Solutions
As whales journey across vast ocean basins, they face an increasing array of human-driven threats that disrupt their critical habitats and migration routes. While protections have helped some populations recover from the impacts of commercial whaling, challenges like ship strikes, fisheries bycatch, underwater noise, and habitat degradation now pose serious risks to their survival.
Blue whale off the coast of Sri Lanka © naturepl.com / Alex Mustard / WWF
Protecting Blue Corridors: A New Approach to Whale Conservation
During the 20th century, nearly 3 million whales were commercially harvested, driving many species to the brink of extinction.1 While a significant reduction of commercial whaling has allowed some populations to bounce back, new threats have emerged that make the migratory routes of whales and other marine species increasingly difficult and dangerous to navigate.2,3
In countless areas around the globe, cetaceans are under threat from human activities. An estimated 300,000 cetaceans are killed each year as a result of fisheries bycatch,4 while populations are impacted from increasing ship traffic,5,6 underwater noise,7 pollution8,9 and loss of important habitats including as a result of climate change.10
These threats often occur in concert and overlap with whales’ critical habitats and migration routes, creating a hazardous and, at times, fatal obstacle course. Now, our conservation approach must evolve by connecting efforts across multiple national jurisdictions and the high seas. It is not just one threat that is causing significant decline in whale populations; it is many threats, working together causing cumulative and often mortal impacts.
Conserving whales under the blue economy
The ocean is one of the most biologically productive and economically valuable systems on the planet. It provides food, energy, transport, and ecosystem services that underpin human wellbeing and economic activity. By 2030, the “blue economy”—encompassing all sectors linked to the ocean—could outpace the global economy in growth and employment potential. Yet, this growth is at risk. The degradation of marine ecosystems due to unsustainable practices threatens the natural capital that economic prosperity depends on.11
A sustainable blue economy must work within ecological boundaries. Integrated maritime policies, ecosystem-based marine spatial planning (MSP), and equitable economic frameworks are essential. Healthy ecosystems and well-managed marine protected areas (MPAs) must be seen not as a trade-off to development, but as its foundation.12,13
We outline a set of collaborative actions needed to better conserve and protect blue corridors for whales, benefiting other marine life and people.12
- Work together to secure critical ocean habitats connecting networks of marine protected areas (MPAs) across national and international waters, covering at least 30% of our ocean by 2030.
- Reduce the risks through cooperative efforts including tackling impacts from overfishing and fisheries bycatch, pollution, and shipping.
- Invest in whales for a thriving ocean securing financial support to integrate ecological roles of whales into global and national biodiversity policies.
Throughout this website, we highlight local and regional case studies along with policy tools that demonstrate these actions in practice.
1. Work Together to Secure Critical Ocean Habitats
Whales rely on a network of critical habitats—feeding, breeding, and migratory areas—many of which lie across national and international waters. Protecting these blue corridors is essential for whale survival and broader ocean health.
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)
MPAs are conservation tools intended to protect biodiversity, promote healthy and resilient marine ecosystems, and provide societal benefits.14 The IUCN recommends that 30% of the ocean be protected from extractive activities15 as a way to support better climate change mitigation and nature conservation.16 WWF and others are collaborating with many stakeholders to protect 30% our global ocean by 2030 through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of marine protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures.15 These include ensuring that the areas traditionally and collectively governed by indigenous peoples and local communities are appropriately recognized and secured and their right to free, prior and informed consent is respected.
While MPAs are more readily established in national waters, creating them in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ)—which cover 61% of the ocean—is more complex . Only 1.18% of ABNJ is protected, compared to 17.21% of national waters. Ongoing negotiations aim to address these legal hurdles . In the Southern Ocean, the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) has led efforts such as the Ross Sea Region MPA—one of the world’s largest.17,18
Mobile MPAs, with boundaries that shift based on species movements or environmental changes, are emerging as key tools for migratory species like whales. Seasonal management areas, such as time-area closures, can reduce threats from fishing and shipping in whale hotspots.19–21
Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs)
Defined by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), OECMs are areas that deliver long-term biodiversity benefits, regardless of whether conservation is their primary objective . These can complement MPAs and recognize diverse governance models, including Indigenous management. Identifying and supporting OECMs is a growing priority.22,23
IUCN Important Marine Mammal Areas (IMMAs)
IMMAs, developed by the IUCN, identify critical habitats for marine mammal conservation. They offer a science-based framework to guide MPA network design and prioritize conservation efforts for marine mammals.24,25
Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs)
KBAs are globally important sites for species and ecosystems. Identified by the KBA Partnership, they help governments and industry make better decisions on conservation and development. In 2021, in the Islas Malvinas (the Falkland Islands) were designated the first KBA for sei whales, highlighting their importance as a seasonal foraging ground.26
Marine Spatial Planning (MSP)
MSP offers a framework for managing human uses of the marine environment, balancing conservation with economic activity. It is essential for minimizing conflicts among stakeholders and maintaining ecosystem integrity.27,28
Effective MSP integrates ecological principles to maintain healthy populations of species and preserve food web dynamics. Spatial risk assessments are a core component, enabling the overlay of species distributions and human activity to guide decisions.29
For example, off the coast of Southern California, researchers developed whale-habitat models to assess ship-strike risk for humpback, blue, and fin whales. They found that rerouting traffic could reduce risk, though trade-offs between species existed. A proposed strategy included spreading vessel traffic across multiple routes.27
Dynamic Ocean Management (DOM)
DOM updates management actions in real time based on shifting ecological or socioeconomic conditions. This adaptive approach is vital in the context of climate change. In the same California case, DOM strategies such as daily or seasonal vessel speed reductions outperformed fixed periods in reducing blue whale strike risk. DOM provides a path forward that balances ocean use and conservation.30
Marine Connectivity Conservation
Connectivity ensures that ecological processes—like whale migration and larval dispersal—continue across spatial scales. While marine connectivity science is less developed than on land, its importance is increasingly recognized .
The IUCN and Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) emphasize that ecological connectivity must guide marine management and MPA design.31,32 Protecting whale migrations—blue corridors—requires internationally coordinated, ecologically connected networks of protected areas.
2. Reduce the risks through cooperative efforts
Whales face multiple human-caused threats simultaneously: entanglement, ship strikes, pollution, and climate-driven habitat shifts. Addressing these requires enhanced, cross-sectoral cooperation.
Strive for ‘Zero Bycatch’
Bycatch remains the leading cause of cetacean mortality. 4 Entanglement in fixed fishing gear is a major threat to whales, particularly in areas like the North Atlantic. Ropeless, or "on-demand," fishing systems allow fishers to mark and retrieve traps without using vertical lines in the water column.33–35
These technologies are being trialed in Canada and the US and could drastically reduce entanglements while allowing continued access to fisheries. Weak ropes and gear modifications also offer immediate benefits. For example, ropes with a breaking strength of 1,700 lbs enable some whales to escape entanglement.36
In the US, the use of weak links has been mandated for over a decade, and Canada is following suit. However, end lines continue to pose the greatest risk. Fully ropeless fishing may offer the most transformative solution.35,37
Types of ‘on demand’ (ropeless) fishing gear and represent an exciting technology to eliminate entanglement in rope-based gear.
Eliminate and Clean Up Ghost Gear
Ghost gear accounts for at least 10% of all marine litter, entangling thousands of marine animals annually. Clean-up efforts must be coupled with policy and industry reform to prevent gear loss and incentivize retrieval.38
Reduce Plastic and Chemical Pollution
Plastic pollution, especially microplastics, accumulates in whale prey and is now found in the baleen and the stomachs of whales. Pollution controls—across plastic, synthetic chemicals and heavy metals—are essential to protect both whales and food webs. Negotiations for the new UN Global Plastics Treaty are a crucial step.
Reduce Ship Strikes and Underwater Noise
Shipping regulations are critical to reducing whale mortality from ship strikes. Among available tools, vessel speed reduction, Areas to Be Avoided, and Traffic Separation Schemes are the most effective, with speed reduction proving particularly efficient. Research shows that reducing vessel speeds to 10–13 knots can significantly lower the risk and severity of collisions with whales and have benefits of reducing underwater noise pollution. 39,40
The International Maritime Organization (IMO), the United Nations agency responsible for global shipping standards, plays the key role in implementing such measures. The Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) is the technical body on marine pollution-related matters and incorporated the issue of ship strikes of cetaceans in 2009, to minimize the risk.41 The IMO has also designated Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) to protect vulnerable ecosystems from shipping with associated measures that can be applied to prevent, reduce or eliminate threats to the area and may include ship routing and reporting systems, pilotage regimes or vessel traffic services. 42
In shipping hotspots like the US West Coast and the Panama, solutions include rerouting ships, setting voluntary slow-down zones, and implementing real-time detection systems. Speed restrictions can also reduce underwater noise, which disrupts whale communication and behaviour.43
3. Invest in whales for a thriving ocean
Growing evidence shows healthy whale populations play an essential role maintaining productivity of marine ecosystems.44 As part of the global effort to tackle biodiversity loss and climate change, their ecological functions must be recognized in policy and planning. 45
We require a suite of responses to tackle the multiple threats, from reducing bycatch and shipping impacts in key hotspots to establishing well-connected networks of MPAs and OECMs. As some whales' migrations span across ocean basins, networks of protected areas will need to be large and potentially mobile where boundaries shift across space and time, as climate change impacts dynamic habitats and causes shifts in species range.21 Whales’ movements across jurisdictional boundaries also present opportunities for innovative transnational collaboration strategies among neighbouring countries toward common conservation goals.
Large-scale collaborative research and long-term monitoring—spanning satellite tagging, acoustic and visual surveys, predictive modelling, and incorporating Indigenous Knowledge —must guide future conservation efforts. The UN Decade of Ocean Science offers a critical opportunity to align global efforts. However, significant funding is required to be invested in order to monitor, evaluate and safeguard blue corridors for whales under a growing and developing blue economy.
A Blueprint for Action
By combining these measures—area-based conservation tools, innovative fisheries solutions, adaptive management, and inclusive policy frameworks—we can better protect blue corridors, rebuild whale populations, and strengthen ocean resilience for the benefit of people and the planet.
A pathway for improving whale conservation through cooperative policy action and coordination across regional agreements, private sector, markets, and national governments
Opportunity: Ratifying the UN Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement (Global Oceans Treaty)
The UN Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement is crucial for protecting whale blue corridors because it offers a framework for conserving marine biodiversity in the high seas—areas that make up two-thirds of the ocean but currently lack comprehensive protection. These high seas are essential parts of whale migratory routes that cross national and international waters. The BBNJ Agreement aims to establish marine protected areas, regulate human activities, and promote international cooperation—addressing cumulative threats like fishing, shipping, and pollution.46,47 Its implementation by nations supports our goal of safeguarding blue corridors through integrated, science-based conservation policies across entire ocean basins.12 Signed in 2023, once 60 countries sign and ratify, the Treaty will enter into force.
1. Rocha, R. C., Jr et al. Emptying the Oceans: A Summary of Industrial Whaling Catches in the 20th Century. Mar. Fish. Rev. 76, 37–48 (2014).
2. Avila, I. C., Kaschner, K. & Dormann, C. F. Current global risks to marine mammals: Taking stock of the threats. Biol. Conserv. 221, 44–58 (2018).
3. Nelms, S. E. et al. Marine mammal conservation: over the horizon. Endanger. Species Res. 44, 291–325 (2021).
4. Read, A. J., Drinker, P. & Northridge, S. Bycatch of marine mammals in U.S. and global fisheries. Conserv. Biol. 20, 163–169 (2006).
5. Pirotta, V., Grech, A., Jonsen, I. D., Laurance, W. F. & Harcourt, R. G. Consequences of global shipping traffic for marine giants. Front. Ecol. Environ. 17, 39–47 (2019).
6. Schoeman, R. P., Patterson-Abrolat, C. & Plön, S. A Global Review of Vessel Collisions With Marine Animals. Frontiers in Marine Science 7, 1–25 (2020).
7. Duarte, C. M. et al. The soundscape of the Anthropocene ocean. Science 371, (2021).
8. Jepson, P. D. & Law, R. J. Persistent pollutants, persistent threats. Science 352, 1388 LP–1389 (2016).
9. Simmonds, M. P. Of Poisons and Plastics: An Overview of the Latest Pollution Issues Affecting Marine Mammals. in Marine Mammal Welfare: Human Induced Change in the Marine Environment and its Impacts on Marine Mammal Welfare (ed. Butterworth, A.) 27–37 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46994-2_3.
10. Albouy, C. et al. Global vulnerability of marine mammals to global warming. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–12 (2020).
11. OECD. The Ocean Economy in 2020. (OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016).
12. Johnson, C. M. et al. Protecting Blue Corridors - Challenges and solutions for migratory whales navigating national and international seas. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.6196131 (2022).
13. WWF. Principles for a Sustainable Blue Economy. WWF https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?247477/Principles%2Dfor%2Da%2DSustainable%2DBlue%2DEconomy (2018).
14. Grorud-Colvert, K. et al. The MPA Guide: A framework to achieve global goals for the ocean. Science 373, eabf0861 (2021).
15. Wcpa, I. Applying IUCN’s Global Conservation Standards to Marine Protected Areas (MPA). Delivering effective conservation action through MPAs, to secure ocean health & sustainable development. 4 (2018).
16. Roberts, C. M., O’Leary, B. C. & Hawkins, J. P. Climate change mitigation and nature conservation both require higher protected area targets. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 375, 20190121 (2020).
17. Brooks, C. M., Crowder, L. B., Österblom, H. & Strong, A. L. Reaching consensus for conserving the global commons : The case of the Ross Sea , Antarctica. Conservation Letters 1–10 (2020) doi:10.1111/conl.12676.
18. UNEP-WCMC & IUCN. Marine Protected Planet [On-line]. UNEP-WCMC and IUCN. Cambridge, UK (2020).
19. Oestreich, W. K., Chapman, M. S. & Crowder, L. B. A comparative analysis of dynamic management in marine and terrestrial systems. Front. Ecol. Environ. 18, 496–504 (2020).
20. Ortuño Crespo, G. et al. Beyond static spatial management: Scientific and legal considerations for dynamic management in the high seas. Mar. Policy 122, 104102 (2020).
21. Maxwell, S. M., Gjerde, K. M., Conners, M. G. & Crowder, L. B. Mobile protected areas for biodiversity on the high seas. Science 367, 252 LP–254 (2020).
22. IUCN-WCPA. Guidelines for Recognising and Reporting Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures. (2019).
23. UNEP-WCMC & IUCN. Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) and World Database on Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (WD-OECM). (2021).
24. Corrigan, C. M. et al. Developing important marine mammal area criteria: Learning from ecologically or biologically significant areas and key biodiversity areas. Aquat. Conserv. 24, 166–183 (2014).
25. Hoyt, E. & di Sciara, G. N. Important Marine Mammal Areas: a spatial tool for marine mammal conservation. Oryx 55, 330–330 (2021).
26. Key Biodiversity Areas Partnership. Key Biodiversity Areas. Key Biodiversity Areas http://www.keybiodiversityareas.org (2025).
27. Redfern, J. V. et al. Assessing the Risk of Ships Striking Large Whales in Marine Spatial Planning. Conserv. Biol. 27, 292–302 (2013).
28. Crowder, L. B. et al. Resolving Mismatches in U.S. Ocean Governance. Science 313, 617 LP–618 (2006).
29. Foley, M. M. et al. Guiding ecological principles for marine spatial planning. Mar. Policy 34, 955–966 (2010).
30. Hausner, A., Samhouri, J. F., Hazen, E. L., Delgerjargal, D. & Abrahms, B. Dynamic strategies offer potential to reduce lethal ship collisions with large whales under changing climate conditions. Mar. Policy 130, 104565 (2021).
31. Lausche, B., Laur, A. & Collins, M. Marine Connectivity Conservation ’ Rules of Thumb ’ For MPA and MPA Network Design. 15 (2021).
32. CMS. Improving Ways of Addressing Connectivity in the Conservation of Migratory Species, Resolution 12.26 (REV.COP13). https://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/cms_cop13_crp26.4.4_addressing-connectivity-in-conservation-ofmigratory-species_e_0.docx (2020).
33. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Ropeless Consortium Towards whales without rope entanglements. 2021.
34. Fisheries And Oceans Canada (DFO). What We Heard Report: Gear Innovation Summit. Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fisheries-peches/management-gestion/ghostgear-equipementfantome/summit-sommet-2020-eng.html (2020).
35. Baumgartner, M., Moore, M., Kraus, S., Knowlton, A. & Werner, T. Overcoming Development, Regulatory and Funding Challenges for Ropeless Fishing to Reduce Whale Entanglement in the U.S. and Canada. Ropeless Workshop Report 45 p. Preprint at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25246403 (2018).
36. Knowlton, A. R. et al. Effects of fishing rope strength on the severity of large whale entanglements. Conserv. Biol. 30, 318–328 (2016).
37. NOAA. Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing Operations; Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan Regulations. Federal Register 72:57104-57194. (2007).
38. WWF. Stop Ghost Gear the Most Deadly Form of Marine Plastic Debris. 64 https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/stop-ghost-gear-the-most-deadly-form-of-marine-plastic-debris (2020).
39. Iwc. A joint IWC-IUCN-ACCOBAMS workshop to evaluate how the data and process used to identify Important Marine Mammals Areas (IMMAs) can assist the IWC to identify areas of high risk for ship strikes. SC/68A/HIM/07 (2019).
40. Vanderlaan, A. S. M. & Taggart, C. T. Vessel collisions with whales: The probability of lethal injury based on vessel speed. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 23, 144–156 (2007).
41. IMO. Guidance Document for Minimizing the Risk of Ship Strikes with Cetaceans. (2009).
42. Australian Government. PSSAs : Great Barrier Reef, Torres Strait and Coral Sea. Australian Maritime Safety Authority https://www.amsa.gov.au/safety-navigation/navigating-coastal-waters/great-barrier-reef-torres-strait-and-coral-sea (2021).
43. Minton, G. et al. Shipping and Cetaceans: A Review of Impacts and Mitigation Options for Policymakers and Other Stakeholders. (2021).
44. Savoca, M. S. et al. Baleen whale prey consumption based on high-resolution foraging measurements. Nature 599, 85–90 (2021).
45. Pearson, H. C. et al. Whales in the carbon cycle: can recovery remove carbon dioxide? Trends Ecol. Evol. (2022) doi:10.1016/j.tree.2022.10.012.
46. De Santo, E. M. Implementation challenges of area-based management tools (ABMTs) for biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). Mar. Policy 97, 34–43 (2018).
47. United Nations. Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement). United Nations https://www.un.org/bbnjagreement/en (2023).