303 
Behavioral reactions of northern bottlenose whales 
(Hyperoodon ampul/atus ) to biopsy darting and 
tag attachment procedures 
Sascha K. Hooker 
Robin W. Baird 
Sa'ad Al-Omari 
Shannon Gowans 
Ha! Whitehead 
Biology Department 
Dalhousie University 
Halifax, Nova Scotia 
B3H 4J1, Canada 
Present address (for S. K. Hooker): British Antarctic Survey 
High Cross, Madingley Road 
Cambridge, CBE OET, United Kingdom 
E mail address (for S. K. Hooker). skh@bas.ac.uk 
Abstract— The effects of invasive or 
intrusive research techniques need to 
be thoroughly documented in order to 
satisfy appropriate standards of animal 
care. How cetaceans react to either 
biopsy darting or tag attachment, pro- 
cedures has been studied for several 
species, and considerable interspecific 
variability in responses has been dem- 
onstrated; however, few studies have 
compared reactions to both techniques. 
In the family Ziphiidae (the beaked 
whales) nothing has been previously 
reported on responses to either tech- 
nique. We examined and compared 
the reactions of northern bottlenose 
whales ( Hyperoodon ampullatus) to 
biopsy darting and tagging. Reactions 
to both these procedures were gener- 
ally low-level and short-lived; stronger 
responses were given to hits than to 
misses. There was no statistical differ- 
ence in observed response to tag versus 
biopsy hits. The prior behavioral state 
of the whales appeared to influence 
the magnitude of reaction to both hits 
and misses and thus may be an impor- 
tant factor to consider in such impact 
assessment. Whales lying still at the 
surface showed stronger reactions than 
traveling or milling animals. Sea state 
appeared to affect whether there was a 
reaction to misses. Whales were more 
likely to respond to a miss in calm 
sea conditions. No avoidance of the 
research vessel was observed following 
a tag or biopsy attempt, and in most 
cases whales approached the research 
vessel again within several minutes. 
Manuscript accepted 16 November 2000. 
Fish. Bull. 99:303-308 (2001 ). 
The nonlethal firing of projectiles at 
whales and dolphins is increasingly 
being used, both in order to obtain skin 
and blubber samples (e.g. Lambertsen, 
1987) and to attach data-recording or 
transmitting devices (e.g. Mate and 
Harvey, 1983; Goodyear, 1993; Baird, 
1998; Mate et al., 1998). Data collected 
with these techniques are important 
for management and conservation pur- 
poses but may come at some cost (usu- 
ally a behavioral disturbance) to the 
individuals involved. This cost may vary 
for different species or populations (see 
e.g. Schneider et ah, 1998), therefore 
the impacts should be assessed each 
time a study is conducted. 
Reactions of various species of ce- 
taceans to biopsy darting have gener- 
ally been mild (e.g. International Whal- 
ing Commission, 1989; Whitehead et 
al., 1990; Brown et al., 1991; Weinrich 
et al., 1991, 1992; Barrett-Lennard et 
al., 1996; Weller et al., 1997). The most 
common response is a “startle” reac- 
tion, although the level of reaction var- 
ies slightly between species, and also 
between populations and individuals. 
In contrast, the reaction of cetaceans to 
tagging with suction-cup-attached tags 
has been found to vary dramatically. Al- 
though reactions of killer whales ( Or- 
em us area) and Dali’s porpoises iPho- 
coenoides dalli) to the technique were 
minor (Baird, 1994; Hanson and Baird, 
1998), those of bottlenose dolphins (Tur- 
siops sp.) were strong and relatively 
long-lasting (Schneider et al., 1998). 
The family Ziphiidae (the beaked 
whales) is the second largest family of 
cetaceans, yet no studies have reported 
their reactions to tagging or biopsy tech- 
niques. In this paper we compare the 
react ions of northern bottlenose whales 
( Hyperoodon ampullatus ) to both tech- 
niques and investigate factors affect- 
ing the behavioral reactions observed. 
These results are particularly relevant 
to agencies that grant research permits 
(e.g. the National Marine Fisheries Ser- 
vice in the USA), which often require 
some discussion of the implications of 
research techniques in terms of animal 
care. Additionally, assessment of the 
magnitude and duration of any behav- 
ioral response caused by the process of 
attaching a tag is vital in ensuring that 
the attachment of the tag does not con- 
found the behavioral data it records. 
Materials and methods 
Field research took place off eastern 
Canada, approximately 300 km east of 
Halifax, Nova Scotia, over a subma- 
rine canyon termed the “Gully" (approx- 
imate position: 44°N, 59°W ) during 
June-August 1996-98. All tagging or 
biopsy attempts were made opportunis- 
