306 
Fishery Bulletin 99(2) 
100 
80 
0) 
2 60 
o 40 
(D 
20 
0 
Tag hits 
_ 
15 
- 
5 
4 
1 
1 
t nuz 
3 
HL 
logging milling/traveling 
Reaction type 
□ none 
□ low-level 
CD moderate 
100 1 
Reaction type 
80 - 
60 - 
□ none 
□ low-level 
40 - 
ta moderate 
20 - 
0 
Biopsy misses 
15 
logging milling/trausling 
Predeployment behavior 
Figure 2 
Relationship between behavioral state and reaction type for tag and biopsy deployments. Reactions during logging behavior were 
stronger than for other behaviors for both hits (P=0.044) and misses (P=0.045). Percentage of each reaction-type is displayed for 
each prebiopsy behavioral category (number of reactions of each type are shown above each bar). 
1996), whereas sperm whales showed strong startle reac- 
tions, occasionally involving defecation (Whitehead et al., 
1990). Reactions of bottlenose whales seemed most similar 
to killer whale reactions, i.e. relatively “low-level.” Gen- 
der-related differences in the levels of reaction have pre- 
viously been noted for humpback whales (Brown et al., 
1994), although no such effects were found in this study. 
Reactions of northern bottlenose whales to suction-cup 
tag deployment were also low-level. Bottlenose whales re- 
acted to 93% of tag hits and 40% of tag misses. Baird 
(1994) documented only minor reactions by killer whales 
to crossbow-deployed suction-cup-attached tags: 52% re- 
action to hits and 26% reactions to misses. Reactions of 
short-finned pilot whales ( Globicephala macrorhynchus) to 
the same tags deployed by crossbow consisted of a tail flick 
and rapid dive (Baird 1 ). Similar variation in reaction has 
been observed from suction-cup-attached tags deployed 
by pole. Little reaction was observed to tags deployed on 
Dali’s porpoise (Hanson and Baird, 1998) or pantropical 
spotted dolphins ( Stenella attenucitcr, Baird 1 ), whereas bot- 
tlenose dolphins showed prolonged and intense reactions 
1 Baird, R.W. 1999. Unpubl. data. Biology Department, Dal- 
housie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4J1 Canada. 
to tagging attempts, reacting to 100% of hits and 71% of 
misses (Schneider et al., 1998). The scale of reaction for 
northern bottlenose whales appears to lie in the middle of 
this range. 
As noted, reactions to tag hits were similar to reactions 
to biopsy hits, despite the fact that tags weigh substan- 
tially more than biopsy darts. A potential explanation for 
this is the variation in “tag hit” under our definition: some 
of the tag hits were glancing blows and so may have had 
little striking impact, whereas others were direct hits. In 
contrast, the impact of biopsy darting was more consis- 
tent (i.e. there were virtually no glancing hits for biopsy 
darts). In addition, the greater weight of the tags result- 
ed in a slower delivery speed, thus the force of a heavier, 
slower-moving tag may have been similar to that of the 
lighter, faster-moving biopsy dart. Alternatively, animals 
may have a set reaction to any impact, such that the same 
response will be elicited unless some threshold is exceeded 
(perhaps through excessive or repeated impact). 
As many authors have pointed out, evaluating short and 
long-term reaction to tag attachment is important in de- 
termining whether the presence of tags affects the record- 
ed behavior (White and Garrott, 1990; Walker and Boveng, 
1995; Croll et al., 1996). Data were recovered from two of 
