail sock (Perrin, 2018).

Once again there is datais a data deficiency for this species life cycle, sexual maturity is estimated to bebetween 8 and 15 years of age, the calving interval is about 3 years and the maximum age recorded was23 years.

This species tends to avoid human interaction, although in some cases, such as that of the Bahamas,Atlantic spotted dolphins have become accustomed to humanour presence, sometimes even swimmingwith residents. When forced into captivity, the Atlantic spotted dolphin shows immediate signs of stress,with most of the captive individuals perishing within the first twelve months, often due to self-inducedstarvation (Perrin, 2018). The IUCN have the Atlantic spotted dolphin classed as least concern.

8

Figure 6: Figure 6 A diagram of Atlantic spotted dolphin (Illustrations by Cetus)

1.5 Aims

The aim of the conservation project in Tenerife is to establish a long-term cetacean monitoring program,studying abundance and distribution of cetaceans, habitat use of different species and the effect of boatencounters on behaviour and group composition. This is to provide information to work towards en-suring the conservation of resident cetacean species and, to a lesser extent, migratory species in watersurrounding Tenerife, with the large-scale aim of establishing long-term management of the area andassisting in promoting marine conservation in the wider region.

The aims are achieved by following a set of objectives:

• To use boat-based surveys to collect abundance and behavioural data about cetaceans surroundingthe southwest coast of Tenerife, focussing on their responses in relation to boat presence andbuilding a photo identification database of all resident individuals.

• To use boat-based surveys to record the location of all species, using this data to create heatmapsof each species, potentially identifying hotspots for breeding and foraging, ideally leading to moreinformation being revealed about the data deficient life cycles of many species.

• To carry out regular beach cleans along the southwest coast of Tenerife, removing any waste andreducing the impact of humans to the coastal area, with the intent to start categorising the wasteto identify the main contributors.

1.5.1 Gaps in knowledge

Although the two resident species found off the southern coast of Tenerife are seen by whale watchingboats daily, little is known about their population and abundance in the area, in particular for theshort-finned pilot whale, which, along with being classed as data deficient by the IUCN, has informationlacking when it comes to the global trends in abundance of the species. Within habitats, like the watersof Tenerife, that are known resident areas for these species, observing their populations and recordingdata on their population numbers, success and threats is crucial to better our understandings aboutcetaceans as a whole, and contribute to addressing data deficiencies for these species. Even for the com-mon bottlenose dolphin, which is classed as a least concern by the IUCN, research is largely needed interms of their population size, distribution and threats (Hammond, 2012). A big gap in knowledge in thewaters surrounding Tenerife are the impacts of increasing noise pollution. As Tenerife is an area heavilyused by boats, it is essential that the effect the activities have on cetaceans is known and monitored, inparticular the effect of extensive, high speed ferry traffic that occurs not only in Tenerife but all over thearchipelago (Ritter, 2012). In order to assess the impact of increased anthropogenic activities have onthe cetacean population,s it is important to investigate their behaviours towards the threats, and howthese behaviours can change depending on their group dynamic. The significance of addressing theseknowledge gaps in the conservation project is important due to the necessity of establishing the bestmanagement actions and aiding in the implementation of conservation measures (Giacoma, 2013).

9

2 Threats to cetaceans

2.1 Tourism

As the Canary Islands have expanded their tourism, the ferry and boat traffic has increased at a similarrate, high-speed ferry traffic between the islands. A study by Carrillo (2010) researched the number ofcarcasses washed ashore around the islands for the 16 years between 1991 and 2007. Within this study556 cetacean carcasses were studied, with 10.6% being attributed to vessel-cetacean collisions. Of the556, 58% washed up to the island of Tenerife, the island we are looking at safeguarding, and of the 59vessel-cetacean collisions, 10% were short finned pilot whales, our projects most encountered species.The results of this study confirm that the amount of collisions is increasing per year, these collisions arehighly likely to be the cause of death and the reasonand reason for stranding, indicated by the severityof the damage done to the mammals, including but not limited to large flesh wounds, broken bonesand, in some cases, animals being completely dismembered. Management recommendations have beenput forward, although none are currently enforced by law;, these include dedicated lookouts and speedlimitations when traveling through zones with a high abundance of cetaceans. As not all collisions arereported, potentially increasing the actual fatalities, it is also suggested that a mandatory reportingsystem which could result in heavy fines if ignored.

A separate study by Carrillo (2010) focused on the question ‘Can Sperm Whales in the ArchipelagoSustain the Current Level of Ship-Strike Mortalities?’, with the Canary Islands having the largest re-ported rates of Vessel-cetacean collisions in the world, Sperm whales are ever-present within the waterssurrounding the Canary islands, implying that the area is of importance to the whale. The study foundthat the abundance is 224 sperm whales around the islands, with the recruitment levels lower than theamount of vessel-cetacean collisions with the sperm whale. In order to stop the population decreasingfurther drastic immediate action should be taken.

2.2 Disease

A strain of virus called morbillivirus, which can infect hosts such as humans, cats, dogs and cetaceans:,within humans it is known as measles, while in animals it has other side effects. A study by Garvey &Carroll (2016) considered studied the deaths of Short-finned pilot whales along the Canary Islands byone strain known as pilot whale morbillivirus. This study performed a necropsy on three short-finnedpilot whales killed between January and May 2015; immunohistochemical analysis was performed on allmajor organs and, this confirmed the hypothesis that there is a separate strain which has adapted tothe species. The paper concludes with ‘pilot whales in the north-eastern Atlantic Ocean could be at riskfor infection, especially in one of the main pilot whale watching regions between La Gomera and South-ern Tenerife Islands in the Canary Islands, which has >700,000 visitors each year’. As the mentionedarea is the area in which we study pilot whales, this may have adverse effects on the population and,although not human caused, it is still important, we as conservationists are aware of the potential damage.

2.3 Plastics

Plastics have infiltrated all parts of our ocean, down to the deepest trenches., a study by Puig & Quiros(2018) aimed to investigate the occurrence within cetaceans which had been stranded within the CanaryIslands (N=465). Out of the 465 individuals examined, 7.74% had ingested at least one foreign body,with 80.6% of these foreign bodies being plastic based, which had the highest mortality rate, causingdirect death within 13 of the stranded cetaceans. 15 different species were found with foreign bodiesinside, including all resident species we study within the project. The species most at risk was the Risso’sdolphin, with all odoncetes being higher risk than mysticetes.

A separate study by Alvarez-Hernandez and Carios (2019) aimed to quantify microplastic levels aroundthe island, evaluating six beaches around Tenerife between October and December 2018. A microplasticis a plastic which is less than 5mm in size;, little is known about the adverse effects of microplastics,with research only starting in recent years, and the studies that have been done show they accumulateup the food chain.

10

Five of the six beaches looked at in this study (Leocadio Machado, El Porıs, Los Abriguitos and PlayaGrande) had relatively low microplastic levels of 3.5g/m2, yet Playa Grande did not conform to thistrend having up to 30x the amount of microplastic when compared to the other beaches (99g/m2).

2.4 Noise pollution

Within the last century the amount of anthropogenic noise in the world’sworlds oceans has increasedsubstantially. Sources of this increase include, shipping boats, constructioning of offshore structures, airguns used for locating oil and gas pools and military sonar. These levels can overlap in frequency withcetacean calls only with an increased amplitude, drowning out the noises used by cetaceans. This hasadverse effects within a pod, although the exact effects are currently not fully understood with moreresearch being needed. Stranding of pilot whales has also been linked to sonar exercises (Williams etal., 2015). While we do not fully know the extent of the damage noise pollution is having on cetaceansaround Tenerife, we can predict it is not healthy for the population. With cetaceans having their majorform of communication stifled, we would expect to see decreased reproduction rates, increased boat col-lisions which would see a steady decline in the population. Finding ways to reduce noise pollution in theoceans around our research area would be a difficult challenge but one that may be needed if we wishfor Tenerife to be as ecologically active.

11

3 Methodology and training

3.1 Training

Training for the Tenerife project is primarily conducted by the Principal Investigator and Project Man-ager. It includes giving the volunteers a briefing session when they first arrive, introducing life on theproject and in the communal house, the risk assessment for the project and information on how toconduct research during the project surveys. The volunteers must then pass a species identification testbased on the information given in the briefing session in order to test they have adequate knowledge tocomplete tasks during the project. To be let on board of one of our partnership whale watching boatsto conduct research, volunteers must get a score of 80% or higher.

3.2 Briefing sessions

3.2.1 General Introduction to the TRW project

During the briefing session, volunteers are given an introductory presentation on the Tenerife project.The presentation includes an introduction to Frontier and its mission statement, aims and objectives, abrief introduction to the Canary Islands and Tenerife itself, and activities/sites the volunteers can do orvisit in their free time. The living conditions of the house are explained, and the daily chores expectedto be carried out by volunteers and staff are highlighted and explained. Around the house importantinformation is pointed out, including the fire emergency plan, weekly schedules that are updated eachweek with general information on day to day activities, such as start times. A brief description of thetypes of surveys carried out during the project are given, but these are expanded on either later in thetraining, or whilst on the surveys. By the end of the general introduction volunteers should be familiarwith the way of life on the project, and with what is expected from them both in the house and whenrepresenting Frontier.

3.2.2 Risk Assessment

The risk assessment for the project is clear and important, and everyone, including staff and volunteers,must follow them. Failure to do so may result in a verbal or written warning, or possible terminationfrom the project, depending on the severity of the offence. Volunteers go through the risk assessmentwith the member of staff conducting their briefing session. For each risk, a clear description is given,detailing what is and is not allowed. The consequence for not following each risk is highlighted, sovolunteers are clearly aware of what will happen if they are found not abiding by the risk assessment.The risks range from potential problems in the house, to problems that could arise when volunteers areon boats and/or representing Frontier. Volunteers are also briefed on what to do if they happen to seeanother volunteer, or staff member, not following the risk assessment. A copy of said risk assessmentcan be found in the communal house and is pointed out to the volunteers upon their arrival.

3.2.3 Cetaceans in Tenerife

Once the volunteers have been briefed on the general aspects of the project, they are introduced to the24 species found in the waters surrounding Tenerife and a few key features on how to distinguish eachspecies. The session starts with a general background to cetaceans, including their evolution and themain differences between cetacean species and fish. The cetaceans as a group are then split into themysticetes and odontocetes, with the reasoning behind why the group is split in two explained. Themysticete whales are firstly described, with each species key features emphasized. Visual aids of thedifferent types of feeding techniques within the group are shown via video, to highlight the features anddifferent species. Similar techniques are then used to go through the odontocete species found aroundTenerife, again emphasizing the key features of each species so the volunteers can identify them in thefield.

12

Lastly, the volunteers are shown the four resident species to Tenerife; the sperm whale, Risso’s dolphin,short-finned pilot whale and bottlenose dolphin, with particular emphasis on how to identify the short-finned pilot whale and bottlenose dolphin, as these two species are almost guaranteed to be seen by thevolunteers. The volunteers then participate in a short species identification quiz, where photographs ofdifferent species are shown. At the end of the cetacean briefing session volunteers should feel comfortableidentifying the species found in Tenerife, and able to give a brief description of each species, in particularthe short-finned pilot whale and bottlenose dolphin, in the event that they are asked to talk about themon the boats.

3.3 Fieldwork training

Training for fieldwork is conducted during the briefing session, and then expanded on by a staff memberwhilst in the field, either on the boats or at the coastal site. Volunteers are given a brief description ofthe whale watching boats we are in partnership with:; Eden, Shogun, Peter Pan and Ragnarok, and anexplanation of what is expected of them whilst on said boats, in order to help the crew. The data andidentification photographs that the volunteers have to collect whilst on board the boats are explained,with particular focus on the standard of photographs needed for the identification photos; clear, distinctdorsal fin photos, usually focused on one individual and taken with the individual in close proximityto the boat. The volunteers are then shown the datasheet used to collect the behavioural data of thecetaceans whilst on the boats , with the sections of the sheet explained, for example how to distinguishthe different behavioural responses cetaceans can demonstrate as a reaction to the boats, and whetherthese mean the individuals are interacting, avoiding or having no response to the presence of the boat .Volunteers are then given an example data sheet to enter into the project database, with a staff memberguiding them on how to enter the data correctly. They are shown how to correctly crop identifica-tion photographs by a staff member on Picasa 3, by making sure to include the whole dorsal fin, fromwhere it connects to the body of the individual on both sides, and then given one or two photographsto crop themselves. Staff -members make sure the volunteers are aware of how to correctly name thephotographs, and which folders to put them in. Although the matching of the photographs is then usu-ally carried out by staff members on DARWIN, a program which helps researchers identify individualswithin a species, through the matching of their fins (DARWIN, 2015), volunteers are made aware thatif they would like to participate in this activity then a staff member will go through the matching process.

As previously mentioned, the volunteers then complete a test, needing a score of 80% or above to beallowed to go on the whale watching boats. Fieldwork training then continues on their first boat, with astaff member going through the data sheet again. The first interaction with a cetacean is completed byboth the staff member and the volunteer and, if the staff member feels that the volunteer can correctlyidentify and fill out all the sections of the datasheet, the volunteer will complete the subsequent interac-tions on their own.

Several lectures were given to volunteers throughout phase 193, to aid other activities or to give volun-teers a broader knowledge of the project and its efforts in Tenerife. These include a newly implementedsenior lecture scheme, which involves university level lectures given by the PI Josh Peters, including top-ics such as reading and analysing hydrophones, using GIS software, advanced statistics used in writingreports and marine mammal rescue procedures.

13

3.4 Survey Area

The location of the whale and dolphin conservation project is in the southwest of Tenerife, Canary Is-lands, Spain, with the communal house located in the village of Oroteanda (Guargacho). Boat fieldworkfor the project is carried out on four partnership boats, Peter Pan and Ragnarok leaving from Puerto deLos Cristianos (28:0489◦N, 16:7116◦W) and Shogun and Eden leaving from Puerto Colon (28:0785◦N,16:7355◦W).

All boat trips take place in the channel between Tenerife and La Gomera. From Los Cristianos, PeterPan runs a morning trip from 10:00 - 13:00 and an afternoon trip between 13:30 - 15:30 and Ragnarokruns two trips, the timings of the trips change depending on the day;, for example on Wednesday’s thetrips run 10:00 - 12:00, 12:30 - 15:30, and on Friday they run 12:30 - 15:30 and 16:00 - 18:00. FromPuerto Colon, Shogun runs one five-hour trip each day, leaving at 11:00 and travelling to Los Gigantes.Eden has three excursions a day, leaving at 11:00, 13:00 and 16:00. All four whale watching boats usedduring the project fly the Barco Azul/Blue Boat ag, meaning the crew and company agree to providewhale watching experiences that keep the welfare of the animals their main priority.

3.5 Methodology

Boat encounters on the behaviours and group composition of the resident cetacean species short-finnedpilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus) and common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) betweenSouth Tenerife and La Gomera Conducting surveys on the behavioural response of cetaceans to anthro-pogenic disturbances are key if potential effects of such disturbances on cetacean populations are to beassessed. In the Canary Islands, notably in Tenerife, cetaceans are at risk from a number of threats,the main being increased tourism to the islands and the rapid expansion of boat traffic in the area,both summarised earlier within the report. The resident cetacean species to Tenerife, the short-finnedpilot whale and common bottlenose dolphin, are distributed over the main shipping routes between thesouthwestern coast of Tenerife and La Gomera (Carrillo, 2010).This exposes both species to the risk ofcollision and potential physical and acoustic disturbance (Verborgh, 2009). Both species are also the tar-get of whale-watching operations. Whale-watching operations can induce behavioural changes that mayhave a negative effect on cetacean populations:, however, these changes vary depending on the species,populations and environmental features (Senigaglia, 2016).

Therefore, the behaviours, or reactions, of the resident species to increasing boat traffic needs to be ad-dressed and, for species with close family bonds, such as the short-finned pilot whale (Taylor, 2011), it isimportant to also look into how their group compositions can affect how their natural behaviours changein response to anthropogenic disturbances, especially with boating pressuringes the greatest threat inwaters between South Tenerife and La Gomera (Ritter, 2012). Many studies have already shown thatboating activity is disrupting the natural behaviour of cetaceans (Cates & DeMaster, 2017), and so thisinformation is vital for conservation efforts aimed at cetacean species, if the exponentially growing issueof environmental disruption on populations are to be assessed and rectified.

The aim of this study was to provide a baseline knowledge on the resident species of the southwesterncoast of Tenerife, the short-finned pilot whale and common bottlenose dolphin, with emphasis on theirbehaviours and responses to interacting boats. First, the two species responses to boats (avoidance,interaction or no response) was observed, and then focusing on how their behaviours change during aninteraction. A further aim was to investigate the areas in which different species reside in relation to thecoast to further understand foraging and breeding habits of the species around the island.

14

3.5.1 Materials and methods

Boat-based surveys were carried out off the southwestern coast of Tenerife on whale watching boats fromLos Cristianos and Puerto Colon. During each survey, 1 to 4 observers were on board, 1 or 2 watch-ing with the naked-eye and filling out the boat-based survey fieldwork form. If the species was eitherthe short-finned pilot whale or the common bottlenose dolphin, the other observers focussed on takingfin identification photographs of the individuals. Data recorded for each sighting included the species,estimation of the number of individuals, including the number of calves and juveniles, time and GPSposition, cetacean behaviour and number of boats in the area, among others. Animals were identified tothe lowest taxonomic level possible, which for most sightings was the species.

To quantify whether a group, during an interaction, are showing an avoidance, interaction or no responsebehaviour to the whale-watching boat, certain behavioural events are looked for. If these behaviouralevents occur it allows the volunteers to assess whether the groups response to the boat is an avoidance,interaction or no response.

These behavioural events are as follows:

• Approach: Individuals actively approach the vessel (Interaction)

• Scout: Individuals approach the vessel but instantly swim/dive away (Avoidance)

• Bow-ride: Individuals swim parallel to the boat, in the waves created by the boat (Interaction)

• Spy-hop: Individuals are vertical in the water with their heads up above sea level (No Response)

• Belly-up: Individuals spin around and have their belly facing the sky (No Response)

• Tail slap: Individuals slap the surface of the water with their flute (No Response)

• Dive: Individuals deep dive, usually shown by a large exhalation before diving (Avoidance)

• Surf: Individuals swim on the surface of the water, using the waves to move them forward (NoResponse)

• Breach: Individuals leap out of the water (No Response)

If no behavioural events occur, then it is noted that the group had no response to the boats presence.The four boats used as the survey vessel are Eden, Shogun, Peter Pan and Ragnarok. All four boatsdiffer in size, shape and material. Eden is a plastic catamaran, and the smallest of the 4 boats, capableof holding a maximum of 50 people. Peter Pan is a boat reaching 18m, and is an authentic wooden Por-tuguese schooner, capable of carrying a maximum of 60 people. Ragnarok is a wooden Viking ship, alsocarrying a maximum of 60 people and Shogun is the largest of the 4 whale watching boats, reaching 26mlong, made of Teak hardwood and has a maximum capacity of 144 people. Using the four different boatsgives different surveying experiences and may potentially give different responses by the cetacean species.

3.5.2 Data Analysis

In order to analyse the data GPS co coordinates with species and boats were converted to CVS files,then imported into QGIS, plotted onto a chosen map, categorising the points by boat and species seen.All other data analysis was done within Excel using the data analysis and statistics add on.

15

4 Results

The results were split into abundance and behaviour towards boats. By researching these two topics inparticular, we have the best chance of conserving the cetaceans, knowing the locations means we knowwhere to think about spatial planning methods and knowing the behaviour towards different boats allowsus to theorize at what aspects of each boat could cause potential negative behaviour.

4.1 Abundance and distribution

Figure 7: Map showing all sightings for each boat around the survey area.

Each dot represents a sighting with two boats covering Los Cristianos, while Eden and Shogun are morenorthern. N = 558 with the percentage of sightings being made up of Eden= 34.6% Peter Pan= 28.4%Ragnarok= 22.6% and Shogun=14.4%. We cannot conclude anything from these percentages though,with the lengths of each boat trip varying, the number of trips a day and the amount of researcher manhours changing. The aims of some of the boats also differ, for example Shogun sails to Los Gigantes asa tourist attraction and Ragnarok spends large periods entertaining rather than whale watching. Dueto the variance in the number of sightings and length of boats trips, all boat statistics have been con-verted into percentage of sightings within that boat, allowing for standardisation and meaningful analysis.

16

Figure 8: Showing species distribution of the four species seen.

There is a clear distinction between the two major species: green as is used for Short-finned pilot whales,which are further out to see, while purple is for bottlenose dolphins., Because the dolphins’ sights areclose to the coast, this means that our dolphins they are slightly smaller due to them being coastal insize, compared to the offshore variance. Short-finned pilot whales are off the side of the drop, as this iswhere they prefer to feed (Carrillo, 2010). N=558 Dd=5 Sf=18 Tt=194 Gm= 340. 60.2% of sightings inthis period were of Short-finned pilot whales, while 36.1% came from bottlenose dolphins and the othertwo dolphins, Atlantic spotted and Short beaked common making up 2.8% and 0.9% respectively.

17

Figure 9: Figure 9 Heatmap of the area showing the four major hotspots forsightings.

Heat map of area can see the four distinct zones clearly, two of which are bottlenose dolphins and twoshort finned whales N = 534 with Gm= 340 and TT= 194. The two clusters should not be consideredhotspots for activity, as those are more so the areas in which the boats are more likely to be, with thesouthern read and green hotspots within Los Cristianos, seen by the two boats Ragnarok and Peter Pan,while the two northern hotspots are outside Puerto Colon, the port which Shogun and Eden leave from.What this map does show however is the clear distance from shore in which Gm prefer to stay, right ondrop off point,. wWhile dolphins tend to cluster closer to the coast within the continental shelf.

18

4.2 Behavioural response

Figure 10: Figure 10 showing all interactions of species.

N= 558, Tt= 194, Sf=18 , Gm= 341, Dd= 5 we can see that Sf are the most interactive, with 66.7% ofthe encounters being interactions, although Dd is fairly close with 60% of its encounters having interac-tions, both Gm and Tt are considerably lower at 13% and 23.2% respectively. Avoidance % is uniformacross the board, when excluding Dd with it’s only 5 encounters, none leading to avoidance. TWiththe avoidance rate of the other three arebeing similar, with having a range of 4.9, between Gm’s 13.1%avoidance rate and Tt’s 8.2%. The mean avoidance rate of the three, excluding Dd, is 10.9%, or roughly1 in 9 encounters lead to avoidance. Since with Dd only hadving 5 encounters there is not enough datato say whether they would also follow this trend.

N=558, average avoidance % across boats is 10.7%, this with Eden being 50% higher at 15% ,and PeterPan sitting lower than the others at 7.6%, Ragnarok and Shogun sit close to the mean, both around 10%.No response has a mean of 69.8% with only a sample error of 2.8, Range of 11.6 a minimum of 63.75and maximum of 75.32 overall there was no outstanding patterns within no responses between differentboats. Interactions with the boats had little variance between Ragnarok, Eden and Peter Pan at 15.8%,18.7% and 17%; however, Shogun had a much higher percentage of interactions 26.2%. This in part canbe attributed to Shoguns route up the coast which sees it have a higher percent of Tt sightings comparedto other boats: at 42.5% of Shogun sightings being Tt, as Tt have a 23.2% of interaction per encounterswhile Gms interaction rate is considerably lower at 12.9%.

19

Figure 11: Figure 12 Showing all encounters of Peter Pan.

N= 158, Tt= 61, Sf= 10, Gm= 85, Dd= 2 we can see that Sf= are the most interactive, with 70% ofthe encounters being interactions although the sample size is only 10. Between the two species with aconsiderable number of sightings, Tt and Gm, it may seem that they have similar behaviour towardsPeter Pan, although Tt has a lower chance of avoidance and non-interaction, although Tt are 80% morelikely to interact with the boat compared to Gm.

Peter Pan interaction, large amount of no response like all boats N=158 I = 27 NR= 119 and A = 12.When compared to other boats encounters, we can see Peter Pan has the lowest amount of avoidance ofonly 7.6% per encounter, compared to Edens 15% and the mean of 10.7%. No response and interactiondo not differ from the normal.

20

Figure 12: Showing all encounters of Eden.

N= 193, Tt= 56, Sf= 7, Gm= 128, Dd= 2, there is not enough data points to make observations fromDd with only two encounters. Sf has 7 encounters, and 4 of those are being interactions. Within the twomore common species, Tt and Gm, they have an avoidance rate of 16.4% for Gm and 12.5% for Tt, bothdouble that of Peter Pan. Eden also has higher interaction rate, both for Gm and Tt when comparedwith Peter Pan, at around 30% higher, while the amount of no responses is less for both.

Figure 13: A graph to display the chance of each reaction per encounter on Eden.

N= 193 I= 36 NR= 128 A=29, large amount of avoidance within Eden, the highest at the mean+1.6standard deviations when compared to avoidance per boat of all boats, while the interaction is only 0.2standard deviations from the mean and no response 0.7 standard deviations from the mean.

21

Figure 14: Showing all encounters of Ragnarok.

N= 126, Tt= 43, Sf= 0, Gm= 83, Dd= 0. On the Ragnarok boat during the 193 season we had zeroencounters with Sf and Dd, while Peter Pan which operates in the same area had encounters with 10 Sfand 2 Dd. Ragnarok has the lowest percentage of avoidances by Tt which each encounter with a Tt onlyhaving a 4.7% of avoidance, compared to the mean of 8.2%.

Figure 15: A graph to display the chance of each reaction per encounter on Rag-narok.

N= 126, A= 13, NR= 93 I=20 Ragnarok has an interaction percentage very close to the mean at only 0.1Standard deviations away when compared with the other three boats, it does have the lowest interactionrate with a 15.9% of a interaction per encounter, which is 0.9 standard deviations below the mean and10.4% lower than Shoguns interaction per encounter rate, which is 61% more likely to have an encounterinvolve an interaction with the boat.

22

Figure 16: Showing all encounters of Shogun.

N= 80, Tt= 34, Sf= 1, Gm= 44, Dd= 1, Shogun had one encounter each with Sf and Dd both leadingto an Interaction, this sample size is not enough to gather meaningful information. Shogun has thehighest percentage of encounters with Tt ending with interactions, with 35.3%, compared to the otherthree boats with uniform 20.9%, 23.2%, and 18%. Reasons for this are unknown but it may be due tothe route the boat takes up the northern coastline to Los Gigantes or as the boat is travelling for longperiods of time it would encourage, bow riding.

Figure 17: A graph to display the chance of each reaction per encounter on Shogun.

N= 80, A=8, NR=51 I= 21 Eden has the highest interaction rate of any boat, but also has the high-est percentage of sightings being Tt at 42.5% although not considerably so with Peter Pan at 38.9%,Ragnarok at 34.1% with Eden being at 29%. Also when comparing all dolphins, which are generallymuch interactive per encounter than Gm, Shogun does not have the highest percentage of sightings beingany species with 45% of Shoguns encounters being either Tt, Dd or Sf compared to Peter Pans 46.2%,although Shogun still maintains a considerably higher interaction per encounter percent.

23

N= 194, A= 16 NR=133 I=45. Bottlenose dolphins had a 68.6% chance of not responding to any whalewatching boats, this ranges from 55.9% of no interaction on Shogun to a 74.1% on Ragnarok. An 8.2% ofavoidance per encounter, with Eden being at 12.5% and Ragnarok at 4.7%, the reason why the dolphinsavoid Eden so much and not Ragnarok will need further investigation.

Figure 18: Figure 21 Responses of Spotted Dolphins.

N= 18, A= 2, NR= 4 I= 12, Out of the 18 spotted dolphins seen in this period, 12 of these ended withinteractions, the highest interaction rate at 66.7% and the lowest no response rate at 22%. This couldbe due to the high bow ride percentage of Spotted dolphins, with 64% of all encounters with Spotteddolphins involving a bow ride.

24

Figure 19: Responses of Short-finned Pilot Whales.

N= 342, A=45 NR=252 I=44 73.9% of Encounters with Short-finned pilot whales had no response, withthe other encounters being split nearly evenly between avoidance and an interaction. Short-finned pilotwhales have the highest percentage of no response encounters, when a short finned pilot whale doesrespond with an interaction it is nearly always an approach or spy hop, very rarely scouting the boat(N=6), while all avoidances are dives, this could be down to natural behaviour as all avoidances are‘diving’, which could also be diving for food for short-finned pilot whales.

Figure 20: Responses of Short-Beaked Common Dolphins.

N=5, A=0, NR= 2, I=3, there was only 5 encounters with short-beaked common dolphins within the193 period so we cannot make any solid conclusions of their behaviour towards boats. The boats thatdid encounter them saw a 60% interaction ratio with all 3 of these being bow rides.

25

5 Conclusion

We can conclude that with all the anthropogenic stressors bearing down on the cetaceans around Tener-ife, that having boats which care about the well being of the cetaceans such as those we use is paramount.By looking into why few Tts avoid Ragnarok or in general why all species have lower avoidance rateswith Peter Pan, Ragnarok and Shogun when compared with Eden we can narrow down the causes ofthese disturbances and work on ways to mitigate them. In order to increase our knowledge on not justcetaceans but also the general marine environment around Tenerife, more data is being gathered in away that can be presented scientifically, by adding fish biomass counts and percentage of plastic wastefrom various sources. In this way, we can get a broader understanding of the adverse effects of tourismon the island and the benefits of a more eco-tourism based model.

26

6 Reference

Spanish Institute of Oceanography (2007). The Canary Islands Topobathymetric Relief Map.

Alvarez-Hernandez, C. & Carios, C. (2019). Microplastic debris in beaches of Tenerife (Canary Islands,Spain). Marine Pollution Bulletin, pp. 26-32.

ARCGIS. (2014). ARCGIS Tutorials. Retrieved from ARCGIS.

Bergmann, M. & Gutow, L. (2015). Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Springer International Publishing.

Carrillo, M. (2010). Cetacean diversity and distribution off Tenerife. Marine Biodiversity Records.

Cates, K. & DeMaster, D. (2017). Strategic Plan to Mitigate the Impacts of Ship Strikes on CetaceanPopulations: 2017-2020. IWC.

Chuenpagdee, R. (2013). Marine protected areas: Re-thinking their inception. Marine Policy, pp. 234-240.

Derraik, J. (2002). The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Marine Pollu-tion Bulletin. pp. 842-852.

Fais, A. & Lewis, T. (2016). Abundance and Distribution of Sperm Whales in the Canary Islands. PLOSone.

Fernadez, J. & Chinea-Mederos, I. (2015). Marine Protected Areas, Small-Scale commercial versusRecreational Fisheries.

Frontier (2018). Frontier About Us. Retrieved from Frontier: www.frontiergap.com

Garvey, P. & Carroll, A. (2016). Morbillivirus and Pilot Whales Deaths, Canary Islands, Spain, 2015.Emerging Infectious Diseases, pp. 740-742.

GESAMP (2016). Sources, Fate and Effects of Microplastics in the Marine Environment. GESAMPReports and Studies, 221.

Giacoma, C. (2013). Are land based surveys a useful tool for managing marine species. Diversity, pp.15-25.

Hartman, K. (2018). Risso’s Dolphin. In Marine mammal encyclopedia. pp. 824-830.

Hernadez, Y. & Barbosa, P. (2018). An institutional analysis to address climate change adaptation inTenerife. Environmental Science and Policy, pp. 184-191.

Hernadez-Guerra, A. & Espino-Falcon, E. (2017). Recirculation of the Canary Current in fall 2014.Journal Of Marine Science, pp. 25-37.

NOAA (2011). Miroplastic marine debris. Retrieved from NOAA: Marine Debris: https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/MicroplasticsOnePager 0.pdfOlson, P. (2018). Pilot whales. In Marine Mammal Encyclopedia. pp. 701-707.

Perrin, W. (2018). Spotted dolphin. In Marine Mammal Encylopedia. pp. 676-681.

Plastics Europe. (2018). Plastics - The facts. Plastics Europe.

Puig, R. & Quiros, B. (2018). Retrospective study of foreign body-associated pathology in strandedcetaceans. Environmental Pollution.

27

Reno, V., Dimauro, G. & Labate, G. (2019). A SIFT-based software system for the photo-identificationof the Risso’s. Ecological Informatics, pp. 95-101.

Riera, R. & Becerro, M. (2014). Out of sight, out of mind: Threats to the marine biodiversity of theCanary Islands. Marine Pollution Bulletin.

Ritter, H. (2012). Model for a Marine Protected Area designed for sustainable Whale Watching.

Saavedra, C. & Gerrodette, T. (2018). Assessing the environmental status of the short-beaked commondolphin (Delphinus delphis) in North-western Spanish waters using abundance trends and safe removallimits. Progress In Oceanography, pp. 66-75.

Santos, M. & Pierce, G. (2015). Marine mammals and good environmental status: science, policy andsociety. trends in aquatic ecology.

Scheer, M. (2013). Call Vocalizations Recorded Among Short-Finned Pilot Whales (Globicephala macrorhynchus)Off Tenerife, Canary Islands. Aquatic Mammals, pp. 306-313.

Society for marine mammalogy (2016). Different modes of acoustic communication in deep-diving. Ma-rine Mammal Science.

Soria, M. & Monroy, C. (2019). Solutions to Marine Pollution in Canary Islands. MDPI, pp. 1-17.

Soto, N. & Gkikopoulou, K. (2016). From physiology to policy: A review of physiological noise effectson marine fauna. Acoustical Society of America.

Velez-Belchi, P. & Gonzalez-Carballo, M. (2015). Open ocean temperature and salinity trends in theCanary Current Large Marine Ecosystem. IOC-UNESCO.

Wells, R. & Scott, M. (2018). Bottlenose dolphin. In Encylopedia or marine mammals. pp. 118-123.

Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (2012). Bottlenose dolphins in captivity.

Whitehall, H. (2018). Sperm whales. In Marine Mammal Encyclopedia. pp. 919-924.

Whitehead, W. (2002). Estimates of the current global population and historical trajectory for spermwhales. Marine Ecology Progress Series, pp. 295-304.

Wikipedia. (2019). About Tenerife. Retrieved from Wikipedia.

Williams, R., Wright, A., Ashe, E. & Blight, L. (2015). Impacts of anthropogenic noise on marine life:Publication patterns,new discoveries, and future directions in research and management. Ocean andCoastal management, pp. 17-24.

28