Dear Marmam,

Apologies for cross-posting.

My co-authors and I are pleased to announce a new pair of papers exploring
the management of noise impacts in Canada, and elsewhere.

Andrew J. Wright & Hilary B. Moors-Murphy 2022. Regulating Impacts of Noise
on Marine Mammals in North America: An Overview of the Legal Frameworks in
Canada and the United States. Journal of International Wildlife Law &
Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2022.2151116

and

Andrew J. Wright, Hilary B. Moors-Murphy & Harald Yurk 2022. Applying
technical guidance from the USA for management of impacts of anthropogenic
noise on wildlife in other countries: the Canadian context. Canadian
Journal of Zoology, https://doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2022-0085 (Currently
available in a Just-In format, fully formatted version to follow soon.)


Abstracts and links follow below. Please also send me an email at
marineb...@gmail.com for a copy if you don't have access.

All the best for the holidays,

Andrew



Andrew J. Wright & Hilary B. Moors-Murphy 2022. Regulating Impacts of Noise
on Marine Mammals in North America: An Overview of the Legal Frameworks in
Canada and the United States. Journal of International Wildlife Law &
Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2022.2151116
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13880292.2022.2151116?src=

Abstract: Marine mammals are protected under dedicated taxonomic
legislation, endangered species legislation, and general environmental
stewardship laws in many countries. Governments and agencies within those
countries are tasked with assessing and limiting human impacts in
accordance with their own laws, including those arising from underwater
noise emissions. While the United States (US) has established thresholds
for permanent and temporary threshold shifts (PTS and TTS) in the hearing
of marine mammals, Canada has not yet established specific numeric onset
thresholds for hearing impairment or other noise-related impacts. Given
that Canada and the US are jointly responsible for the management of a
number of at-risk marine mammals, we provide a brief overview of the main
laws and associated standards relevant to management of noise impacts on
marine mammals in these two jurisdictions. The US PTS/TTS thresholds are
only a small part of a suite of elements collectively applied to assess and
mitigate the full range of impacts of noise on marine mammals, and the
implementation of these (or any other) thresholds in Canada would not
negate the need to conduct case-specific impact assessments to satisfy
their own broader requirements. Caution should be taken when applying US
thresholds to address Canadian legal standards, as there are substantial
differences in the legal definitions to which these thresholds might be
applied. Thus, the need for, and application of, similar generalised
PTS/TTS thresholds in Canada is still under debate and noise impacts will
likely continue to be assessed in different ways in these two bordering
nations.


Andrew J. Wright, Hilary B. Moors-Murphy & Harald Yurk 2022. Applying
technical guidance from the USA for management of impacts of anthropogenic
noise on wildlife in other countries: the Canadian context. Canadian
Journal of Zoology, https://doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2022-0085
https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/cjz-2022-0085

Abstract: Technical Guidance from the U.S. National Marine Fisheries
Service recommends Federal agencies use estimated thresholds for peak sound
pressure levels and weighted cumulative sound exposure levels for the onset
of permanent (and temporary) hearing threshold shifts in marine mammals.
These dual metrics were developed to inform impact assessments within the
U.S. legal landscape. Despite its merits, the Technical Guidance contains
uncertainties due to a lack of data on marine mammal hearing and auditory
response to noise, the underlying assumptions about the representative
value of existing data create limitations in the applicability of the
Technical Guidance. These limitations warrant consideration before it can
be applied effectively in other jurisdictions with different legal
standards. Using the Canadian legal framework as a working example, we
found that Canadian species are under-represented in the dataset used for
the Technical Guidance, which also does not address all relevant impact
types to meet the precautionary requirements of many Canadian legal
standards. Thus, the Technical Guidance alone cannot address all Canadian
legal standards and, if the Guidance is incorporated, some adjustments to
the criteria within may be needed.


--
Andrew Wright, Ph.D.

VaquitaAreBrowncoats: Where Sci-Fi meets Science, the Cosmos meets
Conservation and Firefly meets Flipper. Shiny
https://www.facebook.com/vaquitaarebrowncoats.

"We don't have to save the world. The world is big enough to look after
itself. What we have to be concerned about is whether or not the world we
live in will be capable of sustaining us in it." Douglas Adams

GNU Terry Pratchett
_______________________________________________
MARMAM mailing list
MARMAM@lists.uvic.ca
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/marmam

Reply via email to