Johnson S R, Richardson W J, Yazvenko S B, Blokhin S A, Gailey G, Jenkerson M R, Meier S K, Melton H R, Newcomer M W, Perlov A S, Rutenko S A, Würsig B, Martin C R, Egging D E
LGL Limited, Environmental Research Associates, 9768 Second Street, Sidney, BC, V8L 3Y8, Canada.
Environ Monit Assess. 2007 Nov;134(1-3):1-19. doi: 10.1007/s10661-007-9813-0. Epub 2007 Jul 27.
The introduction of anthropogenic sounds into the marine environment can impact some marine mammals. Impacts can be greatly reduced if appropriate mitigation measures and monitoring are implemented. This paper concerns such measures undertaken by Exxon Neftegas Limited, as operator of the Sakhalin-1 Consortium, during the Odoptu 3-D seismic survey conducted during 17 August-9 September 2001. The key environmental issue was protection of the critically endangered western gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), which feeds in summer and fall primarily in the Piltun feeding area off northeast Sakhalin Island. Existing mitigation and monitoring practices for seismic surveys in other jurisdictions were evaluated to identify best practices for reducing impacts on feeding activity by western gray whales. Two buffer zones were established to protect whales from physical injury or undue disturbance during feeding. A 1 km buffer protected all whales from exposure to levels of sound energy potentially capable of producing physical injury. A 4-5 km buffer was established to avoid displacing western gray whales from feeding areas. Trained Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) on the seismic ship Nordic Explorer had the authority to shut down the air guns if whales were sighted within these buffers. Additional mitigation measures were also incorporated: Temporal mitigation was provided by rescheduling the program from June-August to August-September to avoid interference with spring arrival of migrating gray whales. The survey area was reduced by 19% to avoid certain waters <20 m deep where feeding whales concentrated and where seismic acquisition was a lower priority. The number of air guns and total volume of the air guns were reduced by about half (from 28 to 14 air guns and from 3,390 in(3) to 1,640 in(3)) relative to initial plans. "Ramp-up" (="soft-start") procedures were implemented. Monitoring activities were conducted as needed to implement some mitigation measures, and to assess residual impacts. Aerial and vessel-based surveys determined the distribution of whales before, during and after the seismic survey. Daily aerial reconnaissance helped verify whale-free areas and select the sequence of seismic lines to be surveyed. A scout vessel with MMOs aboard was positioned 4 km shoreward of the active seismic vessel to provide better visual coverage of the 4-5 km buffer and to help define the inshore edge of the 4-5 km buffer. A second scout vessel remained near the seismic vessel. Shore-based observers determined whale numbers, distribution, and behavior during and after the seismic survey. Acoustic monitoring documented received sound levels near and in the main whale feeding area. Statistical analyses of aerial survey data indicated that about 5-10 gray whales moved away from waters near (inshore of) the seismic survey during seismic operations. They shifted into the core gray whale feeding area farther south, and the proportion of gray whales observed feeding did not change over the study period. Five shutdowns of the air guns were invoked for gray whales seen within or near the buffer. A previously unknown gray whale feeding area (the Offshore feeding area) was discovered south and offshore from the nearshore Piltun feeding area. The Offshore area has subsequently been shown to be used by feeding gray whales during several years when no anthropogenic activity occurred near the Piltun feeding area.Shore-based counts indicated that whales continued to feed inshore of the Odoptu block throughout the seismic survey, with no significant correlation between gray whale abundance and seismic activity. Average values of most behavioral parameters were similar to those without seismic surveys. Univariate analysis showed no correlation between seismic sound levels and any behavioral parameter. Multiple regression analyses indicated that, after allowance for environmental covariates, 5 of 11 behavioral parameters were statistically correlated with estimated seismic survey-related variables; 6 of 11 behavioral parameters were not statistically correlated with seismic survey-related variables. Behavioral parameters that were correlated with seismic variables were transient and within the range of variation attributable to environmental effects. Acoustic monitoring determined that the 4-5 km buffer zone, in conjunction with reduction of the air gun array to 14 guns and 1,640 in(3), was effective in limiting sound exposure. Within the Piltun feeding area, these mitigation measures were designed to insure that western gray whales were not exposed to received levels exceeding the 163 dB re 1 microPa (rms) threshold. This was among the most complex and intensive mitigation programs ever conducted for any marine mammal. It provided valuable new information about underwater sounds and gray whale responses during a nearshore seismic program that will be useful in planning future work. Overall, the efforts in 2001 were successful in reducing impacts to levels tolerable by western gray whales. Research in 2002-2005 suggested no biologically significant or population-level impacts of the 2001 seismic survey.
将人为声音引入海洋环境可能会对一些海洋哺乳动物产生影响。如果实施适当的缓解措施并进行监测,影响可大幅降低。本文涉及埃克森石油天然气有限公司作为萨哈林1号财团的运营方,在2001年8月17日至9月9日进行的奥多普图三维地震勘探期间采取的此类措施。关键环境问题是保护极度濒危的西部灰鲸(Eschrichtius robustus),它们主要在夏季和秋季于萨哈林岛东北部的皮尔通觅食区觅食。对其他辖区地震勘探现有的缓解和监测做法进行了评估,以确定减少对西部灰鲸觅食活动影响的最佳做法。设立了两个缓冲区,以保护鲸鱼在觅食时免受身体伤害或过度干扰。1公里的缓冲区保护所有鲸鱼免受可能造成身体伤害的声能水平的影响。设立了4 - 5公里的缓冲区,以避免西部灰鲸被赶出觅食区。地震勘探船“北欧探险家号”上经过培训的海洋哺乳动物观察员有权在这些缓冲区内发现鲸鱼时关闭气枪。还纳入了其他缓解措施:通过将计划从6月至8月重新安排到8月至9月来提供时间上的缓解,以避免干扰迁徙灰鲸的春季到来。调查区域减少了19%,以避开某些深度小于20米的水域,那里是觅食鲸鱼集中的地方,且地震采集的优先级较低。相对于最初计划,气枪数量和气枪总体积减少了约一半(从28个气枪减少到14个气枪,从3390立方英寸减少到1640立方英寸)。实施了“逐步启动”(即“软启动”)程序。根据需要开展监测活动以实施一些缓解措施,并评估残余影响。通过空中和船只调查确定了地震勘探前、期间和之后鲸鱼的分布情况。每日空中侦察有助于核实无鲸鱼区域,并选择要勘测的地震测线顺序。一艘搭载海洋哺乳动物观察员的侦察船停泊在活跃地震勘探船向岸4公里处,以便更好地目视监测4 - 5公里的缓冲区,并帮助确定4 - 5公里缓冲区的近岸边缘。另一艘侦察船留在地震勘探船附近。岸上观察员确定了地震勘探期间及之后鲸鱼的数量、分布和行为。声学监测记录了主要鲸鱼觅食区及其附近的接收声级。对空中调查数据的统计分析表明,在地震作业期间,约5 - 10头灰鲸从地震勘探附近(近岸)水域离开。它们转移到更南部的核心灰鲸觅食区,在研究期间观察到的觅食灰鲸比例没有变化。因在缓冲区内或附近看到灰鲸,气枪被关闭了5次。在近岸皮尔通觅食区以南和近海发现了一个此前未知的灰鲸觅食区(近海觅食区)。随后表明,在皮尔通觅食区附近没有人为活动的几年里,近海区域被觅食的灰鲸使用。岸上计数表明,在整个地震勘探期间,鲸鱼继续在奥多普图区块近岸觅食,灰鲸数量与地震活动之间没有显著相关性。大多数行为参数的平均值与没有地震勘探时相似。单变量分析表明,地震声级与任何行为参数之间没有相关性。多元回归分析表明,在考虑环境协变量后,11个行为参数中有5个与估计的与地震勘探相关的变量存在统计学相关性;11个行为参数中有6个与与地震勘探相关的变量没有统计学相关性。与地震变量相关的行为参数是短暂的,且在可归因于环境影响的变化范围内。声学监测确定,4 - 5公里的缓冲区,结合将气枪阵列减少到14个气枪和1640立方英寸,有效地限制了声暴露。在皮尔通觅食区内,这些缓解措施旨在确保西部灰鲸不会暴露在超过163分贝(相对于1微帕(均方根))阈值的接收声级下。这是为任何海洋哺乳动物开展的最复杂、最密集的缓解计划之一。它提供了关于近岸地震计划期间水下声音和灰鲸反应的宝贵新信息,这将有助于规划未来的工作。总体而言,2001年的努力成功地将影响降低到了西部灰鲸可承受的水平。2002 - 2005年的研究表明,2001年的地震勘探没有产生生物学上显著的或种群水平的影响。