Displacement of migrating bowhead whales by sounds from seismic surveys in shallow waters of the Beaufort Sea

1999 ◽  
Vol 106 (4) ◽  
pp. 2281-2281 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. John Richardson ◽  
Gary W. Miller ◽  
Charles R. Greene
Polar Record ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 22 (138) ◽  
pp. 271-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall R. Reeves ◽  
Donald K. Ljungblad ◽  
Janet T. Clarke

AbstractSeismic survey activities in the western Beaufort Sea, involving ships and sound production, were monitored in autumn 1982 for their possible effects on migrating Bowhead whales Balaena mysticetus. The study, begun in 1981 by die Minerals Management Service of the US Department of the Interior, covered offshore waters between the Alaskan coast and 72°N. Distribution, behaviour and numbers of whales were recorded, and procedures were established for monitoring and controlling seismic activities in their presence.


ARCTIC ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lois A. Harwood ◽  
Lori T. Quakenbush ◽  
Robert J. Small ◽  
J. Craig George ◽  
James Pokiak ◽  
...  

Each spring, most bowhead whales of the Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort (BCB) population migrate to the southeast Beaufort Sea and summer in Canadian waters. In August and September, they form aggregations, which are known to occur mainly in the shallow, shelf waters when oceanographic conditions promote concentration of their zooplankton prey. The movements of individual bowheads while they occupy these late summer habitats are less well known; our knowledge is based on photographic evidence and limited tagging studies conducted from 1982 to 2000. In this study, 85% (17) of the 20 satellite-tagged whales that could have spent some time in the Canadian portion of the Beaufort Sea during late summer 2006 to 2012 spent all or part of August and September there. We analyzed location data for 16 whales, using a two-state switching correlated random walk (CRW) behavioural model, and classified locations in the Canadian waters as associated with lingering behaviour (inferred foraging) or directed travel. We found that these whales spent the greatest proportion of their time lingering (59%), followed by traveling (22%), and transitioning between lingering and traveling (19%). Using only lingering locations for these tagged whales in all study years pooled, we calculated kernel densities and defined five areas within the 75% density contour as aggregation areas. Together, the five aggregation areas we defined comprised 25 341 km2, 14.1% of the total area used by these tagged whales in Canadian waters during August and September of the deployment years. Three aggregation areas were located in shallow waters of the Beaufort Sea Shelf and were used almost exclusively by immature tagged whales in our sample. Two other aggregation areas were observed, one in Darnley Bay and one in Viscount Melville Sound in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Each of these was used by one mature whale. Tagged whales were observed to use one or two aggregation areas in a single season, and rarely more. The proportion of lingering time spent in each aggregation area was highly variable among individuals. The largest aggregation area (10 877 km2), located over the Beaufort Shelf north of the Tuktoyaktuk Peninsula (5 – 52 m depth), was used by 13 of the 16 tagged whales, almost exclusively by the immature whales, including three of four that were tracked in two consecutive summers. The Beaufort Shelf overall (and possibly the Tuktoyaktuk Shelf, including the Outer Shelf, in particular) was especially important for immature bowhead whales, while mature whales used habitats beyond the Beaufort Shelf during late summer. Findings may be important to inform both decisions on management and mitigative actions relating to bowhead whale use of the Beaufort Shelf and studies that aim to improve our understanding of the prey base of BCB bowhead whales in the Canadian Beaufort Sea region.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleg Khakimov ◽  
Yaser Gholami ◽  
Bertrand Tertrais ◽  
Guillaume Cambois ◽  
Mohamed Mahgoub

Abstract Seismic surveys are generally designed to image deep reservoirs, which leaves the near-surface woefully under-sampled. This is particularly a challenge offshore Abu Dhabi, where a complex near-surface – with karstic collapses and meandering channels – contaminates the seismic image with strong footprints. To mitigate these effects, we use near-field hydrophone data, primarily designed to QC the airgun source, for near-surface imaging. Near-field hydrophones (NFH) are positioned about a meter above each airgun and are designed to record the source near-field pressure. They immediately capture dysfunctional or out-of-spec guns, which alerts the recording crew. Yet, in a shallow water environment, they unintentionally record seismic reflections from the near-surface, which we will use for seismic imaging. Streamer vessels usually use two source arrays, 50 meters apart, which shoot in a flip-flop mode. The active NFH refer to the recordings directly above the shooting guns, while the passive NFH refer to the recordings from the array that is not shooting. Because the passive NFH are less contaminated by the source near-field, they are typically the preferred choice for near-surface imaging. Waters are too shallow in offshore Abu Dhabi to use streamer vessels. Instead, seismic surveys involve ocean-bottom cables (OBC) or nodes (OBN) and smaller airgun arrays. The shooting vessels can be single-source or dual-source. While a single source vessel has only active NFH, a dual source vessel has both active and passive NFH. However, even if a dual-source vessel is used, the 50 m distance between the shooting source array and the passive NFH is too large to capture the water-bottom reflection for water-depths shallower than 25 m. For these reasons, we propose to combine both measurements, using active NFH for the very shallow section and passive NFH for the deeper section. We have applied this technique to a recent node survey acquired offshore Abu Dhabi. By combining the active and passive NFH, a very high-resolution shallow image was obtained, which allows the interpretation of geological layers just below the water bottom. Comparisons with high resolution 2D site survey images show good agreement. Given the NFH do not require any additional acquisition and are delivered as a byproduct of standard seismic surveys, we have demonstrated that proper use of NFH can provide high quality images for pre-site survey interpretation, which reduces the need for additional – and expensive – geotechnical surveys. This is the first published use of combined active and passive NFH in Abu Dhabi shallow waters for the purpose of imaging. The resolution of the shallow formation images allows detailed interpretation not achievable using conventional seismic data. In the long term, this technique may reduce the need for additional site survey acquisitions.


1982 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. C. Craig ◽  
W. B. Griffiths ◽  
L. Haldorson ◽  
H. McElderry

Fish use of Beaufort Sea coastal waters was examined during summer and winter periods 1977–80. Arctic cod (Boreogadus saida) were abundant but their occurrence was highly variable. They accounted for 8–78% of all fish caught in Simpson Lagoon during two summers, and 0.4–100% of catches at various coastal sites in winter. Arctic cod increased in abundance in the lagoon during late summer and some association was noted between their numbers and higher salinities but not temperature or turbidity. Some cod remained in shallow waters in early winter but deeper areas were used through the winter, and the highest catch rate was recorded 175 km offshore. Principal foods of the cod in nearshore waters were mysids (Mysis litoralis, M. relicta), amphipods (Onisimus glacialis), and copepods. The cod caught were generally small (60–170 mm) and young (ages 1–3). Most males matured at ages 2–3 and females at age 3. These size, age, and maturity characteristics indicate a life history strategy (r-selection) unlike that typified by many other arctic fish populations, particularly the freshwater and anadromous species which tend to be slow growing, late maturing and long-lived (K-selection).Key words: Arctic cod, Boreogadus saida; Beaufort Sea, distribution, life history strategy


ARCTIC ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
W. John Richardson ◽  
Rolph A. Davis ◽  
C. Robert Evans ◽  
Donald K. Ljungblad ◽  
Pamela Norton

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. e0253929
Author(s):  
Kathleen M. Stafford ◽  
John J. Citta ◽  
Stephen R. Okkonen ◽  
Jinlun Zhang

The Distributed Biological Observatory (DBO) was established to detect environmental changes in the Pacific Arctic by regular monitoring of biophysical responses in each of 8 DBO regions. Here we examine the occurrence of bowhead and beluga whale vocalizations in the western Beaufort Sea acquired by acoustic instruments deployed from September 2008-July 2014 and September 2016-October 2018 to examine inter-annual variability of these Arctic endemic species in DBO Region 6. Acoustic data were collected on an oceanographic mooring deployed in the Beaufort shelfbreak jet at ~71.4°N, 152.0°W. Spectrograms of acoustic data files were visually examined for the presence or absence of known signals of bowhead and beluga whales. Weekly averages of whale occurrence were compared with outputs of zooplankton, temperature and sea ice from the BIOMAS model to determine if any of these variables influenced whale occurrence. In addition, the dates of acoustic whale passage in the spring and fall were compared to annual sea ice melt-out and freeze-up dates to examine changes in phenology. Neither bowhead nor beluga whale migration times changed significantly in spring, but bowhead whales migrated significantly later in fall from 2008–2018. There were no clear relationships between bowhead whales and the environmental variables, suggesting that the DBO 6 region is a migratory corridor, but not a feeding hotspot, for this species. Surprisingly, beluga whale acoustic presence was related to zooplankton biomass near the mooring, but this is unlikely to be a direct relationship: there are likely interactions of environmental drivers that result in higher occurrence of both modeled zooplankton and belugas in the DBO 6 region. The environmental triggers that drive the migratory phenology of the two Arctic endemic cetacean species likely extend from Bering Sea transport of heat, nutrients and plankton through the Chukchi and into the Beaufort Sea.


2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristiano Leite Parente ◽  
Juliana Doyle Lontra ◽  
Maria Elisabeth de Araújo

There are seven species of sea turtles around the world. Among these, five visit the northeast coast of Brazil to reproduce and feed. These sea turtles are impacted by human activity and need conservation measures. The seismic survey is one of these activities due to its high intensity and low frequency sound emissions in the marine environment. Records of sea turtles during seismic surveys in shallow waters of the northeast of Brazil between 2002 and 2003 are presented in this study with some discussion about the effectiveness of the monitoring procedures. Three species of sea turtle were recorded within the seismic survey areas. The Chelonia mydas species was the most commonly sighted turtle. There was only one record of Caretta caretta and Lepidochelys olivacea. The presence of sea turtles in Sergipe state was linked to the reproductive period while this pattern was not observed in Ceará state. The absence of information about distribution and abundance of sea turtles in the surveyed areas previous to and after the seismic surveys, as well as numerous incomplete data make it hard to identify the effect of seismic surveys on those factors and also sea turtle behaviors.


2004 ◽  
Vol 116 (4) ◽  
pp. 2588-2588
Author(s):  
Susanna B. Blackwell ◽  
Robert G. Norman ◽  
Charles R. Greene ◽  
Miles W. McLennan ◽  
Trent L. McDonald ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document