Protocol for Examining Marine Mammals for Signs of Human

OMB Control No. 0648-0178; Expiration Date: 3/31/2017

Protocol for Examining Marine Mammals for Signs of Human Interaction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Exam Information (fill in or circle most appropriate)
Field #: ____________________________________

Species: _________________________________

Examiner: __________________________________

Recorder: ________________________________

Date of exam:_______________________________

Condition code (at exam): 1

Preservation: alive fresh

frozen

frozen/thawed

Body condition: emaciated

Documentation:

print

slide

Image disposition:__________________________

Integument :

digital

normal

abnormal

video

decomposed

2

3

4

5

CBD

not emaciated

CBD

% Skin missing: <10% 10-25% 25-50% >50%

Explanation of terms:
YES = I have examined the area and found signs of human interaction
NO = I have examined the area did not find signs of human interaction
CBD = I have examined the area and could not determine whether there were signs of human interaction (i.e. the
part was missing, degraded, or signs were ambiguous)
NE = I did not examine the area
NA = this animal doesn’t normally have that part (i.e. seals have no dorsal, dolphins have no rear flippers)

WHOLE BODY EXAM

YES

NO

CBD

NE

NA

Image taken

8 Appendage(s) removed / Mutilation (with instrument)
9 Pelt removed / Mutilation (with instrument)
10 Body sliced / Mutilation

(with instrument)

11 Gear / Debris present on animal (including tags)
12 Gear / Debris retained (name & contact info in Comments)
13 External pathology (pox, tattoo lesion, abscess)
14 Natural markings (scars, tooth rakes, unusual pigmentation)
15 HI lesions

(fishery, gunshot, propeller, healed HI scar, brand)

16 Predation / scavenger damage (circle all anatomical areas where damage hinders evaluation; numbers coincide
with anatomical areas below ):
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NONE

FILL IN TABLE FOR ALL POSSIBLE FINDINGS OF HI

17 Rostrum/snout
18 Mandible
19 Head
20 L Front appendage
21 R Front appendage
22 Body R L
23 Dorsum/dorsal fin
24 Ventrum
25 Peduncle
26 L Rear appendage
27 R Rear appendage
28 Flukes/tail
29

IFAW & VAQS (2012)

Image taken?

Other / CBD

Gunshot

Propeller

CBD

Multifilament

Monofilament

other / CBD

Net

Other / CBD

Abrasion

NE/NA

Impression/
Laceration
Penetrating
wound
Healed HI
scar

Twine / line

Origin of Lesion
Gear - Twine Type
Other

Type of Lesion

CBD

NO

DETAILED EXAM OF
ANATOMICAL AREAS

YES

Do not use for natural markings/pathology.

30
31
32
33
34

Internal exam conducted
Bruising/blunt trauma
Skeleton examined
Broken bones present
Mouth/GI tract examined

35
36
37
38

Lungs/bronchi examined
Lung/bronchi contents
Bullet/projectile found
Other lesions noted

Detailed Info

Image
taken

CBD

Date ____________

Partial

INTERNAL EXAM

YES
NO

Field #:______________________
(circle all that apply)
Details in Comments section -use line number
Details in Comments section -use line number
Details in Comments section -use line number
Associated tissue reaction: YES
NO
CBD
intact prey
partially digested
hard parts only
debris/gear
empty
other
Details in Comments section -use line number

(circle contents)

froth
fluid
found using: CT

air
(color:
X-ray dissection (collected? Y

N )

)

Details in Comments section -use line number

39 Comments (note line number from left margin before each comment):

40 Findings of Human Interaction:
(transfer to Level A Datasheet)
41

(Exam Type: external__ internal___ both ___)

Type of HI: (provide details in comments)

□ Entanglement (gear__ debris__ CBD__)
□ Vessel trauma (sharp__ blunt__ both__ )
□ Hooking (recreational__ commercial__ CBD__) □ Gunshot
□ Mutilation
□ Ingestion (gear__ debris__ CBD__)
□ Harassment
□CBD/Other_________

42 Stranding

43

□YES □NO □CBD

Event History/Circumstances:

INITIAL Human Interaction Evaluation: If you marked YES above (line 40) evaluate
the external exam, necropsy, carcass condition and circumstances surrounding the stranding
event to answer the question below. Remember to be conservative in your subjective evaluation.
What is the likelihood that the finding of human interaction (line 40), contributed to
the stranding event?

0: Uncertain (CBD)
44

Justification:

1: Improbable

2: Suspect

3: Probable

Final human interaction evaluation requires additional data from level B and C analyses
as well as review by a veterinary pathologist.
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT INFORMATION
PUBLIC REPORTING BURDEN FOR THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION IS ESTIMATED TO AVERAGE 60 MINUTES PER RESPONSE, INCLUDING THE TIME FOR
REVIEWING INSTRUCTIONS, SEARCHING EXISTING DATA SOURCES, GATHERING AND MAINTAINING THE DATA NEEDED, AND COMPLETING AND
REVIEWING THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION. SEND COMMENTS REGARDING THIS BURDEN ESTIMATE OR ANY OTHER ASPECT OF THE COLLECTION
INFORMATION, INCLUDING SUGGESTIONS FOR REDUCING THE BURDEN TO: CHIEF, MARINE MAMMAL AND SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION DIVISION,
OFFICE OF PROTECTED RESOURCES, NOAA FISHERIES, 1315 EAST-WEST HIGHWAY, SILVER SPRING, MARYLAND 20910. NOT WITHSTANDING ANY OTHER
PROVISION OF THE LAW, NO PERSON IS REQUIRED TO RESPOND, NOR SHALL ANY PERSON BE SUBJECTED TO A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH,
A COLLECTION OF INFORMATION SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, UNLESS THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION
DISPLAYS A CURRENTLY VALID OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB) CONTROL NUMBER.

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

1

PROTOCOL FOR EVALUATING MARINE MAMMALS FOR
SIGNS OF HUMAN INTERACTION
Introduction
Evaluating marine mammals for signs of human interaction requires consistent, objective examination
by trained personnel. This document is meant to accompany formal training by experienced stranding
network participants. This protocol is divided into an objective data collection section and a more
subjective initial human interaction diagnosis. The primary goal of this protocol is to determine whether
evidence of human interaction is present on the animal. The secondary, and more difficult, goal is to
determine whether human activities contributed to the stranding event. A positive score for Findings of
Human Interaction results from an objective evaluation of an animal or carcass. This evaluation does
not attempt to determine whether the signs of human interaction occurred before, during, or after a
stranding event and does not attempt to qualify the severity of the interaction.
The subjective Initial Human Interaction Evaluation takes into account the circumstances of the
stranding event and the animal’s physical condition. A high score indicates that human activities most
likely caused the stranding. A low score indicates that although signs of human interaction are present,
the likelihood that the interaction caused the stranding is very low. For example, old, healed propeller
scars on a known whale are unlikely to have caused a stranding during a domoic acid event and a
dead dolphin calf covered by debris on a beach following a hurricane is unlikely to have died due to
entanglement.
Determining the cause of death is not an objective of this protocol. Without further evaluation,
such as histopathology, and review by veterinarians, pathologists and/or other experts, the exact
reason for stranding and cause of death cannot be definitively determined.
Human interaction (HI) data illustrate where problems between marine mammals and humans occur.
When collected carefully and consistently, these data can be used to describe the types of interaction
taking place (e.g. monofilament net, multifilament net, small or large vessel interaction, ingestion of
debris, etc.), thus providing a sound scientific basis for policy and management decisions. The nature
of strandings makes it inadvisable to use human interaction data to estimate mortality or changes in the
mortality rate due to human interaction.
In addition, there are categories of human interaction that are difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate
such as strandings that result from persistent harassment, those that result in detrimental behaviors
such as surfacing too quickly from a dive after exposure to sub-lethal sound, as well as long-term
effects of man-made products that may result in lowered immunity, disease, or reduced reproduction.
There are new activities such as renewable energy and aquaculture operations that are just beginning
to be exploited in the US. We cannot point to a mark or a diagnostic test that can tell us whether a
stranded whale has been exposed to active sonar or to sound generated by a wind farm. We cannot
guarantee that a seal pup was never exposed to humans or their activities. Finally, we must
acknowledge that we do not understand the effects of multiple human interaction stressors on marine
mammals.
We must acknowledge that, in some way, human activities have affected the lives of every marine
mammal, but for our purposes using this form, we are trying to document those human activities that
are consistently observable and can be documented by stranding responders.
Definitions
In order to effectively evaluate marine mammals for signs of human interaction, you must understand
what you are looking for. Below are terms and explanations of data sheet sections:
Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

2

For most of the sections, you must choose among the following answers:
YES you have examined the area (i.e. left front appendage, snout) and you found signs of human
interaction
NO you have examined the area (i.e. left front appendage, snout) and you found NO signs of human
interaction
CBD (Could not Be Determined) which means either: (1) you have examined the area and could not
determine whether the marks you saw were signs of human interaction, (2) you could not
properly examine the area because it was degraded (scavenged, skin/pelt missing, mangled,
etc.), or (3) you could not examine the area because it was missing (removed, decomposed)
NE you did not examine the area (an explanation as to why is often helpful – e.g. it was too dark; the
animal was to large to roll over, etc.)
NA this question is not applicable to this animal (e.g. it is a seal and doesn’t have a dorsal fin, or it is
a dolphin and doesn’t have rear appendages)
Strategy for filling out the human interaction data sheet
Each line on the data sheet is numbered in the left hand margin. These numbers serve two purposes:
(1) each number corresponds to a section within these instructions with details about how to complete
that line; (2) the line numbers should be entered in the comments section on the second page of the
data sheet to indicate to which item the comment refers.
Page 1:
EXAM INFORMATION: Fill in or circle the most appropriate answer for each of the fields.
1
Field #: unique identifying number originally assigned to the animal by response personnel. Note:
the field number NEVER changes. If other filing numbers are added or accession numbers from
other institutions are added, they should be noted as “additional identifiers”.
Species: note the genus and species or common name of the animal.
2
Examiner: the person evaluating the animal.
Recorder: the person recording the information on the data sheet.
3
Date of exam: the date that you are conducting the human interaction evaluation.
condition code (at exam): the condition code of the animal at the time of the human interaction
evaluation. Use Smithsonian Institution condition codes (Geraci and Lounsbury 2005).
4
Preservation: circle one of following - ALIVE, FRESH (not previously frozen), FROZEN
(completely or partially frozen while exam was conducted), or FROZEN/THAWED (previously
frozen, but completely thawed before exam).
Body condition: circle one of following - EMACIATED (clearly thin, concave epaxial muscle,
obvious neck, ribs, scapulae, hip bones, and/or vertebral processes), NOT EMACIATED (robust
or slightly thin, but not fitting the description of emaciated above) or CBD could not be determined
(bloated, decomposed, not examined, etc.).
5
Documentation: circle all forms of photo/video documentation that apply.
Image disposition: indicate which camera, disk, tape, etc. that images were taken or stored on
and the acronym of the organization that is maintaining them.
6
Integument: (skin, fur, hide) circle one of following - NORMAL (as if it were healthy and alive),
ABNORMAL (conditions not associated with decomposition such as: alopecia, skin lesions,
sloughing, abrasions, etc.) or DECOMPOSED/SCAVENGED (post-mortem changes such as
peeling, sunburn, or scavenger damage).
% Skin missing: Circle the most appropriate number. Note that this does not apply to alopecia
(fur loss) but to SKIN loss.
7
Explanation of terms: definitions of common terms used throughout the data sheet.
WHOLE BODY EXAM: Before beginning a detailed exam, take a look at the whole animal. If possible,
look at all angles and surfaces. Following your whole animal exam, check the most appropriate choice
for each category. If you check YES or CBD, describe what you see in the Comments section on the
Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

3

next page, noting the appropriate line number. Indicate whether you collected an image of an area with
a Y (Yes) or N (No) in the Image taken section. If you are unable to examine any areas, note the details
in the Comments section.
8
Appendages removed (with instrument): Check YES if the head or any appendages (limbs, dorsal
fin, fluke, etc.) appear to have been removed from the animal with an instrument (e.g. if there are
obvious straight line cuts or straight nicks to the bone). In the lower 48 states of the US, this
would be consistent with mutilation. In other areas, such as AK, this may be evidence of the legal
harvest of a marine mammal. It is essential to work with local communities and agencies to
interpret your findings in these cases. Check NO if all appendages are intact. Check CBD if you
are unsure why an appendage is missing or if you cannot examine all appendages. If it appears
an appendage was completely removed by scavenging or predation (e.g. shark bite removed
entire dorsal fin) you should check CBD.
9
Pelt removed (with instrument): Check YES if the pelt appears to have been removed with an
instrument (knife, scraper). Check NO if the pelt is intact (even if the animal’s skin is intact but the
hair/fur is missing). Check CBD if you are unsure (due to decomposition, etc.) of whether the
animal’s pelt was removed. Again, removal of the pelt in most regions of the US would be
considered mutilation; however, in areas where harvesting is permitted, care must be taken in
interpreting and documenting the interaction. If legal harvest is suspected, contact your Regional
Coordinator for guidance on documentation and reporting. Check NA if the animal has no pelt
(cetacean or manatee).
10 Body sliced (with instrument): Check YES if the carcass appears to be sliced with one or more
cuts (from a knife or other blade), consistent with either legal harvest or mutilation (as above,
dependent on the region). Multiple parallel cuts are often indicative of propeller wounds and
should be noted under the HI Lesions category. Check NO if the body is intact or open body
cavity is obviously due to natural causes (e.g. scavenging, predation). Check CBD if the body
cavity has been penetrated and you are unsure of the cause.
11 Gear/debris present on animal: Check YES if the animal is entangled in gear (net, line, pot, buoy,
line with hook, etc.) or debris (anything else). Check NO if there is no gear/debris on the animal.
Check CBD if you are unsure for any reason (e.g. gear/debris is found on, but not wrapped
around the animal, or gear/debris was reported on the animal but apparently removed before you
responded). Note gear/debris present on animal = YES if tags (roto, satellite, etc.) are present on
the animal.
12 Gear/debris retained: Check YES if the gear was retained by a stranding network or NOAA
enforcement official. Note the name and contact information if the gear was retained by anyone
other than your organization. Check NO if the gear was not retained. Check NA if there was no
gear/debris present on the animal.
13 External pathology: If the animal has any lesions that appear to be disease-related such as pox
lesions, tattoo lesions, abscesses, or other unexplained lumps, bumps, or sores, check YES.
Check NO if the animal has no disease-related lesions. Check CBD if you observe lesions and
are unsure of their origin or if the integument is too degraded to assess.
14 Natural markings: If the animal has any natural markings (e.g. tooth rakes, unusual pigmentation,
any non-HI scars) check YES. If the natural marks hamper your examination, please note in the
COMMENTS section. If there are no natural markings, check NO. If you cannot tell if there are
any marks or are unsure of the origin of marks/scars check CBD.
15 HI lesions: Note lesions that may be associated with human interaction (fresh or healed
entanglement or propeller scars, gaff marks, gunshot, healed HI scars, brands, etc.). Check YES
if any human interaction lesions are observed. Check NO if no other lesions are observed. Check
CBD if you observe lesions and are unsure of their origin or if the integument is too degraded to
assess. A detailed exam of these lesions will occur in the next section.
16 Predation/scavenger damage: If there is evidence of predation or scavenger damage, circle the
number(s) that correspond to the anatomical areas where evidence is seen. If the area affected is
not numbered, circle #29, and note the area in the table below (e.g. genital slit, umbilicus, tongue)
and note details of the damage in Comments.
Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

4

17-29 DETAILED EXAM OF ANATOMICAL AREAS– Use this table to record findings of all suspected
or possible evidence of human interaction. This means that any mark that the observer believes is
consistent with some type of HI should be noted here. In addition, any marks for which the source Could
not Be Determined, but that do not appear natural, should also be recorded in this table. DO NOT
RECORD INFORMATION ON NATURAL MARKINGS OR OTHER LESIONS IN THIS SPACE. Examine
the animal carefully starting at the head and working caudally down the right, then left, side, finishing with
the tail or flukes. For this section, indicate whether you observe any SIGNS OF HUMAN INTERACTION
in each anatomical area by checking the YES, NO, or CBD column. If you were not able to examine an
area, check NE, or if it does not apply to your animal, check NA. Be consistent; examine anatomical
areas in the same order each time you do an exam.
TYPE OF LESION- If you checked YES or CBD in any area, proceed to the Type of Lesion section and
check all columns that apply.
• An IMPRESSION is a compression wound that occurs when an object leaves
an indentation but does not lacerate or abrade the skin/pelt. Impressions left
by net or line usually wrap around the leading and/or trailing edges of a fin,
flipper, or fluke. Impressions on the leading edge of an appendage may line
up with a similar mark on the trailing edge.
• A LACERATION occurs when the skin/pelt is penetrated from tight
constriction or prolonged compression. The skin tears resulting in a lesion.
Net and line usually leave linear lacerations. These lacerations may be
evenly spaced along an appendage, or bunched near the proximal end of
appendages (indicating net) and may be accompanied by impressions. A
laceration is different from an incision which is made by a sharp instrument
such as a knife. In cross section, a laceration or impression has rounded or
jagged edges indicating surface tissue damage.
• An INCISION has clean edges and results in little surface tissue damage
(see image at right).
• A PENETRATING WOUND occurs when a foreign object punctures or deeply
penetrates the body, and is generally characterized by a small external
wound and a wound tract that extends deep into the tissue and often into the
body cavity. Sources of penetrating wounds include gaff, knife stab, spear, arrow, gunshot
(especially bullet), etc.
• A HEALED HI SCAR is similar to a natural scar in pigmentation, but exhibits similar characteristics
to the other types of lesions described here (e.g. linear scars on leading edges of appendages
consistent with entanglement, parallel scars consistent with prop strike, etc.). Only check this
column if the lesion is completely healed with no open tissue. Healed scars may be
pigmented and may feel different than surrounding tissue, but there should be no exposed flesh,
discharge, or soft swelling if the wound is healed. Treat healing lesions the same as fresh lesions.
Evidence of HI, even if healed and not likely associated with the stranding event, should still be
scored positive (YES) for HI. It can be difficult to determine the origin of healed scars. If you are
unsure of the origin, check CBD instead of YES in the first set of columns.
• An ABRASION occurs when gear or debris rubs an area and scrapes the skin/pelt without forming
an obvious laceration or distinct impression. This often occurs with heavy line or twine
entanglement or when loose or trailing ends of gear/debris rub (abrade) parts of the body.
• Choose OTHER / CBD for any other types of lesions and describe in the comments section.

Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

5

ORIGIN OF LESION - Once you determine the type of lesion, move to the Origin of Lesion section and
check all that apply.
LINE is made up of many individual strands (multifilament) and is large in diameter. It is used for moorings,
towing, forms the float and lead line of nets, and attaches buoys and anchors.
TWINE is a small diameter line and can be multi- or mono- filament. Twine is constructed of various materials
and is combined in different ways:
MONOFILAMENT twine – a single strand of nylon twine that leaves a single, straight, narrow
impression or laceration (Figure 1, A).
MULTIFILAMENT – line or twine made up of multiple strands of material that are twisted or braided
together and can leave a distinctive impression as a series of parallel, angled lines or ovals (Figure 1,
B and C). If heavier twisted or braided line rubs on a body part or becomes tightly wrapped, it can
cause an abrasion.
NET – nets can be made of either monofilament or multifilament twine and have various
characteristics: twine diameter, square mesh size (knot to knot), and stretch mesh size (diagonal
between opposite knots of a mesh with one knot between; Figure 2). Net impressions are often
characterized by either a criss-cross pattern or a bunching of impressions with or without knot marks
evident where lines intersect.

There are two parts to this section. First, we ask you
A
to indicate what created the lesion, and if the lesion
was related to gear, such as net, twine, or line.
B
Second, we ask if you can determine whether the gear
was monofilament or multifilament.
Based on the descriptions above, indicate the origin of
C
the lesion:
• Twine/Line - select TWINE/LINE if the
impression, laceration, or abrasion is
Figure 1. Impressions left by (A) monofilament, (B)
consistent with the descriptions above, but is
twisted twine and (C) twisted line. Impressions are most
not indicative of interaction with a net.
visible on cetaceans.
• Net - select NET if the marks are consistent
with the descriptions above. Nets made of monofilament may leave multiple impressions or
lacerations, but each lesion is a straight furrow.
• Other/CBD - select this column if the marks appear consistent with entanglement or interaction
with some type of gear, but you cannot determine which type.
If you checked Twine/Line, Net, or Other/CBD, indicate whether lesions were caused by monofilament or
multifilament gear. Select CBD if you observe linear marks, but you are unsure of the origin.

net

A

mesh

B

knot

Figure 2. Typical net design. Nets are measured by the depth and length of the meshes hung between the top and
by IFAW
MMRR
VAQS (2012)
with
from the
bottom lines (float lineDocument
and leaddeveloped
line on gill
nets) and
theand
horizontal
length
of funding
the meshes.
The mesh size can be
John
H.
Prescott
Grant
Program
measured from knot to knot (A) which is called the square or bar mesh size or (B) at it’s maximum diagonal width
which is called a stretch mesh size. Twine size is the diameter of the twine the makes up the mesh.

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

6

If the lesion you noted was not made by gear (line, net/twine), check the appropriate box to indicate the
source:
• Propellers usually leave deep, roughly parallel lacerations (Figure 3). Lesions can be straight (A),
Z or S-shaped (B),
A
B
C
curved (C), or open in
the middle with thin
trails (not illustrated).
Large propellers may
bisect an animal.
• Gunshot wounds vary
Figure 3. Types of propeller lesions left by different styles and sizes of propeller. The
based on the weapon
length, depth, and spacing between lesions can provide information as to the type of
used (shotgun, rifle,
propeller and, thus, type of vessel.
hand gun) and the
distance an animal is
from the weapon. Gunshot wounds can be very difficult to identify through gross exam, but can
be characterized by single (bullet) or multiple (pellet) puncture/penetrating wounds. Radiographs
are often necessary to confirm the findings.
• Other/CBD - select this column for lesions with other origins including, gaff, arrow, and debris
entanglement, etc. or if you are unsure of the origin of the lesion(s).
Every area that scores YES or CBD should have an IMAGE TAKEN that includes a label with identifying
information (field number, date of stranding, species, examiner, subject of image, etc.) and a scale (small
ruler or something of known size). If film or disk space is not limited, take pictures of all areas. Note Y
(Yes) or N (No) in the IMAGE TAKEN column.
Every area that scores YES or CBD should have a comment associated with it. Number each
COMMENT with the corresponding line number for that anatomical area.
If you find lesions in an area not listed in the Detailed Exam table, add it on line 29 and reference in the
COMMENTS section.
Page 2:
FIELD # - Be sure to fill out the field number on both sides of all pages associated with this animal.
INTERNAL EXAM - An evaluation of a dead animal is not complete without a thorough necropsy
(internal examination). Some forms of interaction are only evident through internal exam (e.g. ingestion
of debris or gear) and a final interpretation may change if an animal with external evidence of HI is found
to be suffering from disease, pregnancy complications, injuries, etc. Some observations support a
diagnosis of HI (e.g. for fishery interactions - full stomach, froth in lungs) and others provide evidence for
HI although nothing was noted externally (e.g. stomach full of man-made debris). Be sure to note the
DATE of the internal exam in the INTERNAL EXAM box.
30

Internal examination conducted – If you were able to examine the entire animal, check YES. If you
did not examine the animal internally, check NO. Check PARTIAL if you only examined part of the
animal (e.g. abdominal cavity only), then describe in the Comments section what was examined.
31 Bruising/blunt trauma – Indicate if you see any focal area of bruising (discrete area, not diffuse along
an entire body region). Note whether the area is associated with an external lesion. If it is not
associated with a penetrating lesion or wound, it should be considered blunt trauma. If you check
YES or CBD, note the size of the area and the tissue depth (e.g. sub-dermal to blubber, into muscle,
through muscle and into mesenteries and organs) in the Comments section (do not confuse diffuse
post-mortem blood pooling with bruising).
32 Skeleton examined – Check YES if the entire skeleton was examined. Check NO if no bones were
examined. Check PARTIAL if only some of the skeletal elements were examined. If you check
Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

33

34

35
36
37

38

7

PARTIAL, note in Comments section what was examined (e.g. examined skull, head, left ribs, and
flipper, but not right side or vertebral column).
Broken bones present - Note whether you observed any broken bones.
Associated tissue reaction - Examine the tissue around the break(s) and circle whether any tissue
reaction has occurred (hemorrhage, fibrous tissue, swelling at bone ends, etc.). If you are unsure,
check CBD.
Mouth/GI tract examined - Check YES if the entire GI tract was examined. Check NO if none of the
GI tract was examined. Check PARTIAL if only some elements of the GI tract were examined and
note which areas were examined in the Comments section (e.g. stomach, but not intestines). Note
in the Detailed Info column the predominant condition of the contents. Circle debris/gear if non-prey
items (plastic, line, hooks, etc.) are found. Use the comments section to describe the region of the
GI tract (e.g. esophagus, stomach chamber, intestine, or colon) and its contents (e.g. fish, squid,
crabs, mussels, milk, plastic bag, unknown). Stranded animals with full stomachs are often suspect
cases. Ingestion of gear or debris is considered a human interaction.
Lungs/bronchi examined - Check YES if both lungs were thoroughly examined. Check NO if the
lungs were not examined. Check PARTIAL if you performed a partial examination and record in
Comments section.
Lungs/bronchi contents - Circle all that apply in the Detailed Info column and describe the contents
of each lung, including content volume, in the Comments section.
Bullet/projectile found – Check YES if you discovered any type of projectile (e.g. bullets, pellets,
arrow heads, etc.) during the internal exam. Check NO if no projectiles were found. Check CBD if
you are unsure of an object you have found. Indicate how the item was discovered in the Detailed
Info section (CT scan, X-Ray, dissection) and indicate whether the object was collected. Note: it is
important to follow Chain of Custody procedures when collecting this evidence. Provide details in
the Comments section.
Other lesions noted - Note whether any other pathologies were observed, describe in Comments
section.

39 COMMENTS – The details of what you observe are required in the section. Provide comments for
each item for which you checked YES or CBD. When describing lesions, include measurements
(e.g. length, width and depth, distance between lesions), location (e.g. measurement from nearest
landmark – 20cm caudal of the right flipper), color, shape, and texture. Note the characteristics of
the edges (e.g. jagged, straight, rounded) and the direction of linear lesions (e.g. wraps from leading
edge of dorsal fin to trailing edge on left side). Number each set of comments using the
corresponding line number for that row on the data sheet. Use extra pages if needed and be sure to
note the animal’s field number in the upper right margin. If this information is provided in the
necropsy report or other data sheet, reference that material here.
40

FINDINGS OF HUMAN INTERACTION – Review your exam notes and check YES if you observed
any signs of human interaction on the animal. Check NO if you thoroughly examined the animal and
did not find any signs of human interaction. Check CBD if: (1) you did not examine the animal
thoroughly, (2) decomposition or scavenger damage hampered the exam, or (3) you are unsure
whether marks on the animal were caused by human interaction. This is an objective analysis. It
does not take into account the animal’s physical condition, the timing of the human interaction with
respect to the stranding, or the circumstances surrounding the stranding. After determining the
objective Findings of HI, select the EXAM TYPE you conducted. If you ONLY conducted an external
exam, check EXTERNAL. If you conducted only an internal exam, check INTERNAL (although we
are not sure when this would ever be the case, it is currently on the NOAA Level A form). If you
conducted both external and internal exams, check BOTH. Note, even an external exam that is
scored CBD due to decomposition or other factors is still considered an exam. In some cases, there
may be a finding of CBD during the external exam, but YES during an internal exam (e.g. if the
carcass lacked skin or pelt due to decomposition but the animal had ingested plastic).
Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

8

TRANSFER THE ABOVE INFORMATION TO THE FINDINGS OF HUMAN INTERACTION SECTION
ON THE LEVEL A DATA SHEET.
41 Type of HI - If you circle YES in line 40, indicate to the type(s) of human interaction that you
observed.
Entanglement - occurs when there are lesions (such as linear impressions, lacerations, or
circumferential lesions), or material on the animal consistent with entanglement.
- Choose gear as the type of entanglement if the lesions and/or gear removed strongly suggest
fishing gear. Note that you cannot make assumptions about whether gear was actively fished,
discarded, or ‘ghost gear.’ All should be checked as gear. Likewise, line alone, while used in
fishing operations, is also used for many other applications and cannot be assumed to be
fishing gear unless it has specific markings or attachments indicating it was used in a fishery.
Examples of the latter include buoys, lead core line, and pots. Line of unknown origin should
be marked as CBD, line obviously used for anchoring, mooring, or towing should be
considered debris.
- Choose debris if the entangling material is not related to fishing gear. This includes material
such as plastic bags or sheets, textiles such as clothing, rubber or latex, and metal. Line of
unknown origin should be marked as CBD, and line obviously used for anchoring, mooring, or
towing is considered debris.
- Choose CBD if you are unsure of the origin of the entangling material.
Hooking – occurs when a fishing hook (or lure) is imbedded on the body or in the mouth of an
animal. If the hook or lure is in the throat or GI tract, it should be considered ingested gear.
- Choose recreational if the hook or lure is of a size or design that indicates it is strictly
recreational gear (local tackle shops are often helpful for this).
- Choose commercial if the hook or gear is of a size or type, or is configured in such a way
(such as a longline gangion) that indicates it is strictly commercial gear.
- Choose CBD if you cannot determine the origin of the gear or if it is used in both commercial
and recreational fisheries.
Ingestion – occurs when an animal ingests a foreign object. Ingestion occurs if the object travels
past the mouth and into the throat. If the object is a hook or lure, and it is in the mouth, the HI is
hooking. If the object is line, twine or debris and it is tangled in mouth it is entanglement. Gear or
debris must be ingested to fit this category.
- Choose gear if fishing gear such as a hook, lure, fishing twine, or net was ingested.
- Choose debris if plastic, metal, or other man-made debris was ingested.
- Choose CBD if you cannot determine the origin of the ingesta, but it is clearly man-made.
Gunshot - occurs when an animal is shot with a gun (handgun, shotgun, or rifle). Presence of one or
more ballistic projectiles is the best way to diagnose a gunshot interaction. Wounds from other
projectiles should be categorized under CBD/Other.
Vessel trauma - occurs when an animal is impacted by a vessel, usually through impact with the hull
or propulsion system. The trauma can be ‘sharp’ trauma, such as that from a propeller, or ‘blunt’
trauma such as that from the bow of a ship, or a combination of the two.
- Choose sharp trauma if the external injury appears to be one or more roughly linear wounds
with internal tissue damage associated with the chop or slice wounds.
- Choose blunt trauma if wounds, particularly broken bones and soft tissue damage, are more
internal than external and are consistent with impact from a large object such as a vessel.
- Choose both if the wounds appear to be a combination of sharp and blunt trauma.
Mutilation – occurs when an animal or carcass is intentionally cut or sliced. Mutilation generally
involves the use of some type of knife or blade and can result in several common types of wounds
and amputations including body sliced, stabbed, or gutted or appendages removed.
Harassment – occurs when human activity changes the behavior of an animal. In this context,
harassment occurs if the animal is harassed while it is in the process of stranding, is already
stranded, or if the harassment results in a stranding. It is important to note that harassment is
Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program

Human Interaction Evaluation Instructions

9

common especially with hauled out pinnipeds and that not all harassment is associated with a
stranding (e.g. feeding free-swimming animals is a form of HI, but not a stranding).
CBD/Other – occurs EITHER when non-natural lesions are on the animal, but it is unclear what type
of human activity caused them OR when the type of HI is known, but is not specifically listed above
such as vehicular trauma, a projectile other than gunshot (arrow or dart), oil or chemical spill,
stabbing or clubbing, etc. Describe Other HI in the space provided.
42 STRANDING EVENT HISTORY/CIRCUMSTANCES – provide any information about the stranding
event or circumstances surrounding the event that would be helpful in supporting the HI diagnosis
(i.e. fishing, drilling, or other activities, oil spill, unusual mortality events, previous sightings of animal,
unusual behavior prior to stranding, etc.). Note any objective details provided by the initial reporter,
these may be answers to questions you have asked (i.e. Was there any blood in the water next to
the animal? What did it look or smell like when you first observed it? How was the animal positioned
(belly up, on its side) when you first observed it?).
If there is no physical evidence but harassment is suspected, objectively describe events in this
section including names and contact numbers for witnesses and any authorities that were contacted.
43 INITIAL HUMAN INTERACTION EVALUATION – This section should be completed if you circled
YES under Findings of Human Interaction (line #40). It should be completed after filling out the entire
data sheet. This section is subjective and takes into account the animal’s physical condition, gross
necropsy findings, the timing of the human interaction with respect to the stranding, and the
circumstances surrounding the stranding. Most importantly, it takes into account the evaluator’s
level of experience. If you have not conducted many evaluations or are not familiar with the
region, you may be unable to make an accurate evaluation and should conservatively circle
CBD. This section does not take into account results of level B and C analyses or review by
veterinary pathologist which is why it is considered an INITIAL evaluation.
For this section, you are estimating how likely you think it is that the documented human interaction
contributed to the stranding event. This opinion is expressed as a confidence interval on a scale of 03, as described below. Circle the most appropriate number. The higher the number, the more likely it
is that the interaction contributed to the stranding. If you do not feel that you can provide an
evaluation, circle 0 – Uncertain (CBD). [Note: We do not say that the human activity caused the
stranding because the human interaction could have indirectly contributed to the event without being
the direct cause of the stranding.]
0. Uncertain (CBD) - You cannot provide an evaluation of the likelihood that human interaction
contributed to the stranding (e.g. a Code 4 carcass is found with propeller marks; it is too
decomposed to determine whether the interaction was pre- or post-mortem).
1. Improbable - It is unlikely that the observed human interaction contributed to the stranding or
there are other gross findings that suggest an alternative cause for the stranding (e.g. there are
healed entanglement scars on the flukes of a known humpback whale that died with a full-term
fetus; it is unlikely that the past entanglement contributed to the stranding).
2. Suspect – It is possible that human interaction contributed to the stranding, but the findings of HI
are weak and/or there are other findings that may have caused the stranding (e.g. there is a
small amount of plastic found in an animal’s stomach, but you are unsure of its effect and the
animal is very thin with a high parasite level. Did the plastic ingestion cause the animal’s decline
or was a declining animal eating anything it could get?).
3. Probable - It is very likely that human interaction contributed to the stranding (e.g. a robust animal
with a full stomach, froth in the lungs, and marks that are consistent with entanglement and
underwater entrapment).
44 JUSTIFICATION – Provide a brief justification of your answer for the Initial Human Interaction
Evaluation score. Include information from all sources available to you.
Document developed by IFAW MMRR and VAQS (2012) with funding from the
John H. Prescott Grant Program