Report of the 

2006 NOAA National 

Passive Acoustics Workshop 

Developing a Strategic Program Plan 

for NOAA’s Passive Acoustics 

Ocean Observing System (PAOOS) 

Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 11–13 April 2006

March 2007 

Sofie Van Parijs 

Brandon Southall 

Conveners and Workshop Co-chairs 

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Report of the 2006 NOAA 

National Passive Acoustics Workshop 

Developing a Strategic Program Plan 

for NOAA’s Passive Acoustics 

Ocean Observing System (PAOOS) 

Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 11–13 April 2006 

Sofie Van Parijs1 and Brandon Southall2, Conveners and Workshop Co-chairs 

1 National Marine Fisheries Service, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543 

2 National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Science and Technology, 1315 East West Hwy, SSMC III 

 #12539, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-6233

March 2007 

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-81 

(formerly NMFS-F/SPO 76)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., USN (ret.), Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

William T. Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries 
This document will initially be issued only online. It will be available at: 

http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/ 

It will be available in PDF format so that a paper copy can be easily printed out. It may subsequently 

be issued on paper as well. If it is issued on paper, then copies would be available from: 

Protected Species Branch 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA 

166 Water St. 

Woods Hole, MA 02543 

This document may be cited as: 

Van Parijs, S; Southall, B, Convenors and Workshop Co-chairs. 2007. Report of the 2006 NOAA 

National Passive Acoustics Workshop: Developing a Strategic Program Plan for NOAA’s Passive 

Acoustics Ocean Observing System (PAOOS), Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 11–13 April 2006. U.S. Dep. 

Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-81, 64 p.

THIS DOCUMENT WAS ORIGINALLY ASSIGNED THE NUMBER NMFS-F/SPO 76, IN ERROR.
iii

Contents 

 Page 

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

Discussion (Tuesday afternoon, 11 April and Wednesday morning, 12 April): 

Interagency planning workshop on Passive Acoustics Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 

Discussion (Thursday, 13 April): Working group A - Requirements for passive 

acoustic recording devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Discussion (Thursday, 13 April): Working group B – Integrating numerous platforms 

effectively . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

 

Conclusions: Draft strategic program plan for NOAA’s Passive Acoustics Ocean 

Observing System (PAOOS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

Appendix A: Workshop Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Appendix B: Presentations (Tuesday morning, 11 April): Session 1. Interagency 

planning workshop on Passive Acoustics Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 

Appendix C: Presentations (Wednesday afternoon, 12 April): Session 2. Monitoring 

Biological Noise Using Passive Acoustics – Integrating Platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

Appendix D: Terms of Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

Appendix E: Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 

Appendix F: Literature Cited. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Appendix G: Acronym Referral List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 

Table 1: Passive Acoustic Sensors Currently Available for Data Collection . . . . . . 64 

PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

1

NOAA 2006 National Passive Acoustics Workshop: 

Developing a Strategic Program Plan for NOAA’s Passive Acoustics 

Ocean Observing System (PAOOS) 

Executive Summary 

Sound is the primary means by which many marine organisms convey and sense 

information over any appreciable spatial scale. Acoustic sensing is an optimal means for 

detecting and characterizing physical and biological features of ocean areas. Heightened 

public attention on the effects of anthropogenic sound in the marine environment 

provides impetus for the expansion of passive acoustic observing capabilities in general 

and for NOAA’s leadership efforts in particular, in passive acoustics deployment, data 

acquisition, and management. 

 

Passive acoustics is an exceedingly powerful means of achieving many NOAA 

missions. Expansion of U.S. marine acoustic sensing capabilities is supported by a large 

variety of scientific, legislative, and policy directives, as well as number of international 

resolutions. Various National Research Council (NRC) reports have highlighted the wide 

variety of information that can be obtained through passive acoustic deployments, and 

have recommended that increased investments be made to realize these opportunities 

(e.g., NRC, 2003). Passive acoustic deployments provide enhanced and unique scientific 

data on (a) living marine resources; (b) biotic and abiotic characteristics of marine 

ecosystems; and (c) the effects of anthropogenic sound on protected species and their 

ecosystems. For example, the U.K.'s Inter-agency Committee on Marine Science and 

Technology recently called for a systematic and comprehensive mapping of marine 

ambient noise. 

In 2006, NOAA formally recognized passive acoustics as an observing 

requirement of the agency in the Consolidated Observing Requirements List. Passive 

acoustics is now also identified as an official observing system within NOAA’s 

Ecosystem Observation Program (EOP) within the Ecosystem Goal Team (EGT). Recent 

collaborative interagency planning efforts (including those with academics and 

stakeholders) have focused on the uses of passive acoustics and integrating this tool into 

ocean observing systems within NOAA. These efforts culminated in the National 

Passive Acoustics Workshop held in April 2006 in Woods Hole, MA. The purpose of 

this workshop was to develop a draft strategic program plan for NOAA’s Passive 

Acoustics Oceans Observing System (PAOOS) and to identify critical data requirements. 

Oral presentations were given in two sessions, by NOAA scientists and by invited experts 

from outside the agency to highlight the current status of research and technological 

capabilities in the field of passive acoustics. Each of these sessions was followed by 

group discussions. 

 

The workshop recommended that NOAA’s PAOOS provide data on biological, 

geophysical, oceanographic, meteorological, and anthropogenic ocean events. While 

some of these functions will be served by different elements of the PAOOS, it is critical 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

2

to note the inherently multipurpose capacity of acoustic sensors. Passive acoustic 

deployments will substantively augment existing observing platforms, maximize sensing 

capability, and generate information targeted toward meeting the following five strategic 

objectives: 

1) Develop and deploy sensing capabilities to augment conventional means of 

detecting and assessing living marine resources 

Passive acoustics deployed from autonomous or towed platforms provide an 

excellent means of detecting vocalizing marine animals that is much less 

compromised by sea state, visibility, or the presence of a survey vessel for 

detection than are existing approaches. The augmentation of conventional survey 

methods will enhance NOAA’s mandated requirements with respect to the 

conservation and sustainable management of living marine resources. Passive 

acoustic sensors also hold significant promise in various fisheries science 

applications. 

2) Quantify spatial and temporal variance in marine ambient noise 

Baseline acoustic conditions are poorly known in various marine ecosystems, and 

knowledge is lacking on the respective contributions of natural and anthropogenic 

sound sources (ambient noise budgets). Informed assessments of how humaninduced sound in marine environments may change baseline conditions must be 

based on a characterization of nominal conditions. Such knowledge is also 

critical for assessing and mitigating potential effects of acute acoustic exposures. 

3) Provide detection capability of specific anthropogenic acoustic events 

 

Passive acoustic deployments can provide an autonomous means of sensing 

specific anthropogenic events, such as the passage of vessels through critical 

habitat areas or illegal fishing activities in remote protected areas. This 

enhancement of NOAA’s capability to remotely sense the marine environment 

will both provide an independent means of investigating potential effects of 

individual sound sources on protected marine species and serve as a powerful tool 

in managing large, distant areas. 

4) Provide ecosystem information to NOAA and other geospatial sensing databases 

 As PAOOS data will be highly integrated and assimilated with those of partners 

in other agencies, academia, nongovernmental organizations, and industry, 

information can be managed, archived, and rapidly disseminated to these (and 

other) communities to the greatest extent possible. PAOOS will contribute to and 

be integrated with the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) 

Network and Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS). 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

3

5) Contribute to public education and appreciation of marine ecosystems 

A key component of PAOOS will be to promote education of the general public. 

Web-based information from PAOOS will be provided via various existing 

educational elements of NOAA line offices and will also involve collaborations 

between National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)/Office of Science and 

Technology (ST), NMFS/ Office of Protected Resources (PR), Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Research (OAR)/ Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory 

(PMEL), and NOAA’s Office of Education. NOAA efforts will also be directly 

integrated with significant ongoing Agency educational efforts. 

 

The development of a NOAA PAOOS will be highly integrated across multiple 

line offices and also with academic, military, and industry partners as appropriate. The 

program will be coordinated nationally but integrated and executed regionally across the 

various marine ecosystems under NOAA’s stewardship remit. 

 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

4

Discussion 

Session 1. Internal Intra -Agency Planning Workshop on Passive Acoustics Research 

INTRODUCTION 

Southall (NMFS/ST) chaired this session. Southall and Van Parijs (NMFS/Northeast 

Fisheries Science Center) provided a brief statement of background and context for this 

workshop. Swartz provided background on NOAA’s Planning, Programming, Budgeting 

and Execution System (PPBES) requirements and the mission drivers that were to form 

the structure of the discussion in this session. 

PAOOS will be coordinated by the Ecosystem Observation Program (EOP), which is one 

of nine programs within NOAA’s Ecosystem Goal Team (EGT; 

<http://ecosystems.noaa.gov/index.htm>). The EGT aims to protect, restore, and manage 

the use of coastal and ocean resources through an ecosystem approach to management 

(EAM). NOAA line offices included within the EGT that support PAOOS include: 

NMFS, OAR, National Ocean Service (NOS) and National Environmental Satellite, Data, 

and Information Service (NESDIS). Descriptions of their prospective roles are given in 

the strategic plan presented in the conclusions section of this report. Programs within 

NOAA’s EGT include: Coastal and Marine Resources Program (CMRP), Protected 

Species Program (PSP), Fisheries Management Program (FMP), Aquaculture Program, as 

well as two matrix programs EOP and the Ecosystem Research Program (ERP) which 

constitute the scientific activities that support ecosystem management within NOAA. 

In early 2006, NOAA’s passive acoustic program activities supported within the EOP’s 

Protected Species Monitoring and Assessment Capability were defined as a stand-alone 

observing “system.” The passive acoustics observing system is one of twelve observing 

systems that constitute the EGT’s contribution to the Integrated Ocean Observing System 

(IOOS): 

1. Fisheries Monitoring, Assessment, and Forecast (Fish Assess) 

2. Protected Species Monitoring and Assessment (PSMA)

3. Passive Acoustics Ocean Observing System (PAOOS) 

4. Ecosystem Surveys 

5. Fisheries Commercial and Recreational Fish Statistics 

6. Economic and Sociocultural 

7. National Observer Program (NOP) 

8. National Status and Trends 

9. Coral Reef Ecosystem Integrated Observing System (CRIOS) 

10. National Estuarine Research Reserve System–wide Monitoring Program (SWMP) 

11. National Marine Sanctuaries System-wide Monitoring Program (SWIM) 

12. Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) 

As a result, NOAA required the development of a coherent passive acoustic program plan 

to allow for the initiation and implementation of a passive acoustic ocean observing 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

5

system (PAOOS) within the EOP and EGT. The purpose of the Woods Hole workshop 

was largely to derive such a plan for NOAA. The Science Centers and Regional Offices 

will be responsible for implementing the defined mandates and reporting their successes 

or failures. While PAOOS will stand on its own, there will be a need to integrate regional 

level programs with this program. 

Passive acoustics funding to date 

Currently a small budget exists for NOAA’s Ocean Acoustics Program (NMFS Office of 

Science and Technology) dealing with general marine acoustics and the effects of sound 

on marine life. This funding, which falls within the PSP, is primarily directed towards 

research on assessing the direct effects of sound on marine organisms. In FY06 the 

Administration’s budget request for NOAA’s Ocean Acoustics Program was $1.1M; 

$200,000 was appropriated. This request has been repeated in the President’s Budget 

Request for FY07 at $1.1 and FY08 at $1.8M. 

Situating the PAOOS program 

PAOOS will form a separate entity to the current passive acoustics component funded 

within NOAA’s Ocean Acoustics Program. PAOOS aims to provide baseline capabilities 

with which specialized questions related to NOAA’s mandated requirements can be 

addressed. Passive acoustic techniques offer one of the most practical and economical 

means of undertaking large-scale, long-term monitoring, especially in challenging 

conditions (e.g., bad weather, at night, and remote or inaccessible areas). PAOOS will 

form the backbone for informing three key information areas related to NOAA strategic 

goals (Figure 1). The system will be designed to be malleable in order to respond to and 

characterize ecosystem changes arising from various forces. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

6

Figure 1. Schematic pyramid representing PAOOS capabilities underlying strategic goals 

and NOAA’s commitment to maintaining resilient ecosystems. 

Defining a program 

Below is a detailed summary of the topics identified by the working group relating to this 

program. The topics were discussed in the following order: 

1. Mission Drivers – why passive acoustics 

2. Core Priorities - information needs, required capabilities, and applicability 

3. Capital Needs – sensors, hardware, and software 

4. Support Needs – platforms 

5. Participating Line Offices, Collaborators, and Education 

6. Current Capabilities, and Capacities 

7. 100% Requirement – where we need to go 

8. Planning for the future 

1. MISSION DRIVERS – Why passive acoustics? 

Beyond the recognition by NOAA’s colleagues from across the agency that passive 

acoustics has numerous scientific and management benefits to the agency, there are 

overwhelming scientific directive, legislative authority, policy directives, and 

international statements and resolutions for expanding current U.S. marine acoustic 

Maintaining 

Resilient 

Ecosystems

Monitoring and 

characterizing 

ambient ocean 

noise sources 

Understanding 

the effects of 

ocean noise on 

living marine 

resources 

Utilizing 

passive 

acoustics to 

augment the 

detection and 

assessment of 

PAOOS Strategic Goals 

PAOOS Measurement and Monitoring Capabilities 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

7

sensing capabilities. Passive acoustics is an exceedingly powerful means of achieving 

various NOAA mission objectives by remote sensing of various aspects of the marine 

environment, including biotic and abiotic sources. The strategic implementation of 

passive acoustic sensing capabilities within various observing platforms and spatial scales 

has been clearly identified. The need for NOAA to design and deploy PAOOS is 

supported by drivers from scientific, legislative, policy, and international sectors. The ad 

hoc NOAA working group assembled here listed as many of the drivers from each sector 

as could be identified in a short session and tasked members of the group to provide a 

more complete accounting (given on pp. 26-27). 

2. CORE PRIORITIES/GOALS – Information needs, required capabilities, and 

applicability 

Workshop participants derived four NOAA-specific science priorities and objectives for 

PAOOS:

1) The use of passive acoustic sensors in detecting and characterizing living marine 

resources in high priority areas. 

2) Long term monitoring and characterization of specific sound sources and sitespecific ambient noise. 

3) Increased capability to characterize specific anthropogenic sound sources and 

measure spatiotemporal variability in marine ambient noise. 

4) Passive acoustic applications in augmenting conventional meteorological sensors 

on open-water buoy deployments. 

Questions directed towards meeting these priorities and goals were identified as: 

Q1. How do data on the relative anthropogenic contribution to marine ambient noise 

inform our understanding of human impacts on marine ecosystems? 

Q2. How can passive acoustics advance our understanding and reduce the risk of 

potential adverse effects of anthropogenic sound sources on protected marine species? 

Q3. What are the broad-scale, long-term distributions of marine organisms, especially 

marine mammals and fish, and how can this information be used to improve NOAA’s 

response to mandated management obligations? 

Q4. How are biological sounds linked to physical and environmental variables? 

Q5. How can PAOOS be used to promote education and environmental literacy and to 

address misconceptions? 

In order to answer the goals that have been set and the specific questions regarding 

PAOOS design and implementation, the following actions and capabilities are needed: 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

8

• Identify priority areas suited for asking specific comparative questions on wide 

ranging issues (e.g., deployments in areas of low vs. high anthropogenic sound, 

low vs. high species density, and variable bathymetry or ecology). 

• Develop technologies to sample appropriately in these chosen areas, along with 

the capability to analyze, utilize, and archive data. 

• Capture variability in sounds over long time scales and large spatial scales 

• Concentrate on developing sampling designs that will provide the power to 

address the pertinent questions along with the statistical expertise to analyze these 

data. 

• Address questions at the individual as well as the population level. 

• Further explore the potential for using remote acoustic monitoring to aid species 

level identification and occurrence. 

• Calculate noise budgets over multiple spatial, temporal, and seasonal scales to 

monitor long term trends in dB and frequency changes. 

• Decide at which geographic and temporal scales to monitor. For the former, the 

options are widely dispersed acoustic sensors versus a few on each coast. For the 

latter, recording over short periods for a long time or continuously for a shorter 

period. 

• How long should you monitor? Months, years or decades? 

• Decide whether to focus primarily on coastal or offshore applications. 

• Identify: 

1) geographic hotspots for high ambient and low noise areas; 

2) areas of biologically important marine mammal habitats and determine 

species’ specificity; 

3) geographic variation in anthropogenic contributions to marine ambient 

noise levels; 

4) Key areas useful for baseline acoustic data collection which will help to 

monitor environmental or anthropogenic changes (e.g., coral reefs and the 

polar areas). 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

9

3. PARTICIPATING LINE OFFICES, COLLABORATORS AND EDUCATION 

Participating NOAA Line Offices

NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) will be responsible for the 

coordination and execution of the data acquisition and analyses aspects of NOAA’s 

PAOOS. NMFS components of the system will include: fisheries and protected 

resources surveys, ecosystem surveys, and cooperative research including 

deployments conducted by NMFS science center personnel. NMFS will further 

ensure the scientific quality assurance of PAOOS products and collaborative 

linkages to other federal and state agencies, stakeholders, and the public.

National Ocean Service (NOS) will be responsible for supporting the deployment of 

acoustic sensors as a critical element of the PAOOS within sanctuary boundaries. 

This support is expected to be in-kind support in the form of deployment access 

and, to the extent funds are available direct support of deployments by NOS, 

NMFS, or outside researchers. 

Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) will contribute expertise and 

capabilities in the areas of data acquisition and processing. OAR’s Pacific Marine 

Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) has accomplished some of the most extensive 

passive acoustic data collection and interpretation within NOAA to date. PMEL 

and other entities within OAR are expected to play a key technical role in NOAA’s 

PAOOS. 

National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) will be 

responsible for data management, archiving, and information services provided by 

the NOAA infrastructure to support ecosystem goal objectives. Additionally 

NESDIS will provide technical support and leadership in integration of information 

services located within ecosystem observation programs to achieve NOAA-wide 

objectives for IOOS, Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) and 

related end-to-end data system integration efforts. 

Collaboration and Integration 

NOAA’s PAOOS will be integrated with other ocean observing systems which are or will 

be deployed for other observing purposes but which could be used as PAOOS platforms, 

including: 

• Oceans.US (IOOS) 

• Ocean Research Interactive Observatory Networks (ORION) 

• NOAA’s National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) 

• U.S. Geological Survey 

• Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Units Network 

• U.S. Coast Guard 

• Monterey Accelerated Research System (MARS) 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

10

Education and Outreach

Numerous educational and outreach efforts will be accomplished using data obtained by 

the PAOOS. Metadata as well as raw acoustic recordings (as practical) will be 

transferred to the public in a variety of fora and media using the below and other potential 

mechanisms: 

• NOAA’s Office of Education 

• National Oceans Service – National Marine Sanctuaries 

• NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration 

• NMFS Line Office and Program Websites 

• National Marine Educators Association 

• Association of Zoos and Aquariums 

• Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums 

• URI – Discovery of Sound in the Sea 

• Cornell University - MacCaulay Library of Sound 

5. CURRENT CAPABILITIES & CAPACITIES 

See appendices A and B for a list of participants and summaries of presentations on 

current research capabilities both within and outside the agency. 

6. PAOOS Requirements – Personnel, Hardware, Software, and Data Management 

The NOAA internal workshop identified the 100% requirement solution to meet the 

specific goals and answer the pointed questions above. These are discussed below in 

terms of people, hardware, and computing capacity. 

Personnel

• 1-2 Full time equivalent (FTE) employees with skilled acoustic expertise for 

each NMFS Science Center and selected National Marine Sanctuaries and 

OAR research facilities. 

• 1 FTE national team leader for passive acoustics – NMFS/ST Headquarters. 

• 1 FTE acoustic propagation specialist to work with regional staff to facilitate 

analyses and address effects issues for discrete exposures – NMFS/ST 

Headquarters. 

• 1 FTE statistician and acoustic software specialist – NMFS/ST Headquarters. 

• 1 FTE outreach specialist. 

• Resources to support temporary staff for acoustic deployments. 

• Sufficient resources to support a program to promote and train students 

proficient in passive acoustic research (e.g., via Hollings scholarship and other 

student programs). 

• Sufficient staffing to facilitate data management. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

11

Infrastructure and Hardware

• A range of acoustic sensors is needed with various frequency parameters, 

recording duration, and depth deployment capabilities. Each center and region 

has its own set of requirements depending on each situation and the questions 

asked. Current equipment options are listed in Table 1. 

• Passive acoustic monitoring should be integrated into every NOAA marine 

mammal survey cruise, requiring each NMFS Science Center to have two 

towed arrays, sufficient expertise and resources to maintain and deploy them, 

relevant hardware and software to run programs and relevant accessories. 

• Each NMFS Science Center and selected National Marine Sanctuaries and 

OAR research facilities should have at least 5-10 fixed passive acoustic 

sensors of variable deployment type (depending on requirements). The 

intention is to not be limited by the existence of only one NOAA sensor; 

instead science centers would receive internally competitive funds that would 

enable them to innovate, calibrate, and maintain specific acoustic devices of 

their choice. 

• Sufficient access to ship time for surveys and deployment of acoustic 

recording devices will be required. Sufficient hardware and software 

sufficient are needed to handle massive data streams, for automated detection 

capabilities for multiple species, and for real time detection capabilities. 

• Sonobuoys: each center wants to have the capability to deploy sonobuoys with 

sufficient antennae and receivers, filters/amplifiers, and data storage. 

• Promoting future work with gliders in partnerships with ONR, WHOI, Scripps 

etc. in order to further develop the use of acoustics using this platform. 

Data Analysis and Management

• Each region will require sufficient resources to establish data archives and 

transfer to national database (NESDIS). 

• 1-3 FTE at NESDIS to handle data management and coordination with each 

regional PAOOS data manager as well as sufficient computing and archival 

capabilities. 

• Promote further research and development of current software packages with 

the aim to increase the ability to deal with: (1) vastly larger data streams; (2) 

improved automated detection capabilities for multiple species; (3) more user 

friendly software; and (4) real time detection capabilities. 

7. PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE 

A PAOOS working group will be established to set priorities and guide this program. 

There will be a yearly rotating chair starting with Brandon Southall and semi-regular 

meetings that will rotate regionally. Center directors and regional administrators will be 

approached for advice in identifying the appropriate people to participate in this working 

group. An informal document will be sent to all 12 other observing programs in EOP, 

NESDIS, NOS headquarters and Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory 

(AOML) to let them know of the creation of this working group along with a request for 

the nomination of relevant participants. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

12

Discussion 

Working group A: Requirements for passive acoustic recording devices

Facilitator: Steve Swartz; Rapporteur: Stephanie Watwood 

INTRODUCTION 

Swartz welcomed the group and gave brief background regarding NOAA and its 

organizational structure. Swartz then discussed the current aims of the workshop, the 

development of a clear program plan for passive acoustics within NOAA. This meeting 

was designed to focus NOAA’s responsibilities (in session 1) and then look beyond 

NOAA to the expertise from outside in order to gather ideas on how the Passive 

Acoustics program should be designed and what the goals should be. Southall stressed 

the need to grow within NOAA but remain interconnected with people outside the 

agency. The list of participants for this session can be found on in Appendix A. 

This subgroup considered a wide range of topics, centered on the following general areas: 

• Passive acoustic data management and archiving (including various sensor 

systems) 

• Research and development in autonomous versus towed passive acoustic 

arrays (including scaling considerations) 

• Deployment and data analysis/management decisions. 

1. PASSIVE ACOUSTIC DATA MANAGEMENT ISSUES 

Data collection and archiving issues were discussed in terms of maximizing 

opportunities. Input was invited on this topic, and two different approaches were 

defined: 

1. Onboard or “selective” processing which saves only the small amounts of data that 

are of interest. 

2. Collection and storage of all raw data with no or little discrimination. 

Problems and advantages with these approaches included: 

• Selective processing is a useful method when a project has very specific 

questions; however, it is easy to miss important data when using this 

method. Storage is not a problem, and the personnel time needed for 

processing is minimal. 

• Collecting all data is useful for a broader overarching ecosystem based 

approach, but it can produce so much data that it overwhelms our abilities 

to process and analyze the results. Although storage and personnel time 

are constraints, this method allows for data mining opportunities in the 

future. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

13

Discussion and possible solutions included: 

Swartz raised the possibility of using NESDIS (National Environmental Satellite, Data 

and Information Service) for data storage. The NESDIS model uses a web-portal system 

that is a metadata archive. It does not store anything. Data are held in individual 

laboratories, and NESDIS tells you where to go to get data. However this raises the 

problem of data holders and institutions coming and going. What happens when data 

holding no longer present in NESDIS? NESDIS only functions if individual institutions 

are funded to archive their own data. The Navy shares data with NASA Stennis Space 

Center and NOAA. The archives exist, and there is an intergovernmental agency data 

sharing agreement. Distributed system cannot rely on individual academics to store data; 

scientists are not typically responsible for data archiving. A defined data format for 

distributed data is needed. Distributed sites must be stable and formatted in certain ways. 

As for fundamental underpinnings, individual archives must be ensured or fashioned in 

some way. If the government wants to maintain a distributed network, it is responsible 

for supporting individual data holders. 

Specifications for data analysis and archive

Many readily available commercial programs exist for analysis of passive acoustic data 

(e.g., Ishmael <http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/vents/acoustics/whales/ishmael/>, Raven 

<http://www.birds.cornell.edu/brp/Raven/Raven.html>). With nominal acoustic 

bandwidths, it is generally not possible to hold data on a raw level. There is a need for 

metadata about sensors and a sampling scheme for data to be usable. Scientists must 

remain a clear part of this decision process. One precedent for the use of metadata is 

NOAA’s National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC). However, NODC may be 

overwhelmed by the volume of acoustic data whereas NESDIS may be more able to deal 

with large amounts of incoming data. However the latter requires moving beyond private 

ownership of the data or setting clear quality standards on incoming data. Spending time 

and energy in standardizing collection and data processing standards could provide a high 

payoff and low cost effort for NOAA at this point in time. Government committees exist 

for setting standards for meta and raw data, and PAOOS participants and contributors 

should ensure their data comply with these standards. 

Possible avenues for obtaining guidance: 

Census of Marine Life is also working on setting standards for metadata. 

The seismic community also uses many sensors to obtain acoustic data, but they have 

archives, standards, etc. already in place. This could be a good model, but we would 

need to adopt it to a higher volume of data. 

National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) – ask them what their standards are for 

hardware, data, and metadata. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

14

Federal Geospatial Data Committee (FGDC) also might give input to the question. 

Future requirements and next steps:

1. Need for further developing automatic processing tools. 

2. Design and set up a coherent structure for data management. 

3. Define clear specifications and standards for data collection. 

4. Decide upon clearly defined financial and logistical support for the data 

management system. 

5. Promote continued development of analytical software programs. 

2. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT – Current status and needs 

2.1 Acoustic versus visual surveys 

Currently, acoustic and visual data are perceived in different ways but there is a need to 

think about them similarly. Correction coefficients are used in visual surveys. Passive 

acoustics should not be held to a higher standard than the benchmark (visual surveys). 

We need to be creative and develop correction coefficients for passive acoustics as well. 

We need distance sampling procedures for passive acoustics. However acoustic surveys 

should not be assumed to be a replacement for visual surveys, instead both should be 

utilized to complement each other. However, passive acoustic surveys have proven very 

reliable for some species (e.g., sperm whales). 

Start using a tool kit strategically; use particular tools when they are most probable to be 

successful. Passive acoustics are good for estimating density of animals around a fixed 

listening station, because stations are not randomly placed it is difficult to extrapolate that 

information to other listening stations. It is important to optimize the survey pattern based 

on historical data. If you know more about the distribution of animals, you can improve 

performance. 

Automated processors for dealing with real time data during surveys

Several programs exist that work well (e.g., Rainbow Click 

<http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=35875>). There are three main 

problems with acoustic data of these type; (1) high false alarms, (2) no false alarms but a 

high threshold; and (3) statistics – missed detection and false alarm rates are the same. 

Therefore, these systems still require substantial calibration of the data (i.e., visual 

observations and trails). The group identified matched field processing as an area of 

potential advancement regarding real-time data but noted some practical difficulties in 

application, particularly in shallow water. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

15

3. COMPARATIVE QUESTIONS DRIVING DEPLOYMENT DECISIONS 

For investigating broad scale questions (e.g., trends in marine ambient noise), long term 

iterative passive acoustic monitoring was deemed to be the most appropriate sampling 

regime. 

For determining regional abundance, random sampling should occur with respect to the 

distribution of animals. The underlying assumption is that little is known about animals’ 

interaction with their environment. As more becomes known, more effort can be placed 

where the largest variance is coming from (sample heavily in high density areas and little 

in low density areas). 

For developing a comparative approach to assessing behavioral responses to variable 

marine ambient noise and/or specific sound sources, a flexible deployment scheme 

consisting of elements of both of the above approaches is required. The group felt that 

prioritizing deployments in areas with relatively high and low densities of certain 

anthropogenic sound sources and variable geographical features was the only way to 

determine whether and to what extent human-induced changes in marine ambient noise 

affected marine life and ecosystems 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

16

Discussion 

Working group B: Integrating numerous platforms effectively 

Facilitator: Sue Moore; Rapporteur: Robyn Angliss 

INTRODUCTION 

Sue Moore (NMFS/National Marine Mammal Laboratory (NMML)) chaired this section. 

Moore welcomed participants and provided a brief statement of background and context 

for this session. Effective PAOOS for marine mammals requires a multidisciplinary 

approach spanning the science spectrum from physical oceanography to animal behavior. 

The group was specifically charged to discuss a multidisciplinary approach with regard to 

three topic areas: 

• Requirements of integration with oceanographic parameters 

• Requirements for integration with anthropogenic conflict issues (noise, 

shipping, etc.) 

• Requirements for integrating detection, seasonal occurrence, abundance 

and behavioral platforms 

For each of these topic areas, specifics were discussed on: (1) data requirements and 

management, (2) scale of sampling, and (3) current efforts and opportunities. While it is 

recognized that successful PAOOS must be responsive to regional variability, there is 

much in the way of standard framework that can be applied to launch a successful longterm program. 

1. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTEGRATION WITH OCEANOGRAPHIC 

PARAMETERS 

Discussion on this topic focused on how to physically integrate passive acoustic 

equipment and data with current and future oceanographic sampling and data bases. Colocating passive acoustic recorders on existing NOAA/PMEL moorings has been done in 

the Bering Sea since 2003, and expanding this practice will help forge obvious 

partnerships with other NOAA line offices (e.g., NOAA’s NDBC and Deep-ocean 

Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis (DART). The major benefit of using existing 

moorings is that basic oceanographic data (e.g., temperature, salinity, florescence) are 

collected at the same temporal and spatial scales as whale vocalizations. 

1.1 Data requirements and management

Summary of main points: 

a. Collect acoustic and oceanographic information on the same spatial and temporal scale. 

b. Both existing and new buoys or moorings can be used to collect both acoustics and 

oceanographic data. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

17

c. Forge partnerships within NOAA, with other organizations, and with state or local 

marine-related agencies to gain access to the buoys. 

d. The National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) list of standard oceanographic 

measurements outlines the types of information that should be collected and reported 

routinely; databases managing acoustics information should be able to accommodate the 

standard measurements provided in the NODC list. 

The discussion was separated generally into a discussion of (1) data and equipment 

requirements and (2) data management needs. 

Five options for instrument placement were identified and discussed: 

i. On the same mooring as existing oceanographic instruments. There are significant 

benefits from this approach: the moorings are visited regularly for maintenance, so 

acoustics equipment can be deployed and collected on a regular schedule at no or a low 

cost. Two drawbacks are that the oceanographic moorings may not be placed in areas 

that are biologically interesting and sometimes the mooring itself is noisy (e.g., a chain 

that is part of the mooring may rattle). A good source of information on existing buoys is 

the NDBC; see website at www.ndbc.noaa.gov for locations of buoys. Most acoustics 

instruments have no moving parts. Interference with most standard oceanographic 

measurements is unlikely. 

ii. Place passive acoustics instruments on a separate mooring adjacent to an existing 

oceanographic mooring. This approach also benefits from the fact that the oceanographic 

moorings are visited regularly for maintenance, so acoustics equipment can be deployed 

and collected on a regular schedule at no or a low cost. This approach may be necessary 

if the oceanographic researchers are uncomfortable with co-locating the passive acoustics 

equipment, but it is still critical to be able to collect both passive acoustics in an area 

where oceanographic data are already collected. 

iii. Place moorings with passive acoustic recorders and oceanographic instruments in 

areas that are of biological interest. This approach allows the acousticians to direct the 

placement of the mooring and will likely be more expensive because ship time would be 

needed to place and maintain the instruments. 

iv. Towed arrays: Towed arrays are typically used in conjunction with visual surveys for 

cetaceans. They enable the confirmation of species identify with acoustic recordings. 

Often, there are standard stations for conductivity, temperature and depth (CTD) casts; 

however, the full suite of oceanographic instruments may not be available on a CTD, and 

some vessels contracted for visual surveys do not have the capability to do CTDs. 

v. Sea Gliders: These are now available from at least three organizations: Applied 

Physics Laboratory-University of Washington (APL-UW), Woods Hole Oceanographic 

Institution (WHOI), and Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI). The sea 

gliders are already programmed to collect temperature and salinity, and hydrophones can 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

18

be added. In addition, video recorders may be added to collect zooplankton data. UWAPL sea gliders have been developed to include passive acoustics. However, there is no 

on-board processing focused on producing interpretation of the acoustic signal. 

The NODC standards should be used to decide what to collect at a mooring. Collecting 

data such as temperature and salinity are mandatory; collecting Acoustic Doppler Current 

Profiles (ADCP), fluorescence and oxygen are a bonus. A uniform acoustics protocol 

should be encouraged so that data from various sources will be easy to use. 

1.2 Scale of sampling

To the extent possible, acoustic sampling should match the temporal and spatial scale of 

oceanographic sampling. Dedicated funding to support long term sampling (years to 

decades) is urgently needed to develop baselines of seasonal ambient noise to include 

natural and anthropogenic factors, and there should also be cetacean calling cycles 

concomitant with measures of ecosystem variability. Short term visual and acoustic 

sampling should be focused to address specific questions relevant to regional population 

assessments of behavioral changes. 

Specific issues discussed included: 

• Using subsurface moorings avoids problems with shaking or moving of the 

equipment, theft, and vandalism. 

• If passive acoustic information is to be collected on a duty cycle, ensure that the 

duty cycle for the acoustics is synchronized with the duty cycle for the 

oceanographic instruments so that all instruments collect data simultaneously. 

• Buoys using active acoustics are probably not good for mounting passive acoustic 

equipment. 

• Research institutions (e.g., University of Rhode Island, Monterey Bay Aquarium 

Research Institute) and states or coastal commissions may also have buoys where 

passive acoustic instruments could be added. However, some of these buoy 

systems may be transitory, as smaller organizations may depend on a less-stable 

funding for deployment and maintenance. 

• In some areas, a reusable, fully retrievable system must be used (e.g., in National 

Marine Sanctuaries). However, in some cases, emphasizing the use of the buoy as 

directly related to the mission of the organization has resulted in increased 

tolerance for a non retrievable anchor system. 

The Macaulay Library of Sound would like feedback on the kinds of searches the 

acoustics community wishes to conduct in this library/database of marine mammal 

vocalizations. For instance, it is currently possible to search for vocalizations based on 

water temperature and salinity. Many participants noted that it would also be helpful to 

search on chlorophyll levels, water depth, and other basic oceanographic properties in 

order to model where vocalizations are most likely to occur. Further, databases other 

than the Macaulay Library of Sound, such as the Ocean Biogeographic Information 

System- Spatial Ecological Analysis of Megavertebrate Populations (OBIS-SEAMAP) 

and Living Marine Resources Information System (LMRIS) should also include a set of 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

19

standard, routinely-measured oceanographic parameters so that the same types of 

searches can be performed with these databases. 

Data management needs 

Although vocalizations and associated oceanographic data require a great deal of storage 

space (many terabytes), participants generally seemed confident that more terabytes 

could be easily purchased and that technology will improve storage solutions over time. 

A greater concern was that the available search functions and data management options 

would grind to a halt when trying to efficiently access huge amounts of data. One option 

mentioned would be to hold the vocalizations and associated data in a central archive and 

have familiar “front ends” such as OBIS-SEAMAP and LMRIS tap into the archive. 

NESDIS might be the best entity to archive and manage the acoustics data. 

Whenever possible, the entire recording should be archived, even if only a portion of the 

recording is of primary interest. For instance, a student might be most interested in blue 

whale vocalizations and may ignore other interesting recorded sounds (fish, other marine 

mammals, vessels). The entire recording should be preserved so that it can be used for 

other purposes. Thorough analyses of all of the recordings might have to wait until there 

are better automated analyses which would allow quick overviews of the data. 

Managers should work closely with acoustic experts to address specific management 

questions of interest. That said, it seems reasonable that some information could be 

readily “packaged” for easy management use (e.g., baseline information on ambient 

sound in a sanctuary). If each Science Center hires two acousticians, management access 

to acoustics information may be far easier than at present. 

 

1.3 Current efforts and opportunities 

Many current efforts were discussed earlier, such as 

• Inclusion of passive acoustics instruments on existing moorings 

• Coastal Ocean Observing System (COOS) buoys or other instruments that collect 

basic oceanography data 

• Autonomous bottom mounted recorders: great for near-real-time information, but 

do not collect oceanographic data yet. 

• Port buoy systems 

• Basic, easy-to-deploy Autonomous Underwater Listening Stations (AULS) 

currently are deployed within each of the 14 National Marine Sanctuaries (NMS) 

under the supervision of the education coordinator. Of those 14 sites, seven 

(Gray's Reef NMS, Channel Islands NMS, Hawai’i an Island Humpback Whale 

NMS, Northwestern Hawai’i an Island Marine National Monument, Olympic 

Coast NMS, Florida Keys NMS and Cordell Bank NMS) have deployed and 

captured recordings from their habitats serving as a baseline for anthropogenic 

and natural sounds in the sanctuaries. Stellwagen Bank NMS has numerous 

recordings from Cornell automated recording units (ARUs) 

(http://stellwagen.noaa.gov/science/passive_acoustics.html). 

• Piggyback on moorings made via other venues (IOOS) 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

20

• The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has been involved in integrating passive 

acoustics with aircraft surveys; a publication on this will be out soon. 

• Seagliders. Participants noted that there is a trend towards using seagliders 

instead of fixed moorings. As this new equipment comes online, people should 

strive to collect acoustics along with all of the other oceanographic data. 

Seagliders with acoustic capabilities are being developed. 

Meeting participants should contact the staff in their region involved in IOOS and make it 

clear that passive acoustics are to be integrated into the IOOS system. The following are 

the IOOS points of contact: 

Person to talk to about IOOS – Josie Quintrell 207/798-0857 

National Coordinator for National Federation of Regional Associations for IOOS 

(Regional Association Framework) 

2. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTEGRATION WITH ANTHROPOGENIC 

CONFLICT ISSUES (noise, shipping, etc.) 

Moore provided a brief introduction to this section of the workshop and indicated that 

participants should consider how sound affects marine mammals at a broad scale. To do 

this, researchers need to collect baseline information on sound levels and ensure that 

these data are collected in a way that will inform studies on local impacts of 

anthropogenic noise. 

In this case calibration of the data is critical. If a researcher is simply studying calls, 

calibration may not be necessary, but if the researcher seeks to develop ambient noise 

budgets or to make other precise sound measurements, instrument calibration is 

necessary. Calibration is not a trivial matter, and evaluation of noise elements is 

impossible without it. 

Reliable calibration typically involves underwater measurements using a reference 

hydrophone and controlled sound source. Calibration of an instrument (or an instrument 

design) may cost $10,000 including the facility cost and the effort expended by acoustic 

instrumentation specialists. A less expensive approach is to calculate the instrument 

response based largely on component specifications, but this approach is prone to 

unanticipated problems and errors. The U.S. Navy operates several calibration facilities 

such as the Transducer Evaluation Center (TRANSDEC) in San Diego which can be 

rented by the hour for such work. Even with the best facilities and personnel, calibrations 

are typically difficult when accuracy below 1 dB is desired or when working at 

frequencies below 50 Hz. 

Other approaches to calibration include using wind speed measurements and known 

relationships of noise to wind speed in the ocean, or using ambient noise sources within 

an array of instruments to calibrate one to the other. The gold-standard, however, 

remains the reference hydrophones maintained by the U.S. Navy. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

21

Data requirements 

• When working in the noise arena well calibrated systems are essential. 

• Develop a standard set of tests to verify software such as Raven, which is to be 

used by non-acousticians. 

• Develop park/sanctuary sound budgets 

• Develop a way to localize the sources of sounds 

Ambient sound levels are quite variable, and everybody has a different interest. A 

methodology for summarizing and interpreting acoustic records should be specified. 

Discussion then focused on whether monitoring of sound should be specific to certain 

types of vessels, which is important in monitoring and managing human use of 

sanctuaries. The U.S. Navy and National Park Service (NPS) already have considerable 

information on sounds made by ships that can be used before collecting more data. 

In marine sanctuaries, measurement of sound is equivalent to the NPS mandate to 

monitor and value the “soundscape” in the parks; marine sanctuaries have a mandate to 

understand and manage the sound as it is an integral part of the marine habitat. 

Participants discussed a need to better understand what features of the new ships are 

making them noisier; one participant suspected that it is the size and speed of the vessels 

that has increased the sound levels, as the number of vessels on the water has not 

increased substantially in recent years. Although there are devices for making ships 

quieter, the shipping industry is interested in a cost/benefit analysis of making equipment 

quieter and more efficient before they effect changes. 

One major issue is that analysis of noise measurements is lagging far behind the actual 

collection of noise data despite the increasing availability of software to automatically 

analyze recordings. Validation of the software is still needed to ensure that what is being 

measured is what the software was intended to measure. A set of validated standards 

needs to be developed that can be used by anyone developing analytical software for 

acoustics measurements. A committee has been formed recently within the Acoustical 

Society of America dealing specifically with standardization of acoustic surveys of 

marine mammals and will likely address some of this topic. 

Management of anthropogenic sound data 

Participants discussed several options for management of the large extended databases 

being developed. There was a general feeling that it would be good to approach NESDIS 

in Boulder, CO as the principal place to archive and manage anthropogenic sound data. 

Participants noted that while data storage is cheap, data management and maintenance are 

expensive. 

2.2 Scale of sampling 

Clearly, depending on the source, it is important to study sound using different temporal 

and spatial scales. It will be important to collect information on ambient sound beyond 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

22

sanctuaries as marine mammals are not limited to these regions; in addition, there are 

many other special areas (e.g., critical habitat) where ambient sound measurements 

should be taken. 

Discussion also occurred on sampling sounds from seismic explorations, and those 

responsible for monitoring before, during and after seismic operations. It was noted that 

Marine Minerals Management Service (MMS) is the first line of interaction with oil and 

gas companies, so MMS usually has input into how operations are monitored etc; Angliss 

(NOAA/NMML) noted that MMS asks NOAA for suggestions for conservation 

recommendations and hence we need to know how to advise MMS. There have been 

some differences in how seismic operations associated with oil and gas have been 

authorized; while incidental harassment authorizations have been issued by NMFS for 

work in the Arctic Ocean, they have only been issued for work in the Gulf of Mexico 

over the past 3-4 years. One main issue is funding: funds from a lease sale are provided 

to the MMS and cannot be used to address NOAA priorities for measuring impacts of 

sound. 

NOAA is far behind in ramping up to understand anthropogenic noise. The oil and gas 

industry plans on 40-year timelines, yet NOAA doesn’t receive this long term 

information. Because of these completely different time scales, it is very difficult to 

address issues of industry noise. The recent interest in collecting information in the 

Chukchi Sea highlights the need to collect ambient information throughout U.S. waters. 

Industry is moving so quickly to work in the Chukchi that it is very possible that baseline 

data may not be collected before industrial presence occurs. 

2.3 Current efforts and opportunities

To date, little work has been done on the impacts of sound on fish. Very little is known 

about the sounds that fish produce, and even less is known about the impact of sound on 

fish. Passive monitoring of fisheries is likely to grow in the next few decades. 

3. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTEGRATING ABUNDANCE AND BEHAVIORAL 

PLATFORMS 

Participants identified a number of ways that passive acoustics are being used with data 

on abundance and behavior. Data from towed arrays have been used to augment certain 

cetacean abundance estimates derived from line transect sampling. Moore noted that 

estimates from autonomous moored recorders have not yet been attempted, but this may 

be possible using radial-distance sampling techniques. Advances in population 

estimation, statistics, and a better understanding of animal behavior will be required to 

make this a reality. 

While passive acoustics cannot currently be used to estimate abundance, animals are 

detected far better than with visual surveys. The presence of blue whales off Hawaii and 

in the Gulf of Alaska may not have been documented without the use of passive 

acoustics. Visual surveys and passive acoustics should be integrated in a synergistic way. 

One approach might be to place long-term recorders in areas, determine what species are 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

23

present during what seasons, and then use combination of acoustics and visual surveys to 

do more focused studies. Another way to integrate techniques is to use acoustics as a way 

to find animals for biopsying or tagging studies. This was done successfully in 1999 and 

2005 by NMML with North Pacific right whales. 

3.1 Data requirements for abundance/behavior via acoustics 

Participants identified the following types of information needed to determine abundance 

or behavior using acoustics: 

• Specific sounds need to be assigned to particular species. This can be very 

difficult for some delphinid species. It may be possible to identify species via 

clicks, but additional diagnostics will be needed. It may also be possible to use 

power spectra to diagnose clicks, but distinguishing species specific clicks for 

most mid-sized toothed whales will be challenging. 

• “Strip widths” need to be estimated for standard towed arrays; these arrays 

provide good information on bearing but poor information on distance. 

• Visual surveys need to be conducted around a passive acoustic recorder to collect 

recordings of animals sighted in the area. 

• Always measure the full bandwidth. 

• Because fish do not have to come to the surface to breathe, it is usually difficult to 

determine what species is making a call and what behavior is related to the call. 

Remotely operated vehicles cannot be used as they are too noisy. Using light on 

quiet buoys can work, but it can also affect fish behavior. Infrared can be used to 

observe fish behavior, but only for a few feet. This topic will require some 

focused study. 

• Transmission loss needs to be evaluated in all circumstances. 

• In multipath situations estimates are needed; for instance, a dolphin whistle may 

bounce off the surface to the receiver which presents a good opportunity for 

getting distance from the source to the receiver. 

• Arrays of passive acoustics recorders should be deployed when possible, as these 

provide much better information on animal locations. 

• Acoustics may be a way to augment distance sampling by providing information 

on different behaviors by sex and age class. 

• It is critical to consider and to improve our understanding of the behavioral 

aspects of vocalizations. 

• The possibility of translating the numbers of calls to the numbers of individuals, 

i.e. using acoustics to improve abundance estimates, needs to be further 

researched. 

• Acoustics can be used to identify separate stocks, however it is important to 

determine which species this work for, and what species are problematic? 

• Further research into the changes in vocalizations in relation to sex, age, etc needs 

to be pursued for all species. 

• How can we get abundance via acoustics and have visual operations augment a 

primarily acoustic study? 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

24

NOAA is not the only agency evaluating how to best use acoustics to monitor habitat. 

The NPS conduct point count surveys for birds, but these have never been calibrated. 

There is great interest in gaining a better understanding of how sound can be used to 

monitor and estimate population abundance. 

Data management for abundance/behavior data 

At this time, there is little physical integration of visual and acoustic survey data. These 

data types are typically stored in separate databases but should be combined. There have 

also been suggestions that any point samples (e.g., biopsies) should be included in the 

same database. 

Standardized terminology is needed to refer to behaviors observed while vocalizations 

are being made. Cornell University’s www.ethodata.org provides a list of animal 

behaviors, but this list may be too exhaustive. There is a shorter list of functional 

behaviors that might be more useful. The list of functional behaviors should be reviewed 

and updated with new behaviors and definitions that are relevant to marine species. 

3.2 Scale of sampling

This agenda item has been previously discussed and was not discussed further at this 

point in the meeting. 

3.3 Current efforts and opportunities

Participants noted that it is very important to continue to study well-known populations to 

document fine-scale behavior. This study is important because detection probability will 

depend on call frequency, and call frequency depends on age, sex, and behavior, and fine 

scale behavior is best addressed with populations that are very well studied. Although it 

is not cost-intensive to “get into” acoustics, there is a paucity of systems that are 

inexpensive and simple; the Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC) found that 

starting an acoustics program, or finding people who could do acoustics work on 

contract, was difficult. 

At this time, signal recognition software is being developed or modified by individual 

researchers, or their laboratories. One participant questioned whether acoustics could 

transition to a system where someone with a moderate amount of training can take on an 

acoustics project by using standardized software. The general feeling of the group was 

this would not be possible because even simple acoustics analysis requires substantial 

interpretation, and individuals without training will be unable to reliably interpret data. 

NMFS staff at the workshop noted during an earlier discussion that there had been a 

suggestion that each NMFS Science Center should have a data manager and an analyst to 

handle acoustics information. In addition, NMFS HQ should have a statistician familiar 

with acoustics (who could assist on a nationwide basis), a coordinator for acoustics 

research, and a basic acoustician. There was great interest in increasing the numbers of 

students in acoustics because there are insufficient numbers of people trained in basic 

acoustics to process all the data that have been collected. The following were identified 

as ways to bring new students or early-career professionals into NOAA: Sea Grant 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

25

fellows, National Research Council postdocs, Consortium for Oceanographic Research 

and Education (CORE). There was a recognition that the U.S. Navy has done a lot more 

to train students than has NOAA; Barlow’s students at the SWFSC are supported by 

Navy funds. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

26

CONCLUSIONS: DRAFT STRATEGIC PROGRAM PLAN 

for 

NOAA’s Passive Acoustics Ocean Observing System (PAOOS) 

I. Directives and Authority for NOAA’s PAOOS 

 Beyond the recognition of NOAA colleagues from across the agency that passive 

acoustics have numerous scientific and management benefits to the agency, there is 

overwhelming scientific directive, legislative authority, policy directives, and 

international statements/resolutions for expanding current U.S. marine acoustic sensing 

capabilities. Passive acoustics provides an exceedingly powerful means of achieving 

various NOAA missions by remote sensing of various aspects of the marine environment, 

including biotic and abiotic sources. The development of a strategic design and 

implementation plan for achieving such sensing capabilities with various observing 

platforms has been clearly called for. The need for NOAA to implement the PAOOS is 

supported by certain aspects of the following drivers from scientific, legislative, policy, 

and international sectors. 

 Directives from the Scientific Community

• National Research Council (2005). “Marine mammal populations and ocean 

noise: Determining when noise causes biologically significant events” National 

Academies Press, pp.142 - http://books.nap.edu/catalog/11147.html 

• Marine Technology Society (2004). “Human-generated sound and the effects on 

marine life” (Special Issue: Vol. 37 #4) 

• National Research Council (2003). “Ocean noise and marine mammals” National 

Academies Press, pp. 204 - http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10564.html 

• Pew Commission (2003). America's Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea 

Change - http://www.pewtrusts.org/pdf/env_pew_oceans_final_report.pdf 

• National Research Council (2000). “Marine mammals and low-frequency sound: 

Progress since 1994” National Academies Press, pp. 160 - 

http://books.nap.edu/catalog/9756.html 

• Richardson, W. J., Greene, Jr., C.R., Malme, C.I., and Thomson, D.H. (1995). 

“Marine mammals and noise” Academic Press, San Diego, CA. 

• National Research Council (1994). “Low frequency sound and marine mammals: 

Current knowledge and research needs.” National Academies Press, pp. 92 - 

http://books.nap.edu/catalog/4557.html 

 Legislative Authorities

• Marine Mammal Protection Act. http://ipl.unm.edu/cwl/fedbook/mmpa.html 

• Endangered Species Act. http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa.html 

• National Environment Policy Act. 

http://www.nepa.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm 

• National Marine Sanctuary Act. http://www.cr.nps.gov/locallaw/FHPL_NtlMarineSanct.pdf 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

27

• Marine Protected Area Executive Order. 

http://www.nepa.gov/nepa/regs/eos/eo13158.html 

• Coral Reef Act and Executive Order. 

http://www.mms.gov/eppd/compliance/13089/13089.txt 

• Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/ 

 Policy Directives

• U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy: An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century 

(2004) - http://www.oceancommission.gov/

• U.S. Ocean Action Plan (call for Global Earth Observation Network) - 

http://ocean.ceq.gov/actionplan.pdf 

• OMB Circular A-16 (Coordination of Geographic Information and Related 

Spatial Data Activities) - 

http://clinton4.nara.gov/textonly/OMB/circulars/a016/a016.html 

• National Spatial Data Infrastructure - http://www.fgdc.gov/nsdi/nsdi.html 

• Congressional Directive to Marine Mammal Commission to convene meetings on 

marine acoustics - 

http://www.mmc.gov/sound/plenary5/pdf/plen5finalsummary.pdf 

 International Bodies Considering Marine Acoustics 

• Arctic Council – Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (2005-2008) - 

http://www.pame.is/sidur/sidur.asp?id=70 

• United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the 

Law of the Sea - 

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/doalos_publications/LOSBulletins/bulletinpdf/bulleti

n53e.pdf 

• World Conservation Union (IUCN): Resolution on Undersea Noise (2004) - 

http://www.awionline.org/whales/Noise/IONC/Docs/IUCN_RES053.pdf 

• Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans in the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea 

and contiguous Atlantic Area (ACCOBAMS) - 

http://www.cms.int/pdf/en/summary_sheets/Accobams_Agr_Sum_Sheet.pdf 

• Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas 

(ASCOBANS) - http://www.ascobans.org/files/agreement1992.pdf 

• International Whaling Commission - http://www.iwcoffice.org 

Previous NOAA Workshops: 

Web link to relevant reports can be found at: 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/reports.htm
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

28

II. PAOOS Strategic Objectives and Links to the NOAA Strategic Plan 

 

PAOOS Strategic Objectives: 

NOAA’s PAOOS will provide data on biological, geophysical, oceanographic, 

meteorological, and anthropogenic ocean events. While some of these functions will 

clearly be served by different elements of the PAOOS, it is critical to note the inherently 

multipurpose capacity of acoustic sensors. Passive acoustic deployments will 

substantively augment existing observing platforms, maximizing sensing capability, and 

generating information targeted toward meeting the following strategic objectives: 

1) Develop and deploy sensing capabilities to augment conventional means of 

detecting and assessing living marine resources 

Passive acoustics from autonomous or towed platforms provide a means of 

detecting vocalizing marine animals that is less compromised by sea state, 

visibility, or the need for the immediate presence of a survey vessel for detection. 

The augmentation of conventional survey methods will enhance NOAA’s 

mandated requirements in supporting the conservation and sustainable 

management of living marine resources (e.g. Moore et al. 2006 and Rountree et 

al. 2006). 

2) Quantify spatial and temporal variance in marine ambient noise 

Baseline acoustic conditions in various marine ecosystems and the respective 

contributions of natural and anthropogenic sound sources (ambient noise budgets) 

are poorly known. Any informed assessment of how human introduction of 

sound may change baseline conditions in which animals have evolved must be 

based on a characterization of nominal conditions. Such knowledge is also 

critical for assessing and mitigating potential effects of acute acoustic exposures. 

3) Provide detection capability of specific anthropogenic acoustic events 

Passive acoustic deployments can provide an autonomous means of sensing 

specific anthropogenic events, such as the passage of vessels through critical 

habitat areas or the presence of illegal fishing activities in remote protected areas. 

This enhancement of NOAA’s capability to remotely sense the marine 

environment will not only provide an independent means of investigating 

potential effects of individual sound sources on protected marine species, but also 

a potentially powerful tool in managing large, distant areas. 

4) Provide ecosystem information to NOAA and other geospatial sensing databases

 PAOOS data will be highly integrated and assimilated with those of partners in 

other agencies, academia, non governmental organizations, and industry. Data 

will be managed, archived, and disseminated to these communities to the greatest 

extent possible. PAOOS will contribute to and be integrated with GEOSS 

Network and IOOS. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

29

5) Contribute to public education and appreciation of marine ecosystems 

A key component of PAOOS will be to promote education and address perceived 

misconceptions in the general public. Web-based information will be provided 

from PAOOS elements via various educational elements of NOAA line offices, 

including collaboration between NMFS/ST, NMFS/PR, OAR/PMEL, and 

NOAA’s Office of Education. NOAA efforts will also be directly integrated with 

the significant educational effort underway in the form of the “Discovery of 

Sound in the Sea” project at the University of Rhode Island. 

 PAOOS Links to the NOAA Strategic Plan

The PAOOS contributes to NOAA’s ecosystem observing activities and the ecosystem 

mission goal to “protect, restore, and manage the use of coastal and ocean resources 

through an ecosystem approach to management.” Contribution of the system to many of 

the identified outcomes, performance objectives, and strategies of the ecosystem goal are 

given briefly below. 

• Ecosystem Goal Outcomes 

1) Healthy and productive coastal and marine ecosystems that benefit society

The PAOOS will provide monitoring and assessment of living marine and 

coastal resources and their habitats (strategic objectives 1 and 2). Further, 

sensing capabilities will significantly enhance the capacity to assess 

human introduction of sound into marine environments, both acutely and 

chronically (objectives 2 and 3), and its role as a potential ecosystem 

stressor among other human impacts. 

2) A well-informed public acting as stewards of coastal and marine ecosystems

As described in strategic objective 5, considerable effort will be made to 

ensure maximal public transfer of information from passive sensing 

capabilities. This will include scientific publications, input into geospatial 

databases (objective 4), as well as internal contributions to the education 

and outreach efforts of NOAA’s Office of Education, NMFS Regional and 

Science Center efforts, and coordination with NMS educational efforts. 

The PAOOS design and operation will also include the transfer of 

information to public-access, web-based education (e.g., Cornell 

University’s Macaulay Library of Natural Sounds and the University of 

Rhode Island’s “Discovery of Sound in the Sea”). 

• Ecosystem Goal Performance Objectives 

1) Assess, model, and forecast ecosystem resources for management decisions 

The activities described under Ecosystem Goal Outcomes #1, above, 

directly support management decisions regarding living marine and 

coastal resources. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

30

2) Increase the portion of the population that is knowledgeable about coastal 

and marine ecosystem issues. 

As described under Ecosystem Goal Objective #2, NOAA’s PAOOS will 

generate scientific and technical publications, contribute to relevant 

databases, and provide outreach and education material to NOAA’s 

internal and external constituents, including the media. 

• Ecosystem Goal Strategies 

1) Manage uses of ecosystems by applying scientifically sound observations, 

assessments, and research findings to ensure the sustainable use of 

resources and to balance competing uses of coastal and marine 

ecosystems 

PAOOS will provide observation and assessment of specific marine 

species, natural environmental variables (biotic and abiotic), and 

anthropogenic contributions to marine ambient noise. Such baseline and 

applied ecosystem observations directly support the sustainable 

management of living marine and coastal resources. 

2) Improve resource management by advancing our understanding of 

ecosystems through better simulation and predictive models. 

Passive acoustic sensing is a powerful means of locating, identifying, and 

characterizing specific living marine resources and elements of their 

natural and affected environments. PAOOS will provide baseline 

measures, which may serve as a basis for predictive modeling of the 

effects of continued increases in anthropogenic sound input. 

3) Develop coordinated regional and national outreach and education efforts 

to improve public understanding and involvement in stewardship of 

coastal and marine ecosystems. 

PAOOS will have dedicated contributions to education and outreach 

efforts both within and outside NOAA (described above). 

4) Engage in technological and scientific exchange with our domestic and 

international partners to protect, restore, and manage marine resources 

within and beyond the Nation’s borders 

NOAA’s increased remote sensing capabilities will provide vast quantities 

of area-specific data to the academic and government scientific 

communities via geospatial data bases (e.g., OBIS-SEAMAP). Data will 

be obtained and archived by NESDIS in a manner that it is accessible to 

both domestic and international partners for research and management 

purposes. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

31

III. PAOOS Design, Data Management, and Integration

Elements: Participating Line Offices 

NOAA Fisheries Service (NMFS) will be responsible for the coordination and 

execution of the data acquisition and analyses aspects of NOAA’s PAOOS. NMFS 

components of the system will include: fisheries and protected resources surveys, 

ecosystem surveys, and cooperative research including deployments conducted by 

NMFS science center personnel. NMFS will further ensure the scientific quality 

assurance of PAOOS products and collaborative linkages to other federal and state 

agencies, stakeholders, and the public.

National Ocean Service (NOS) will be responsible for supporting the deployment of 

acoustic sensors as a critical element of the PAOOS within sanctuary boundaries. 

This support is expected to be in-kind support in the form of deployment access 

and, to the extent funds are available, direct support of deployments by NOS, 

NMFS, or outside researchers. 

Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) will contribute expertise and 

capabilities in the areas of data acquisition and processing. OAR’s Pacific Marine 

Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) has accomplished some of the most extensive 

passive acoustic data collection and interpretation within NOAA to date. PMEL 

and other entities within OAR are expected to play a key technical role in NOAA’s 

PAOOS. 

National Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service (NESDIS) will be 

responsible for data management, archiving, and information services provided by 

the NOAA National Data Center infrastructure to support ecosystem goal 

objectives. Additionally NESDIS will provide technical support and leadership in 

integration of information services located within ecosystem observation programs 

to achieve NOAA-wide objectives for IOOS, GEOSS, and related end-to-end data 

system integration efforts. 

 System Design: Personnel, Infrastructure, and Data Management Requirements

 NOAA’s PAOOS will be organized with overarching national goals and 

objectives, but integrated and implemented with a regional approach based on NOAA’s 

identified large marine ecosystems (LME). The following personnel and infrastructure 

requirements exist for NMFS and NOS elements of the PAOOS to fulfill the goals and 

objectives for each of NOAA’s LMEs: 

 Personnel: 

• 1-2 FTEs with skilled acoustic expertise for each NMFS Science Center and 

selected National Marine Sanctuaries and OAR research facilities. 

• 1 FTE national team leader for passive acoustics – NMFS/ST Headquarters 

• 1 FTE acoustic propagation specialist to work with regional staff to facilitate 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

32

analyses and address effects issues for discrete exposures – NMFS/ST 

Headquarters 

• 1 FTE statistician and acoustic software specialist – NMFS/ST Headquarters 

• 1 FTE outreach specialist who will partner with entities identified below 

• Resources to support temporary staff for acoustic deployments 

• Sufficient resources to support a program to promote and train students 

proficient in passive acoustic research (e.g., via Hollings fellowships and 

other student programs). 

• Sufficient staffing to facilitate data management (discussed below) 

 Infrastructure: 

• Passive acoustic monitoring should be integrated into every NOAA marine 

mammal survey cruise, requiring each NMFS Science Center to have two 

towed arrays, sufficient resources to maintain and deploy them, relevant 

hardware and software to run programs and relevant accessories. 

• Each NMFS Science Center and selected National Marine Sanctuaries and 

OAR research facilities should have at least 5-10 fixed passive acoustic 

sensors of variable type depending on requirements. 

• Sufficient access to ship time for surveys and deployment of acoustic 

recording devices will be required. Sufficient hardware and software are 

needed to handle massive data streams, automated detection capabilities for 

multiple species, and for real time detection capabilities. 

 Data management: 

• Each region will require sufficient resources to establish data archives and 

transfer to national database (NESDIS). 

• 1-3 FTE at NESDIS to handle data management and coordination with each 

regional PAOOS data manager as well as sufficient computing and archival 

capabilities. 

 Collaboration and Integration 

 NOAA’s PAOOS will be integrated with other ocean observing systems which 

are or will be deployed for other observing purposes but which could be used as PAOOS 

platforms, including: 

• Ocean.US (IOOS) 

• ORION 

• NOAA’s NBDC 

• U.S. Geological Survey 

• Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit Network 

• U.S. Coast Guard 

PAOOS Working Group Coordination: At the April 2006 National Passive 

Acoustics Workshop, where years of planning and discussions regarding passive 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

33

acoustics within NOAA culminated in the current concept for NOAA’s PAOOS, 

it was agreed to form an ad hoc observing system working group. Following 

completion of the PAOOS strategic plan, a NOAA working group on passive 

acoustics will be established. Science Center directors, regional administrators, 

and other appropriate management will be consulted to determine the appropriate 

people to participate in this working group. There will be a yearly rotating chair 

and semi-regular meetings that will rotate regionally. An announcement will be 

distributed to all EOP, NESDIS, NOS, and OAR headquarters to inform them of 

the creation of this working group and request nomination of relevant participants. 

 Education and Outreach

Numerous educational and outreach efforts will be accomplished with data obtained by 

the PAOOS. Metadata as well as raw acoustic recordings will be transferred to the public 

in a variety of fora and media with the below and other potential mechanisms: 

• NOAA’s Office of Education 

• National Oceans Service – National Marine Sanctuaries 

• NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration 

• NMFS Line Office and Program Websites 

• National Marine Educators Association 

• Association of Zoos and Aquariums 

• Alliance of Marine Parks, Zoos, and Aquariums 

• URI – Discovery of Sound in the Sea 

• Cornell’s McCauley Library of Sounds 

IV. Outcomes, End-Users and Beneficiaries

 Outcomes: Short to Moderate Term

1) Provide agency scientists with increased sensing capabilities to augment 

existing methods to conduct timely and accurate stock assessments and 

forecasts for protected species. 

2) Produce measures of spatial and temporal variability in marine ambient noise in 

areas where these factors are unknown; produce noise budgets which account 

for the relative contribution of natural and anthropogenic. 

3) Enhance NOAA’s capability to assess the potential effects of discrete noise 

events (e.g., explosions in marine protected areas) on living marine resources. 

4) Contribute information on marine animal acoustic communication and other 

marine environmental features to printed, classroom, and web-based education 

and outreach efforts. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

34

 Outcomes: Long Term

1) Fundamentally improve the ability of the agency and outside researchers to 

detect and characterize living marine resources. 

2) Quantitatively assess temporal trends in the anthropogenic contribution to 

marine ambient noise. 

3) Improve NOAA’s capability to manage living marine resources. 

4) Play a leadership role in providing scientific data on marine mammal presence 

and abundance as well as acoustic characteristics of marine ecosystems to 

geospatial databases and the general public. 

 End Users and Beneficiaries

NOAA: A successful PAOOS will provide monitoring, assessment, and forecasting 

information and data analysis required for NOAA to meet its science and 

management mandates. Within the Ecosystem Goal, PAOOS will support (at least) 

the missions of NOAA’s Protected Species Management Program, National Marine 

Sanctuaries, Habitat Program, Coral Reef Conservation Program, Coastal and 

Marine Resources Program, Ecosystem Research Program, and Office of Law and 

Enforcement. Further, it is expected that PAOOS may support other goals, 

including NOAA’s Climate and Ecosystems Program, given the potential for 

passive acoustic data to provide information on meteorological events. 

Research Community: PAOOS will ensure delivery of data products to the research 

community, including high quality information on living marine resources and their 

environment. To the extent that NOAA’s passive acoustic capabilities are integrated 

into the GEOSS and IOOS, those systems will benefit from PAOOS as well. 

General Public: Science based conservation and management programs provide 

societal benefit and opportunities for expanding public value of marine ecosystems. 

Environmental Non-government Organizations (NGOs): Environmental NGOs are 

expected to use data provided by PAOOS to monitor the status of living marine 

resources and marine ecosystems. 

Industry: NOAA’s PAOOS will also provide critical information on presence and 

characteristics of marine animals and ecosystems that are essential in sustainable 

management and conservation of living coastal and marine resources.
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

35

APPENDIX A 

Workshop Participants 

The workshop was split into two separate sessions, an interagency planning session and a 

session involving invited experts from outside of the agency. Session two was further 

broken out into two separate working groups, 2a and 2b. 

Session 1. Interagency planning workshop on Passive Acoustics Research 

Robyn Angliss (Rapporteur Session 2a) NMFS National Marine Mammal Laboratory 

Kyle Baker (2b) NMFS Southeast Regional Office 

Jay Barlow (2a) NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center 

David Gouveia NMFS Northeast Regional Office 

Leila Hatch (Rapporteur Session 1, 

Participant 2b) 

NOS Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary 

Dave Johnston (2b) NMFS Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center 

Linda Jones (2b) NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center 

Marc Lammers (2b) NMFS Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center 

Tony Martinez NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center 

David Mellinger Oregon State University and NOAA Pacific Marine 

Environmental Laboratory 

Sue Moore (Facilitator Session 2a) NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center @APLUniversity of Washington 

Brandon Southall NMFS Office of Science and Technology HQ DC 

Kate Stafford APL-University of Washington and NOAA Alaska 

Fisheries Science Center 

Steve Swartz (Facilitator Session 2b) NMFS Office of Science and Technology HQ DC 

Sofie Van Parijs (2b) NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

Session 2. Monitoring Biological Noise Using Passive Acoustics – Integrating 

Platforms 

Mark Baumgartner Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 

Jack Bradbury (2b) Cornell University 

David Bradley (2a) Pennsylvania State University 

Christopher Clark (2b) Cornell University 

Roy Gaul (2a) Blue Sea Corporation 

Bob Gisner (2a) Office of Naval Research 

Clifford Goudey Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

John Hildebrand (2b) Scripps Institution of Oceanography 

Nathalie Jaquet (2b) Center for Coastal Studies 

Mark McDonald (2b) Whale Acoustics 

Jim Miller (2a) University of Rhode Island 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

36

Dave Moretti (2b) Naval Undersea Warfare Center 

Jeff Nystuen (2b) APL – University of Washington 

Susan Parks (2a) Cornell University 

Andrew Pershing (2b) Cornell University 

Rodney Rountree (2b) Marine Ecology and Technology 

Applications 

Peter Tyack (2b) Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 

Cathy Vigness (2a) Marine Acoustics Inc. 

Stephanie Watwood (Rapporteur Session 2b) Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 

Mason Weinrich (2a) Whale Center of New England 

Lynnee Willians (2b) Duke University 

Peter Worcester (2a) Scripps Institution of Oceanography 

Observers 

Ingrid Biedron (2b) Cornell University 

Nicole Mihnovets (2b) New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation 

Misty Nelson (2b) NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science 

Center

 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

37

APPENDIX B 

Presentations (Tuesday AM, 11 April) 

Session 1. Interagency planning workshop on Passive Acoustics Research 

SWFSC Acoustic Survey Research for Marine Mammal Assessment 

Jay Barlow, Shannon Rankin, Julie Oswald, and Erin Oleson 

At the Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) we have been experimenting with 

the incorporation of acoustics in line-transect surveys since 1995. The Cetacean Acoustic 

Detection and Dive Interval Survey (CADDIS) in 1995 examined the acoustic 

detectability of beaked whales and found that only Baird’s beaked whales made sounds 

that could be readily detected (Dawson et al., 1998). The Shallow Water Positioning 

System (SWAPS) survey in 1997 was our first combined visual and acoustic survey and 

provided density estimates of sperm whales by using detections from both methods 

(Barlow and Taylor, 2005). Starting in 1998, towed hydrophone arrays were used on 

dolphin line-transect surveys. We have worked with others (Thode et al., 2000; 

Mellinger, 2001) to develop software to localize dolphins from their whistles. Results 

showed that dolphins could be detected from their whistles at significantly greater 

distances using acoustics. In collaboration with Scripps, sonobuoys have been used 

opportunistically on our surveys to make low-noise recordings of sounds from a variety 

of species. Most notably, we were the first to find that Bryde’s whales make stereotypical 

low-frequency calls similar to blue whales and that the various call types show strong 

geographic patterns (Oleson et al., 2003). We have also made first recordings in the 

presence of western blue whales (Rankin et al., in press) and sei whales in the North 

Pacific Ocean. Recordings from sonobuoys and our towed array have been used to 

examine the feasibility of determining species from dolphin whistles. Using two different 

classification methods (DFA and CART), we have found that more than 50% of whistles 

from nine dolphin species can be correctly classified to species (Oswald et al., 2003), 

compared to an 11% correct classification by chance alone; the correct classification 

score can be improved by recording higher frequencies (Oswald et al., 2004). We have 

tracked the mysterious “boing” down to its source ... the North Pacific minke whale 

(Rankin and Barlow 2005). Future research on acoustic survey methods will concentrate 

on estimating g(0) for sperm whales, improving our ability to listen in a forward direction 

using a towed hydrophone, estimating g(0) for dolphins, and estimating the density of 

calling minke whales from their “boings” recorded on past surveys. We also hope to 

expand our research into passive acoustic monitoring of ambient sound. 

Listening for Large Whales in Offshore Waters of Alaska, 1999-2004. 

Sue E. Moore, Kathleen M. Stafford, David K. Mellinger, John A. Hildebrand 

(Based on: BioScience, January 2006) 

In 1999, the first phase of a multi-year program to advance the use of passive acoustics 

for detection and assessment of large whales in offshore Alaskan waters was initiated at 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

38

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Mammal 

Laboratory (NMML) and Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL). Two types 

of recorders have been used: (1) long-term hydrophones developed by PMEL (http:// 

www.pmel.noaa.gov/vents/acoustics/whales/bioacoustics.html) and (2) Acoustic 

Recording Packages (ARPs) developed by Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO) 

(http://cetus.ucsd.edu). To date, autonomous recorders have been successfully deployed 

in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA: 1999-2001), the southeastern Bering Sea (SEBS: 2000-

present) and the western Beaufort Sea (WBS: 2003-2004). Seasonal occurrences of six 

endangered species (blue, fin, humpback, North Pacific right, bowhead and sperm 

whales) have been documented based on call receptions in these remote ocean regions. In 

addition, eastern North Pacific gray whale calls were detected in the WBS from May 

through January. 

In addition, and not included in the BioScience article, two high-frequency ARPS 

(HARPS) were deployed in July 2004 offshore Washington state in waters where the 

Navy plans to expand a training range and within the boundaries of NOAA’s Olympic 

Coast National Marine Sanctuary. One instrument was lost, but the second has been 

recovered and redeployed twice. This range-monitoring study has been funded by 

Navy/N45, with conduct of the program transferred to SIO in October 2005. Also, with 

support from ONR, the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) plans a sea trial of the 

Acoustic Seaglider in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary in August 2005. Six 

APL-type gliders will carry broadband hydrophones and operate with SIO gliders in a 

field including both bottom mounted and vertical acoustic arrays. This is anticipated as a 

proof of concept test for detection and (possibly) tracking of blue and humpback whales. 

Acoustic Studies of Cetaceans in the Northwest Region 

Linda Jones, Brad Hanson and Dawn Noren 

The Northwest Fisheries Science Center is addressing a wide variety of acoustic related 

issues important to conservation of marine mammals in our region. Since 2003, the 

NWFSC’s Marine Mammal Program has funded a variety of research projects using 

passive acoustic methods to directly address the distribution of cetaceans, particularly 

southern resident killer whales, and potential anthropogenic impacts of noise on this and 

other species. We have also used behavioral and energetic studies to address the 

potential impacts of noise on cetaceans. Studies are conducted in two areas: coastal 

waters off Washington, Oregon and northern California and in a highly urbanized area in 

the inland waters of the greater Puget Sound area. During NOAA research cruises in the 

coastal waters, traditional visual survey methods are combined with towed passive 

hydrophone arrays to study cetacean winter distribution and locate areas of importance 

during the winter. A hydrophone system which uses two arrays towed in parallel is being 

developed to track cetaceans for longer periods of time. Moored passive hydrophones 

(HARPS and PALS) have been placed in several coastal locations during the winterspring period to record ocean noise and cetacean vocalizations to study winter 

distributions. The inland waters of Puget Sound are the primary summer and fall range 

for southern resident killer whales as well as a very busy shipping area with large 

numbers of commercial cargo ships, tugs and barges, Navy ships, fishing boats, whale 

watch and recreational boats. An average of over 20 boats per day now closely follow 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

39

the killer whales during this period and this raises concern about the whales’ ability to 

communicate and find prey. Navy mid-range sonar use in Puget Sound near the whales 

increased public concern regarding noise affects on the whales. In the inland area, 

studies have focused on characterizing ambient noise over different temporal scales, 

collecting controlled noise measurements of vessels, developing propagation models of 

sound in the complex acoustic environment of Haro Strait, WA, as well as collecting 

behavioral and energetic data to assess the affects of vessel noise on southern resident 

killer whales. There is evidence from recent boat-based and land-based studies that the 

large number of vessels may modify killer whale behavior in various ways. A final 

research project involved compiling a list of all available acoustic data in the Puget 

Sound are to identify what acoustic information is available in this region. 

Passive Acoustics Preview: PIFSC Cetacean Research Program 

Dave Johnston, Jeffrey Polovina & Jason Baker

More than 20 cetacean species are known to occur in the Pacific Islands Region (PIR), 

which encompasses the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, or EEZ (waters out to 200 nmi 

from shore) around the entire Hawaiian archipelago, Johnston Atoll, Kingman Reef and 

Palmyra Atoll, Baker and Howland Islands, Jarvis Island, American Samoa, Wake Island, 

Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Many of the species 

present are poorly studied throughout their range, and virtually unstudied in large 

portions of the PIR. The Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) recently 

initiated a cetacean research program to begin addressing data gaps in the region, with a 

focus on stock assessments for poorly known species. Building on successes in other 

NMFS regions, passive acoustic methods are one tool being developed for stock 

assessment purposes in the PIR, employing both mobile and static packages. We 

currently have 2 bottom mounted acoustic recorders deployed in the region, one at Cross 

Seamount south of Oahu and another at Palmyra Atoll. Six months of data have been 

recovered from the Cross Seamount deployment and are currently being analyzed. A 

recent large vessel cetacean survey in American Samoa, the equatorial central Pacific and 

Johnston Atoll combined acoustic observations from a towed array and sonobouys to 

study cetacean vocalizations and focus visual survey efforts. Further passive deployments 

are planned to study cetacean distribution and fishery interactions in the Northwestern 

Hawaiian Islands and in the Mariana Islands in conjunction with the Southwest Fisheries 

Science Center. 

Passive Acoustic Monitoring of Biological and Anthropogenic Activity on Coral 

Reefs and in Nearby Waters 

Marc O. Lammers, Russell E. Brainard, Whitlow W.L. Au and Kevin Wong 

lammers@hawaii.edu

Monitoring the changing state of coral reef ecosytems is a challenging task that is 

exacerbated when the reefs in question are in remote locations. Physical sensors provide 

a wide range of measurements of local environmental variables, but do not give an 

indication of biological activity. Since 2004, through a partnership with the Hawaii 

Institute of Marine Biology, PIFSC has been developing tools to monitor biological 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

40

activity on remote coral reefs acoustically. Moored Ecological Acoustic Recorders 

(EARs) have been developed to sample the ambient sound field at pre-set intervals with a 

bandwidth of up to 30 kHz. Test deployments around Oahu, Hawaii are providing some 

preliminary results. Snapping shrimp produce the dominant acoustic energy on the reefs 

examined and exhibit clear diel acoustic trends. At frequencies below 2 kHz, many fish 

sounds occur, which also exhibit distinct temporal variability. Many sounds can be 

detected automatically, making the examination of the sound field an efficient means of 

tracking diel and seasonal variability in acoustically active species. In addition, sounds 

from passing vessels are also easily detected by the EAR, providing insight into 

anthropogenic activities near deployment sites, such as in marine protected areas. The 

EAR is presently in its second generation of development and has a deployment life of 

one year. Four units were deployed in American Samoa in February 2006 and four 

additional units are planned for deployment in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands 

Ecosystem Reserve. The data obtained from these and future deployments will be used 

to examine seasonal, inter-annual and decadal trends in biological activity and to help 

detect significant ecological events on remote reefs, such as coral bleaching. Ongoing 

efforts are targeted towards improving the EAR’s vessel detection capabilities, adapting 

the design to deep water deployments (100-300 m), increasing its deployment life and 

improving data processing algorithms. 

Passive Acoustic Research at NOAA-PMEL / OSU 

David K. Mellinger and Robert P. Dziak 

The PMEL Vents Program has a passive acoustics program for research on marine 

mammals and seafloor hydrothermal activity. Marine mammal research is focused on 

measuring spatio-temporal distributions of marine mammals and the factors that affect 

those distributions, though we also study ocean noise, call type variation (we would like 

to combine this with genetic analysis), and related issues. We have studied right, blue, 

fin, Brydes, minke, humpback, and sperm whales. We also develop analytical tools, 

particularly acoustics software for detecting marine mammal sounds, visualization and 

measurement of acoustic features, and acoustic localization and tracking of marine 

mammals. Our hydrothermal research focuses on the remote detection of earthquakes 

associated with seafloor volcanic activity. Earthquakes in the ocean crust produce 

acoustic phases that propagate in the deep sound channel. Exploiting the low acoustic 

energy attenuation properties of the deep sound channel allows for distant detection of 

seafloor volcanic activity from throughout the Pacific and Atlantic Ocean basins. Our two 

principal methods of data collection are via the US Navy's SOSUS arrays in the Pacific 

(we have a classified facility for these data), and via our autonomous hydrophone 

instrument, the Haruphone. Autonomous hydrophone deployments have occurred or will 

occur in the eastern tropical Pacific, mid-Atlantic, Gulf of Alaska, Scotian Shelf, Mariana 

Islands, Drake Passage, Bering Sea, Davis Strait, Indian Ocean, and near Iceland. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

41

Passive Acoustic Detection of Marine Mammals at SEFSC 

Anthony Martinez and Lance Garrison 

Since 2000, the NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC) has conducted 

several joint visual and acoustic surveys of the Gulf of Mexico, continental shelf and 

slope waters along the Atlantic U.S. coast and parts of the Caribbean aboard the NOAA 

ship Gordon Gunter. Acoustic operations to date have primarily employed a fiveelement towed hydrophone array, a shorter two-element array and surplus US Navy 

sonobuoys, both high frequency and directional. These passive acoustic devices were 

utilized simultaneously with visual survey efforts except where limited by water depths. 

The visual survey team operated independently of the acoustic effort and was not notified 

of acoustic contacts. Visual sightings were reported to the acoustics team and noted in 

the acoustic data logs. These datasets are currently being reviewed to match acoustic and 

visual detections. There have been numerous instances where acoustically detected 

marine mammals were not observed by the visual team. 

The SEFSC has also worked through contracts with Cornell University to conduct 

passive acoustic monitoring utilizing anchored sub-surface autonomous recording buoys 

called “pop-ups”. Most recently, these devices have been deployed between Georgia and 

North Carolina to monitor North Atlantic right whales. Pop-ups were deployed across 

the bathymetry at three sites from November through April in 2004, 2005, and 2006. 

These buoys recorded right whale contact calls throughout the winter at all sites in each 

year. These data are currently being analyzed to evaluate the temporal and spatial 

distribution of right whales in the area and will be compared to concurrent aerial visual 

surveys. 

The passive acoustics program at SEFSC has primarily focused on the development of 

methods and capability for monitoring of marine mammals. There are significant 

analytical challenges that remain to be addressed. The most critical programmatic needs 

are to increase the capacity to manage and process data, to conduct the analytical work 

needed to efficiently utilize acoustic tools to augment visual sightings data, and to 

document the spatial patterns and habitat use of marine mammals. 

NEFSC Passive Acoustics Research 

Sofie Van Parijs, Debbie Palka and Richard Merrick 

Past work on passive acoustics within the NEFSC has involved the incorporation of 

acoustics in line-transect surveys in order to estimate the abundance of North Atlantic 

marine mammal species. Particular emphasis was placed on harbor porpoise (1999 & 

2001) and offshore Atlantic marine mammal species (2004). In 1999 a specially designed 

porpoise box array was used which measured the amplitude of clicks detected at 50, 75 

and 125 kHz. Estimated density of groups was ~2.5 times that obtained from a 

conventional line transect analysis of only the visual data, assuming g(0)=1. The 

probability of detection on the track line [g(0)] for the upper visual team was about 0.4, 

compared with using two visual teams g(0) = about 0.35. In 2001 a system was used that 

was most sensitive between the 100Hz to 22 kHz range. 133 hours were surveyed 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

42

resulting in over 22 hours of recordings covering over 2500km of survey track line. 114 

odontocete whistles and 24 mysticetes tonal calls and gun-shot sounds mostly in areas 

with low ambient noise which separated into 15 odontocetes and 16 mysticetes acoustic 

encounters. In 2004, Rainbow Click (a mid frequency click detector) and Whistle (a mid 

frequency tonal sound detector) were tried out throughout the survey. For the future a 

new towed array is being built that will allow access to low, mid and high frequency in 

order to expand our focus further in particular to sperm whales and Northern right 

whales. This system will be field tested in the summer of 2006. 

NEFSC has funded several external passive acoustic projects in the Northeast region on 

large whales. Within the Center, passive acoustics ‘popup’ acoustic receiving devices 

(BRP, Cornell University) are being used in collaboration with Stellwagen Banks Marine 

Sanctuary in order to monitor the presence/absence of large whales throughout the 

sanctuary during a 12 month period. Firstly, we are interested in determining any activity 

that might occur during the winter months, seeing as the weather conditions render this 

time of year inaccessible to most other conventional survey methods. Secondly, we aim 

to develop an increased knowledge of the movements and occurrence of large whales in 

relation to the shipping lane passing through the sanctuary. This data will be linked with 

existing AIS data on ship movements. Our aim is to better inform management of the 

likelihood of potential conflicts between ships and whales. Future work will relate 

individual and group acoustic behavior of large whales with detailed oceanographic 

parameters, in collaboration with Mark Baumgartner (WHOI) during the May 2006 

cruise. Other passive acoustic projects include the development and deployment of 

moored, autonomous passive acoustic buoys with real-time data processing and data 

uplinks, as well as continued deployment of pop-up buoys at a number of sites in the 

Northeast. All this work is being done cooperatively with Cornell. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

43

APPENDIX C 

Presentations (Wednesday PM, 12 April) 

Session 2. Monitoring Biological Noise Using Passive Acoustics – Integrating 

Platforms 

The Marine Animal Sound Archive at the Macaulay Library. 

Jack W. Bradbury 

The presentation will describe the current size and scope of the marine animal sound 

archive at The Macaulay Library, and outline current, imminent, and planned services 

that the Library can provide to those working on passive marine acoustics projects. Input 

from the marine bioacoustics community on how the Macaulay Library can further refine 

and augment these services is strongly encouraged. 

Overview of Passive Acoustic Recording Devices 

Brandon Southall 

A brief overview by region of existing passive acoustic recording devices and discussion 

of the potential for future deployments. 

Marine Mammal Monitoring on Navy Ranges (M3R): A Long Term Study of the 

Effect of Sound on Marine Mammals 

David Moretti, Ronald Morrissey, Nancy DiMarzio, Jessica Ward, Susan Jarvis 

 To date, in situ studies of the effect of sound on marine mammals have centered on 

singular events or controlled source experiments. The ONR Marine Mammal Monitoring 

on Navy Ranges Program (M3R) has developed tools to detect and localize vocalizing 

marine mammals using the assets of the Navy's Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation 

Center (AUTEC). These facilities provide vast instrumented undersea areas each capable 

of acoustically monitoring over 500 nmi2

. Continual monitoring of vocalizing animals 

will be established. A comprehensive baseline of the effect of sonar on marine mammals 

as measured through the animals' movements and vocalizations over broad temporal and 

spatial scales will be described. The movements and vocalization patterns of the vocally 

active animals will be recorded. These data will provide a baseline metric of animal 

activity in the absence of anthropogenic sound. Vocalizing animals will also be 

monitored in the presence of anthropogenic sound sources. Animal movements and 

vocalizations during sound exposure will be recorded and compared to the baseline data. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

44

Science Payoffs from Ambient Noise Monitoring: Results of the Warwick Workshop 

David Bradley and James H. Miller 

Two workshops were held on the topic of ocean ambient noise budgets, monitoring and 

implications for marine mammals. The attendees established a set of testable hypotheses 

and designed a science plan that meets the 2003 NRC recommendations for research that 

reveals the trends in underwater noise and consequent impact on marine mammals. The 

workshops were held in Warwick, Rhode Island on March 29-30, 2004 and October 25-

26, 2004. This paper provides a summary of the workshops’ recommendations. 

The hypotheses include the following: I) low-frequency ambient noise is increasing at a 

rate of 3 dB per decade, dominated by shipping noise and masking mammal 

communications, II) high and low latitude ambient noise have differing characteristics 

because of the presence of the sound speed minimum at or near the surface and the speed 

of global climate change will stress the adaptability of the mammals to accommodate a 

new acoustic environment, III) the northern right whale has failed to recover from 

whaling due to the anthropogenic noise in those near shore areas of its habitats and IV) 

the acute effects of man-made sound on beaked whales from mid-frequency sonar 

involve a behavioral reaction rather than direct acoustic trauma. A set of experiments will 

be discussed to address these and other hypotheses. These experiments initially focus on 

the Gulf of Maine and then involve other areas. 

Acoustic Monitoring of Marine Mammals and Ambient Noise 

John Hildebrand 

An overview of passive acoustic monitoring and ambient noise characteristics are 

presented. Acoustic monitoring is complimentary to visual approaches for the study of 

marine mammal populations. When acoustic and visual techniques are compared, they 

often reveal different aspects (behavioral, spatial, or temporal) of the population under 

study. Long-term acoustic study of baleen whales is an established technique. Acoustic 

Recording Packages (ARP’s) have been deployed continuously for up to one year to 

study baleen whale calls at low frequencies (e.g. 1000 Hz). Recently, High-frequency 

Acoustic Recording Packages (HARPs) have allowed the study of odontocetes from their 

calls. Current HARP capabilities are for sampling rates up to 200 KHz, and data storage 

up to 1920 Gbytes, which allows for 55 days of continuous sampling. Longer 

deployment times are possible using intermittent sampling (e.g. 330 days at 1/6 duty 

cycle). HARP deployments have been conducted at four sites of interest to NOAA: (1) 

the Bering-Sea, (2) the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, (3) the southern 

California bight (including the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary), and (4) 

Cross Seamount and Palmyra Atoll in the tropical Pacific (PIFSC study areas). Longterm acoustic recordings from these HARPs reveal that odontocete clicks (impulsive calls 

generally at frequencies above 20 kHz), may be helpful in species identification. 

Examples of data from these areas of NOAA interest are presented, along with techniques 

for data analysis. 

The characteristics of ambient noise from commercial shipping and whale watching boats 

are presented. Ambient noise in the North Pacific basin has increased at a rate of about 3 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

45

dB per decade for at least the past four decades. Repeat ambient noise measurements at 

the San Nicolas SOSUS array site (off shore southern California), reveal about 12 dB of 

increased noise in the low frequency band (10-80 Hz) between the early 1960’s and the 

early 2000’s. These data suggest that both more commercial ships, and increased noise 

from individual ships have contributed to increases in ambient noise. Noise 

measurements from individual whale watching vessels were made during controlled tests 

in the Haro Strait. These data suggest that mid- to high frequency noise (2 – 80 kHz) 

may be elevated in close proximity to whale watching vessels during active maneuvers. 

Ocean Climate from Passive Acoustics – Sorting Out the Racket 

Jeffrey Nystuen 

Long-term passive acoustic measurements provide a unique description of climate in 

marine environments. The ambient sound filed contains quantitative information about 

physical, biological and anthropogenic processes and activities. Low-duty cycle passive 

aquatic recorders (PALs) have been used to collect data from a variety of moorings in a 

variety of marine environments, including deep-water, coastal and inland waterway 

locations. Sound budgets developed at these sites describe acoustic climate and are 

needed as baseline information for future decisions regarding the impact of soundproducing human activities on the marine environment. 

Listening to Fish: Passive Acoustics Applied to Marine Fisheries and Ecosystems 

Cliff Goudey and Rodney Rountree 

Passive acoustics is a rapidly growing field that uses new technology to locate fish by 

listening to sounds they produce. This can be a powerful new tool for the identification 

of essential fish habitat (EFH). For example, spawning locations of scienanids have been 

mapped by listening to the courtship sounds of males in estuaries of the southeastern US. 

Using this approach we have successfully recorded haddock, Melanogrammus aeglefinus, 

spawning sounds in the Jeffreys Ledge - Stellwagen Bank region of the Gulf of Maine. 

In another study, Rountree and Juanes (in review) made the first field recordings of sound 

production in the cusk, Brosme brosme, in the Stellwagen Bank National Marine 

Sanctuary. In situ recordings of this type have not previously been made in North 

American continental shelf waters. As part of these efforts, we have developed novel 

underwater passive acoustic probes (hydrophones/recorders) for use that can be deployed 

by commercial fishermen. The Acoustic Underwater Listening Stations (AULS) are 

deployed on the seabed much like passive fishing gear and continuously record ambient 

sounds for up to 30 hours (at an 11 kHz sampling rate). During two field seasons we 

collected over 3,000 hours of recordings in 67 deployments. Preliminary results suggest 

that haddock soniferous activity, and presumably spawning activity, occurs primarily in 

the late afternoon and early evening hours. An on-going study of the spawning behavior 

of haddock seeks to confirm the daily pattern of spawning, and will pave the way for 

future passive acoustics surveys to identify haddock essential fish habitat. In other 

studies, we are working with all 14 of the National Marine Sanctuaries to use AULS to 

begin cataloguing underwater sounds in each system. More recently, we have begun 

sampling with a deep-water AULS capable of recording in depths of over 1000 m. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

46

Near Real-time Passive Acoustic Monitoring, Tracking Behavior, and Movements 

and Defining Ocean Noise 

Christopher W. Clark

Autonomous seafloor recorders have been deployed in GoM to monitor for Northern 

right whales since 2001. In spring 2005 and 2006 moored, auto-detection buoys that 

transmit data via cell phone have been deployed in Cape Cod Bay. These hardware 

technology efforts are tightly coupled to major software developments for automatic 

sound detection, recognition, and classification. A major motivation for these 

undertakings is to provide timely information on the presence of whales to reduce ship 

collisions and gear entanglements. A secondary motivation is to better understand whale 

acoustic behavior to interpret the distribution and population condition. Some benefits 

include dramatic increase in spatial and temporal coverage, higher probability of 

detecting presence from acoustic than from aerial survey, and an immense baseline of 

acoustic data including biotic, abiotic, and anthropogenic sources. Some limitations 

include difficulty of translating call rates into number of animals, inherent delay in 

obtaining results from seafloor recorders, and deployment difficulties in shallow water 

and areas with high noise levels from shipping traffic. Whales can be located and tracked 

with arrays of units to obtain minimum number of animals per unit time and to 

synchronize their distributions and movements relative to food resources, other whales 

and vessels. The auto-buoy technique provides a cost-effective mechanism for detecting 

species of interest while collecting marine sounds and ambient noise data. It is now 

totally feasible to install an integrated network of passive acoustic and oceanographic 

sensors to generate a near-real-time overview of the acoustic ecology in the Gulf of 

Maine. 

Social Functions of Right Whale Sound Types – Seasonality and Implications for 

Passive Acoustics 

Susan Parks 

The social function of particular call types plays an important role in passive acoustic 

monitoring. Currently data is lacking on the social function of different sound types for 

many marine mammal species. This could have major implications for the interpretation 

of passive acoustic recordings for population monitoring. Differences in sound 

production by age, sex, or season can impact the effectiveness of passive acoustic 

monitoring. For example, right whales produce a variety of call types, ranging from 

intense broadband gunshot sounds to quieter tonal calls. These call types vary in 

suitability for passive acoustic detection given observed seasonal and sex differences in 

production. Previous studies have investigated the behavioral role of these call types in 

the Bay of Fundy, Canada, indicating that the gunshot sounds and tonal sounds produced 

in surface active groups are sex specific, with males producing gunshot sounds, and 

females the tonal scream calls (Parks et al. 2005; Parks and Tyack 2005). Both sexes 

produce the upcall. Analysis of recordings made in different habitat areas in different 

seasons indicate a difference in the relative production of different sounds types, with the 

upcall being the only call that is present equally in all habitats (Parks and Clark 2005). As 

a result, the selection of the upcall for passive acoustic monitoring provides a species 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

47

specific sound that is produced by both sexes in all seasons. In species with less 

knowledge of the social behavior in sound production, selection of particular call types 

could lead to bias in sampling if, for example, calls produced only by males in the 

breeding season were selected for detection studies. 

Vocalization Rates of North Atlantic Right Whales During Summer in the Gulf of 

Maine as Measured from Dtags. 

Peter Tyack 

One of the critical datasets required to evaluate effectiveness of passive acoustic 

monitoring involves the interval of time a whale will be silent without vocalizing. An 

ideal method for obtaining these data involves use of an acoustic recording tag on the 

whale. I report results of a collaboration with the IFAW RV Song of the Whale and 

WHOI Dtag research teams (Matthews et al. 2001) analyzing vocal rates of North 

Atlantic right whales in the Gulf of Maine. The data described here update the Matthews 

et al. paper and rely upon 160 hours of Dtag data recorded from 44 right whales tagged 

for more than 30 min during the summers of 1999-2005 in the Bay of Fundy, Canada and 

36.1 hours of data recorded by the RV Song of the Whale during 21 encounters with right 

whales. Parks (2003) also estimated the Source Level of right whale calls using a 

hydrophone array to identify calls from whales at known ranges. Her work showed 

Source Levels for screams of about 170 dB re 1 μPa at 1 m when the broadband noise 

level averaged about 125 dB. Assuming 15 log range propagation and detection at a 

signal to noise ratio of 0 dB, this would suggest a detection range of about 1 km. 24 hour 

spectrograms from the Bay of Fundy indicate average noise levels of about 112 dB rms 

for the 50-200 Hz band and 95 dB rms for 200-1000 Hz. The 50-200 Hz average noise 

level of 112 dB is consistent with a detection range of 7 km given the same assumptions. 

Whale calls were clustered in time, so the average rate of calling does not provide an 

accurate estimate of the statistics of silent intervals. Analysis of towed hydrophone 

recordings estimates that the mean interval between clusters of moan vocalizations is 

about a minute. However, this estimate is taken from a series of moans. Four encounters 

recorded with towed hydrophones had no moans during intervals of 1-2 hours. Twentyfive of the tag recordings with durations up to 6.5 hours had no calls. For twelve of the 

other nineteen tags with recorded calls, the average interval between calls of the tagged 

whale was 188 s. Overall, the maximum intercall intervals (censored by start and end of 

recordings) had a median value of 2 hours, with an upper quartile value of 4 hours. 

These data suggest that acoustic detection data alone are insufficient to estimate 

effectiveness of passive acoustic monitoring. PAM systems must take into account 

unbiased estimates of intervals between detectable vocalizations along with acoustic 

characteristics of the calls such as Source Level, Noise Levels and Transmission Loss in 

the environment, and Detection Thresholds. In this case, it does appear possible to use 

PAM to detect right whales during intervals of many hours over spatial scales of several 

km, but quantitative analysis of even longer recordings of more individuals will be 

required to estimate the number and types of animals that would be undetected for a 

specific PAM application. If managers can estimate the parameters for temporal and 

spatial scales, and probability of detection required to meet management objectives for 

reducing risk of entanglement or collision, then it would be helpful to review data on 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

48

visual and acoustic data from different platforms to evaluate whether any mix of existing 

methods can meet the requirements, and if so, what is the optimal mix. 

Investigating Baleen Whale Ecology with Acoustic and Oceanographic Observations 

Collected from Autonomous Underwater Vehicles 

Marc Baumgartner 

Standard methods to investigate marine mammal ecology employ ship-based human 

observers and in-situ instrumentation to simultaneously characterize distribution and 

oceanographic conditions. Unfortunately, this approach is expensive, labor intensive and 

inefficient, since observers can only detect marine mammals in daylight, good visibility, 

and low sea state. Passive acoustics provide a means to detect the occurrence of 

localizing animals over long durations regardless of sea conditions, however moored 

recorders collect data in a fixed location only and typically lack accompanying 

oceanographic observations throughout the water column. Autonomous underwater 

vehicles are capable of continuous operation over a variety of spatial scales, and can 

measure many of the same oceanographic properties observed during ship-based studies. 

Autonomous gliders, in particular, have characteristics that make them ideal for 

ecological studies: high endurance (> 60 days at sea, range of hundreds of kilometers), 

fine horizontal and vertical measurement resolution, and relatively silent operation that 

permits passive acoustic measurements. 

We recently demonstrated the utility of ocean gliders for studying baleen whale ecology 

during a pilot project conducted off Cape Cod, Massachusetts. We deployed an array of 

gliders to characterize the physical and biological environment near baleen whales. Each 

of the four gliders continuously measured temperature, conductivity, depth, chlorophyll 

fluorescence, and optical backscatter while profiling from the surface to 100 m once very 

20 minutes. In addition, three gliders were outfitted with custom-built acoustic recorders, 

and the fourth carried an acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP). The gliders were 

deployed on May 6, 2005, operated flawlessly through a gale during which seas reached 

17 ft, and were recovered on May 11. Downsweep whale calls in the 40-100 Hz 

frequency band preliminarily attributed to sei whales exhibited a diel pattern (fewer calls 

by night, more by day) that corresponded strongly to the diel vertical migration of 

zooplankton observed in the ADCP acoustic backscatter measurements. The number of 

calls in this frequency band did not diminish during the gale. Acoustic events were 

accurately time- stamped, thus the moving glider array was used to determine the 

position of vocalizing whales. Having demonstrated the potential of ocean gliders for 

baleen whale ecological research, our future efforts will focus on (1) extending the 

duration of the acoustic recordings to match the endurance of the vehicles, (2) developing 

a real-time detection and reporting capability, and (3) increasing the recording/detection 

frequency to monitor odontocete vocalizations.
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

49

Towards Operational Forecasts of Right Whale Distributions in the Gulf of Maine 

Andy Pershing 

All management actions to limit right whale mortality depend on knowing when and 

where right whales are likely to be found. For certain applications such as setting up 

seasonal area management zones, a knowledge of the right whale’s climatological 

movement patterns are sufficient; however, other management options such as dynamic 

area management zones or sighting advisories require more precise information on likely 

whale locations. We have developed a prototype system to forecast the distribution of 

right whales. At the heart of this system is a model of the right whale’s main prey, the 

copepod Calanus finmarchicus, and the dynamics of this model are determined by 

circulation forecasts and satellite data (chlorophyll and temperature). Although our 

experience with the prototype suggests that our approach has merit, several 

improvements are needed. We are currently beginning a one-year project to dramatically 

improve the performance and utility of this system. Improvements will include: state of 

the art circulation forecasts, the ability to assimilate zooplankton observations, a right 

whale likelihood model, and an improved web-based interface. Initially, localizations of 

right whales, including those from passive acoustic sensors, will be displayed on top of 

the satellite or modeled fields. Eventually, we hope to assimilate these observations into 

the right whale likelihood model. 

Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary as a Model for Integrating Platforms 

to Characterize the Marine Acoustic Environment 

Leila Hatch and David Wiley 

 

The US National Marine Sanctuary Act directs designated sanctuaries to protect 

sanctuary resources while allowing compatible human uses, and to conduct, support, or 

coordinate research, monitoring, evaluation, and education programs. To meet these 

mandates, the National Marine Sanctuary Program has identified site characterizations as 

a priority activity. Site characterizations provide an account of a sanctuary’s biodiversity, 

habitats, resources, ecological processes, anthropogenic impacts and, when combined 

with monitoring programs, provide the means for objective and informed management 

decisions. The Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary (SBNMS) is host to many 

species of protected species (e.g., critically endangered North Atlantic right whales) and 

is subjected to high levels of sound producing anthropogenic activity (e.g., vessel traffic). 

Site characterization of the SBNMS, therefore, necessitates comprehensive acoustic 

monitoring and the development of integrative analytical approaches to determine the 

relative inputs of sound sources within the sanctuary and their possible effects on the 

behavior of federally-protected species. 

To address this goal, ten automated recording units (ARUs), developed by Cornell 

University’s Bioacoustics Research Program, have been deployed to monitor the acoustic 

sound field within the boundaries of SBNMS continuously between January, 2006 and 

January, 2007. Through collaborations with scientists, managers and policy experts from 

the NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center and Northeast Regional Office, Woods 

Hole Oceanographic Institution, Cornell University and the University of Massachusetts, 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

50

Boston, these acoustic data will be analyzed to address multiple questions regarding the 

locations and behaviors of vocalizing whales, estimate the potential for hearing loss and 

masking to various species, and identify the sound contribution from large commercial 

vessels and specific vessel classes. 

Here, we highlight ongoing and preliminary research at the sanctuary that will be further 

informed by this year’s acoustic monitoring data, including efforts to accurately estimate 

reductions in whale ship strikes due to re-routing of shipping lanes, integration of ARU 

data with vessel data from the US Coast Guard’s Automatic Identification System, and 

efforts to characterize received levels and behavior relative to boats for whales tagged in 

the sanctuary.
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

51

APPENDIX D 

NOAA National Workshop on Passive Acoustics 

Terms of Reference 

Background 

In August 2003 NOAA’s Ocean Acoustics Program (NMFS ST-HQ) convened a meeting 

in Silver Spring, MD of agency colleagues on the general subject of marine acoustics, 

with particular emphasis on the effects of noise on marine mammals. Ongoing efforts to 

enhance agency policies regarding the setting of “effects thresholds” were presented and 

discussed, and software for calculating sound propagation that was demonstrated and 

provided to regional colleagues. This was the first national forum among the various 

NOAA personnel working on marine acoustics. 

This collaborative national effort was preceded by a workshop convened by Dr. Dave 

Mellinger (Oregon State University @ NOAA-PMEL) and Dr. Jay Barlow (SWFSC) in 

November 2002 (Mellinger and Barlow 2003) and followed by a second workshop in 

February 2004 convened by Dr. Jay Barlow and Dr. Roger Gentry (Ocean Acoustics 

Program) (Barlow and Gentry 2004). The current state of knowledge regarding 

anthropogenic sound and marine mammals was reviewed and discussed, with specific 

emphasis on research needs and the development of a national program by which NOAA 

would begin to address those relating most directly to our mandated responsibilities 

(Barlow and Gentry 2004). A national research plan was developed (NOAA Acoustics 

Program Research Proposal 2004) to enable NOAA to more fully meet management 

requirements regarding marine acoustics. Though this proposal has yet to be funded, a 

small portion was in the FY06 budget request. 

Many issues considered in previous workshops and in the proposed national program 

remains of high relevance to NOAA. One of these is passive acoustics and the extensive 

opportunities arising from deploying hydrophones on various monitoring platforms. 

Recently, the NOAA Observing Systems Council (NOSC) conducted an inventory of the 

agency’s observing requirements (Consolidated Observational Requirements List 

(CORL)). Thanks to the collaborative efforts of NOAA colleagues from several areas, 

three general passive acoustic observing capabilities (sound from both biological and 

other natural sources, as well as human sources of sound) were identified within the 

CORL. Additionally, passive acoustic sensing has been identified as a discrete observing 

system within NOAA’s Observing Systems Architecture (NOSA) database (IOOS 2005). 

Arising from these distinctions and the critical importance to various agency missions of 

expanding NOAA's passive acoustic sensing capabilities, collaborative efforts are 

underway to identify and prioritize operational solutions to meet these requirements. 

A NOAA-wide workshop is proposed for 11 – 13 April 2006 in Woods Hole, MA to 

continue internal efforts to develop the passive acoustic observing system and integrate 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

52

deployments with existing and planned ocean observing systems. Following an initial 

internal planning session, the workshop will be expanded to include colleagues from 

outside the agency who have been considering the implementation of passive acoustic 

systems on broad spatial scales as well as a meso-scale regional approach. This second 

session of this workshop will focus primarily on the Gulf of Maine, with the anticipation 

for future workshops to concentrate on other key regions. 

Workshop Goals 

1. Augment observational requirements documentation for CORL and NOSA 

databases and EOP goal team. 

2. Define clear and prioritized observing requirements as they relate to NOAA 

strategic goals. 

3. Use Gulf of Maine as a “test bed” for discussions on various strategies for 

integrating passive acoustics into existing and proposed ocean observing systems, 

emphasizing multiple data uses (e.g., ambient noise budgets, marine animal 

detection, weather/climate issues). 

Workshop Format and Goals 

The workshop will be three days long and divided into two discrete sessions, each with a 

corresponding working group. Each section will have a chair to guide and advance 

discussion in a productive manner; break-out groups may be used in any or all of the 

sections. A rapporteur will be provided for each working group and each working group 

will produce a written report that will contribute to the planned final workshop report. 

Session 1. Interagency planning workshop on Passive Acoustics Research 

 This session will comprise the first day and a half of the meeting and will be 

limited to invited NOAA staff. It will commence with discussion of the general structure 

and goals of the workshop and brief presentations from respective centers, regions, and 

sanctuaries, on existing passive acoustic projects. Break-out groups will assess: (1) 

mandates and drivers for NOAA to engage strongly in passive acoustics; (2) existing 

technologies for data acquisition, analysis, and archive; and (3) current NOAA 

capabilities and activities and prioritize specific goals on 5, 10, and 20 year timelines. 

Session 2. Monitoring Biological Noise Using Passive Acoustics – Integrating Platforms 

 The second session will comprise the latter one and a half days. Following the 

internal NOAA working group on passive acoustics, colleagues from outside the agency 

will be invited to continue on-going discussions of global deployment of passive acoustic 

equipment. Two previous workshops on this issue have been convened with some of the 

top researchers in the world, many of whom will be invited to join NOAA colleagues and 

consider the role that NOAA may play in various research projects identified in previous 

workshops. One of the main focuses will be on a case-specific consideration of an 

extensively studied area of the country in terms of passive acoustics, the Gulf of Maine 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

53

region. A number of reviews will be presented of what existing passive acoustic research 

has achieved to date within the Gulf of Maine area as well as on larger scales. 

Participants will consider the Gulf of Maine as a “test bed” to explore ideas regarding 

what acoustic techniques, deployments, and sampling regimes might answer the pertinent 

questions for this area. 

Workshop Participants 

The workshop will bring together a diverse group of scientists and managers to include: 

• NOAA Acoustics staff representing Headquarters Office and at least one 

 representative from each of the Science Centers and Regional Offices 

• NOAA NOS staff including staff from Stellwagen Banks 

• Scientists from academia and other government agencies 

Workshop Venue, Logistics, and Attendance 

The workshop will be held from 11 to 13 April 2006 at the NMFS Northeast 

Fisheries Science Center in Woods Hole, MA. The NEFSC conference room has been 

reserved for the workshop. Travel support will be provided to invited speakers from 

outside the agency; limited support may be available for NOAA participants lacking 

programmatic funds to support their involvement. 

 The workshop will be open to the public to the extent practical with limited space 

but will not include public comment sessions. Only invited speakers and participants will 

present or participate in discussions. This is not a consensus building workshop. 

Workshop Outcomes 

 Observing requirements and strategies for the NOAA Passive Acoustic Observing 

System will be improved and expanded. A more formalized mechanism for internal 

NOAA collaboration on passive acoustics will be considered. A NOAA Tech Memo will 

be prepared containing summary of presentations, discussions, and recommendations of 

the full session deliberations and working groups for each section. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

54

APPENDIX E 

DRAFT AGENDA 

NOAA NATIONAL WORKSHOP ON PASSIVE ACOUSTICS

11-13 APRIL 2006 

WOODS HOLE, MA 

DAY 1: TUESDAY, APRIL 11TH 

SESSION I. INTERAGENCY PLANNING WORKSHOP ON 

PASSIVE 

ACOUSTICS RESEARCH 

Meigs Room, Swope Building, Marine Biological Laboratory. 

Chair: Brandon Southall, NMFS HQ – ST 

Rapporteur: Leila Hatch, SBNMS 

8:30 – 9:00 COFFEE BREAK

9:00 -9:15 OPENING REMARKS 

9:15 – 9:45 “Building NOAA’s Passive Acoustics System within the PPBES 

System” – Steve Swartz (NMFS HQ, Office of Science and 

Technology) 

9:45 -10:45 SUMMARIES OF PASSIVE ACOUSTIC RESEARCH AT NMFS 

SCIENCE CENTERS (20 MIN) 

• Jay Barlow, SWFSC: Review of SWFSC 

• Sue Moore, AFSC@ APL-UW: Listening for large whales in offshore waters of 

Alaska, 1999 - 2004 

• Linda Jones, NWFSC: Review of NWFSC 

10:45 - 11:00 BREAK

11:00 – 12:30 

• Dave Johnston/Marc Lammers, PIFSC: Review of PIFSC 

• Dave Mellinger, NOAA-PMEL: Review of NOAA-PMEL 

• Tony Martinez, SEFSC: Review of SEFSC 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

55

• Sofie Van Parijs, NEFSC: Review of NEFSC 

 

12:30-1:30 LUNCH (ON YOUR OWN) 

1:30 – 3:15 GROUP TASK I (All) 

1. Identify why NOAA should develop/expand passive acoustic sensing 

capabilities (45 min.) 

• What relevant scientific questions NOAA is/should be addressing are met 

with passive acoustics?

• What management strategies are supported by the current research? 

• Identify mandates/drivers and how passive acoustics relates to NOAA 

missions 

2. Identify current tools and sampling regimes/data management (1 hr.) 

• What are the current and future sensors? 

• Discuss sampling bandwidth and data management. 

• Identify relevant existing or planned observing systems in which passive 

acoustics should be implemented. 

• Discuss spatial and temporal scaling considerations. 

• Identify uses where passive acoustics can serve multiple purposes (e.g. 

living marine resource detection and climate issues) 

 

3:15- 3:30 BREAK

3:30 – 5:00 GROUP TASK II (All) 

3. Where are we now and where do we need to go? 

• Where are we now (summaries provided from morning presentations)? 

• What are the current knowledge gaps? 

• How do we improve and integrate efforts within and across regions? 

5:00 - 5:30 REVIEW/ASSESS

• Chair and rapporteur meet to discuss progress and prepare summary of tasks I and 

II for distribution to group for morning session 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

56

DAY 2: WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12TH 

SESSION 1. CONTINUED

Meigs Room, Swope Building, Marine Biological Laboratory. 

8:30 – 8:45 REVISIT PROGRESS 

8: 45 – 10:30 REVIEW/MODIFY GROUP TASKS I and II (All)

10:30 – 10:45 BREAK

10:45 – 11:45 GROUP TASK III (All)

4. Develop priorities/recommendations 

• Specify 100% solution to meeting NOAA needs regarding passive acoustics 

• Identify most pressing and achievable research needs – set priorities! 

• Identify goals on 5, 10, and 20 year timelines 

• Discuss how recommendations of workshop will be used in the development 

of a strategic plan for NOAA passive acoustics system 

11:45 – 12:00 CONCLUSION 

• Establishing a formal working group 

• Concluding remarks 

12:00 – 1:00 LUNCH (ON YOUR OWN - LUNCHTIME SEMINAR AT 12:30!) 

SESSION II. MONITORING BIOLOGICAL NOISE USING 

PASSIVE ACOUSTICS– INTEGRATING PLATFORMS 

Meigs Room, Swope Building, Marine Biological Laboratory. 

Chair: Sofie Van Parijs, NEFSC 

Rapporteur: Stephanie Watwood, WHOI 

12:30 – 1:00 LUNCHTIME SEMINAR 

• Jack Bradbury, CORNELL UNIVERSITY: The Marine Animal Sound Archive 

at the Macaulay Library. 

1:00 – 1:20 OPENING REMARKS 

[1:20 – 3:30] BIG PICTURE PRESENTATIONS ON PASSIVE 

ACOUSTICS 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

57

1:20 – 1:35 

• Brandon Southall, NOAA Acoustics Program (NMFS/ST): Summary of existing 

acoustic deployments and existing/proposed potential platforms 

1:35 – 1:50 

• David Moretti, Ronald Morrissey, Nancy DiMarzio, Jessica Ward, Susan 

Jarvis (Naval Undersea Warfare Center): Marine Mammal Monitoring on 

Navy Ranges (M3R): A Long Term Study of the Effect of Sound on Marine 

Mammals 

1:50 – 2:10 

• David Bradley, PENN STATE and James H. Miller, URI: Science Payoffs from 

Ambient Noise Monitoring: Results of the NOAA Warwick Workshops

2:10 – 2:40 

• John Hildebrand, SCRIPPS: CALCOFI and CINMS monitoring 

2:40 – 3:10 

• Jeff Nystuen, APL-UW: Ocean Climate from Passive Acoustics – Sorting Out the 

Racket 

3:10 – 3:30 

• Cliff Goudey, MIT, and Rodney Rountree, META: Listening to Fish: Passive 

Acoustics Applied to Marine Fisheries and Ecosystems

3:30-3:45 BREAK 

[3:45–5:15] PRESENTATIONS - PASSIVE ACOUSTICS IN 

THE GULF OF MAINE REGION

3:45 – 4:00 

• Chris Clark, CORNELL UNIVERSITY: Real time passive acoustic monitoring, 

tracking behavior and movements and defining ocean noise

4:00 – 4:15 

• Susan Parks, CORNELL UNIVERSITY: Social functions of right whale sound 

types – seasonality and implications for passive acoustics

4:15 – 4:30 

• Peter Tyack, WHOI: Integrating DTAGs with passive acoustics for studying 

vocalization rates of North Atlantic Right Whales. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

58

4:30 – 4:45 

• Mark Baumgartner, WHOI: Investigating baleen whale ecology with acoustic 

and oceanographic observations collected from autonomous underwater vehicles 

4:45 – 5:00 

• Andy Pershing, CORNELL UNIVERSITY: Towards Operational Forecasts of 

Right Whale Distributions in the Gulf of Maine

5:00 – 5:15 

• Leila Hatch and Dave Wiley, SBNMS: Stellwagen Bank National Marine 

Sanctuary as a model for integrating platforms to characterize the marine 

acoustic environment. 

 

5:15 – 5:30 SUMMARY

• Discuss format of working groups for day 3 

• Co-chairs/Rapporteurs for working group meet to discuss progress 

DAY 3: THURSDAY, APRIL 13TH 

SESSION 2. CONTINUED

MBL Club, Marine Biological Laboratory & Candle House Room 105 

8:30 – 10:30 WORKING GROUP DISCUSSIONS 

Working group A [Facilitator: Steve Swartz; Rapporteur: Stephanie Watwood] 

• Requirements for passive acoustic recording devices 

 Scale that each recording device addresses 

 Current use of these devices 

 Current failures in data collection i.e. patchy data collection at 

varying sites 

 Goals needed to cover different components of data collection 

 What is needed to address NOAA’s mandates for acoustics? Need 

specific recommendations and action plan 

 Advantages and problems of fixed versus towed passive acoustic 

arrays 

 Identify and prioritize deployment sites 

Working group B [Facilitator: Sue Moore; Rapporteur: Robyn Angliss]

Integrating numerous platforms effectively: 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

59

• Requirements for integration with oceanographic parameters 

 Data requirements and management 

 Scale of sampling 

 Current efforts and opportunities 

• Requirements for integration with anthropogenic conflict issues (noise, shipping 

etc.). 

 Data requirements and management 

 Scale of sampling 

 Current efforts and opportunities 

• Requirements for integrating abundance and behavioral platforms 

 Data requirements and management 

 Scale of sampling 

 Current efforts and opportunities 

10:30 – 10:45 BREAK 

10:45 – 12:30 WORKING GROUP DISCUSSIONS (Cont.) 

12:30-1:30 LUNCH (ON YOUR OWN) 

1:30-4:30 WORKING GROUP DISCUSSIONS

3:15 – 3:30 BREAK 

4:30-5:30 RECONVENE 

• Discussion/Summary 

• Co-chairs/Rapporteurs meet to conclude and discuss report 

5:30 END OF WORKSHOP 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

60

APPENDIX F 

LITERATURE CITED 

Barlow, J. and Gentry, R. (2004): Report of the NOAA workshop on anthropogenic 

sound and marine mammals, 19 – 20 February 2004, NOAA-TM-NMFSSWFSC-361, 29pp. 

Barlow, J. and B. L. Taylor. 2005. Estimates of sperm whale abundance in the northeastern 

temperate Pacific from a combined acoustic and visual survey. Marine Mammal Science, 

21(3):429-445. 

Dawson, S.M., J. Barlow, and D. Ljungblad (1998): Sounds recorded from Baird’s beaked whale, 

Berardius bairdi. Marine Mammal Science, 14(2): 335–344. 

IOOS 23 November 2005: The Ecosystem Goal’s Contribution to NOAA’s Integrated 

Ocean Observing System (IOOS): Helping to Build the IOOS National 

Backbone 

Mellinger, D.K. (2001): Ishmael 1.0 User’s Guide. NOAA Tech. Memo. OAR PMEL-120, 26 pp.

Mellinger, D., and J. Barlow (2003): Future directions for acoustic marine mammal 

surveys: Stock assessment and habitat use. Report of a Workshop held in La Jolla, 

CA, 20–22 November 2002, NOAA OAR Special Report, NOAA/PMEL 

Contribution No. 2557, 37 pp. 

Moore S. E., K. M. Stafford, D. K. Mellinger and J. A. Hildebrand (2006). Listening for 

large whales in the offshore waters of Alaska. Bioscience, 56 (1): 49-55. 

NOAA Acoustics Program Research Proposal (100% solution). 2004. NOAA/NMFS. 

Oleson, E. M., J. Barlow, J. Gordon, S. Rankin, and J. A. Hildebrand. 2003. Low frequency calls 

of Bryde's whales. Marine Mammal Science, 19(2):160-172. 

Oswald, J. N., J. Barlow, and T. F. Norris. 2003. Acoustic identification of nine delphinid 

species in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean. Marine Mammal Science, 19(1):20-37. 

Oswald, J. N., S. Rankin, and J. Barlow. 2004. The effect of recording and analysis bandwidth 

on acoustic identification of delphinid species. Journal of the Acoustical Society of 

America, 116(5):3178-3185. 

Parks, S.E. and C.W. Clark. 2005. Variation in acoustic activity of North Atlantic right whales in 

three critical habitat areas in 2004. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 

117:2469. 

Parks, S.E., P.K. Hamilton, S.D. Kraus and P.L. Tyack. 2005. The gunshot sound produced by 

male North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) and its potential function in 

reproductive advertisement. Marine Mammal Science, 21:458-475. 

Parks, S.E. and P.L. Tyack. 2005. Sound production by North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena 

glacialis) in surface active groups. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 

117:3297-3306. 

Rankin, S. and J. Barlow. 2005. Description of stereotyped minke whale vocalizations from the 

North Pacific Ocean. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118(5): 3346–3351. 

Rankin, S., J. Barlow, and K. Stafford. (2006). Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) sightings 

and recordings south of the Aleutian Islands. Marine Mammal Science, 22(3), 708-713. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

61

Rountree R. A., R. G. Gilmore, C. A. Goudey, A. D. Hawkins, J. J. Luczkovich, D. A. Mann 

2006. Listening to fish: Applications of passive acoustics to fisheries science. Fisheries, 

31 (9): 433. 

Southall, B. (2005): Report of Shipping Noise and Marine Mammals: A Forum for 

Science, Management, and Technology, held in Arlington, Virginia, 18-19 May 

2004. 

Thode, A., T. Norris, and J. Barlow 2000. Frequency beamforming of dolphin whistles using a 

sparse three-element towed array. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107(6): 

3581–3584. 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

62

APPENDIX G 

ACRONYM REFERRAL LIST 

ADCP – Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler 

AFSC – Alaska Fisheries Science Center 

AIS – Automatic Identification System 

APL-UW - Applied Physics Laboratory of the University of Washington 

ARP – Acoustic Recording Packages 

ARU – Automated Recording Units 

AULS – Autonomous Underwater Listening Stations 

AUTEC - Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center 

BRP – Biological Reference Point 

CADDIS – Cetacean Acoustic Detection and Dive Interval Studies 

C-Cap – Coastal Change Analysis Program 

CMRP – Coastal and Marine Resources Program 

COOS - Coastal Ocean Observing System 

CORE – Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education 

CORL - Consolidated Observations Requirements List 

CRIOS – Coral Reef Ecosystem Integrated Observing System 

CTD – Conductivity, temperature, and depth 

DART - Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis 

EAR – Ecological Acoustic Recorder 

EOP – Ecosystem Observations Program 

EFH – Essential Fish Habitat 

EGT – Ecosystem Goal Team 

ERP - Ecosystem Research Program 

FTE – full time equivalent 

GEOSS – Global Earth Observation System of Systems 

HARPS – High-frequency Acoustic Recording Packages 

IFAW – International Fund for Animal Welfare 

IOOS - Integrated Ocean Observing System 

LME – Large Marine Ecosystems 

LMRIS – Living Marine Resources Information System 

NDBC - National Data Buoy Center 

NESDIS - National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service 

NGO – Non Government Organization 

NODC – National Oceanographic Data Center 

NOP – National Observer Program 

NOS – National Ocean Service 

NOSA – NOAA Observing Systems Architecture 

NOSC – NOAA Observing Requirements List 

NMFS/PR – National Marine Fisheries Service/Protected Resources 

NMFS/ST – National Marine Fisheries Service/Science and Technology 

NMML – National Marine Mammal Laboratory 
PAOOS Strategic Program Plan 

63

NMS – National Marine Sanctuaries 

NRC – National Research Council 

NWFSC – Northwest Fisheries Science Center 

OAR – Oceanic and Atmospheric Research 

OBIS-SEAMAP – Ocean Biogeographic Information System Spatial Ecological Analysis 

of Megavertebrate Populations 

ONR – Office of Naval Research 

PAM – Passive Acoustic Monitoring 

PaCOOS – Pacific Coast Ocean Observing System 

PAOOS – Passive Acoustics Ocean Observing Program 

PIFSC – Pacific Islands Fishery Science Center 

PMEL – Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory 

PPBES – Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System 

PSMA - Protected Species Monitoring and Assessment 

PSP – Protected Species Program 

ROV – Remotely Operated Vehicles 

SBNMS – Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary 

SEAMAP – Southeast Area Monitoring and Assessment Program 

SIO – Scripps Institution of Oceanography 

SOSUS – Sound Surveillance System 

SWaPS – Shallow Water Positioning System 

SWFSC – Southwest Fisheries Science Center 

SWiM – National Marine Sanctuaries System-Wide Monitoring Program 

SWMP – National Estuarine Research Reserve System-wide Monitoring Program 

TRANSDEC – Transducer Evaluation Center 
PAOOS S

64

 TOWED 

HYDROPHONE 

ARRAYS 

DRIFTING 

SONOBUOYS 

MOORED 

AUTONOMOUS 

HYDROPHONES 

NEAR REAL 

TIME BUOYS 

SEA BED 

MOUNTED 

HYDROPHONE 

ARRAYS 

GLIDE

TYPE Multiple units Multiple units 

Onmi 57B DIFAR 53D 

Multiple units; sometimes used in arrays of 3-10 units 

Multiple units Multiple 

hydrophones 

Multiple ufollowing programmroute 

VESSEL 

REQUIREMENTS 

Dedicated ship time 

Dedicated ship time 

Yearly or bi-yearly deployment and retrieval 

One-time deployment; maintenance 

One-time deployment; maintenance 

Deploymeand retriev

FREQUENCY 

RANGE 

0.5 - 250 kHz 10 Hz – 2.5 

kHz DIFAR 10 Hz – 25 kHz OMNI 

10Hz – 100 kHz; this varies by type 

0-50 kHz 0 – 1000 Hz 0-50 kHz 

DURATION Hours to months Up to 8 hours 0.25-2 years / 

deployment 

Years Years to decades Weeks to 

months 

DATA STORAGE 

CAPACITY 

Essentially unlimited 

Essentially unlimited 

Giga- to terabytes. Essentially 

unlimited 

Essentially unlimited 

Gigabytes 

AVAILABLE 

TYPES 

Within NOAA: NMFS-SWFSC (Barlow) Outside of NOAA: Ecologic Ltd., many other vendors 

Military surplus, usually free but somewhat unreliable 

Within NOAA: Haruphone (OARPMEL) EAR (NMFS/PIFSC – Lammers). Outside of NOAA: Popup (Cornell Univ. - Clark), HARP, ARP (Scripps - Hildebrand), EARS buoy (UNO – Ioup), AULS (MIT – Goudey & Rountree), AURAL-M2 (MTE Inc) 

Cornell Univ. – Clark 

Military (e.g., SOSUS); Oceanographic (MOOS, ORION/ NEPTUNE) 

SeaGlider (Univ. of WashingtoSeveral otSIO ALICWHOI 

Table 1. Summary of the passive acoustic sensors currently available for data collection.