Journal Publications 2025

Capri D Joliffe

Acoustics 2025 — Sounds of the Sunset Coast, Joondalup, Western Australia (2025)

There is global consensus that anthropogenic underwater noise represents a ubiquitous pressure to marine fauna, with an increasing number of studies seeking to understand both the short- and longterm impact of noise exposure on various species. As our understanding of the full extent of threats and pressure to marine fauna populations grows, so too does concern regarding the impacts and management of noise generating activities from offshore industries. Regulators, proponent and EIA practitioners for offshore industries are faced with the challenge of integrating new scientific understandings and increasingly complex impact prediction tools within existing regulatory and management frameworks. Often these management frameworks are based around standardised mitigation measures and set and forget management approaches. These frameworks are limited in their ability to be adaptable to real time information, and often blind to the nuances of operational and environmental context. While the level of environmental impact that is acceptable will vary between environmental and regulatory contexts, EIA and mitigation approaches are often based around demonstrating that impacts are reduced to a level that is as low as practicable and fail to demonstrate that impacts will be managed to achieve a specific environmental outcome. Over the past decade, the technical capability surrounding noise impact prediction has significantly evolved, this has occurred alongside a growing body of information to inform species distribution and habitat use. As our ability to predict the impacts and risks of underwater noise grows, it becomes increasingly evident that set and forget mitigation measures fall short in managing impacts to an acceptable level. This highlights the need for pragmatic underwater noise management frameworks that are sensitive to environmental and operational context and adaptive in their implementation. This paper will discuss best practices in underwater noise impact 

Van Den Hoff, J., J. Delarue, V.E. Warren, C. McPherson, J.L. Lieser, H. Achurch, P. Virtue, and B.S. Miller

Marine Ecology Progress Series 757:17-36(2025)

DOI: 10.3354/meps14813

Baseline characterisation of the acoustic underwater environment is integral to understanding changes in the soundscape of a location. We used passive acoustic monitoring to investigate the soundscape of a seasonally ice-covered, shallow marine environment close to a permanently occupied research station in Prydz Bay, East Antarctica, from July (winter ice cover) 2021 through to February (summer open water) 2022. We applied a suite of automated detectors to detect sounds, with manual analysis of a subset of recordings to validate automated detections and characterise detector performance. From July until late November, the landfast ice cover had a dampening effect on mean daily ambient underwater sound pressure levels. The anthropophony of the ice-covered environment included contributions from aircraft landings and the movements of over-ice vehicles. The biophony was most influenced by the sounds of Weddell, crabeater and leopard seals and Antarctic minke whales. Mean daily sound levels increased immediately as the ice cover decreased and the sea surface became exposed to the effects of wind. The soundscape of the open-water/drifting pack-ice environment then altered to include noise from ship and small boat activities and vocalisations of killer whales and leopard and Ross seals. The results demonstrate a study site with high seasonality in natural sound sources and an unprecedented contribution of noise from human activities during the period of ice cover. There is likely a year-round contribution of anthropogenic noise to the Antarctic coastal marine environment close to research stations that are often co-located with regional hot-spots in faunal occurrences.