Friday, November 15, 2019

MRTP Act: Rise Fall and Need for Change: Eco Legal Analysis

MRTP Act: Rise Fall and Need for Change: Eco Legal Analysis 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Title The title of the project is MRTP Act: Rise, Fall and Need for Change: Eco-Legal Analysis and is part of the submissions to be made for the internal assessment for the course of Economics II. 1.2 Overview of Topic India, in its formative years of freedom, laid down the seeds of socialistic approach towards economic development. Five-year plans were designed with the aim of self-realance and self-sufficiency of the Indian industry and in this process of indigenuity, focus was laid on strong governmental regime to ensure equal and prosperous distribution of resources. One such attempt of the state resulted in the enactment of the MRTP Act, 1969 with the basic aim of comprehensive control over direction, pattern and quantum of investment to ensure that wealth is not concentrated in the hands of the few. However, with the emergence of the new Industrial Policy statement of 1980, a need was felt for promoting competition in domestic market, technological upgradation and modernization which was then followed by the massive New Policy Reforms of 1991 which emphasized attainment of technological dynamism and international competitiveness, by opening up the Indian economy to foreign investment. This could not be met by the Indian industry since it was not in competitive terms with the rest of the world and operated in an over-regulated environment. Hence, as was concluded in the Raghavan Committee Report, 2000  [1]   changes were sought in the competition policies of India and thus, the MRTP Act was laid to rest. This project will trace the performance of the MRTP and point out the faults that led to its failure and thus its repeal by the Competition Act. 1.3 Objective of Project This project is aimed at advocating and analysing the performance of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practice Act, 1969 (henceforth, MRTP Act) in the Economic-Legal aspect. The project will primarily analyse the performance of the MRTP Act over the various Industrial development phases (From 1951 to post-1991 Reforms) and then try to establish how and why it paved the way for Competition Act, 2002. Thus, the basic aim is to establish the reasons for the failure of the MRTP and the subsequent reasons for the establishment of the Competition Act. 1.4 Data Set Explanation In the course of this project, the following data-sets have been used: 1) MRTP Commission Data: Depicting the number of cases considered and disposed of by the MRTP Commission in its last years of existence, i.e. from 2002-2004. This data has been computed in the form of Bar-Graph for illustrative purpose. This data has been sourced from the work of Sh. Pradeep S. Mehta, Gen. Sec., CUTS International in A Functional Competition Policy for India published by Academic Foundation, New Delhi, 2005. This data is available online and has been accessed through [Link has been provided at the concerned graph] 2) Annual Growth Rate of Industrial Production Index: Depicting the trend in the growth of Industrial Production from the Year 1951 to the year 2007. This has been represented in the form of Data-Table, and the data divided into the various Industrial phases. This data has been sourced primarily from the book of S. K. Misra and V. K. Puri titled Economic Environment of Businees, 5th ed, Himalaya Publishing House, 2008. This book is available at the Reference Section of the NALSAR Law Library. This data is originally sourced in the above-mentioned book from: (a) Government of India, Handbook of Industrial Statistics, 1992, Table 50, p.150; (b) S. L. Shetty, Structural Retrogression in the Indian Economy since the Mid-1960s, Economic and Political Weekly, Special Supplement, 1978, Table 4, p. 9; (c) Government of India, Economic Survey, 2000-01, Box 7.1, p.130; (d) RBI, Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, 2000, Table 199, p. 409; (e) Government of India, Economic Survey, 2004-05, Table 7.2, p.142; (f) RBI, Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, 2006-07, Table 237, p. 606 and Table 238, p. 607. 1.5 Research Methodology The methodology adopted in this project is descriptive. The research is based on findings and statistics provided in primary sources like Statistical data and Committee Reports and on secondary sources of books and articles published in journals, hence the methodology adopted is despcriptive in nature. 1.6 Limitations The research is limited to the resources available at the NALSAR Library and the data sets available online and at the NALSAR Library in the manner of Study Reports and Research findings. 2. MRTP: WHY IT WAS ENACTED 2.1 Post-Independence: Socialistic Industrial Regime Structure In the years preceding the enactment of the MRTP Act, 1969, India had only been a free nation for a little more than 15 years. Following independence, it had laid down the formative structure of its governance and organization on the touchstone of socialism. The socialist approach was inherent in the functioning of the government as it preached social and economic equality, which was later adopted in the Preamble to the Constitution of India  [2]  by the 42nd Amendment. In this process, the concept of planned economic development started since the early 1950s. However, this approach did not yield the desired result of socio or economic equality. The initial industrial licensing policies had not borne the planned results- instead, the market and the industries were showing negative trends and wealth was getting concentrated in the hands of the few. This was observed by the Hazari Committee in its 1967 Report on Industrial Planning and Licensing Procedure, 1955 where it found that working of the licensing system had resulted in disproportionate growth of some big industrial house.  [3]   Similarly, the Mahalanobis Committee Report (1964) on Distribution and Level of Income, reported that the top 10% of the population cornered 40% of the income while the 20 of the largest firms in India owned 38% of the total built up capital of the private sector.  [4]   2.2 Emergence of MRTP The previous industrial policies had clearly not worked in the direction the state had hoped for since, post independence many new and big firms had entered the Indian  market and they had little competition and thus, were trying to monopolize the  market. Hence the need for a stricter policy regime was realised to safeguard the welfare of the consumers by removing barriers to competition in the Indian economy, and this resulted in the enactment of the MRTP Act, 1969 which came into force in June 1970. The primary objectives of the Act were listed down in the Preamble as follows:  [5]   i) Regulate the concentration of economic power to the common detriment, ii) Control monopolies and monopolistic trade practices, iii) Prohibit restrictive trade practices, and iv) Regulate unfair trade practices. 2.3 Primary Concepts To understand the objectives of the MRTP and for the understanding of this project, we will first proceed to discuss the primary concepts related to the project topic: 1) Monopolistic Trade Practices Section 2(i) of the MRTP Act, 1969 defines Monopolistic Trade Practice as trade practices that have the effect of preventing or lessening competition in the production, supply or distribution of any goods or in the supply of any services- by misusing ones power to use the  market conditions,  in terms of production and sales of goods and services, and thus abuse its market position- are called monopolistic trade practices. Firms involved in monopolistic trade practice  try to eliminate competition from the  market by taking advantage of their monopoly and charge unreasonably high prices. This in effect leads to deterioration in the product quality and limits technical  development. Thus, such practices are anti-consumer-welfare. 2) Restrictive Trade Practices Activities that firms indulge in that tend to block the flow of capital into production, in order to maximize their own profits and to gain control over the  market- such activities are termed as Restrictive Trade Practices.  [6]  Such firms also control conditions of delivery to affect the flow of supplies leading to unjustified costs of production and distribution- while establishing their monopoly in the market. 3) Unfair Trade Practices Section 36-A of the MRTP Act, 1969 which was inserted on the recommendation of the Sachar Committee Report, laid down as to what may  be termed as  Unfair  Trade Practices:  [7]   False representation and misleading  advertisement  of goods and services. Misleading representation regarding utility, quality and standard of goods and services. Giving false guarantee or warranty on goods and services without adequate tests. False claims or representation regarding  price  of goods and services. Giving false facts regarding sponsorship, affiliation etc. of goods and services. Making false or misleading representations of facts. 2.4 Doctrine of the Act The MRTP Act, 1969 had its origin in the Directive Principles of State Policy embodied in the Constitution of India. Article 39[(b) and (c)] of the Constitution lay down that the State shall direct its policy towards ensuring:  [8]   (i) that the ownership and control of material resources of the community are so distributed as to best serve the common good; and (ii) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment. Thus, the doctrine behind the MRTP Act, 1969 was based on the concept of planned economic development that had started since early 1950s. The Public Sector Industrial (Development Regulation) Act, 1951 and Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 together commanded a comprehensive control over direction, pattern and quantum of investment. However, despite such control that the state exercised through these Acts, these did not entirely benefit the consumers rather, these complex network of controls and regulations fettered the freedom of the enterprises and yielded negative results for the economy. 3. FUNCTIONING AND PERFORMANCE: THE MRTP COMMISSION 3.1 Functions The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC), a quasi- judicial body, was established under Section 5 of the MRTP Act, 1969 to take up action against companies that indulged in monopolistic and unfair trade activities. It discharged functions as per the provisions of the Act. The main functions of the MRTP Commission being: to enquire into and take appropriate action in respect of unfair trade practices and restrictive trade practices. in regard to monopolistic trade practices, to enquire into such practices:  [9]   upon a reference made to it by the Central Government, or upon its own knowledge or information; submit its findings to Central Government for further action. The Office of the Director General of Investigation Registration was created in the year 1984 to perform certain statutory functions and duties under the MRTP Act, 1969 so as to subserve its objective to protect the interests of the consumers in the country.  [10]  The Act was amended from time to time and major amendments took place in the years 1984 and 1991 and these reforms shall be discussed later in this project. 3.2 Mechanism The working of the MRTP Commission can be put down in the following steps: 1) As discussed above, the MRTP Commission was empowered under section 10 of the Act to take either suo motu action or action upon reference by the government, against companies that were deemed to be adopting restrictive, monopolistic or unfair practices. 2) All such trade practices were considered to be prejudicial to public interest. Hence, the onus was on the entity, body or undertaking charged with the perpetration of such trade practices, to plead under the MRTP Act to avoid being indicted. 3) If the pleadings were satisfactory to the Commission and if it was further satisfied that the restriction is not unreasonable, the Commission would arrive at the conclusion that the trade practice is not prejudicial to public interest and discharge the enquiry against the charged party.  [11]  Furthermore, if a trade practice was expressly authorised by any law for the time being in force, the Commission was barred from passing any order against the charged party. 4) Otherwise, if the Commission deemed it to be fit, it could either: a) give temporary injunction, or b) award compensation. 3.3 Illustrative Cases A) Shyam Gas Company Case This was a case where the supply of cooking gas cylinders was in short supply, which led to unfair exploitation of the situation. Shyam Gas Co. was the sole distributor of BPCL for cooking gas cylinder at Hathras (U.P.) which was allegedly engaging in the following restrictive practices: giving gas connections to the customer only when he purchased a gas stove or a hot plate from the company; and charging customers twice the price for supply of fittings and appliances. The MRTP Commission held that the company was indulging in a restrictive trade practice that was prejudicial to the interest of the consumers. B) Bal Krishna Khurana Case This was the first case where a sales promotion organizer was charged under unfair trade practices. The respondent, Bal Krishna was famous all over North India for his selling export quality hosiery at extremely low prices wherein he sold goods worth Rs. 210/- for as low as Rs. 15/- The Commission received complaints from consumers who reported that they were being cheated into buying sub-standard goods. The Commission then put a restraining order against Bal Krishna from organizing any such promotion ventures. In addition, the Commission also advised newspapers against carrying any such misleading advertisements.  [12]   3.3 Performance The MRTP Commissions performance can be understood by looking at the data which shows the functioning of the Commission in its last phase (till 2007), depicting the volume of inquiries commissioned and reliefs awarded. A) Under Restrictive Trade Practices Figure 1: Enquiries Considered and Disposed of by MRTP Commission as of 31.12.2004 (RTP) SOURCE: Computed from data available at- Pradeep S. Mehta, CUTS International, A Functional Competition Policy for India, p. 47, Academic Foundation, New Delhi 2005.  [13]   B) Under Unfair Trade Practices Figure 2: Enquiries Considered and Disposed of by MRTP Commission as of 31.12.2004 (UTP) SOURCE: Computed from data available at- Pradeep S. Mehta, CUTS International, A Functional Competition Policy for India, p. 47, Academic Foundation, New Delhi 2005.  [14]   4. MRTP AND INDUSTRIAL GROWTH RATE: ANALYSIS The objective of this project is to analyse the performance of the MRTP Act, 1969 and then establish why it had to be replaced by a newer Competition Act, 2002. For this purpose, and to establish the shortcomings of the MRTP, we will now consider the Industrial Production Growth Rates during the period starting from 1951 till 2007 (the year MRTP was formally declared to be dysfunctional) and then draw conclusions by contrasting between the stricter regime, pre-1991 reforms and the post-1991 reforms phase of industrial development. 4.1 Industrial Growth Rate: 1951-1980 Table 1: ANNUAL GROWTH RATES OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION IN INDEX NOS., 1951-1980. Use-Based or Function Classification 1951-55 1955-60 1960-65 1965-74 1974-79 1979-80 1. Basic Goods 4.7 12.1 10.4 6.5 8.4 -0.5 2. Capital Goods 9.8 13.1 19.6 2.6 5.7 -2.3 3. Intermediate Goods 7.8 6.3 6.9 3.0 4.3 1.9 4. Consumer Goods 4.8 4.4 4.9 3.4 5.5 -4.4 (a) Durables 6.2 6.8 5.6 (b) Non-Durables 2.8 5.4 -6.1 GENERAL INDEX 5.7 7.2 9.0 4.1 6.1 -1.6 SOURCE: (1) Government of India, Handbook of Industrial Statistics, 1992, Table 50, p.150; S. L. Shetty, Structural Retrogression in the Indian Economy since the Mid-1960s, Economic and Political Weekly, Special Supplement, 1978, Table 4, p. 9. (2) Accessed in: S. K. Misra and V. K. Puri, Economic Environment of Businees, 5th ed, p. 399, Himalaya Publishing House, 2008. [Available at NALSAR Law Library] 4.2 Industrial Growth Rate: 1981-1991 Table 2: ANNUAL GROWTH RATES OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION IN INDEX NOS., 1981-1991. Use-Based or Function Classification 1981-85 1985-90 1990-91 1. Basic Goods 8.7 7.4 3.8 2. Capital Goods 6.2 14.8 17.4 3. Intermediate Goods 6.0 6.4 6.1 4. Consumer Goods 5.1 7.3 10.4 (a) Durables 14.3 11.6 14.8 (b) Non-Durables 3.8 6.4 9.4 GENERAL INDEX 6.4 8.5 8.3 SOURCE: (1) Government of India, Handbook of Industrial Statistics, 1992, Table 50, p.150; S. L. Shetty, Structural Retrogression in the Indian Economy since the Mid-1960s, Economic and Political Weekly, Special Supplement, 1978, Table 4, p. 9. (2) Accessed in: S. K. Misra and V. K. Puri, Economic Environment of Businees, 5th ed, p. 400, Himalaya Publishing House, 2008. [Available at NALSAR Law Library] 4.3 Industrial Growth Rate: 1992-2007 Table 3: ANNUAL GROWTH RATES OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION IN INDEX NOS., 1981-1991. Use-Based or Function Classification 1992-93 to 1996-97 1997-98 to 1996-97 1997-98 to 2001-02 2002-03 to 2006-07 1. Basic Goods 6.8 4.1 6.6 6.7 2. Capital Goods 8.9 4.7 14.4 15.7 3. Intermediate Goods 8.5 5.8 6.2 2.5 4. Consumer Goods 6.6 5.5 9.6 12.0 (a) Durables 13.4 10.7 8.8 15.3 (b) Non-Durables 4.8 3.8 10.0 11.0 GENERAL INDEX 7.4 5.0 8.2 8.2 SOURCE: (1) For Column 2, Government of India, Economic Survey, 2000-01, Box 7.1, p.130; For Column 3, RBI, Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, 2000, Table 199, p. 409; For All Columns 1 4, Government of India, Economic Survey, 2004-05, Table 7.2, p.142; RBI, Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, 2006-07, Table 237, p. 606 and Table 238, p. 607. (2) Accessed in: S. K. Misra and V. K. Puri, Economic Environment of Businees, 5th ed, p. 401, Himalaya Publishing House, 2008. [Available at NALSAR Law Library] 4.4 Comparison of the Phases Now basing on the above data-set, the researcher would now proceed to draw some inferences while considering the economic and social conditions prevailing at the corresponding time in India. 4.4.1 Phase of 1951-1980 1) If one observes closely, the general index (G.I.), the time-band of 1951-55 shows an impressive figure of 5.7 (impressive because India had just gotten independence and was taking its foundational steps in setting up the economy). This rate moves positively as we trace the G.I till the year 1965- where it reaches a peak of 9.0. This is the phase where the Indian economy was controlled by a handful of big business houses, and the government was struggling with its licensing and controlling policies- even in the absence of many players, the industry saw a sharp growth. 2) However, as we move on to the year 1965-76 we see a sharp fall to 4.1 accompanied by sharp falls in the index of basic goods, capital goods and intermediate goods. This is the phase where the unfettered growth of the few business houses could not be controlled and the market had started showing monopolistic trends- and showing falling indexes. More importantly, during the same phase, MRTP was introduced in the year 1969. Though it was implemented to control any monopolistic trends by preventing concentration of wealth in the hands of the few and catalyse competition in the market, it clearly failed in the initial years. The market did not react in a positive manner- the government had started with its nationalization and strict licensing policy. Some economists were of the view that there was a considerable slackening of real investment and this was followed by a decline in private-investment as well. This has been attributed to loss of stimulus for investment, and this possibly stems from the strict regime of MRTP, 1969.  [15]   In addition, other reasons can also be adduced to the fall in the index. Among them: Wars fought in 1965 and 1971 Drought conditions in some of the years between 1965-71 Oil crisis of 1973 3) Though the new policy was slowly starting to yield results, however the growth never really happened and this is evident from the negative trend observed in the phase 1979-80. It only changed after the New Industrial Policy of 1984 which is discussed next. 4.4.3 Phase of 1981-1991 1) The phase of 1981-85 shows a positive growth, in contrast to the preceding decade primarily because of the 1984 reforms. This broadened investment across the public and private sectors, while some level of deregulation was allowed. Most importantly, the cap on MRTP firms (which were subject to special regulation) was increased, which resulted in the more number of small-sized firms to be free from government regulation- thus, in turn leading to an increase in the production of consumer goods- especially durables. Thus, the loosening of government hold on small businesses was returning dividends to the consumers. The Industrial Policy of 1984 made the most significant changes to the Indian market- it reduced the domestic barriers to entry and expansion to inject a measure of competition in domestic industry, simplifying the procedures and providing easier access to better technology and intermediate material imports.  [16]   2) Also, this was the phase when the Green Revolution was yielding positive results and the agricultural sector was seeing a manifold increase in production. 2) This growth rate was successfully sustained over the next decade till the time preceding 1990. However, parallel to this growth was the increase in govt. spending deficit. India had reached a stage where it could lend no more- its Foreign Reserves had dried up and investment in all forms had almost ceased. This was the time when India took the mammoth step of Liberalization with the New Policy Reforms of 1991. 4.4.3 Post 1991 Reforms 1) The New Policy Reforms of 1991 brought about a host of changes to the Indian economy. The most major change being Liberalization- opening up of the market in accordance with the WTO Regime. This not only opened the gates of foreign investment but also brought about domestic policy changes in the licensing and regulation scenario. 2) The greatest change in the market was that made to the MRTP Act. Prior to the 1991 Reforms, a total of 1,854 undertakings were registered under the MRTP Act- of these, 1787 belonged to large industrial houses and remaining 67 were dominant undertakings.  [17]  The New Industrial Policy, 1991 now scrapped the assets limit for MRTP companies- this meant doing away with the requirement of prior approval from Central government for establishing new undertakings, expansions, mergers, amalgamations and takeovers. Thus, the changes brought about in the 1991 Reforms opened up the market in more ways than one. And hence, one can safely conclude that keeping with Indias liberalization, MRTP had become undesirable, rather, an obstacle to the growth story and thus, had to undergo multiple amendments in the period following the 1991 Reforms. In the next chapter, the researcher will continue with this line of thought and bring about the other shortcomings of the MRTP and how it finally came to be replaced. 5. SHORTCOMINGS OF MRTP Continuing from the last chapter, we have observed by comparing the industrial data that over the course of 4 decades from the time MRTP was enacted, the industry reacted in manners not suitable to the consumer. In this chapter, the researcher will discuss the other facets relating to the problems associated with the MRTP. 5.1 Anti-Welfaristic Results Though the MRTP was enforced with the aim of distribution of resources and leveraging of competition in the market, the desired results could not be obtained. Rather, the market conditions turned out to be hostile for the consumer, and small-businesses and big-businesses alike, were subjected to excessive control. The heightened governmental control, where new undertakings and ventures were severely restrained by complex procedures, created conditions wherein the firms, existing and new, found it difficult to survive and thus, could not give back any benefits to the consumer. 5.2 Stringent Provisions The Act aimed at abolishing all acts which were anti-competition. The Act, over the years became very active in taking on firms head-on to make them stand in line with the provisions of the Act. The provisions, though aimed at benefitting the consumers and the industrial growth, often played out tough- and the stringent provisions did not benefit anyone. For instance, the concept of Predatory Pricing, which is still a marketing policy adopted by companies to have an edge over their competitors, was handed down heavily by the MRTP Commission. Predatory Pricing is defined as pricing a good or service below the cost of production of the good or service, with the objective of driving a competitor out of trade or to discipline him and thereby achieve elimination of competition.  [18]  This is a means for a firm with strong market power to eliminate other competitors and then, dominate the market. This is effectively an anti-competitive mechanism, however, it can also be used to drive competition i.e. it can be effectively used to establish a strong competitive market. Examples are ripe in the current market where there are strong competitive conditions for the firms- they have to dole out quality at the best price to keep themselves established in the market, otherwise other competitive firms will drive them out of business. Examples being: A) Tide, a detergent that was introduced in the Indian market in 2000 was successful in breaking into a market which was strongly held by Surf (so much so, that households used to use Surf as a generic term for any kind of detergent). Tide used strong pricing, backed by its robust parent company, predatory in nature, to quickly grab a large market share for itself. It offered quality detergent at a price than the other existing detergents. This in turn made the other companies lower their price and offer better quality. Hence, the consumer emerged the winner from this competitive trend between the detergent makers. B) Tata Docomo, a mobile service provider that rolled out only 2 years back in the Indian market, entered at a time when there were established players in the market like Airtel, Reliance and state-run BSNL. But Docomo with its pricing policy which was unlike the prevailing market conditions, offered calling rates which changed the pulse. The market prior to the arrival of Docomo was based on per/minute charges, but Docomo came up with a per/second policy- thus, forcing other established players to also offer similar rates. Though such strategy was predatory in nature, but it helped in establishing a more competitive market which only went onto help the customers. Thus, the point that the researcher is trying to drive home is that such predatory pricing is not necessarily anti-competitive but rather an agent to bring about better options for the consumer. Hence, this is more beneficial in terms of consumers welfare. However, the MRTP Commission took up a strong case against such pricing and though it aimed at benefitting the market by ensuring fair competition, it instead closed down on the benefits to the customers. Hence, what was then required is a strong, case-by-case basis of handling and not absolute ban on predatory pricing. 5.3 Ambiguity in Law The MRTP Act, 1969 contained only one particular section, Section 2(o) to cover all anti-competition practices- defining Restrictive Trade Practice as a trade practice which prevents, distorts or restricts competition and thus, by defining it in Orcas: Study of Habitat, Types and Social Behaviours Orcas: Study of Habitat, Types and Social Behaviours Introduction Called â€Å"whale killer† by the Spanish sailors, and also as â€Å"killing demon† to The Haida of British Columbia. Whatever it called, mariners have long been astonished by the talent of the large black and white dolphins known as Orcas, or killer whales. The biggest members of the dolphin family, Orcas are one of the most iconic species of cetacean which other marine mammals like whales and porpoises. They are apex predators with no other animals that hunt them, except for humans. Killer whales as a species have a sundry diet, although individual population often specialize in particular types of prey. Some feed exclusively on fish, while other hunt marine mammal. Killer whales can be found though out all oceans from the tropical seas to the freezing Arctic and Antarctic. What is Ontology? Ontology is a theory that relates all the related surrounding to show the relations of the information which concern about the existing organisms in the surrounding. It also related to the metaphysics that is a philosophy branch that deals with a principles that is the first and relates all the concepts likes cause, time, space, being and many more. A part from that, ontology is like a mind map to show how the flow of the living or the nature of being. It will relate to each other and makes others more understand the concept of this philosophy. Moreover, a controlled vocabulary must be use in forming the ontology as will show the relation of one word to another. If not, the ontology structure might not give the user understanding and it will be less valuable. It will be shown in queries of information that link with each other. Furthermore, a controlled vocabulary terms is a must as to the show the accurate definitions and facilitate the accurate and consistent information. Taxonomy Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Cetacea Family: Delphinidae Genus: Orcinus Species: Orca Types There are three types of orcas may be recognizable enough to be considered as different subspecies. The three types may differ in genetics, behaviour, morphology, and ecology. A genetic study suggests that these subspecies has been separated from others killer whales for approximately 750,000 years, which evolution cause them to change separately from each other and creating distinctly physical appearance from each other’s. Main Types Residents Killer Whales The most commonly sighted of the three populations. Resident Killer Whales are noticeably different from both transient and offshore forms. The dorsal fin is rounded at the tip and curved and tapering, or falcate. Resident whales have a variety of saddle patch pigmentations with five different patterns recognized. Theyve been sighted from California to Russia. Resident whales primarily eat fish. Resident killer whales in the North Pacific consist of populations Southern residents, Northern residents, Southern Alaska residents, Western Alaska North Pacific residents. Resident type killer whales occur in large social groups termed pods, which are defined to be groups of whales that are seen in association with one another greater than 50% of the time. The pods represent collections of matrilines (a matriarch and all her descendents), which have been found to be the stable social unit. The Southern Resident killer whale population contains three podsJ, K, and L podsconsidered one stock under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and as a distinct population segment (therefore, species) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Their range during the spring, summer, and fall includes the inland waterways of Puget Sound (Washington state), Strait of Juan de Fuca (boundary between the United States and Canada), and Southern Georgia Strait (between Vancouver Island and British Columbia, Canada). Their occurrence has also been documented in the coastal waters off of, Oregon, central California, and Queen Charlotte Islands. Relatively little is known about the winter movements and range of the Southern Resident stock. Southern Residents have not been observed associating with other resident whales, and genetic data suggest that Southern Residents rarely, if ever, interbreed with other killer whale populations. Transients Killer Whales These subspecies occur throughout the eastern North Pacific, and have primarily been studied in coastal waters. Their geographic range overlaps that of the resident and offshore killer whales. The dorsal fin of transient whales tends to be straighter at the tip than those of resident and offshore whales.6 Saddle patch pigmentation of transient killer whales is restricted to two patterns, and the large areas of black colour dont mix into the white of the saddle patch that is seen in resident and offshore types. Transient type whales are often found in long-term stable social units of less than 10 whales, smaller than resident social groups. Transient killer whales feed nearly exclusively on other marine mammals. Transients are also referred to as Biggs killer whale in honour of Michael Bigg, who was a Canadian marine biologist who is recognized as the founder of modern research on killer whales. The term has become increasingly common and may eventually replace the transient label. Offshores Killer Whales A third population of killer whales in the northeast Pacific was discovered in 1988. They are similar to resident whales, but can be distinguished generally by features such as their rounded fins with multiple nicks on the edge, smaller overall size, and tendency for males and females to be more similar in size (less sexual dimorphism) Offshores have the largest geographic range of any killer whale community in the north-eastern Pacific and often occur 15 km or more offshore, but also visit coastal waters and occasionally enter protected inshore waters. Animals typically congregate in groups of 20-75 animals with occasional sightings of larger groups up to 200 whales. They are presumed to feed primarily on fish, though they have been documented feeding on sharks. Genetic analyses indicate that offshore killer whales are reproductively isolated from other forms of killer whales. Antarctic Type Antarctic (type A) Killer Whale A large (perhaps to 9.5m), black and white form killer whale. It migrate to Antarctica during austral (summer) where it forages in open (ice free) waters and feeds mainly on minke whales and occasionally elephant seals. During the winter, It probably migrates to lower latitudes, perhaps to the tropics. Pack Ice (large type B) Killer Whale A large, two-toned gray and white form with dark cape pattern and very large eye patch. Often have yellowish cast due to diatoms. Circumpolar, it forages mainly in loose pack ice where it preys on ice seals or Weddell seals, which groups wave-wash off ice floes by creating waves with their tails. Occasionally take Minke whales. Gerlache (small type B) Killer Whale A medium sized, two-toned gray and white form with dark cape pattern and large white eye patch. Often appears yellowish due to diatom infestation. Common around Antarctic Peninsula, especially in Gerlache Strait. Preferred prey unknown but has been feeding on penguins on numerous occasions. Ross Sea (type C) Killer Whale The smallest killer whale known. Adults males reach only 6m. A two-toned gray and white form with a dark grey cape, and often colored yellowish by diatom film. Eye patch is distinctively narrow and slanted. Occurs deep in the pack ice im eastern Antarctica and feeds on fish. Especially common in the Ross Sea. Subantarctic (type D) Killer Whale Recently describe form, known from a dozen sightings. Easily recognized by its tiny eye patch, with rounded head, swept back and pointy dorsal fin. Distributed in subantarctic water and sometimes associated with islands. Preferred prey unknown but reportedly steals fish off long-lines. Morphology A typical killer whale distinctively bears a black back, white chest and sides, and a white patch above and behind the eye. Calves are born with a yellowish or orange tint, which fades to white. It has a heavy and robust body with a large dorsal fin up to 2 m (6.6 ft) tall. Behind the fin, it has a dark grey saddle patch across the back. Antarctic killer whales may have pale grey to nearly white backs. Adult killer whales are very distinctive and are not usually confused with any other sea creature. The killer whales teeth are very strong and covered in enamel. Its jaws are a powerful gripping apparatus, as the upper teeth fall into the gaps between the lower teeth when the mouth is closed. The front teeth are inclined slightly forward and outward, thus allowing the killer whale to withstand powerful jerking movements from its prey while the middle and back teeth hold it firmly in place. Killer whales are the largest extant members of the dolphin family. Males typically range from 6 to 8 metres (20 to 26ft) long and weigh in excess of 6 tonnes (5.9 long tons; 6.6 short tons). Females are smaller, generally ranging from 5 to 7m (16 to 23ft) and weighing about 3 to 4 tonnes (3.0 to 3.9 long tons; 3.3 to 4.4 short tons). Killer whales have good eyesight above and below the water, excellent hearing, and a good sense of touch. They have exceptionally sophisticated echolocation abilities, detecting the location and characteristics of prey and other objects in their environments by emitting clicks and listening for echoes. Life cycle Female orcas mature usually around age 15. Mothers calve, with usually a single offspring, about once every five years after a 17-month pregnancy. In resident pods, births occur at any time of year, although winter is the most common. Mortality is extremely high during the first six to seven months of life, when 37–50% of all calves die. Killer whales are protective of their young, and other adolescent females often assist the mother in caring for them. Females breed until age 40, meaning on average they raise five offspring. The lifespans of wild females average 50 years, with a maximum of 80–90 years. The females are known to go through menopause and live for decades after they have finished breeding. Males sexually mature at the age of 15, but do not typically reproduce until age 21. Wild males live around 29 years on average, with a maximum of 50–60 years. Captive killer whale lifespans are typically significantly shorter, usually less than 25 years; however, numerous individuals are alive in their 30s, and a few have reached their 40s. Range and habitat The killer whale is the most cosmopolitan of all cetaceans and may be the second-most widely-ranging mammal species on the planet, after humans (Rice 1998). Killer whales can be seen in virtually any marine region, from the equator to polar waters. Although they are generally more common in near shore areas and in higher-productivity areas and/or higher latitudes, there appear to be no hard and fast restrictions of water temperature or depth on their range. The distribution extends too many enclosed or partially-enclosed seas, such as the Mediterranean Sea, Sea of Okhotsk, Gulf of California, Gulf of Mexico, Red Sea, and Persian Gulf. However, there are only extralidmital records from the Baltic Sea and no records from the Black Sea. Killer whales may occur in virtually any marine or estuarine habitat but are most common in areas of high marine productivity, particularly at higher latitudes and near shore (Dahlheim and Heyning 1999; Forney and Wade 2006). Sightings range from the surf zone to the open sea. Movements can be extensive. For instance, some killer whales have been documented to have moved between Alaska and central California, a distance of more than 2000 km. In the Antarctic, they readily enter areas of floe ice in search of prey (Pitman and Ensor 2003). Killer whales in some areas congregate seasonally in coastal channels to forage and occasionally enter river mouths. Population Although the available data are far from complete, abundance estimates for the areas that have been sampled provide a minimum worldwide abundance estimate of about 50,000 killer whales. It is likely that the total abundance is higher, because estimates are not available for many high-latitude areas of the northern hemisphere and for large areas of the South Pacific, South Atlantic, and Indian Ocean. However, this population abundance refers to several forms of killer whales that may be recognized as different species or subspecies in the future (Reeves et al. 2004). Behaviours Social structure Unlike other animals, orcas or killer whales are momentous for their complex societies. Besides human, the only other animals with this complex socials structure are elephants and due to their complexity, many of the marine experts are unease about how humane it is to keep orcas in captive situations. Resident killer whales have a complex yet stable social grouping system. Different from other mammal species, resident live their mother for their entire lives. As females could reach age of 90, they could be as many as four generation traveling together forming matrilineal which is very stable. Individuals sometimes separate for only a few hours at a time for mating or forage. Pods, form from loose aggregations of closely related matrilineal which commonly consist of one to four or five matrilineal. Pods may separate for weeks or months at a time, unlike matrilines. One research shows that DNA testing shows that resident males almost always mate with females from other pods. The next rank of resident socials structure is Clans which composed of pods with same dialect. They often mingling with pods from different clans as the clan ranges overlap. The final rank of relationship is called community. It is interpreted as a set of clans that frequently commingle, although they do not share vocal patterns. Vocalizations Same as other cetaceans, orcas depends heavily on underwater sounds for orientation, feeding and communication. Clicks, whistles and pulsed called are the three categories of sounds they produced. Clicks are believed to be used primarily for navigations and discerning prey and other object in the surrounding environment. It is also commonly heard during social interactions. Dialects Orcas dialects are different between pods due to the similarity of the call differentiate one pod from the other. Dialects are usually generated within the orca’s birth pod. Differences between dialects can be not only between pods but between ecotypes, which are specific populations within a species that have a geographical and genetic variability. Intelligence After the sperm whale, orcas have the second-heaviest brains among marine mammals. They have been trained in captivity and described as intelligent. Orcas also often impersonate others, and seem to intentionally teach skills to their younger pod members. People and marine biologist have interacted closely with orcas numerous times and said that the orcas show playfulness, curiosity, and ability to solve problems. Hunting As apex predators, there is nothing that can stop them from hunting and preying on everything. They will eat anything, but not always willingly. Hunting strategies and prey Salmons The main diet of resident orcas but they will hunt and eat smaller and deeper-dwelling fish if they have to. The favourite of the resident orcas is the Chinooks salmons as it has been observed that it make up 65% of all the salmons consumed. Resident also eats lingcod, halibut, squid and other types of fish. Whales Better known as killer whales, it’s this prey which gave them the notorious name. Orcas have dined on whales in all shape and sizes. They will attack eventually anything even the largest animal in the world, the blue whale. But the common victim to this â€Å"wolves of the sea† is the Minke whale. Other whales documented to be attacked by orcas are Fin, Humpbacks, Grey, Bowhead, Sei and even the fearsome Sperm whales. Orcas also often hunt the fragile whale calf. Individuals of the pods take turn tiring the calf by blocking it form re-surfacing to breath witch will slowing suffocate and eventually drowning the calf, while the other distract the mother. They often will only eat the lips and tongue, and let the whale body to sink. In the far north, belugas and narwhals are also have been preyed upon. Porpoises and dolphins Porpoises are faster swimmer than the orcas making it harder to catch. Hunted by the Transient’s attacks, they cooperate by letting one orca to chase the porpoises to flea directly into the pod. Once caught, the orcas will launch the porpoises out of the water by hitting them with their tails. Once too injured to swim away, the orcas will strip the porpoises down to their bones and lungs. Same technique has been observed to be used on bottlenose dolphins. Orcas also use direct chase to catch the dolphins. Sharks With great intelligent, the orcas have figured out to goes above and beyond other oceans notorious predator, the sharks. There even recorded documentary of the Great White falling victim to a pod of orcas. They use their 5-inch-long teeth to grab hold of the sharks fins and turn it upside down underwater witch cause tonic immobility that leaving the shark to suffocate within minutes as they need to move to breath. After the shark had suffocated, then the orcas would start feeding on it. Sea lions, leopard seals, and penguins Orcas have many techniques to catch these preys. The most dramatic is using the wave as cover to caught prey off guard on the beach. Next technique is â€Å"wave-hunting† where orcas will spy-hop to locate any prey on ice floes, and then swim in groups to create waves that washes the prey off the ice and into the water where other orcas lie to snatch the prey. Another method of hunting for orcas is waiting until the prey come to them. They wait at edges of the ice for unsuspecting prey that want to enter the water or slips and fall into the water.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.