Shipping noise in a dynamic sea: a case study of grey seals in the Celtic Sea

Chen, Feng; Shapiro, Georgy; Bennett, Kimberley A.; Ingram, Simon; Thompson, David; Vincent, Cécile; Russell, Debbie J. F.; Embling, Clare B.

doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.09.054

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Seismic air-guns 240-250 dB re 1 μPa Richardson et al, 1995 Seismic air-guns 195-210 dB re 1 μPa Wardle et al, 2001 Seismic air-guns 186-191 dB re 1 μPa Skalsky et al, 1992 Drill vessel 174-185 dB re 1 μPa Richardson et al, 1995 Ship noise (dynamic sea conditions) 173-185 dB re 1 μPa Chen et al, 2017 Piling noise 164 dB re 1 μPa Spiga et al, 2017 Small or medium size vessels (ferry & motorboat) 150-180 dB re 1 μPa Richardson et al, 1995 Ship noise (engine exhausts, in port) 135-142 dB re 1 μPa EPA, 2010…”

Section: Review Article Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic Noise Pollution From Marine Industrial Activities: Exposure and Impacts

Kuşku¹,

Yiğit²,

Ergün³

et al. 2018

Aquat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The improvements in marine technological developments propagate urbanization in the ocean environment. The construction or operational activities of marine structures such as energy plants, oil platforms, pipelines , sea-tunnel passages, or cable-stayed suspension bridges, and vessel traffic are sources of underwater noise pollution. How underwater sounds such as piling, pole drilling, or machinery noises may affect the marine live is mostly ignored in marine construction, and there is lack of information regarding underwater sound effects on marine live in the oceans. Recently, a remarkable interest is developing concerning underwater sound effects, especially in aquaculture facilities, with experimentation of musical stimuli or various noises caused by pumps or filter systems on behavior and stress responses of fish in culture conditions. With the increase of urbanization and progressive development of marine industries, more and more pressure from human-generated (anthropogenic) underwater sound pollution may threaten marine mammals, fish species and invertebrates from underwater noises that in terms might be called as "Underwater Noise Pollution". The future of marine life and that of human being, and the dramatic increase of underwater sound pollution is a new debate that needs to be controlled in a sustainable way with environmentsound approaches. Therefore the potential effects of various sound sources derived from marine industrial activities have been reviewed in this study.

show abstract

Section: Review Article Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic Noise Pollution From Marine Industrial Activities: Exposure and Impacts

Kuşku¹,

Yiğit²,

Ergün³

et al. 2018

Aquat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), but there is little published information using at‐sea movements of seals in relation to vessel activity (Chen et al . ). Several studies have called for monitoring of areas where there is high incidence of shipping traffic (Merchant et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Seals and shipping: quantifying population risk and individual exposure to vessel noise

Jones

Hastie

Smout

et al. 2017

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Vessels can have acute and chronic impacts on marine species. The rate of increase in commercial shipping is accelerating, and there is a need to quantify and potentially manage the risk of these impacts. 2. Usage maps characterising densities of grey and harbour seals and ships around the British Isles were used to produce risk maps of seal co-occurrence with shipping traffic. Acoustic exposure to individual harbour seals was modelled in a study area using contemporaneous movement data from 28 animals fitted with UHF global positioning satellite telemetry tags and automatic identification system data from all ships during 2014 and 2015. Data from four acoustic recorders were used to validate sound exposure predictions. 3. Across the British Isles, rates of co-occurrence were highest within 50 km of the coast, close to seal haul-outs. Areas identified with high risk of exposure included 11 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC; from a possible 25). Risk to harbour seal populations was highest, affecting half of all SACs associated with the species. 4. Predicted cumulative sound exposure level, cSELs(M pw ), over all seals was 176Á8 dB re 1 lPa 2 s (95% CI 163Á3-190Á4), ranging from 170Á2 dB re 1lPa 2 s (95% CI 168Á4-171Á9) to 189Á3 dB re 1 lPa 2 s (95% CI 172Á6-206Á0) for individuals. This represented an increase in 28Á3 dB re 1 lPa 2 s over measured ambient noise. For 20 of 28 animals in the study, 95% CI for cSELs(M pw ) had upper bounds above levels known to induce temporary threshold shift. Predictions of broadband received sound pressure levels were underestimated on average by 0Á7 dB re 1 lPa (AE3Á3). 5. Synthesis and applications. We present a framework to allow shipping noise, an important marine anthropogenic stressor, to be explicitly incorporated into spatial planning. Potentially sensitive areas are identified through quantifying risk to marine species of exposure to shipping traffic, and individual noise exposure is predicted with associated uncertainty in an area with varying rates of co-occurrence. The detailed approach taken here facilitates spatial planning with regard to underwater noise within areas protected through the Habitats Directive, and could be used to provide evidence for further designations. This framework may have utility in assessing whether underwater noise levels are at Good Environmental Status under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Details of electronic Supporting Information are provided below.Appendix S1. Usage maps.Appendix S2. Modelling acoustic exposure.Appendix S3. Sound exposure levels for individuals.Appendix S4. Validating acoustic predictions with underwater sound measurements.Appendix S5. Caveats and limitations.Appendix S6. Spatial co-occurrence using 2011 ship usage maps.

show abstract

“…This is because of the dipole radiation pattern of a ship and its image source, yielding a propagation loss well above the wrongly, yet commonly applied 20 log 10 (range) at shallow inclination angles (e.g., Ainslie et al, 2014). Using sound propagation models, Chen et al (2017) showed that gray seals experienced step changes of up to 20 dB in the received ship noise levels as they dove throughout the water column in the Celtic Sea. This was because of environmental features such as thermoclines, which a geometric propagation loss model cannot account for.…”

Section: Common Issues and Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Ship Noise on Marine Mammals—A Review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of marine watercraft is on the rise-from private boats in coastal areas to commercial ships crossing oceans. A concomitant increase in underwater noise has been reported in several regions around the globe. Given the important role sound plays in the life functions of marine mammals, research on the potential effects of vessel noise has grown-in particular since the year 2000. We provide an overview of this literature, showing that studies have been patchy in terms of their coverage of species, habitats, vessel types, and types of impact investigated. The documented effects include behavioral and acoustic responses, auditory masking, and stress. We identify knowledge gaps: There appears a bias to more easily accessible species (i.e., bottlenose dolphins and humpback whales), whereas there is a paucity of literature addressing vessel noise impacts on river dolphins, even though some of these species experience chronic noise from boats. Similarly, little is known about the potential effects of ship noise on pelagic and deep-diving marine mammals, even though ship noise is focused in a downward direction, reaching great depth at little acoustic loss and potentially coupling into sound propagation channels in which sound may transmit over long ranges. We explain the fundamental concepts involved in the generation and propagation of vessel noise and point out common problems with both physics and biology: Recordings of ship noise might be affected by unidentified artifacts, and noise exposure can be both under-and over-estimated by tens of decibel if the local sound propagation conditions are not considered. The lack of anthropogenic (e.g., different vessel types), environmental (e.g., different sea states or presence/absence of prey), and biological (e.g., different demographics) controls is a common problem, as is a lack of understanding what constitutes the 'normal' range of behaviors. Last but not least, the biological significance of observed responses is mostly unknown. Moving forward, standards on study design, data analysis, and reporting are badly needed so that results are comparable (across space and time) and so that data can be synthesized to address the grand unknowns: the role of context and the consequences of chronic exposures.

show abstract

Shipping noise in a dynamic sea: a case study of grey seals in the Celtic Sea

Cited by 20 publications

References 43 publications

Acoustic Noise Pollution From Marine Industrial Activities: Exposure and Impacts

Acoustic Noise Pollution From Marine Industrial Activities: Exposure and Impacts

Seals and shipping: quantifying population risk and individual exposure to vessel noise

The Effects of Ship Noise on Marine Mammals—A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About