Low Energy Seismic Surveys (LESS) Produce High Decibels
Is LESS Actually HESS?
by Carol Georgi and Karl Kempton,
Former Energy Planner for San Luis Obispo County,
Lead Author of Proposed Central Coast National Marine Sanctuary, 1990"
Introduction
Low Energy Seismic Surveys (LESS) are blasting at high decibel levels nearshore and offshore California's coast, including within National Marine Sanctuaries and State Marine Protected Areas. These surveys do not warn the public or initiate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process because California State Lands Commission (CSLC) continues to use their inadequate and outdated 1984 CEQA for LESS.
The permit for LESS is a one-year "General Permit to Conduct Offshore Geophysical Surveys." (PRC 8392) These permits are granted to companies for surveys CSLC defines as low energy because the survey equipment uses no more than two kilojoules of energy. The definition for these permits is based on source energy levels, and CSLC does not consider output sound pressure levels, measured in decibels (dB), to define LESS.
These one-year general permits appear to be "blanket permits" (automatically approved) because each individual geophysical survey is not reviewed, mitigated, or monitored. Only the one-year General Permit is listed on the CSLC voting agenda without information on the various individual surveys, which are automatically permitted within the one-year "blanket permit." In fact, local Harbor Masters receive the individual permits lacking equipment and decibel information less than two weeks before the survey vessel arrives forcing fishing boats out of the area.
High Energy Seismic Surveys (HESS) are defined by CSLC as using equipment that uses more than two kilojoules of energy, and therefore, needs a CEQA process. For example, PG&E was denied their proposed HESS that was planned to produce 230- 250 dB offshore San Luis Obispo County, CA by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) in their November 2012 Meeting. (See: California Coastal Commission Reports 2012)
CSLC is in the process of updating their 1984 General Geophysical Permits. (See: Low-Energy_Geophysical Program/Low-Energy Geophysical Program) However, the continuance of permitting LESS during their update puts the public and marine life at risk of Underwater Acoustic Trauma Impacts caused by high decibel shock pressure waves.
This article will 1) define Underwater Acoustic Trauma Impacts, 2) introduce survey equipment that may meet the CSLC definition of LESS, but produces high dB 3) suggest a correlation between PG&E's LESS and increased sea otter "strandings" (deaths), and 4) give an example of a 221 dB survey in a National Marine Sanctuary, and a 219 dB survey in a State Marine Protected Area.
Underwater Acoustic Trauma Impacts
Underwater Acoustic Trauma Impacts are the biological damage caused by high decibel shock pressure waves when they move through marine organisms and human bodies. The underwater pressure waves are created by repeated large sounds or blasts from survey equipment. Biological damages that may result are hearing damage, internal tissue damage, internal bleeding, lung hemorrhaging, significant concussion effects, gas embolism, and death. (Ocean Mammal)
By testing, the Navy established the standard Diver Studies for divers of not receiving more than 145 dB. Therefore, any seismic survey that produces more than 145 received dB should be considered "high energy," and needs to warn the public to stay out of the water. Underwater high decibel shock pressure waves are dangerous to both people and marine life in national marine sanctuaries, marine protected areas, as well as in all ocean areas.
Survey Equipment Produces High Decibels
Technological advances have increased the decibel output of survey equipment used for LESS. Some equipment is within the range of PG&E's denied high-energy survey that was going to produce 230-250 dB. For example, during July through August 2012, the U.S. Geological Survey used a Reson 7111 Multibeam Echosounder that produced 233 dB in outer Estero Bay.
More examples of equipment that produce high decibels are onboard the survey vessel Pacific Star for several surveys in Alaska in 2013.They include: side scan echosounder L3 Klein 5000 that produces 249 dB, and several Reson Seabat Multibeams that produce 223-233 dB.
More information and charts for the equipment and surveys are here.
Therefore, the CSLC definition of "No more than 2 kilojoules of energy input may be used on any acoustic pulse generation equipment during a survey" is inaccurate to predict low energy and needs to be revised to include decibels produced by the equipment.
Correlation between 2011 LESS and Increased Sea Otter "Strandings" (when dead sea otters wash ashore)
Photo by Maryann Avila
The year 2011 has the highest recorded sea otter strandings of 335. The highest months of strandings in 2011 are January, February, August, September, and October of 2011 USGS / Project.
The strandings correlate with PG&E's LESS dates, especially the highest months of the strandings in 2011. All four High Resolution 3D Geophysical Surveys used equipment producing 216 – 219 dB.
2010-Oct-Dec31– M/V Michael Uhl – Point Buchon within MPA – 216 – 219 dB
2011-Jan-March 30-M/V Michael Uhl- Offshore San Luis Obispo County – 216 – 219 dB
2011- Dec -Jan 30, 2012- M/V Bluefin- San Luis Bay – 216 dB
2011-Aug-Dec – M/V Michael Uhl-San Simeon Pt. to Cayucos Pt. – 216 dB
Many factors are being considered to determine the causes of the increased sea otter deaths. We believe Underwater Acoustic Trauma Impacts occurred to sea otters in the areas near PG&E's LESS in 2011. We suggest these Underwater Acoustic Trauma Impacts would have at least weakened the mammals' immune systems and basic bodily functions, if not killing them. This would account for increased numbers of sea otters killed by predators.
We have sent this possible correlation to Dr. M. Tim Tinker, Research Wildlife Biologist and Professor, University of California Santa Cruz, in hopes that he will add seismic surveys to the list of possibilities contributing to the causes of higher sea otter strandings. (See: Sea Otter Research / Tinker
More information can be found in our January article.
Seismic Survey in a National Marine Sanctuary
Many were surprised when seismic blasting occurred during the February 9 & 10, 2013 weekend without warning the public in the popular Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary. Fugro Pelagos, contracted by the Channel Islands National Park Service (NPS), performed seismic surveys within kelp monitoring stations offshore Santa Cruz and Anacapa Islands that produced repeated pulses of 221 dB close to shore. Anyone in the water, especially divers, could have received Acoustic Trauma Impacts from 221 decibels (dB).
When the Chumash Nation leaders learned of this seismic survey within their sacred homeland islands, they contacted Russell Galipeau, Superintendent of the Channel Islands NPS and asked him to delay the seismic survey so their concerns could be heard in the CEQA process. Fred Collins of the Northern Chumash Council, wrote this letter.
Matt Ward, Chair, of the Chumash Maritime Association, Freddie Romero of the Santa Ynez reservation, and Fred Collins of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council were disappointed with the email reply from Channel Islands NPS Superintendent, Russell Galipeau, who stated the project will continue as scheduled, thereby denying the Chumash Nation their CEQA rights.
Email to Chumash from NPS Superintendent, Russell Galipeau
"Over the past several years, the State of California has been mapping the seafloor to better understand the topography and substrate. We have focused their efforts to those areas where we have long-term ecological monitoring in place. I have attached two documents that will shed light on this operation. The first is a map of the areas that have been mapped by the State of California and those areas where mapping is yet to be completed. The second attachment is the Marine Life Contingency Plan. This document lays out the purpose and need, on-board monitoring and mitigation measures and reporting procedures. Measures are in place to avoid adverse impacts to marine life. The project will continue as scheduled."
End of email
The Chumash Nation February 8th reply email listed many reasons why the attached Marine Life Contingency Plan (See: MWCP-Pelagos-NPS pdf ) was incomplete and missing accurate information.
Email to Russell Gilbeau from Chumash
Hello Russell,
After reviewing the documents cc to NCTC in an email to Freddie Romero, we have found that these test must not go forward, you must stop them they have the potential to create a lethality zone in the water.
The documents state that the R2Sonar decibel levels that are listed in one of the documents herein could be as high as 220 decibels, the Navy will not allow its divers in the water over 140 db.
According to this information the R2Sonar is a multibeam Sonar capable of 220 decibels with a 160 degree radius capability.
My first check on R2Sonar on Google tells us that the technology is advanced innovative state of the art technology. Well, it looks like the innovative part is the ability to shoot the high level sonar and also use the wide angle degree features to cover more territory without moving the ship.
My mind keeps imagining a nurse telling a child that they may feel a short sting from the shot and then it will be over before you know it....only in this case the quick shot is not over before the ocean critters know it...on the contrary there may be life altering after effects like loss of hearing or a slow and painful death, loss of plankton, loss of fish, harassment of our Dolphins, Whales, and many other affects not know.
The Feb. 9, 2013 benthic survey is not ok. that whole study is designed to tell researchers whether or not, oh say for instance lobsters, have the ability to move out of their habitat if they are forced to....or whether or not they are strictly restricted from moving from one zone to another. The last time I checked on that study, the researchers originally thought that benthic creatures cannot move quickly enough to re-locate even if their survival of the species depended on it. However after a couple of years of research they are finding that their fist prediction is incorrect. Indeed some benthic creatures have pulled off a re-location when compromised at home.
NPS need to stop this test immediately, because of the potential for take and harassment of marine life.
NPS need to follow your own guideline for research on the Channel Island, the Chumash community needs to be notified early in all research project, so that we have the opportunity to voice our opinions. This is not the first time NCTC has ask to be notified of any and all research project on the NPS Channel Islands.
End of Email
We concur with the Chumash leaders. There were no measures in place to avoid Acoustic Trauma Impacts to humans recreating in the water, no before and after assessment of the marine life, and poor mitigations for the Acoustic Trauma Impacts to marine life.
The equipment and dB are stated on pages 2&3 of the MWCP: R2 Sonics 2024 multibeam system---221 decibels. Current scientific literature states the area from the sound source to 160 dB is considered the "Zone of Lethality" because of the high risk of destruction of the marine web-of-life (plankton, eggs, larvae, etc.), especially for creatures that cannot move out of the area. However, the MWCP states mitigations to "protect" marine life are to call the "Zone of Lethality" the "safety zone."
In their November 13, 2012 addendum to the staff report on PG&E’s proposal for HESS, the CCC termed the area of water column near the blasting as the "Zone of Lethality" because of the expected level of mortality of the marine web-of-life.
Excerpt from MWCP
"The distance from the sound source to the 160 dB level (20.6 m [67.6 ft]) for the equipment used on the survey will be the "safety zone" used by onboard PSO. At the time of equipment start-up, marine wildlife within that zone will be noted and if any of those animals show behavioral changes during equipment start-up, either the equipment will be shut-down until the animal(s) move out of the safety zone or after 15 minutes of the animal(s) remaining in the safety zone, the equipment will be "ramped up" to full power. With the incorporation of that and the other mitigation measures discussed below, the proposed offshore survey activities are unlikely to have a high potential to injure and/or disturb marine wildlife."
Such a statement is made without reviewing the current scientific literature on the adverse biological impacts to marine organisms caused by acoustic seismic testing.
Seismic Surveys in California’s State Marine Protected Areas
Looking at the Composite Survey Map below, one can see the blue outline of the Point Buchon Marine Protected Areas that are within the pink survey zone of the Oct-Dec 2010 and Jan-Mar 2011 LESS. These two surveys used equipment that produced 216 and 219 dB, creating what many term, a "Zone of Lethality" for the web of life in those survey areas. Further, looking at the composite blasting map below, one can see the blue outlines of all the MPA's along the San Luis Obispo County coast that received blasting from the so-called "LESS."
Conclusion
CSLC must suspend the geophysical seismic surveys because they are not "low energy," and CSLC has not completed their review and update of the geophysical permit program. To permit the applications of physical science technologies without the responsibility to acknowledge and prevent biological impacts to human life is irresponsible. The Precautionary Principle needs to be applied for careful assessment, mitigation, and warning to the public.
We would like to thank both Brian Stacy, local nearshore fisherman, and Mandy Davis of COAST Stop Ocean Blasting for sharing their research documents with us as we work together to ask for an investigation of PG&E's LESS, mitigation to the local fishermen, and cessation of the general geophysical permits until their review is completed.
Is LESS actually HESS? We map and list our research to date.
Map Composite Survey Map 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012
PG&E's LESS 2010 through 2012
1) 2010-Oct-Dec31– M/V Michael Uhl – Point Buchon
High Resolution 3D Geophysical Survey---within MPA
216 dB - Boomer System
219 dB - Sparker System
2) 2011-Jan-March 30-M/V Michael Uhl- Offshore San Luis Obispo County
High Resolution 3D Geophysical Survey---within MPA
216 dB - Boomer System
219 dB - Sparker System
3) 2011-Aug-Dec – M/V Michael Uhl-San Simeon Pt. to Cayucos Pt.
High Resolution 3D Geophysical Survey --- affect MPAs & MBNMS?
210 dB - Edgetech 3200 Subbottom profiling system --- 210 dB - Furuno FCV-271 Echosounder
216 dB - Triple Plate AP 3000 boomer
4) 2011- Dec -Jan 30, 2012- M/V Bluefin- San Luis Bay
High Resolution 3D Marine Geophysical Survey
210 - Odom Echotrac Sounder
216 - Triple Plate AP3000 boomer
5) 2011-Dec-Jan 15 – M/V Michael Uhl – Point Buchon within MPA
ROV survey
2012-July-Aug R/V Parke Snavely (USGS)—Outer Estero Bay
233 dB - Reson 7111 multibeam echosounder
6) 2012-Aug-Nov 20= M/V Pacific Star-Estero Bay to Point Sal
High Resolution 3D Survey
217 dB - Furuno FCV- 1200L Echosounder
216 dB - Triple Plate AP3000 boomer
7) 2012-Nov 5 –Nov16-Chinook-Estero Bay
Seafloor Mapping Geophysical Survey
200 dB - EdgeTech 272 Side Scan Sonar
221 dB - R2 Sonics 2024 multibearm
Composite Blast Map 2008-,2009, 2010, 2011, 2012
Join Us On Facebook
|
