Analysis and Ranking of the Acoustic Disturbance Potential of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

220 -I- FIG. 5.3 SER RATING COMPARISON, CHUKCHI SEA Summer, 50% Ice Cover Q\ 9 sNC1 SER(ref) SER(area) = UI Z 0 Icebreaker de Kulluk &a o" 8 *+- Species "* 49 , s
Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and Technologies Corporation Referring to Fig. 5.3, the black bars represent the SNC rating for the dominant bandwidth of a specific source. The height of a bar is proportional to the acoustic energy density level produced by a source type in the Chukchi Sea Planning Area. The dark gray ba'rs represent the Reference SER rating which is proportional to degree of matching between the hearing response (known or assumed) of a species and the acoustic output bandwidth of a source. The Reference SER r ting is based on the assumption that the species density in the area is l/km 3 . It is necessary to include the actual species density in the SER rating since, if the density is zero, there is no probability of acoustic interaction. Therefore, an area SER rating is also determined which includes the species density value (observed or estimated) for the area. This is shown by the light gray bars in Fig. 5.3. If the species density is very low, the area SER values will be significantly lower than the reference values showing that, while a species sensitivity for a given source may be high, the probability for an acoustic interaction in a given area may be low because of a low probability of encounter. In order to obtain SER values for gray whales it was necessary to derive an estimated hearing sensitivity characteristic since no measured data are available for any baleen whale (Sec. 2.3). This was done using a scaling procedure based on knowledge of their vocalization frequency range and an assumption that their maximum hearing sensitivity is comparable to that of the smaller whales and pinnipeds for which data are available. Since the vocalization range of gray ihales extends to below 50 Hz, this implies that their hearing sensitivity is good in this range also. As a result they may be potentially more influenced by low frequency industrial noise than are species which have extended high frequency hearing sensitivity. The estimated hearing sensitivity characteristic and its derivation are discussed in Appendix D. This estimated gray whale hearing response characteristic was used to enable SER values to be obtained for this important species. The hearing sensitivity characteristic for the walrus, which is also .unknown, was assumed to be similar to that of the California sea lion. Hearing characteristics of the white whale have been measured and are given in Section 2.3. The SER values from Table 5.4B which are used for the graphs in Fig. 5.3 show the ratings for source - species pairs which have a high potential for acoustic interaction in the Chukchi area during summer conditions. As indicated by the reference SER values, the gray whale is potentially the species most influenced by all of the sources. The SER rating for the seismic array - gray whale encounter is the highest in the table, followed closely by the icebreaker and KULLUK rating for the same species. The SER value for the gray whale - tug/barge encounter is lower than the gray whale ratings with the other sources. While the maximum output 1/3 octave band for this type of source nearly coincides with the estimated maximum hearing sensitivity range of the gray whale, the maximum output level is more than 15 dB below that of the other sources. The small craft shown in the SNC model results would also have low SER values. Thus the potential impact of noise from commercial transport and small craft activities on gray whales in the Chukchi Sea area during summer conditions is predicted to be less than produced by the oil industry activities used in the modeling
Page 1 and 2:
BBN Svstems and Technologies Cor~or
Page 3 and 4:
Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and Tec
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
H BOWERS BAW I ALEUTIAN ARC 3 STGEC
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
A BEAUFORT SEA B U WCH SEA CHOPEaAS
Page 33 and 34:
Report No. 6945 L 1 A. Baird's Beak
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
A BEAUFCRT SEA B CHW(CH SEA CHOPEBA
Page 40 and 41:
A BEAUFCRT SEA BWKQIYA DrnTONBAsw E
Page 42 and 43:
A BEAUFORT SEA BCHlKCHSEA CHaeEansr
Page 45 and 46:
on the ice. The single calves remai
Page 47 and 48:
A 0EAUFaAT SEA BCHJKCH 9 A CHaPE BA
Page 49 and 50:
BCmrcCHSEA CHOPEBnsw 0 NORTON 0Am E
Page 51 and 52:
.. A BEWORT SEA B WKCH SEA CH)PEBAS
Page 53 and 54:
Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and ~ec
Page 55:
Page 58 and 59:
l fjG 1 ll.1 16:' 1 GI) 158 15.1 1
Page 60 and 61:
Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and Te~
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Table 2.8. Characteristics of Under
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Report No. 6945 BBN Systems arid Te
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Report No'. 6945 BBN Systems and Te
Page 84 and 85:
Report No. 6945 , BBN Systems and T
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Report No, 6945 BBN Systems and Tec
Page 104 and 105:
Report No. 6945 BBN systems and Tec
Page 106 and 107:
FIG. 3.2 NOISE SPECTRA IN SHALLOW W
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Adapted From K.H. Jacob (1986) Cali
Page 114 and 115:
FIG. 3.8 ESTIMATED OVERALL SOUND LE
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
FIG. 3. Q UNDERWATER NOISE SPECTRA
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
FIG- 3.1 1 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF
Page 126 and 127:
FIG- 3-12 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF C
Page 128 and 129:
-- Alr Gun Array + Vlbrosels -* Ice
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
FIG. 3.14 REPRESENTATIVE SHIPS AND
Page 134 and 135:
BBN Systems and Technologies Corpor
Page 136 and 137:
~ -- -- FIG. 3.1 7 REPRESENTATIVE R
Page 138 and 139: FIG. 3-18 REPRESENTATIVE CULTURAL S
Page 140 and 141: Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and Tec
Page 142 and 143: FIG. 4.1 CORRECTION TO 300 M REFERE
Page 152 and 153: A. 6. ~la~onca 011shwe. mm I C. MSI
Page 154 and 155: Report No. 6945 BRN Systems and Tec
Page 160 and 161: FIG. 4.1 1 AIR TO SHALLOW WATER SOU
Page 164: Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and Tec
Page 187: Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and Tec
Page 221 and 222: ~epbrt No. 6945 BBN Systems and Tec
Page 231 and 232: Report No. ,6945 BBN Systems and Te
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Report No. 6945 BBN Systems and ~ec
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Report No. 6945 - BBN Systems and T
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Report No. 6945 FIG. C. 1 A BBN Sys
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
FIG. D. 1 HUMAN VOCALIZATION AND AU
Page 288 and 289:
FIG. D. 3 ESTIMATED HEARING CHARACT
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304:
show all

Analysis and Ranking of the Acoustic Disturbance Potential of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?