We wish to note the availability of two recent publications
concerning vessel collisions with large whales. Abstracts appear below
and the papers are available at:
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/shipstrike/jembe_article.pdf
and
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/shipstrike/opr44.pdf
Greg Silber
Office of Protected Resources
NOAA, Fisheries Service
Silver Spring, MD, USA
Silber, G.K., J. Slutsky, and S. Bettridge. 2010. Hydrodynamics
of a ship/whale collision. Journal
of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology
391:10-19.
ABSTRACT
All
endangered large whale species are vulnerable to
collisions with large ships; and "ship strikes" are the greatest
known threat to one of the world’s rarest whales, the North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis).
The
magnitude of this threat is likely to increase as maritime commerce
expands. Factors
influencing the incidence and severity of ship strikes are not well
understood,
although vessel speed appears to be a strong contributor. The purpose
of this
study was to characterize hydrodynamic forces at play near a moving
hull that
may cause a whale to be drawn to or repelled from the hull, and to
assess the
forces exerted on a whale at the time of impact particularly as it
relates to
vessel speed. Using scale models of a container ship and a right whale
in
experimental flow tanks, we measured accelerations experienced by a
whale model
in the presence of a moving vessel, and assessed hydrodynamic actions
near the
hull on the static, free floating whale model. Impact accelerations
were
measured while the whale was at the surface at various vessel speeds,
orientations of the whale relative to the vessel path, and distances
off the
direct path of the vessel. We observed that accelerations experienced
by the
whale model in a collision: increased in magnitude with increasing ship
speed;
were not dependent on whale orientation to the vessel path; and
decreased
exponentially with increasing separation distances from the ship track.
Subsequent
experiments with the whale model submerged indicate a pronounced
propeller
suction effect, a drawing of the whale toward the hull at one to two
times the
ship’s draft, and increased probability of propeller strikes resulting
from
this class of encounter. We present a heuristic map of the hydrodynamic
field
around a transiting hull likely involved in close whale/vessel
encounters. These
results may have bearing on policy decisions, particularly those
involving
vessel speed, aimed at protecting endangered large whales from ship
strikes
worldwide.
Silber,
G.K., and S. Bettridge. 2010. Vessel operations in
right whale protection areas
in 2009. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech.
Memo. NMFS-OPR-44. 44 p.
Executive Summary
One of
the greatest threats to the recovery of the highly
depleted North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) is collisions with
ships (or “ship strikes”). The U.S.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National
Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) has taken a number of steps to reduce the
threat,
including issuing a final rule (73 Federal Register 60173,
October 2008)
that requires vessels >65 feet in length to
travel at 10 knots or less in certain times and locations (termed
“Seasonal
Management Areas”, or SMA) of right whale occurrence. NMFS
also initiated a program whereby “Dynamic
Management Areas” (DMA) are established in areas in which right whales
are
observed outside SMAs, whereby temporary zones are created and vessels
are
requested (but, not required) to either navigate around the zone or
travel
through it at 10 knots or less. This
process allows for management measures that are tied directly to the
known, but
perhaps transitory, presence of right whales, and provides a means to
establish
areas effecting vessel operations that are smaller (in area) and
shorter (in
duration) than seasonal management measures.
NMFS is monitoring the effectiveness of the restrictions by
assessing
compliance with the vessel speed limits as well as adherence to
associated
voluntary measures. Automatic
Identification System (AIS) technologies provide a precise and easily
accessible means to do so.
Originally conceived as a safety
of navigation technology, the AIS uses Global Positioning System
(GPS)-linked,
very high frequency (VHF) radio signal that provides for ship-to-ship
and
ship-to-shore information transfer. It
transmits the ship’s name, call sign, position, dimensions, speed,
heading and
other information multiple times each minute.
The AIS signal provides a suite of information, both dynamic
(that is
unique to a particular voyage) and static (that is consistent for a
given
vessel). Dynamic information includes
the vessel’s position, speed over ground, course over ground, heading,
rate of
turn, and position accuracy (< or > 10 m) which are determined by
continuous GPS-linked updates. Static
information includes the vessel’s: name,
call sign, type, cargo, and its Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI)
number.
Given the rate at which it provides this information, AIS is a precise
means to
remotely track vessel speeds and other vessel operations.
Our goal here is to
provide (a) a
characterization of vessel traffic volume, patterns, and speeds of
vessels
transiting SMAs, and (b) an initial assessment of vessel adherence to
the
vessel speed restrictions. This summary
is for the period of January 2009 (the rule was enacted December 2008)
through
December 2009. We also provide an initial
characterization of vessel use of DMAs in the same period.
We gathered
information on vessel
activity in 10 operational SMAs, and in 18 DMAs for the period January
to
December 2009. As set forth in the
rulemaking, the SMAs we analyzed were effective in: Cape Cod Bay (1
January –
15 May); an area Off Race Point, MA (1 March – 30 April); an area in
the Great
South Channel (1 April – 31 July); an area extending from mid-coastal
Georgia
to northern Florida (15 November – 15 April); and (1 November – 30
April for
each of the following) Block Island Sound, port entrances of New York
City and
New Jersey, Philadelphia, PA, Norfolk VA, Wilmington, NC, and an area
extending
from Wilmington, NC to just south of Savannah, GA.
A total of 39,615
vessel transits
were recorded in active SMAs in 2009. Of
these, 10,982 were not applicable to conditions set forth in the Rule
or were
deemed inaccurate and were therefore removed from further analysis. Thus, a total of 28,633 transits were
analyzed to determine vessel types, vessel speeds, SMA use, and other
characteristics of these passages.
The New York-New
Jersey port
entrance SMA had the greatest number of transits (n = 7,651) followed
by the
North Carolina-Georgia complex and the Norfolk SMAs (6,502 and 4,790
transits,
respectively). Cargo vessels constituted
the majority of ship passages in all SMAs, comprising over 50.3 % of
all vessel
transits, (and excluding the “other” vessel type category) followed by
tanker
vessels (14.9%), and tug-type vessels (10.2%).
Cargo vessels were strongly represented in the New York-New
Jersey, Norfolk
and North Carolina-Georgia
SMAs, with the North Carolina-Georgia complex having the highest number
of
cargo transits of all SMAs. Considering
all transits in all active SMAs the ratio of foreign flagged to
domestic
vessels was 1.6:1
The
most common maximum speed
represented was 11 knots; and the majority of all transits were between
11 and
16 knots. A substantial number of
transits were at maximum speeds in excess of 16 knots. Aggregate
maximum speeds in most SMAs
exhibited a “bell-curve” with peaks between 10 and 16 knots; while the
most
highly represented maximum speed in nearly all SMAs was 11 - 12 knots. Generally, domestic vessels had lower
aggregate vessel speeds than did foreign-flagged vessels;
foreign-flagged
vessels tended to travel at 12 knots or greater. Cargo
vessels exhibited the highest aggregate
maximum speeds (with the most traveling in the 15-16 knot range),
followed by
tankers (with peaks in the 11-13 knot range), and aggregate speeds for
passenger vessels had peaks around 12 knots.
Vessels in the “tug, tow, dredge”, and “other” categories
exhibited peak
aggregate speeds around 10 knots.
In 2009, 18 DMAs were
“triggered” by right whale presence,
all occurring in waters off New England. A total of 1,406 vessel transits occurred in
these active DMAs. The majority were
tankers (n = 521), nearly twice as many as any other vessel category. Excluding the “other” category, cargo vessels
were the second most common type. The
distribution of vessel speeds through DMAs is different than the
distribution
for vessel speeds utilized in SMAs (it was not a “bell-shape” as in the
SMA
speed distributions). In DMAs, 11 knots
was the most common maximum speed; and there appeared to be a higher
proportion
of vessels traveling 11 knots or less than those vessels traversing
SMAs. A second peak occurred at 14 knots with a
large portion traveling at 13 and 14 knots; probably reflecting the
number of
cargo ships and tankers traversing the zones.
Likely, many tug and barges and “big-tows” (vessels typically
traveling
at speeds under 12 knots) have limited options to route around such
areas: being largely coastal and having
specific
destinations that require routes through DMAs and therefore opt to
travel
through DMAs; whereas larger, ocean-going vessels on more lengthy
routes may
have the latitude to avoid a particular area.
It is not clear why “compliance” (defined strictly
here as maximum speed <10 knots) with vessel speed
requirements was
low. Contributing
factors may be a lack of public recognition of the rule, disregard for
it, or
inadequate early enforcement. There
are almost certainly learning and acquisition phases to a requirement
that
substantially alters standard practices.
With regard to “foreign-flagged” vessels and their operators,
particularly those making infrequent port calls, language barriers or
simple
lack of familiarity with domestic requirements may hamper acquisition
of the
significance and requirements of the rule.
Regarding knowledge of the rule, however, NOAA and a suite of
partners
made a concerted effort to notify the public and maritime community
about the
requirements both prior to their enactment and during the periods in
which SMAs
were in effect. Perhaps one significant
weakness in efforts to alert mariners is that of NOAA’s printed
nautical charts
which currently do not depict SMAs. There
are lessons to be learned about the importance of an effective
enforcement
program, and about possible weaknesses in the distribution of various
notification outlets, their capacity to reach the targeted audience, or
the
level of their impact in influencing the behavior of certain maritime
operators.