banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Shipping noise in whale habitat: Characteristics, sources, budget, and impact on belugas in Saguenay–St. Lawrence Marine Park hub
Rent this article for
    + View Affiliations - Hide Affiliations
    1 GIPSA-Lab, Dept. Image-Signal, 11 rue des Mathématiques, 38402 Saint-Martin d’Hères, France
    2 Maurice Lamontagne Institute, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 850 route de la Mer, Mont-Joli, Québec G5H-3Z4, Canada
    3 STIC AP, ENSTA-Bretagne, 2 rue François Verny, 29200, Brest, France
    4 Saguenay–St. Lawrence Marine Park, Parks Canada, 182 rue de l’Église, P.O. Box 220, Tadoussac, Québec GOT 2A0, Canada
    a) Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Also at: Marine Science Institute, University of Québec at Rimouski, 310 Allée des Ursulines, Rimouski, Québec G5L-3A1, Canada. Electronic mail: yvan_simard@uqar.qc.ca
    J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 132, 76 (2012); http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4728190


Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Map of Saguenay Fjord mouth showing (a) the bathymetry of the study area, (b) the locations of beluga groups from daytime reticule binocular observations from Pointe Noire during the study period, (c) theSaguenay ferries main paths as described by Chion et al. (2010) from AIS data analysis, and (d) the distribution of monitored whale-watching boats in summer 2009 from Parks Canada vessel track observations.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(Color online) Percentiles of the cdf of the estimated SSL of the whale-watching fleet (continuous lines) and ship SSL references (from Mitson, 1995; NRC, 2003) (dotted lines). 1: supertanker, 2: large tanker, 3: tanker, 4: merchant ship, 5: fishing vessel, 6: ICES recommendation for fisheries research vessels.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

(Color online) (a) Median SSL per vessel category and (b) their corresponding 2-s.d. envelope.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

(Color online) ΔSLwb difference as function of speed increment (Δv) between ∼10–15 kn to 26 kn per vessel category, separately for the (a) 0.01–1 kHz bandwidth, (b) the 1–20 kHz bandwidth from hydrophones 3 and 4, and (c) comparison of the 0.01–20 kHz bandwidth from hydrophone no. 4 with Erbe (2002).

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

(Color online) Percentiles of the cdf of measured noise PSD over the [10 Hz–10 kHz] band during the recording period; the 10th percentile corresponds to the estimated natural ambient levels. The slopes of the median, 99th and 10th percentiles are extended to the [10–100 kHz] band from a linear fit to [5–10 kHz] frequencies. Overimposed are Wenz’s reference curves for heavy traffic < 3 kHz and for 40 kn wind >200 Hz (arrow pointed bold dotted lines), and beluga audible levels (shaded area) from the 1-s.d. lower bound of the composite audiogram envelope of Finneran et al. (2005), extended to 100 Hz with a slope of −30 dB per decade from Erbe (2002).

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

(Color online) Probability that daytime noise differs from nighttime noise by the number of dB indicated by the ordinate axis, for frequencies from 10 to 10 000 Hz. Median difference with 1-dB resolution (dashed line); mean difference (continuous bold line).

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

(Color online) Mean broadband SPL over the diel cycle for the low- (dotted line) and high-frequency (triangle line) bands separately and pooled (thin upper line) during the recording period and the daytime traffic statistics from Chion et al. (2010) (middle line).

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

(Color online) High-resolution SPLwb [1–20 kHz] for 7 June 2010 (dots) with its smoothed low-pass version (Butterworth filter, order 4, cutoff frequency = 1/3600 Hz) (middle bold line), the ±12 dB estimated magnitude of the fast oscillations around the low-pass series due to ferry transits (thin lines) and the monthly average (lower bold line).

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

(Color online) SPLwb [1–20 kHz] diel series by source: natural floor level (dotted line), SPLwb with the addition ferry hourly mean level (triangle line), and total SPLwb including the whale-watching fleet (upper line).

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

(Color online) Saguenay Fjord mouth noise excess and RRF relative to natural conditions (a) cdf quartiles of noise level increments relative to natural ambient noise, ΔNL, as a function of acoustic frequency; these ΔNL are exceeded 75% of the time for the first quartile, 50% for the median, and 25% of the time for the third quartile, and (b) the corresponding range reduction factor, i.e., the percentage of time the range is below the given ratios relative to natural conditions.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

(Color online) (a) Cdf of measured noise PSD as in Fig. 5 but for twelfth-octave bands, (b) level-frequency areas of masked signals corresponding to the 50th or 99th percentile of the measured noise cdf, based on the Fletcher’s equal-power tonal masking model and beluga CR from Johnson et al. (1989). Signals with twelfth-octave levels smaller than the curves would be masked assuming no behavioral or auditory compensation. Beluga audible area (shaded background) as in Fig. 5.


Generic image for table

Saguenay ferry shipping and whale-watching fleet diel schedule. Measured broadband SPL[1–20 kHz] (in dB re 1 μPa) and estimated natural ambient and ferry noise levels averaged over 1 h.

Generic image for table

Characteristics of the whale-watching fleet vessel types used for source level assessment at two sailing speeds.

Generic image for table

SLwb median and s.d. per vessel class.


Article metrics loading...


Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Shipping noise in whale habitat: Characteristics, sources, budget, and impact on belugas in Saguenay–St. Lawrence Marine Park hub