Vanessa Pirotta: The “humpback comeback” is not just a cool name; we use it to refer to the recovery of the East Coast of Australia humpback whale populations, and also the West Coast population of humpback whales. It’s a genuine conservation success story. I say this with excitement because it’s not often we can celebrate the recovery of an animal population, and particularly a mammal population that was brought to the brink of extinction due to whaling.

Now we’re seeing humpback populations come back. This is very much focused in Australia. There are other humpback populations in both the Southern Hemisphere and the Northern Hemisphere, but specifically we’re celebrating because we’ve just had new estimates: the East Coast Australian humpback whale population is now estimated to be at least 50,000 individuals.

Mike DiGirolamo: Welcome to the Mongabay Newscast. I’m your co-host, Mike DiGirolamo, bringing you weekly conversations with experts, authors, scientists, and activists working on the front lines of conservation—shining a light on pressing issues facing our planet and holding people in power to account. This podcast is edited on Gadigal land today.

On the newscast, we speak with Vanessa Pirotta, an award-winning wildlife scientist and expert on whales and marine wildlife conservation. She joins us to talk about some good news: the humpback comeback on Australia’s East Coast. Humpback populations have recovered to an estimated 50,000, up from just a few hundred whales decades ago after commercial hunting was outlawed.

However, Pirotta stresses the need for continued protection of the species and their food source, Antarctic krill. Krill are a keystone species and provide vital ecological services that benefit everyone. The intergovernmental agency managing Southern Ocean waters recently let protections for krill expire. We speak with Pirotta about why protecting krill is vital—not just for humpbacks, but for everyone.

Mike: Vanessa, welcome to the Mongabay Newscast. It’s a pleasure to have you with us.

Vanessa: Whale hello. Thank you for having me.

Mike: I had the privilege of attending your talk at South by Southwest, and I had a few questions from your presentation. Before we get to that, can you tell our audience: what is the Humpback Comeback?

Vanessa: The Humpback Comeback is not just a cool name; we use it to refer to the recovery of the East Coast of Australia humpback whale populations—in particular—and also the West Coast population. It’s a genuine conservation success story. I say this with excitement because it’s not often we can celebrate:
A) the recovery of an animal population, and
B) particularly a mammal population that was brought to the brink of extinction due to whaling.

Now we’re seeing humpback populations come back. This is focused on Australia. There are other humpback populations in both the Southern Hemisphere and the Northern Hemisphere, but we’re celebrating because we’ve recently had updated estimates: the East Coast Australian humpback whale population is now estimated to be at least 50,000 individuals, which is a wonderful milestone. The last estimate was in 2015, and this is the most significant update since then—which is good news.

Mike: It is an incredible comeback story. Can you tell our listeners where humpback populations were at their lowest, and why?

Vanessa: The humpback whale populations that visit Australian waters were hunted to near extinction. As a whale scientist based in Sydney, I’ll focus on the East Coast humpback population. They were hunted down to only a few hundred individuals—their numbers were really bad.

Many of us weren’t alive during that period. Some listeners may remember the 1960s or earlier, when people would look out from Australia’s coast and not see whales because there just weren’t many. Whales are long-lived animals; they can reach 50-plus years of age—possibly 80-plus if they navigate life’s challenges, many of which are human-caused. There may be animals alive today that saw whaling vessels—I don’t know that, but they are long-lived and have seen a lot.

Fortunately, we can now go to the coastline and literally see the humpback comeback on what we call the “humpback highway,” the migratory corridor whales use to travel up and down Australia’s east and west coasts. Using simple, accessible terms helps the public understand a conservation success story about an animal the size of a school bus.

Mike: It’s a remarkable story. A whale spotter asked me what data the pre-industrial whaling population estimate is based on, since that was a long time ago. I noticed the 50,000 estimate is higher than pre-industrial whaling levels. Do you have insight into how that estimate is calculated?

Vanessa: That’s a big question. For a general listener, my response will be general—and it’s an example of how many rabbit holes there are.

One way we learn about whale populations is by counting. On parts of Australia’s east coast, we can literally count whales passing an observation area. Once they cross a certain mark, we reset and continue, so we don’t double-count. There are systematic surveys for the East Coast population because a large proportion travels along the humpback highway. Some whales go farther offshore and can’t be seen, so you can’t do a complete census—you can’t see every whale at once.

Another source is photo-identification of flukes. Every whale has a unique tail pattern, like a fingerprint. Citizen scientists can photograph flukes and upload them to Happywhale, which uses AI to match individuals. Much of this information feeds into the revised 50,000 estimate led by Dr. Lyndon Brooks and Dr. Wally Franklin, along with other data.

As for pre-industrial whaling estimates, that’s not my area of expertise. Historically, information was collected in many ways, and I know from other scientists that some catch data were withheld. It took investigative work to uncover actual catches, which were higher than reported. That helps explain why some populations haven’t recovered—the true removals were larger, or their reproductive turnaround is longer compared to humpbacks.

Mike: I believe the southern right whale and the blue whale are struggling. You mentioned some factors. What else is contributing to their low numbers?

Vanessa: Not all whale populations are doing well. The southern right whale—and in the Northern Hemisphere, the North Atlantic right whale—have terrible numbers. The North Atlantic right whale is probably the most imperiled of the large marine mammals. Ship strike and entanglement in fishing gear are literally limiting recovery. If a ship kills a reproductive female, that’s devastating.

If we lose a single female humpback on Australia’s East Coast, the entire population won’t collapse—though of course we should still care. But in some populations, the loss of one individual seriously threatens the whole group. Human factors are key, as is reproductive turnaround—some species breed more slowly.

There’s also pollution: debris and acoustic pollution. If you’re listening to this podcast and the person next to you doesn’t want to hear it, that’s acoustic pollution for them—an unintended byproduct of someone else’s actions. Order a product and it ships by sea; ships produce sound. There’s an airplane over my head right now; I don’t want that sound—that’s acoustic pollution. Add climate change, which we’ll likely discuss.

The world is dynamic. Whales don’t recognize international borders. They’re large, making them vulnerable to ship strike and other pressures, and they need substantial food to sustain that size. I hope listeners are thinking more deeply about the world we’ve dived into.

Mike: This is a good news story, but conservationists I’ve spoken to worry it could be used to justify easing protections for humpbacks. Would you say there’s a risk of this good news being misused?

Vanessa: No. We need to celebrate good news because so much is doom and gloom. While celebrating, it’s an important reminder that humpbacks are incredibly important to people and ecosystems. Now that we have recovery numbers, we must do more.

More whales mean more interactions with human activities—more entanglements, ship strikes, and vessel noise. We need to highlight that to stakeholders who manage whales: governments, international parties, the IWC.

Mike: The IWC is the International Whaling Commission, established in 1946. It currently has 88 member countries. Commercial whaling stopped in Australia in 1979. The IWC voted in 1982 to pause commercial whaling by 25 votes to seven. That moratorium is still in place today.

Vanessa: It should also be a message—through good science communication—that while some species are doing well, others are not. It provides a platform to talk about struggling populations like the southern right whale or the North Atlantic right whale.

Mike: Hello listeners, and thanks for tuning in. If you want to read Vanessa Pirotta’s book Humpback Highway or learn more about her work, you can find links in the show notes. If you aren’t subscribed to the Mongabay Newscast, please do so and leave us a review on your podcast platform. It helps our show grow. You can also email us at podcast@mongabay.com. Thank you. Back to our conversation with Vanessa Pirotta.

You mentioned on the panel that “krill are fundamental to optimism.” I love that phrase. Let’s talk about krill. Humpback whales feed on krill in the Southern Ocean. There’s an intergovernmental agency called CCAMLR, meeting right now in Hobart, and advocates say they should continue to protect krill—the main food source. Yet this management body recently let protections for krill for humpbacks expire. What’s your opinion of that action—or lack of action—and what do you think of this situation?

Vanessa: First, a refresher on what krill are, because some listeners may not know. If you hold out your palm, you could imagine a handful of krill there. They’re small—about two to six centimeters—prawn-like creatures that are a keystone species, particularly in the Southern Ocean. A keystone species is fundamentally important to the functioning of the whole system.

Krill feed Southern Hemisphere whale populations that feed on them and grow in great numbers. They’re eaten by small whales, crabs, penguins—many species. Whales feed on them, then defecate elsewhere, moving nutrients that in turn feed krill food. It’s a cycle.

CCAMLR provides an annual opportunity to highlight krill’s role and to manage sustainable krill populations. I think it’s amazing we have an annual meeting dedicated to this—I’ve been to Hobart while CCAMLR met, though not inside the meetings. It’s absolutely important.

Protecting krill is crucial. As a whale scientist, I’m worried about whale populations. Gaps in protections where there shouldn’t be are concerning. I hope people are highlighting ocean changes—like climate change—which may reduce krill habitat. Lose ice, lose krill homes. For whales that rely on krill, that’s bad. At the same time, humans harvest krill.

As I said on the panel, David Attenborough’s Blue Planet highlighted the realities of krill harvesting. I’m not sure many people grasp the scale. I know it’s being discussed at CCAMLR, but as we speak, the ocean is vast. I’m hoping krill will be something we can keep in good numbers to maintain marine ecosystem function. There’s always room to do more.

I’m optimistic because every whale I see represents decades of carbon sequestration and resilience—animals traveling to climate-threatened places and facing human activity risks. Recovery shouldn’t make us complacent. More evidence should drive more action.

Mike: I want to switch gears to your work with the Gamay Rangers. How has this collaboration worked, and how is it mutually beneficial for your work and for the Gamay Rangers?

Vanessa: This connects directly to your earlier questions about recovering whale populations. More whales mean more need to protect an animal that’s culturally significant. For the Gamay Rangers, the humpback—or yuriyawi as a spiritual ancestor—matters deeply. I’m not speaking on their behalf, just reflecting information shared with me.

Working with the Rangers has been an amazing two-way journey—Western science and Traditional Knowledge together. Traditional knowledge holders observe their environment closely and are excellent science communicators. They notice seasonal changes and document and share that knowledge.

Mike: The Gamay Rangers are the first city-based Indigenous rangers in Australia, protecting and patrolling Botany Bay in metropolitan Sydney. They share Indigenous knowledge with the New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service, scientists, and other experts, particularly regarding humpback whales migrating through Botany Bay by the thousands. They’ve also worked with the University of New South Wales, providing anecdotal information about how the bay’s habitat and species have changed over decades—much of it not documented by Western science.

Vanessa: Learning through science and asking questions of Indigenous knowledge holders creates powerful two-way reflection: “This is what we found scientifically—does it reflect what you’ve observed? How has it changed over many years?” Most importantly, it offers an opportunity to be respectful—going to Elders, asking questions, and listening if they wish to share.

As a woman and mother in science, working with the Gamay Rangers has helped me embrace being a mother in science. In the Western system, that can be challenging. In this collaboration, it’s embraced and strengthens the work. I’m asking questions not just about tomorrow, but the years ahead—for my “calves,” my children—so we do the best we can for the ocean and whales.

That’s why I’m optimistic about doing as much as we can for krill and having global conversations that get people talking about krill who otherwise wouldn’t—because it’s all connected. I hope you’re seeing those connections today.

Mike: Indeed, it’s all connected. You mentioned looking to future generations. We chatted earlier about risk aversion. Is there something bold you wish the Australian government would do for conservation—something that might be seen as a risk but would benefit the long term?

Vanessa: The Australian federal government has pretty good protections for marine megafauna, so I’m happy with that—though there’s always more anyone can do. It comes down to effort—funding—and opportunities to continue research.

For example, the whale snot drone research I led during my PhD opened opportunities to learn about whale lungs in ways that link directly to viruses in Antarctica. There’s so much more we can do in the next stage of this research; with more funds, we could answer many questions.

More than just funding, I want politicians and parliamentarians connected to experts—whale scientists and discovery-makers. If decision-makers are aware of current science, they can make good decisions. The more we know, the better economic and policy decisions we can make to protect animals.

This also links to my illegal wildlife trafficking detection research, which was well funded at the R&D stage and led to world-first algorithms for detecting trafficking. It’s about taking chances. People are risk-averse because the environment is precious and we want to invest wisely. Some argue humpback research shouldn’t be funded and money should go to species like the southern right whale. But we must keep learning from a recovering species too. More whales are a catalyst to do more.

We need to keep asking questions and stay curious. Sometimes people say, “Why do we need to study dolphins in Sydney Harbour?” Because they’ve never been studied there, and it’s happening under our noses. It’s a great opportunity for emerging scientists and to connect Australians with their blue backyard.

I love optimism. Even with de-extinction discussions—I’ve spoken with the Colossal team about the thylacine and potentially helping the vaquita porpoise in the Gulf of California, with perhaps only about 10 left. Sometimes it takes people willing to fund bold ideas. Progress in one area advances science elsewhere. We should be open to that.

As an Australian whale scientist, much of my research informs government on targeted, cost-effective decisions to protect a species we’re obligated to protect nationally and internationally.

Mike: You mentioned something I wasn’t fully aware of: you’ve spent a lot of your research collecting whale snot and studying it. You mentioned diseases from Antarctica. Antarctica is changing rapidly in the context of global heating. What are you looking into next, and how do diseases fit in?

Vanessa: That component is about describing the microbiome—the bacteria living in lungs—and then looking at viruses. As we learned during COVID, viruses need a host—like us or a whale. Whales inhale and exhale; they have two nostrils on top of their heads. We’re acquiring information from the environment in unique ways, and advances in technology—drones, PCR, DNA techniques—are helping us build a bigger picture.

Mike: PCR—polymerase chain reaction—is a method to detect small amounts of DNA specific to a pathogen in blood, snot, saliva, or other fluids. During COVID-19, many of you became familiar with PCR testing. In this case, by following whales and launching drones from boats, scientists can collect snot from blowholes when whales surface and glean all kinds of information from that material.

Vanessa: In Antarctica, we have an opportunity to learn what’s happening there. We know about avian flu—an awful, timely situation. Think of whales as the canary in the coal mine: they transit to the Southern Ocean, and what we detect in their bodies—viruses or bacteria—may indicate changes in Antarctica we don’t yet understand. Whale populations can reflect environmental changes before we see them.

We need to be mindful of how we acquire ocean information and build a pathway forward—capturing information from the past (Antarctica is great for that), documenting the present, and helping us anticipate future changes. Whale snot is one example; we can also assess body condition to see if animals are getting what they need in Antarctica over summer, then migrating past places like Sydney, using stored energy to reproduce, and returning to feed. They’re capital breeders—feeding intensively part of the year, then using those resources to reproduce. Again, it’s all connected. Understanding biology guides our questions about change in places like Antarctica.

Mike: You recently noted an animal spotted in New Zealand waters that could be a white humpback called “Loo.” Only a handful of white whales are known. Why is this exciting? Is it a sign there are many more elsewhere?

Vanessa: I can’t explain how fascinating it is to see people fascinated by a white whale. From a social science perspective, it’s interesting. People often ask me about two things: strandings—why whales strand—and white whales.

There’s a particular individual known as “Loo,” a white humpback seen off Byron Bay in 1991, estimated to be in his late thirties now. He lacks melanin—the pigment—so he looks like an iceberg underwater. I’ve seen him once; my first chapter in Humpback Highway is dedicated to him. We confirmed he’s male through genetic sampling led by Dr. Danielle Burns.

There are only a few white whales around the world: two white calves in Tonga last year; a paper on one off South America; “Willow” in the Northern Hemisphere. There aren’t many. They look different, so the public can spot them without a scientist.

When a white whale was seen recently off New Zealand, people like me—who’ve published on Loo—paid attention. We haven’t seen Loo for five years. He could be dead, though whales can live 50–80+ years, and gaps between sightings can be 11 years or more. Loo has been known to pass through New Zealand waters. The photos, location, and timing made this sighting compelling and warranted investigation.

As a scientist, I put out calls through media and social media to get people looking. One person can’t see everything. The attention white whales bring connects people to the ocean. Whether you think a white whale is “just another whale,” it gets people talking—on the 7 p.m. news, on trains. It’s a chance to share that a few exist and that whales don’t recognize borders. A white whale can be a flagship—like the panda for WWF. I call Loo and other white whales the rock stars of the whale world; even internationally, people know them because they look different.

Mike: This is a question for those who aren’t already nature-minded. Why should the average person care about whale conservation? What’s the direct line to their life?

Vanessa: Do you ever go to an event where you eat seafood?

Mike: Yes.

Vanessa: Many celebrations involve food that exists thanks, in part, to whales. People often say trees are the lungs of the Earth; every second breath you take is actually thanks to the ocean. Whales play important ecological roles for everyone. Alive, they feed in one area and defecate in another, moving nutrients that contribute to the food you eat. Their feces move iron around, fertilizing the sea. Whether you’re pescatarian, vegetarian, or you eat seaweed—this is all connected.

Whales also bring economic value. People travel to see them, supporting livelihoods.

They live 50–80+ years; some live over 200. While alive, they store carbon—removing it from the atmosphere and storing it in long-lived bodies. When whales die, their bodies can sink to the deep sea—a whale fall—locking away carbon for a century or more and creating deep-sea habitats.

So whales are important ecologically, economically, and for our future—alive and in death they provide vital services.

Mike: Vanessa Pirotta, where can people learn more about you and find Humpback Highway?

Vanessa: Thank you. Visit vanessapirotta.com—V-A-N-E-S-S-A P-I-R-O-T-T-A—or follow me on TikTok, LinkedIn, Instagram, X, Bluesky, and Facebook at Dr. Vanessa Pirotta. Humpback Highway is available online. I also have two children’s books—Voyage of Whale and Calf and Oceans at Night—with a third on the way.

Mike: Vanessa Pirotta, thank you for speaking with me today. It’s been a pleasure.

Vanessa: Thank you, and have a whale of a day.

Mike: If you want to find a copy of Humpback Highway or learn more about Vanessa’s work, see the links in the show notes. If you’re enjoying the Mongabay Newscast or any of our podcast content and want to help, please spread the word by telling a friend and leaving a review, and subscribe on your podcast platform. Word of mouth is the best way to expand our reach.

You can also support us by becoming a monthly sponsor via our Patreon page at patreon.com/mongabay. Mongabay is a nonprofit news outlet, so even a dollar per month makes a big difference and helps offset production costs. If you enjoy our audio reports from nature’s frontlines, go to patreon.com/mongabay to learn more and support the Mongabay Newscast.

You can read our news and inspiration from nature’s frontlines at mongabay.com, or follow us on social media: LinkedIn (Mongabay News), Instagram, Threads, Bluesky, Mastodon, Facebook, TikTok (@mongabay), and YouTube (MongabayTV). Thank you, as always, for listening.