Scientists in the New England Aquarium’s Anderson Cabot Center for Ocean Life, who conduct aerial surveys to collect data on the presence of marine animals, photographed more than 100 unique North Atlantic right whales over six weeks in waters south of Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket.
The aquarium team and another survey team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) flew six surveys between Feb. 5 and March 18, and photographed more than 115 right whales in that time, about a quarter of the current population of 380. Seventy individuals were sighted on March 2 alone, which the aquarium said is the highest daily number of individual right whales it’s ever documented; the surveys began in 2011.
Many of the right whales, identified by unique marks on their heads called callosities, were deep below the surface, which scientists noted could indicate that food is abundant south of the islands, especially in the Nantucket Shoals area.
“Seeing this many right whales in one area has been incredibly exciting for our team, and marks one of the busiest seasons we’ve ever had,” Katherine McKenna, an associate scientist on the aerial survey team, said in a press release. “Our recent surveys highlight the Nantucket Shoals as an important habitat for a significant portion of the population.”
Most of the right whales photographed and documented by the center’s scientists were adults, which the aquarium said is typical for this time of year. Among the 31 adult females documented, 17 are known to be calving females. Calvin, a 34-year-old female who was orphaned as an 8-month-old calf, was spotted. She’s been entangled in fishing gear eight times, and has birthed four calves.
“We have seen right whales in Southern New England waters year after year, and they are extremely vulnerable to fishing gear entanglements and vessel strikes,” Orla O’Brien, research scientist for the aquarium, said in the release. “This area has seasonal fishing restrictions in place, yet right whales still face risks from vessel strikes without mandatory speed restrictions to protect them.”
The aggregation of whales documented in the surveys triggered a dynamic management area, which is a voluntary slow zone that asks boaters to travel at 10 knots or slower to prevent collisions. The current slow zone is in effect until March 27.
The NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service announced in early March a request for information to modernize the 2008 vessel speed rule as the federal government considers a reversal of the slow zones. This 18-year-old rule activates permanent seasonal management areas, where the speed limit is enforced mostly around large East Coast ports, as well as dynamic management areas that are both temporary and voluntary, and based on data from visual and acoustic sensors.
I support low vessel speeds. With a population this small, caution is warranted.
But let’s not pretend these whales suddenly appeared because of the latest climate talking point. They’ve been in these waters all along. What’s changed is the level of monitoring — not the existence of whales.
That distinction matters. Because when every observation gets folded into a larger narrative, we lose the ability to make targeted, credible policy.
Protect them where they are. Enforce it.
But don’t use a long-standing presence to justify ever-expanding restrictions as if this is something entirely new.
That’s not science. It’s framing.
Not everything needs a storyline.
Murray– Did you read the article ? It states that the regular surveys started in 2011 and this was the highest number of whales they have seen they have seen. There is no reason to assume there have been more surveys than usual. The article also doesn’t say anything about climate change. We of course don’t know how many whales have not been killed as a result of the slow zones, but it is very unlikely it has resulted in more deaths. I agree with you about the slow zones. I would also like to point out that these whales are to the south of the vineyard and Nantucket. I’ve said it before– I think they like the vibrations from the windmills. There is certainly no evidence to suggest the gloom and doom scenarios expressed by some of those opposed to the windfarm are keeping the whales away or killing them.
What is killing these whales is fishing gear and ship strikes. See WHOI resesrch results and the Center for Marine Studies findings.
Don — oh yes, I read it.
What it says is that this was the highest daily count since surveys began in 2011. What it does not say is that these whales are somehow new to these waters, or that offshore wind suddenly made this habitat important.
In fact, the scientists quoted say right whales have been seen in southern New England waters year after year. So no, a record survey result does not prove novelty. It proves a remarkable count in a place that already matters.
And right on cue comes your usual village crier routine of unrelated talking points — this time, windmill “vibrations.” The article points to likely feeding conditions. You supplied the make-believe.
NOAA’s concern here is vessel strikes. That is why slow zones exist. Not to validate your turbine theory, and not to turn a real whale-protection issue into one more offshore wind detour.
So yes, I read it. More carefully than you seem to have.
The whales are real. The risk is real.
Your theory is just fantasy.
Murray– Indeed —my theory might be fantasy. But it’s more probable than theories the whales will not be able to navigate, communicate, reproduce or find food.. It seems that the fact that the whales are navigating, communicating reproducing and finding food have “proved” those theories were and are wrong. We have conclusive common sense observations to debunk those “fantasies”. We have no empirical evidence to support any rational argument that my theory is wrong. In fact– we have record numbers of sightings. We can speculate on why we are seeing more whales. You can say more surveys– I can say that the towers are turning into vertical reefs and are enabling an environment that produces more food. There is clear historical evidence of that.. I don’t know, but if I am in a restaurant, I like to have a little music in the background. Who are we to say that whales don’t ? And I’m happy that we can agree that slower ship speeds may save the life of even one whale. Maybe more. Yeah, my talking point may be unrelated , but every story about whale deaths or dolphin strandings over the last 5 years has turned to the unrelated windmills.
Don — thank you for conceding your theory may be fantasy. That was the clearest part of your comment.
No, record sightings do not “prove” your windmill theory any more than they disprove every concern anyone has ever raised. They prove whales are present in meaningful numbers in these waters and appear to be finding food there. That is what the article says.
“Whales are here” is evidence. “Therefore windmills are helping them” is your speculation.
What you keep doing is taking a real observation and stapling your preferred offshore-wind storyline onto it as if that somehow makes it evidence. It doesn’t.
And “we have no empirical evidence my theory is wrong” is not a serious standard. By that logic, any unsupported idea survives until personally disproved to your satisfaction.
The article’s actual point is much simpler: the whales are there, the habitat matters, and vessel strikes remain a real risk. That is why slow speeds matter.
Everything beyond that — your music analogy, your vertical-reef theory, your need to drag windmills into every whale story — is still just you freelancing.
The whales are real. The risk is real.
Your theory is still fantasy.