Oceans have become substantially noisier since the Industrial Revolution. Shipping, resource exploration, and infrastructure development have increased the anthrophony (sounds generated by human activities), whereas the biophony (sounds of biological origin) has been reduced by hunting, fishing, and habitat degradation. Climate change is affecting geophony (abiotic, natural sounds). Existing evidence shows that anthrophony affects marine animals at multiple levels, including their behavior, physiology, and, in extreme cases, survival. This should prompt management actions to deploy existing solutions to reduce noise levels in the ocean, thereby allowing marine animals to reestablish their use of ocean sound as a central ecological trait in a healthy ocean.

Underwater noise, whether of natural or anthropogenic origin, has the ability to interfere with the way in which marine mammals receive acoustic signals (i.e., for communication, social interaction, foraging, navigation, etc.). This phenomenon, termed auditory masking, has been well studied in humans and terrestrial vertebrates (in particular birds), but less so in marine mammals. Anthropogenic underwater noise seems to be increasing in parts of the world's oceans and concerns about associated bioacoustic effects, including masking, are growing. In this article, we review our understanding of masking in marine mammals, summarise data on marine mammal hearing as they relate to masking (including audiograms, critical ratios, critical bandwidths, and auditory integration times), discuss masking release processes of receivers (including comodulation masking release and spatial release from masking) and anti-masking strategies of signalers (e.g. Lombard effect), and set a research framework for improved assessment of potential masking in marine mammals.

Underwater noise of whale-watching boats was recorded in the popular killer whale-watching region of southern British Columbia and northwestern Washington State. A software sound propagation and impact assessment model was applied to estimate zones around whale-watching boats where boat noise was audible to killer whales, where it interfered with their communication, where it caused behavioral avoidance, and where it possibly caused hearing loss. Boat source levels ranged from 145 to 169 dB re 1 pPa (3 1 m, increasing with speed. The noise of fast boats was modeled to be audible to killer whales over I6 km, to mask killer whale calls over 14 km, to elicit a behavioral response over 200 m, and to cause a temporary threshold shift (TTS) in hearing of 5 dB after 30-50 min within 450 m. For boats cruising at slow speeds, the predicted ranges were 1 km for audibility and masking, 50 m for behavioral responses, and 20 m for TTS. Superposed noise levels of a number of boars circulating around or following the whales were close to the critical level assumed to cause a permanent hearing loss over prolonged exposure. These data should be useful in developing whale-watching regulations. This study also gave lower estimates of killer whale call source levels of 105-124 dB re 1 FPa.

No abstract

The number of marine watercraft is on the rise-from private boats in coastal areas to commercial ships crossing oceans. A concomitant increase in underwater noise has been reported in several regions around the globe. Given the important role sound plays in the life functions of marine mammals, research on the potential effects of vessel noise has grown-in particular since the year 2000. We provide an overview of this literature, showing that studies have been patchy in terms of their coverage of species, habitats, vessel types, and types of impact investigated. The documented effects include behavioral and acoustic responses, auditory masking, and stress. We identify knowledge gaps: There appears a bias to more easily accessible species (i.e., bottlenose dolphins and humpback whales), whereas there is a paucity of literature addressing vessel noise impacts on river dolphins, even though some of these species experience chronic noise from boats. Similarly, little is known about the potential effects of ship noise on pelagic and deep-diving marine mammals, even though ship noise is focused in a downward direction, reaching great depth at little acoustic loss and potentially coupling into sound propagation channels in which sound may transmit over long ranges. We explain the fundamental concepts involved in the generation and propagation of vessel noise and point out common problems with both physics and biology: Recordings of ship noise might be affected by unidentified artifacts, and noise exposure can be both under-and over-estimated by tens of decibel if the local sound propagation conditions are not considered. The lack of anthropogenic (e.g., different vessel types), environmental (e.g., different sea states or presence/absence of prey), and biological (e.g., different demographics) controls is a common problem, as is a lack of understanding what constitutes the 'normal' range of behaviors. Last but not least, the biological significance of observed responses is mostly unknown. Moving forward, standards on study design, data analysis, and reporting are badly needed so that results are comparable (across space and time) and so that data can be synthesized to address the grand unknowns: the role of context and the consequences of chronic exposures.