|
TAGGING: A semi-serious rant
Howard Hall
Hot-Branded sea
lion |
The 16mm movie camera in my right hand only weighed
fifteen pounds, but it was beginning to seem much heavier
as I climbed up the steep face of the coastal sand dune. My
other hand was balancing a tripod that was digging deeper
into my shoulder with every step. I really wanted to stop
and rest. But the top of the dune was only another few minutes
away and I didn’t want to set the camera down in the
sand.
I reached the top of the dune and was relieved to
find that it offered a perfect perspective looking down the
long curving beach. Covering the sand were hundreds of enormous
elephant seals - the reason I had come to this spot in Northern
California. I planned to work here for about a week, filming
courtship behavior and territorial fighting of these spectacular
pinnipeds.
The early morning light was perfect and I decided
to start with a long establishing shot showing the entire
beach. Then using a telephoto lens, I would capture a variety
of medium shots that compressed hundreds of seals against
the breaking waves. Once satisfied with the establishing shots,
I would move closer to spend the rest of the day filming episodes
of fighting, mating, and females nursing young.
I mounted and leveled the camera on the tripod and
then used a small dry paintbrush to dust-off the sand that
had accumulated on the camera. One grain of sand in the camera
gate is plenty to ruin a roll of film. Then I uncovered the
12-240mm zoom lens and looked through the viewfinder simultaneously
twisting the zoom to 240mm in order to set focus. When the
image clarified it revealed a large male elephant seal lying
in the sand surrounded by dozens of smaller females. Thirty
yards behind the male another smaller male was crawling out
of the surf. The larger male suddenly rose on its forward
flippers to confront the intruder. Wow, this is great! I reached
for the camera run switch then stopped when I saw the “Lizard.”
Painted on the side of the large male elephant seal, in letters
that spanned the width of its body in day-glow green fluorescent
paint, was the word “Lizard.” What the hell? I
removed my finger from the run switch and refocused on the
smaller male leaving the surf. Damn! Apparently, his name
was “Buster.”
I hurriedly surveyed the other animals on the beach.
I couldn’t believe it. Nearly every male elephant seal
had been painted along with many of the smaller females. There
was essentially no way to get a shot without including a hideously
marked animal. I looked up from the camera and at the sandstone
bluffs behind the seal rookery. Surprisingly, no one had painted
their names on the sandstone walls, nor did I see large signs
erected to mar the beauty of the coastal highway. No, all
the graffiti was confined to the wildlife.
After spending a couple hours confirming that there
was no way to capture the elephant seal sequence that I had
come for without including flamboyantly disfigured animals,
I packed up my gear and headed south toward San Diego and
home. Of course, I knew what had happened. Some scientist,
probably in pursuit of publishing a masters or doctorial thesis,
was conducting a study of elephant seal movements perhaps
to learn more about their territorial behavior within the
rookery. And, of course, I knew that in order to save these
wild animals it was important to learn everything possible
about their migratory behavior.
On a small inflatable boat in San Ignacio lagoon
I struggled to hold my movie camera still as the large gray
whale approached. Even though the water was calm and my lens
was very wide, it was difficult to hand-hold the camera still
enough to do professional wildlife work – at least for
my taste. As the whale approached, a small white butterfly
drifted over its back fluttering against the gentle breeze.
It was a beautiful shot. Fortunately, I had just switched
the camera off when another explosion caused me to instinctively
duck. After a week in the lagoon, I should have been prepared
for the noise.
The scientists were also working from a similar
if not somewhat larger inflatable boat. They had erected a
teeter-totter-like device that was mounted on the pontoons
and supported a long fiberglass boom. At the end of the boom
hung a coffee can-sized device that was held about six feet
above the water by an operator on the other end of the boom.
When the scientists approached a whale closely enough, or
when a “friendly” whale approached their boat,
the boom was released by the operator allowing the canister
to fall on the back of the whale where upon it detonated with
a small (for a whale maybe) explosive charge. The explosion
sent out a spider web of cables beneath the animal’s
skin anchoring a transmitter and antennae to the whale’s
back. The discomfort to the whale was really almost insignificant
– for us sort of like being stung by a wasp. Those of
us who have experienced wasp stings know that it’s really
not that big a deal. Nevertheless, the gray whales tend to
react with a fair amount of rather violent splashing around
and immediate acceleration in the opposite direction.
Of course, it’s critically important to understand
the movements of these large endangered animals if we hope
to protect them. In this case, however, we learned primarily
that whales, once so adorned with embedded transmitter and
radio antennae, invariably descend immediately to the lagoon
floor, turn upside down, and then rub the transmitter off
in the mud. Although this observation may not have been worthy
of a masters thesis, I suspect the incidents did serve to
correct any further aberrant “friendly” behavior
by those particular whales.
In Dominica a scientist explained to me how dangerous filming
whales can be to the animals. Whales use enormous amounts
of energy to swim – energy that must be replenished
with limited food resources. A diver entering the water in
a whale’s path often causes the whale to divert its
course, the additional expenditure of energy beyond what would
naturally be spent otherwise must necessarily, even if only
in a small way statistically, negatively influence the animal’s
survivability. Certainly, this makes a great deal of sense
to me and so I explained that inserting myself in a whale’s
path seldom results in a useful shot anyway. So I don’t
use that technique. In fact, nearly every shot I’ve
captured of gray whales, right whales, humpback whales, and
(in this case) sperm whales were accomplished when the animals
became interested in me, or my boat, and diverted their course
for an inspection sometimes hanging around for hours. The
scientist explained, however, that even this diversion from
feeding is unnatural, energy expensive, and could influence
the animal’s ability to survive. I admitted that I really
hadn’t considered that and decided, technically, it
was probably true.
Tagged and branded Sea
Lions |
Of course, it also occurred to me that the expenditure
of energy sperm whales experience when being chased by this
particular scientist’s boat or in response to the impact
of the bow-mounted harpoon gun might also be significant.
Certainly, the impact was far from life-threatening and only
served to mount a transmitter to the animal via small (to
a whale anyway) dart and thin (relatively) steel cable. In
fact, this would probably feel like little more than a wasp
sting would feel to us (in this case perhaps a rather large
wasp). More importantly, any loss of survivability of each
whale tagged with a transmitter is more than redeemed by the
knowledge gained about sperm whale behavior. We can’t
protect these animals unless we know what they do and where
they go.
On the Silver Bank the technique for proper in-water observation
of whales was reinforced when explained to us by another team
of scientists. Additionally, it was explained that the use
of SCUBA has a very negative impact because the bubble noise
frightens the animals. And frightened animals tend to run
away unnecessarily expending large amounts of critical energy.
Indeed, I noticed this tendency for frightened whales to expend
large amounts of energy every time the scientific team ran
their inflatable up on a humpback whale’s back at high
speed and shot it with a crossbow. Despite the very small
hole caused by the arrow, little more than an equivalent bee
sting, the whales would splash, dive, and run like crazy while
the scientists would whoop and holler like cowboys on roundup.
It really did look like buckets of fun (for the scientific
team, not the whales).
During the season, this methodology allowed the scientific
team to remove over a hundred small bloody plugs of skin and
blubber from the Atlantic humpback population that over-winters
on the Silver Bank. The ensuing DNA analysis allowed the scientists
to learn a great deal about the population dynamics of Atlantic
humpbacks, information that will be invaluable in publishing
articles, masters theses, and even doctoral theses that will
be critical for saving the species. The crossbow procedure
also helped to correct the aberrant tendency for some whales
to demonstrate “friendly” behavior.
On the El Bajo seamount in the Sea of Cortez something
was finally learned about the mysterious schooling behavior
of hammerhead sharks. This was accomplished by tagging as
many of the sharks as possible with numerical tags as well
as transmitters. Movements of the sharks were then monitored
with the use of receivers suspended on buoyed lines high above
the bottom. Unfortunately, this methodology was often interrupted
when manta rays became tangled in the buoy lines. The death
of the mantas was unexpected and distressing to everyone diving
at the seamount at the time including the scientists. But
it was certainly worth it. We learned that some of the sharks
stay at the seamount all night while others descend to feed
primarily on squid, almost certainly in response to getting
hungry. That squid was the primary food resource was confirmed
by doing exhaustive stomach contents analysis. How this information
might have been useful in protecting schooling hammerheads
may never be known since most of the sharks and the remaining
mantas were all fished out commercially in the few years that
followed.
Film and processing is amazingly expensive when shooting
in the IMAX format. This is especially true when working in
IMAX 3D. Each 7-minute load of film costs more than $20,000
to purchase, process, and print. So when making the film Into
the Deep, I had to be especially careful to avoid filming
animals that were aesthetically unacceptable. This problem
was most significant as we attempted to capture a lovely sequence
of California sea lions for the film.
Eighty feet below the surface at San Miguel Island
sea lions were chewing the tops off of palm kelp plants. I
had never seen this behavior before and as far as I know it
remains unexplained today. It was potentially a great sequence
for the film. But each time I trained the camera on one of
these lovely animals, a disfigured one would swim into frame
ruining the shot. First it was sea lion number 2383 then it
was sea lion 3134. It was easy to tell what number the animal
was because the number had been hot-branded into the animal’s
flesh in figures fully the width of the body. Now you would
think that huge numbers permanently burned into an animal’s
flesh would be sufficient to identify any given sea lion.
But I also noticed that many sea lions had an additional plastic
tag (with a different number) mounted via a hole punched in
their front flipper. The explanation for the two numbers was
probably simply that two numbering systems were being used
by two different scientific studies. Fortunately we managed
to find and film enough unblemished animals to make a nice
sequence for the film.
Of course, Into the Deep was made a long time ago
– almost thirteen years now - when there were lots of
unbranded sea lions swimming around. Now it may be a bit tougher.
The National Marine Fishery Service sponsors the hot-branding
of thousands of sea lion pups each year. Using a hot branding
iron seems a bit cruel. But I have been told that if you brand
baby sea lions, before their nerve endings are fully developed,
the pain is not significant. And most of the time the burn
heals without causing life-threatening infection. Furthermore,
all the writhing and screaming performed by the baby animals
is scientifically called “avoidance response”
and should not be confused with pain as we know it.
Branding a few thousand baby California sea lions
is no big deal, because there are so darn many of them. But
recently a Federal judge issued a ruling preventing the National
Marine Fisheries Service from hot-branding several thousands
baby Stellar sea lions. Stellar sea lions are, after all,
an endangered species. The judge thought it might be a good
idea to investigate the impact of hot branding an endangered
species before conducting the research. This is a real shame.
How will it be possible to protect these animals when we know
so little about them? And how can we keep track of individual
animals unless we have a good numbering system? Perhaps the
judge has a point, however. Perhaps it might be a good idea
to conduct a preliminary study to determine the effects hot-branding
has on baby sea lion mortality before we risk impacting the
Stellar population. I suggest this could be done easily by
conducting a scientific study using green fluorescent paint
to mark up a few thousand baby California sea lions (as I
mentioned, there’s lots of those) then hot-branding
a few thousand more. We would then punch plastic tags in all
of the baby sea lion flippers for further identification.
Then the statistical difference in mortality between the two
populations could be measured to see if it is significant.
Certainly, this study is worthy of someone’s master’s
thesis.
Of course, I would rather that any numbering system
for keeping track of our wildlife be aesthetically attractive.
Hot-brands are really quite unsightly especially when portions
of the brand are infected. And because the brands are so large,
even photographers who are skilled at Photoshop will have
difficulty removing the numbers from digital images of sea
lions. For the most part scientists do a much better job with
sea otters. Hot-branding sea otters is really out of the questions
since otters with intact pelts are such a major tourist attraction
for the city of Monterey. All it would take would be one dead
otter washing up on the beach with a putrefied hot-brand,
and that would be that. Instead, many otters are tagged with
subcutaneous electronic tags plus an ear tag plus a large
and colorful plastic tag in each rear foot. Why so many tags
are necessary requires a more detailed scientific explanation
and is beyond the scope of this essay (which is to say I haven’t
a clue). I’m told, however, that videotaping of the
tagging procedure is strictly prohibited because the “avoidance
response” associated with punching holes through otter
feet can be easily mistaken for excruciating pain.
Despite the occasional unpleasantness, it is critical
that tagging and transmitters remain a major part of what
marine biology masters candidates and doctoral candidates
do. We have learned wonderful things from tagging programs.
Recently white sharks tagged in California turned up swimming
at 1,000 feet in the waters off Hawaii! No one could have
predicted that. And when filming great whites at Guadalupe
Island last year, knowing about these trips to Hawaii made
waiting for an untagged shark to swim by quite tolerable.
To some degree tourism itself benefits from tagging
programs. There are several shark-tagging programs that are
used as much to attract sport divers as they are to create
useful migratory data. It seems to be great fun to watch or
even participate in the process of sticking animals with dart-tipped
spears. And without tagging, what would all those heroic death-defying
scientists do during Discovery’s Shark Week or on National
Geographic shark shows? Indeed, in the late 1970’s and
early 1980’s Shark Tagging Competitions and phony-baloney
Wild Kingdom pseudo-scientific tagging expeditions helped
me afford a down payment on my first home! Why shouldn’t
other sport diving operations benefit? Oh, sorry, you didn’t
think the science being conducted on all of those shows was
real, did you?
Clearly, as human population increases and wildlife
populations plummet, it will be increasingly important to
know where every animal is in our oceans at any given time.
There is a program currently being funded that should accomplish
just that. The Census of the Seas project is a one billion
dollar program designed to get an accurate count of what’s
living in our ocean. This program will start modestly by placing
4,000 transmitters on everything from blue whales to leatherback
turtles. The program’s ultimate goal is to tag pretty
much every large animal in the sea. Only after every animal
has been tagged and properly numbered can we hope to know
enough about their migratory patterns to prevent their extinction,
or at least know a little about them before commercial fisheries
removes them all with nets and long-lines. There is not a
moment to waste. The decline of wildlife populations in our
oceans is accelerating dramatically. At the same time there
is an ever increasing population of scientists, filmmakers,
even sport divers armed with tags, transmitters, DNA sampling
devices, crittercams, and millions of dollars in funding for
marine life population dynamics studies. If we procrastinate
too long there may be more scientists, tags, crossbows, branding
irons, and transmitters than there are animals to be numbered.
If we act now, perhaps we can get every animal tagged or branded
before it’s too late.
Hopefully, sometime in the very near future, filmmakers
like me will no long turn their cameras away from animals
they consider disfigured with tags, brands, or transmitters,
but will instead consider unadorned animals as unworthy, unnatural,
even obscenely naked. Soon we may all look askance at a big
horn sheep that does not have a beer can-size transmitter
strapped around its neck, or a monarch butterfly without a
number taped to the top of each wing. And hopefully, someday
soon our government will change sanctioned illustrations our
national symbol to show bald eagles with bands on their legs
and large numbered tags under each wing just as they appear
today in nature (anywhere in the lower 48 states). Then when
one of us is out in the wild and sees a rare bald eagle the
wilderness experience will fully meet our happy expectation.
|