Marine shipping noise management recommenda1ons in the
SGaan Kinghlas-Bowie Seamount Marine Protected Area
Annina Altherr | aaltherr@uvic.ca
University of Victoria, Department of Geography | Faculty of Social Sciences
Introduc1on
Marine vessel noise is a widespread issue that affects many marine species, par7cularly
baleen whales, whose auditory range coincides with the low frequency noise emi<ed by
large vessels such as cargo ships and tankers1
.
The rapid expansion of the global shipping fleet over the last several decades has affected
the marine soundscape to the point that anthropogenic noise is now a dominant feature
of the underwater world, and has led to as much as a 12 dB increase in background noise
levels in some areas2
.
Due to the impacts of marine noise on whales, noise is an important considera7on for
marine planning and management, as well as marine conserva7on efforts. However,
noise management in the ocean is difficult because chronic noise contributors like
shipping vessels, unlike acute noise events, are a constantly moving noise source, and
their impacts are not necessarily always well understood.
Research Objec1ve
The study area for this project is the SGaan Kinghlas-Bowie Seamount Marine Protected
Area (SK-B MPA), an ecologically rich offshore protected area3
. Noise management is not
currently a priority for the management of the SK-B MPA; this research a<empts to
understand how anthropogenic noise reduc7on management could be implemented at
the SK-B MPA.
Study Area
The SGaan Kinghlas-Bowie Seamount is located approximately 180km west of Haida
Gwaii4. The SK-B MPA measures 6000km2 and encompasses three underwater seamounts;
the largest of these, Bowie Seamount, reaches the phototrophic zone and creates a unique
ecosystem that is comprised of both deep sea and coastal species4. The upwelling of cold,
nutrient-rich water occurring at the seamount also helps creates a produc7ve zone in an
otherwise barren area of open ocean3.
This unique coastal ecosystem in the middle of the open ocean provides a migratory respite
for whales, making it a hotspot for species such as fin, blue, sperm, humpback, and killer
whales, as well as pacific white sided dolphins and beaked whales species3, 5.
However, shipping vessels travelling to and from the large ports of Burnaby, Sea<le, and
Prince Rupert o\en pass through and near the MPA’s waters, increasing the sound levels in
the area4.
Data and Methods
Geographic Informa1on Systems (GIS) Analysis
• Designed noise management scenarios based on management plans for other
ecologically important areas impacted by shipping noise
• Mapped and analyzed management scenarios in GIS so\ware to determine the impact
of the various schemes on nearby transi7ng vessels, as there are major shipping lanes
located near the SK-B MPA
• Data: Automa7c informa7on system (AIS) satellite vessel data was used for this project.
The data included informa7on on vessels transi7ng near and through the SK-B MPA in
2015. A<ributes included vessel speed, vessel count, vessel hours, and the number of
vessel types (e.g. recrea7onal boats, container ships, ferries, tankers, tugs)
Interviews
• Used the views of managers, stakeholders, and scien7fic experts to gain an
understanding of the possibili7es and challenges for noise management at the SK-B
MPA, and to inform possible noise management scenarios for the SK-B MPA
Preliminary Results
Discussion
Knowledge on the exact impacts of noise on marine animals is not comprehensive, as
impacts vary depending on species, level and frequency of noise, and exposure 7me and
level. However, experts agree that the precau7onary principle is the ra7onal and
preemp7ve approach to the issue of marine vessel noise2, 6
.
There are different possible methods of limi7ng the extent of noise in the marine
environment being explored and developed, including:
Ø Diver7ng shipping lanes: physically moving the shipping lanes so that ecologically
important areas are farther away from the noise source7
. It can be difficult to
determine the distance the lanes would have to be moved to substan7ally reduce
noise
Ø Vessel quie7ng technologies: includes reducing vessel speed and/or properly
maintaining vessel hulls to reduce the amount of noise created1, 8
Ø Buffer zones: buffer zones and other spa7al and/or temporal exclusion zones can
help priori7ze ac7vi7es and can help achieve marine conserva7on goals, by
iden7fying areas of ecological, cultural, and socio-economic importance, and
separa7ng them by permi<ed ac7vi7es to reduce conflict and to achieve the goals of
each area. Buffer zones create whole areas that are theore7cally quieter than the
surrounding ocean7, 9
Based on the literature review conducted, an examina7on of management feasibility at
this remote site, and analysis of 2015 vessel tracks in and near the SK-B MPA, it is likely
that buffer zones will be the most effec7ve method of noise management at the site.
Buffer zones similar to those implemented elsewhere in the world were mapped, and
their impacts on vessel traffic near the SK-B MPA were analyzed.
u As the graphs show, a similar number of vessel trips in both July and December 2015
(the summer and winter months of 2015 with the most traffic) would be affected by
5km, 7km, or 10km buffer zones, sugges7ng that implementa7on challenges would
be similar
u A much larger number of vessel trips would be impacted by 50nm and 130km buffer
zones, but the exact number is hard to determined due to data limita7ons
As interviews with industry representa7ves and stakeholders are completed, it will
become more apparent how large the buffer zones should be to help protect marine
organisms in the SK-B MPA from the impacts of marine vessel noise, while ensuring that
implementa7on, monitoring and management remain feasible.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Jamie Cassels Undergraduate Research Award through
the University of Victoria. Supervised by Dr. Rosaline Canessa and Dr. Lauren McWhinnie.
Thank you to the CORAL team for your support!
References
1. Haren, A. M. (2007). Reducing noise pollu7on from commercial shipping in the Channel Islands na7onal marine sanctuary: A case study in marine
protected area management of underwater noise. Journal of Interna7onal Wildlife Law & Policy, 10(2), 153-173.
2. Boyd, I., Frisk, G., Urban, E., Tyack, P.,, . . . Shinke, T. (2011). An interna7onal quiet ocean experiment. Oceanography, 24(2), 174-181.
3. Canessa, R., Conley, K., & Smiley, B. (2003). Bowie Seamount Pilot Marine Protected Area: An Ecosystem Overview. Can. Tech. Aquat. Sci. 2461.
4. DFO. (2011). Sgaan Kinghlas Bowie Seamount Marine Protected Area Monitoring Indicators, Protocols and Strategies. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci.
Advis. Rep. 2010/036.
5. Kaschner, K., Watson, R., Trites, A., & Pauly, D. (2006). Mapping world-wide distribu7ons of marine mammal species using a rela7ve
environmental suitability (RES) model. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 316, 285-310.
6. Ardron, J., Gjerde, K., Pullen, S., & Tilot, V. (2008). Marine spa7al planning in the high seas. Marine Policy, 32(5), 832-839.
7. Geijer, C. K. A., and Jones, P. J. S., (2015). A network approach to migratory whale conserva>on: are MPAs the way forward or do all roads lead to
the IMO? Marine Policy, 51: 1-12.
8. Hatch, L., Clark, C., Merrick, R., Van Parijs, S., Ponirakis, D., Schwehr, K., Thompson, M., Wiley, D., (2008). Characterizing the rela7ve contribu7ons
of large vessels to total ocean noise fields: a case study using the Gerry E. Studds Stellwagen Bank Na7onal Marine Sanctuary. Environmental
Management 42 (5), 735–752.
9. Wiley, D. N., Thompson, M., Pace, R. M., & Levenson, J. (2011). Modeling speed restric7ons to mi7gate lethal collisions between ships and whales
in the Stellwagen Bank Na7onal Marine Sanctuary, USA. Biological Conserva>on, 144(9), 2377-2381.
Background image taken by and used with permission of UVic CORAL
Data provided by exactEarth Ltd. 2016 and processed courtesy of MEOPAR
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
5km 7km 10km 50nm (92.6km)
Number of December 2015 Trips Affected by
Proposed Buffer Zones
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
5km 7km 10km 50nm (92.6km)
Number of July 2015 Trips Affected by Proposed
Buffer Zones
Fig 3. 5km, 7km, and 10km buffer zones around
the SK-B MPA and July 2015 vessel tracks
Fig 6. Comparison of the number of vessel trips
through the study area in July and December
2015
Fig 5. 10km, 50nm, and 130km buffer zones and
2015 gridded vessel tracks
Fig 1. Study area, 180km west of Haida Gwaii Fig 2. Overview map of study area
Fig 4. 5km, 7km, and 10km buffer zones around
the SK-B MPA and December 2015 vessel tracks
