99
gain their support for conservation. One of the biggest
advantages of telemetry is its usefulness in outreach, as this
data can be presented in a highly attractive way. However,
it is not only their support that is vital. Web-based citizen
science projects are a prime example of how volunteers can
help process the enormous amount of telemetry-derived
data (e.g., through the Zooniverse portal with links to
Seabirdwatch, Weddell Seal Count, Snapshots at Sea,
Penguin Watch, etc.) (Zooniverse 2017). In general, results
from bio-telemetry studies on marine top predators can
inform local, regional, and international conservation management, and the general public, which in turn, could trigger actions to mitigate potential anthropogenic threats. To
be effective, these management measures should be highly
flexible according to the very dynamic nature of marine
ecosystems.
Conclusion
It is evident that tagging marine top predators with biotelemetry devices has an enormous value – not only for
studying their movement ecology but also for resolving
marine conservation issues. Data from these devices have
already answered numerous fundamental questions, and will
continue to do so in the future (Hays et al. 2016). The current
rapid technological advances will certainly lead to an ever
growing variety of new devices and methodological
approaches. Nevertheless, animal welfare may not be overlooked. Although no negative long-term effects of biotelemetry devices were reported for most species, there is
still potential for improvements. Tag effects must be thoroughly assessed and the miniaturization of bio-telemetry
devices must continue to ensure the wellbeing of tagged
animals.
In conclusion, adaptive and dynamic management is necessary to guarantee healthy marine ecosystems and this can
benefit substantially from monitoring top predators with biotelemetry devices (Maxwell et al. 2015). However, regardless of the management approach, it is clear that
multidisciplinary collaboration is key and sharing data is
imperative, if conservation is to be successful (Cvitanovic
et al. 2015). Additionally, scientists need new tools and
frameworks to link animal telemetry-derived data to conservation and management, while maximizing the outcome of
the global investment in bio-telemetry devices (McGowan
et al. 2017). This will enable us to address the relevant key
questions in top predator movement ecology—in conjunction with governments and society—and ultimately lead to
effective conservation and management of marine
ecosystems.
Appendix
This article is related to the YOUMARES 8 conference session no. 1: “Sentinels of the Sea: Ecology and Conservation
of Marine Top Predators”. The original Call for Abstracts
and the abstracts of the presentations within this session can
be found in the appendix “Conference sessions and
Abstracts”, chapter “6 Sentinels of the Sea: Ecology and
Conservation of Marine Top Predators”, of this book.
References
Aarts G, MacKenzie M, McConnell B et al (2008) Estimating spaceuse and habitat preference from wildlife telemetry data. Ecography
31:140–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.05236.x
Afanasyev V (2004) A miniature daylight level and activity data
recorder for tracking animals over long periods. Mem Natl Inst
Polar Res Spec Issue 58:227–233
Agardy MT (1994) Advances in marine conservation: the role of
marine protected areas. Trends Ecol Evol 9:267–270. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0169-5347(94)90297-6
Agardy MT, Bridgewater P, Crosby MP et al (2003) Dangerous targets?
unresolved issues and ideological clashes around marine protected
areas. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshwat Ecosyst 13:353–367. https://
doi.org/10.1002/aqc.583
Aguilar Soto N, Johnson MP, Madsen PT et al (2008) Cheetahs of
the deep sea: deep foraging sprints in short-finned pilot whales off
Tenerife (Canary Islands). J Anim Ecol 77:936–947. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01393.x
Andersson M (1978) Optimal foraging area: size and allocation of
search effort. Theor Popul Biol 13:397–409
Andrews RD, Pitman RL, Ballance LT (2008) Satellite tracking reveals
distinct movement patterns for Type B and Type C killer whales in
the southern Ross Sea, Antarctica. Polar Biol 31:1461–1468. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00300-008-0487-z
Antonelis GA, Baker JD, Johanos TC et al (2006) Hawaiian monk seal
(Monachus schauinslandi): status and conservation. Atoll Res Bull
543:75–101
Arcalís-Planas A, Sveegaard S, Karlsson O et al (2015) Limited use
of sea ice by the Ross seal (Ommatophoca rossii), in Amundsen
Sea, Antarctica, using telemetry and remote sensing data. Polar Biol
38:445–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1602-y
Årthun M, Nicholls KW, Makinson K et al (2012) Seasonal
inflow of warm water onto the southern Weddell Sea continental shelf, Antarctica. Geophys Res Lett 39:2–7. https://doi.
org/10.1029/2012GL052856
Arthur B, Hindell M, Bester MN et al (2016) South for the winter?
within-dive foraging effort reveals the trade-offs between divergent
foraging strategies in a free-ranging predator. Funct Ecol 30:1623–
1637. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12636
Austin D, Bowen WD, McMillan JI et al (2006a) Stomach temperature telemetry reveals temporal patterns of foraging success in a
free-ranging marine mammal. J Anim Ecol 75:408–420. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01057.x
Austin D, Bowen WD, McMillan JI et al (2006b) Linking movement,
diving, and habitat to foraging success in a large marine predator.
Ecology 87:3095–3108
Baker JD, Johanos TC (2002) Effects of research handling on the
endangered Hawaiian monk seal. Mar Mamm Sci 18:500–512.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2002.tb01051.x
Bio-telemetry as an Essential Tool in Movement Ecology and Marine Conservation
gain their support for conservation. One of the biggest
advantages of telemetry is its usefulness in outreach, as this
data can be presented in a highly attractive way. However,
it is not only their support that is vital. Web-based citizen
science projects are a prime example of how volunteers can
help process the enormous amount of telemetry-derived
data (e.g., through the Zooniverse portal with links to
Seabirdwatch, Weddell Seal Count, Snapshots at Sea,
Penguin Watch, etc.) (Zooniverse 2017). In general, results
from bio-telemetry studies on marine top predators can
inform local, regional, and international conservation management, and the general public, which in turn, could trigger actions to mitigate potential anthropogenic threats. To
be effective, these management measures should be highly
flexible according to the very dynamic nature of marine
ecosystems.
Conclusion
It is evident that tagging marine top predators with biotelemetry devices has an enormous value – not only for
studying their movement ecology but also for resolving
marine conservation issues. Data from these devices have
already answered numerous fundamental questions, and will
continue to do so in the future (Hays et al. 2016). The current
rapid technological advances will certainly lead to an ever
growing variety of new devices and methodological
approaches. Nevertheless, animal welfare may not be overlooked. Although no negative long-term effects of biotelemetry devices were reported for most species, there is
still potential for improvements. Tag effects must be thoroughly assessed and the miniaturization of bio-telemetry
devices must continue to ensure the wellbeing of tagged
animals.
In conclusion, adaptive and dynamic management is necessary to guarantee healthy marine ecosystems and this can
benefit substantially from monitoring top predators with biotelemetry devices (Maxwell et al. 2015). However, regardless of the management approach, it is clear that
multidisciplinary collaboration is key and sharing data is
imperative, if conservation is to be successful (Cvitanovic
et al. 2015). Additionally, scientists need new tools and
frameworks to link animal telemetry-derived data to conservation and management, while maximizing the outcome of
the global investment in bio-telemetry devices (McGowan
et al. 2017). This will enable us to address the relevant key
questions in top predator movement ecology—in conjunction with governments and society—and ultimately lead to
effective conservation and management of marine
ecosystems.
Appendix
This article is related to the YOUMARES 8 conference session no. 1: “Sentinels of the Sea: Ecology and Conservation
of Marine Top Predators”. The original Call for Abstracts
and the abstracts of the presentations within this session can
be found in the appendix “Conference sessions and
Abstracts”, chapter “6 Sentinels of the Sea: Ecology and
Conservation of Marine Top Predators”, of this book.
References
Aarts G, MacKenzie M, McConnell B et al (2008) Estimating spaceuse and habitat preference from wildlife telemetry data. Ecography
31:140–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.05236.x
Afanasyev V (2004) A miniature daylight level and activity data
recorder for tracking animals over long periods. Mem Natl Inst
Polar Res Spec Issue 58:227–233
Agardy MT (1994) Advances in marine conservation: the role of
marine protected areas. Trends Ecol Evol 9:267–270. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0169-5347(94)90297-6
Agardy MT, Bridgewater P, Crosby MP et al (2003) Dangerous targets?
unresolved issues and ideological clashes around marine protected
areas. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshwat Ecosyst 13:353–367. https://
doi.org/10.1002/aqc.583
Aguilar Soto N, Johnson MP, Madsen PT et al (2008) Cheetahs of
the deep sea: deep foraging sprints in short-finned pilot whales off
Tenerife (Canary Islands). J Anim Ecol 77:936–947. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01393.x
Andersson M (1978) Optimal foraging area: size and allocation of
search effort. Theor Popul Biol 13:397–409
Andrews RD, Pitman RL, Ballance LT (2008) Satellite tracking reveals
distinct movement patterns for Type B and Type C killer whales in
the southern Ross Sea, Antarctica. Polar Biol 31:1461–1468. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00300-008-0487-z
Antonelis GA, Baker JD, Johanos TC et al (2006) Hawaiian monk seal
(Monachus schauinslandi): status and conservation. Atoll Res Bull
543:75–101
Arcalís-Planas A, Sveegaard S, Karlsson O et al (2015) Limited use
of sea ice by the Ross seal (Ommatophoca rossii), in Amundsen
Sea, Antarctica, using telemetry and remote sensing data. Polar Biol
38:445–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1602-y
Årthun M, Nicholls KW, Makinson K et al (2012) Seasonal
inflow of warm water onto the southern Weddell Sea continental shelf, Antarctica. Geophys Res Lett 39:2–7. https://doi.
org/10.1029/2012GL052856
Arthur B, Hindell M, Bester MN et al (2016) South for the winter?
within-dive foraging effort reveals the trade-offs between divergent
foraging strategies in a free-ranging predator. Funct Ecol 30:1623–
1637. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12636
Austin D, Bowen WD, McMillan JI et al (2006a) Stomach temperature telemetry reveals temporal patterns of foraging success in a
free-ranging marine mammal. J Anim Ecol 75:408–420. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01057.x
Austin D, Bowen WD, McMillan JI et al (2006b) Linking movement,
diving, and habitat to foraging success in a large marine predator.
Ecology 87:3095–3108
Baker JD, Johanos TC (2002) Effects of research handling on the
endangered Hawaiian monk seal. Mar Mamm Sci 18:500–512.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2002.tb01051.x
Bio-telemetry as an Essential Tool in Movement Ecology and Marine Conservation