Posts Tagged ‘acoustic’

NOAA pushes Navy to stop sonar testing at marine mammal hot spots

Saturday, January 30th, 2010

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has acknowledged the link between certain types of sonar and negative impacts on marine mammals, including death. In an letter to the Council on Environmental Quality last week, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco proposed that marine mammal "hot spots"—areas where marine mammals are in high abundance—become off limits to mid-frequency active sonar testing. (Lubchenco is, by the way, the first woman AND the first marine ecologist to lead NOAA. Huzzah!)

According to this LA Times blog post, NOAA is also calling for a process to estimate the "comprehensive sound budget for the oceans." This is a huge step in developing a plan to protect marine species that rely on underwater communication. It’s critical, too, in light of the new findings that link ocean acidification with the decreased transmission of underwater sound (see this recent post.)

The letter from Lubchenco to the CEQ is available here (PDF).

  • Share/Bookmark

Cows of the sea

Wednesday, December 30th, 2009

by Hilary L. Maybaum

I just can’t get excited about manatees. For one thing, they don’t do much except munch sea grass and reproduce.

Manatee photo

Because of their place in the food chain, some people refer to manatees as "cows of the sea." To me, they are more like amoebae, slow-moving and blobby.


There are no great displays of aggression or emotion, no jaw-dropping feeding methods, just… a bunch of sea potatoes hanging around the subtropics. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Yes, they’re cute, in an ugly sort of way. I know, I know, they’re endangered and for that reason alone I should be interested. Oddly, I’m not.

I do, however, perk up at any mention of military/marine-mammal conflict. So when Peter Kobel (@TheEcoist) pointed out this recent L.A. Times article on a pending manatee habitat ruling, I sat up and took notice.

The U.S. Navy is balking at the proposed expansion of manatee "critical habitat" in Florida and southern Georgia. The proposal stems from an organized group of environmental advocates who state a compelling case for expansion. The Navy’s position is that more habitat for the manatees will mean less habitat for submarines and other forms of military defense.

The Navy claims to "coexist with various endangered species" and to "do all kinds of things" to help protect them. To a large extent, this is true. I have worked as an environmental consultant on many Navy contracts, and can personally vouch for their stewardship. The Navy does conduct marine-mammal surveys when needed; for example, on Environmental Impact Assessments and the like. However, I also know that the Navy, in general, prefers the conclusions of such assessments to match their a priori assumptions.

Now it is up to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to make a ruling. What should they decide? If it were me, I’d say that each side needs to give a little bit. Yes, folks, I’m advocating the C-word: compromise. Given that the manatee population numbers less than 4,000, and their habitat designation has not been reviewed since the 1970s, it seems they are due some additional area. For decades, manatees have sacrificed their lives and health for Floridians’ well being. Those gentle personalities put them in harm’s way far too often; is it not time for some payback? On the other hand, we are (lest we forget) a nation at war, and we need to maintain a strong defense system, at least for now.

  • Share/Bookmark

Sonar and strandings

Monday, December 28th, 2009

by Hilary L. Maybaum

Why do mass strandings of marine mammals happen? Researchers have been trying to answer this question scientifically for decades. Various hypotheses have been put forth, from parasitic diseases to anomalies in Earth’s magnetic field. Now, manmade sonar can be added to that list.

Sonar—an acronym for SOund Navigation And Ranging—is the technique of using sound propagation to navigate, communicate, or detect underwater objects. Originally deployed on a massive scale during World War I for enemy submarine detection, sonar has since become a mainstream navigation and fish-finding aid for military, commercial, and recreational vessels alike. It relies on variations in underwater sound speed, determined mainly by temperature, pressure, and salinity (saltiness). There are two kinds of sonar systems. Passive sonar simply “listens,” without transmitting any sound. Active sonar—such as that used in fish-finding—emits sound pulses, sometimes called pings, for detection of objects. The pulses can vary in frequency, loudness, and duration.

I actually did my Master’s Thesis on the effects of an active 3.3 kHz sonar systems on humpback whales in Hawaii. A group of sonar engineers in Massachusetts had a National Geographic grant to test a prototype system on its detection of humpback whales in Stellwagon Bank. They were getting lousy results, mostly because of the shallowness and sound opacity in the bank’s waters. I invited them to come test their system in Hawaii, where the waters were clear and deep. They did, and I investigated the behavioral effects of their system on the whales. It turned out there were some observable effects, and we all concluded it was not a plausible system to use for this purpose.

But I digress. This post is about beaked whales.

Cuvier's beaked whale

Public domain image of a Cuvier's beaked whale from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

In 2005, a group of scientists studied a mass stranding of beaked whales off the Canary Islands and found lesions apparently induced by mid-frequency sonar sounds. Previously, other scientists had suggested a link between mass stranding of beaked whales and mid-frequency sonar, but were unable to establish a causal relationship. This particular stranding event of 14 whales occurred about four hours after the onset of an international naval sonar exercise conducted between the coast of Fuerteventura Island and 40 km offshore.

Postmortem examinations of the whales found no external trauma or bruising, with the exception of one postmortem shark bite. No pre-existing health issues were indicated. The researchers did, however, find severe internal hemorrhaging, swelling, and congestion in the head and neck areas, including the jaws, ears, and brain. They also found evidence of nitrogen supersaturation (“the bends”) in the blood vessels and tissues of vital organs. Beaked whales are known for their deep diving capabilities, and don’t normally get the bends unless their dive behavior is dramatically altered (see this press release from Peter Tyack’s group at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution).

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) sued the Navy over the use of mid-frequency sonar after this and similar findings were published. I’m interested in finding out where that lawsuit stands.

Update: The lawsuit was settled this time last year, in favor of the Navy. A precedent had already been set by the Supreme Court. According to a 12/29/08 NY Times article:

…in a ruling on a council lawsuit challenging the Navy’s sonar training exercises off Southern California, the Supreme Court ruled that military training trumped protecting whales.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote that forcing the Navy to deploy an inadequately trained antisubmarine fleet would jeopardize the safety of the fleet. He also wrote that it was unclear how many marine mammals the Navy’s sonar exercises might harm.


Many thanks to Dr. Joseph Mobley for sending me the original article on the mass stranding event from Vet Pathol 42:446-457 (2005).

Thanks also to Mary Beckman (@sciwriter) for the update on the Navy’s lawsuit.

  • Share/Bookmark

Acid oceans may alter marine mammal messaging

Sunday, December 27th, 2009

by Hilary L. Maybaum

I already knew that carbon dioxide affects the pH level of seawater, and that increased levels of dissolved CO2 could therefore cause the oceans to become more acidic by lowering seawater’s pH. While writing a book on climate change, I learned that ocean acidification is already happening in response to increased levels of atmospheric CO2; that is, the ocean can no longer buffer itself in response to global climate change with natural acid-base (chemical) reactions. Further, ocean acidification can, in turn, dissolve the tests (shells or exoskeletons) of crustaceans, corals, and other critters that depend on calcium carbonate for their bodily protection.

What’s news to me—and bad news at that—is how ocean acidification can also affect the transmission of underwater sound. According to recent articles in Science Daily and in Scientific American, scientists at my alma mater, SOEST at the University of Hawaii, and a scientist at my dream institute, California’s MBARI, found that ocean acidification lowers the ability of seawater to absorb low-frequency sound. In other words, increased CO2 levels make the ocean more transparent to sounds with frequencies up to about 5,000 Hz.

Dolphins, killer whales, humpback whales, blue whales, and scores of other marine mammals rely on the clear transmission of underwater sound to communicate with each other in the wild. They already deal with continuous low-frequency noise from waves and whitecaps. They also contend with constant low-frequency noise from anthropogenic (manmade) sources such as daily ocean traffic—ships, barges, and the like— as well as tourist and recreational activities. [I'm not even going to get into the cacaphony of naval testing of low-frequency sonar and explosives in this post.] I and others have found behavioral effects associated with increased noise levels and changes in existing underwater sounds. My colleagues have referred to some of these effects as whales “running away with their fins covering their earholes.” Of course, my esteemed colleagues exaggerate, but you get the idea.

Think of a beautiful house high on a hill, overlooking a long stretch of sandy, white beach. When you go to sleep, you are lulled by the gentle sounds of ocean waves hitting the shore. Now imagine that someone decides to put a superhighway between your house and the coast. You can no longer hear the ocean waves because of the traffic noise. That’s the kind of acoustical interference we are talking about. What happens when marine mammals can’t get their messages across because the cruise ships are louder, the jet skis are deafening, and breaking waves are giving them headaches? Will they run away, adapt, or die?

  • Share/Bookmark

What do birds have to do with it?

Sunday, December 20th, 2009

Once upon a time, I studied humpback whales. My old research buddy, Adam Frankel, still does. Specifically, he is still studying whale song. I know this not because he told me, but because I just came across a Science News article with a quote from him. Quotes Adam,

[Danielle Cholewiak, a researcher for the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary based in Massachusettes,] "showed short-term acoustic interactions between males—that was the new thing."

This "new thing" is the finding that male humpbacks may respond to the vocalizations of other male humpbacks by changing their song. Which means that the old postulation about the purpose of whale song being advertisment for virility (i.e., reproductive fitness) is one line of evidence closer to validation.

What birds have to do with it is the fact that humpback song and bird song share similar characteristics. Their songs all have repeated notes, called phrases, which are arranged in themes. Bird researchers have been able to correlate song patterns with specific behaviors. Not so with whales. Still, borrowing the methodologies used by bird researchers has proven helpful in cracking the whale song enigma.

  • Share/Bookmark