1043 



Estimating the harvest of Pacific walrus, 

 Odobenus rosmarus divergens, in Alaska 



Joel L. Garlich-Miller 



Douglas M. Burn 



Marine Mammals Management 



U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 



1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 



E-mail address (for J L Gariicii-Miller) Joel_GarlichMilleria'mail fws gov 



For thousands of years, walrus 

 hunting has been an important 

 component of the economy and cul- 

 ture of Native communities along 

 the Bering and Chukchi Sea coasts 

 (Ray, 1975). Today, the Pacific \^a\- 

 rns (Odobenus rosmarus divergens ) 

 remains a valuable resource to 

 coastal natives in Alaska (United 

 States) and Chukotka (Russia) as 

 a source of food and raw materials 

 for traditional equipment and 

 handicrafts. 



Accurate information regarding 

 the number of animals removed 

 annually from the population is 

 fundamental for the conservation 

 and management of any species. As 

 the agency responsible for manag- 

 ing Pacific walrus in U.S. waters, 

 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

 ( FWS ) gathers data on the size and 

 composition of the subsistence wal- 

 rus harvest in Alaska. The FWS 

 presently administers two separate 

 harvest monitoring programs: the 

 Walrus Harvest Monitoring Project 

 ( WHMP) and the Marking Tagging 

 and Reporting Program (MTRP), 



The WHMP is an observer pro- 

 gram carried out at select walrus 

 hunting villages in Alaska. Each 

 spring, as the pack ice recedes 

 northward, hunters from coastal 

 communities in the Bering Strait 

 region have access to herds of wal- 

 rus as they migrate to their sum- 

 mer range. Historical harvest infor- 

 mation indicates that approxi- 

 mately QO^t of the annual reported 

 walrus harvest in Alaska occurs in 



this region (Fay and BowlbyM. 

 WHMP monitors stationed at the 

 primary walrus hunting villages in 

 the Bering Strait region (Gambell, 

 Savoonga, Little Diomede and 

 Wales; Fig. 1 ) collect information on 

 the size and composition of the wal- 

 rus harvest. Hai-vest monitors meet 

 boats as they return from walrus 

 hunting trips in order to collect bio- 

 logical samples and harvest infor- 

 mation at the boat landing site 

 (Garlich-Miller^). The goal of the 

 WHMP is to identify and record the 

 gender and age class of every wal- 

 rus retrieved by hunters from these 

 villages during the monitoring pe- 

 riod. Although there is no way of 

 evaluating the degree to which this 

 goal is achieved, WHMP monitors 

 meet most of the returning boats, 

 and the number of retrieved ani- 

 mals not recorded during the har- 

 vest monitoring period is believed 

 to be small (Dickerson'^). 



The MTRP is a Federally man- 

 dated year-round, statewide pro- 

 gi-am (Fig. 1 ). The marking and tag- 

 ging rule requires that all hunters 

 certify (tag) walrus ivory (tusks) 

 and report all walruses that are 

 taken. The objectives of the MTRP 

 are to collect harvest information 

 and to certify specified marine 

 mammal parts to help control ille- 

 gal harvests and trade. Hunters are 

 required to bring walrus tusks to a 

 MTRP tagger within 30 days of the 

 kill. The tagger attaches individu- 

 ally numbered wire tags to the 

 tusks and records the numbers on 



a tagging certificate. MTRP tags 

 are not attached to calf walruses (or 

 other walruses that may be miss- 

 ing tusks); however, hunters are 

 required to report all animals 

 taken. The age class, gender, kill 

 date, and kill location of each wal- 

 rus are recorded on the certificate 

 (Stephensen et al."*). 



These two programs indepen- 

 dently provide information on the 

 size and composition of the harvest. 

 Except in the case of the village of 

 Wales, WHMP and MTRP staff are 

 different people. Each of the two 

 monitoring programs has its 

 strengths and weaknesses. The 

 WHMP benefits from the presence 

 of on-site staff to collect accurate 

 biological information from every 

 walrus retrieved in a community 

 during the monitoring period. Un- 

 fortunately, the monitoring period 

 is seasonal (restricted to the spring 

 hunt) and operates only in four 

 coastal villages. The MTRP is a 

 statewide, year-round program; 

 however hunter compliance with 

 the MTRP rule is variable and ani- 

 mals lacking tusks (e.g. calves, 

 yearlings, and animals with broken 

 tusks) often go unreported (Burn, 

 1998). 



' Fay, F. H.,andC. E.Bowlby. 1994. The 

 harvest of Pacific walrus, 1931-1989. 

 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Marine 

 Mammals Management, Anchorage, 

 AK. Technical report MMM 94-2,43 p. 



- Garlich-Miller. J. 1997. Age, sex, and 

 reproductive status of Pacific walrus har- 

 vested in the Bering Strait region, 1994- 

 1996. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ma- 

 rine Mammals Management, Anchorage. 

 AK. Technical Report MMM 97-1.25 p. 



3 Dickerson, L. 1989. U.S. Fish and 

 Wildlife Service, Marine Mammals Man- 

 agement, Anchorage. AK. Personal 

 commun. 



^ Stephensen. W. D., D. Cramer, and D. 

 Burn. 1994. Review of the Marine 

 Mammal Marking Tagging and Reporting 

 Program. 1982-1992. U.S. Fish and 

 WildHfc Service, Marine Mammals Man- 

 agement, Anchorage, AK. Technical Re- 

 port MMM 94-1, 49 p. 



Manuscript accepted 13 January 1999 

 Fish, Bull, 97(41:1043-1046 11999). 



