2. 2
Suggested citation:
Berrow, S. McKeogh, E. Keogh, N. Wilson-Parr, R. Russell, C. Meade, R. 2014 Cruise Report on
CV14020 Deployment of Passive Acoustic Monitoring Equipment in the Porcupine Basin and
adjacent Shelf Edge and Concurrent Cetacean, Seabird and Passive Acoustic Monitoring
Survey, Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology Document CV14020 Cruise Report by GMIT for
Woodside Energy (Ireland) Pty Ltd.
Simon Berrow1,2
, Enda McKeogh1
, Niall Keogh3
, Ryan Wilson-Parr4
,
Clodagh Russell1
and Rossa Meade1
Cetacean Survey Team – SB, EMcK, RM, CR
Bird Survey Team – NK, RW-P
Passive Acoustic Monitoring – SB, EMcK
Visual Cetacean Surveys – RM, CR
1
Irish Whale and Dolphin Group, Merchants Quay, Kilrush, Co Clare
2
Marine and Freshwater Research Centre, Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology,
Dublin Road, Galway
3
BirdWatch Ireland, Unit 20, Block D, Bullford Business Campus, Kilcoole, Co. Wicklow
4
Ecologists Ireland Consultants Ltd, 78 Gleann Alainn, Tullyallen, Drogheda, Co. Louth
3. 3
INTRODUCTION
The waters of Ireland’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) are thought to represent some of the most
important cetacean (whales, dolphins and porpoise) habitats in Europe. To date, 24 species of
cetacean have been recorded, with seven of these having been confirmed as calving within the Irish
EEZ (Berrow 2001) and a number of other species are possibly calving (e.g. minke whale and
northern bottlenose whale). In recognition of their importance for cetaceans, the Irish government
declared all Irish waters (within the EEZ) to be a whale and dolphin sanctuary in 1991 (Rogan and
Berrow 1995) and under the EU Habitats Directive all species of cetacean are entitled to strict
protection including of their habitat. Despite this recognition, information on the distribution and
relative abundance of cetaceans within the Irish EEZ, especially in offshore waters, is still limited
(Wall et al. 2006). The Irish Whale and Dolphin Group (IWDG) have been collecting data on the
distribution and relative abundance of cetaceans in Irish waters (including Northern Ireland) since
1991. The IWDG casual and constant effort sightings schemes record data mainly from land-based
sightings and surveys (Berrow et al. 2010) with a strong emphasis on “citizen science”. Dedicated
offshore surveys in Ireland have been relatively limited given the large costs involved. In 1994 the
Celtic Sea was surveyed as part of the Small Cetacean Abundance in the North and Baltic Sea
(SCANS) international survey targeting the harbour porpoise (Hammond et al. 2002). A repeat of this
survey (SCANS II) which included all continental shelf waters was carried out in July 2005 (Hammond
et al. 2013). A similar dedicated survey of all waters beyond the continental shelf was carried out in
July 2007 but excluded the porcupine Seabight (Hammond et al. 2009). These surveys generated
density and abundance estimates for the most frequently recorded species. The first offshore atlas
of cetaceans and seabirds were created between 1999 and 2001 as part of the Petroleum
Infrastructure Programme funded projects, largely from platforms of opportunity. O’Cadhla et al
(2004) presented 772 cetacean sighting records from 442 survey days at sea and showed the
Porcupine Bight was important for pelagic dolphins and fin and other baleen whales. An atlas of
cetaceans in UK and Irish waters was published by Reid et al. (2003) using a combination of datasets.
This suggested the porcupine bight was important for bottlenose dolphins and long-finned pilot
whales.
Since 2001 the IWDG have established an offshore recording scheme through conducting cetacean
surveys onboard ships of opportunity including commercial ferries, research and naval service
vessels. IWDG also utilise the Maritime Squadron Air Corps Casa 252 aircraft as platforms for
offshore surveys (Wall et al. 2013) and since 2008 have carried out a number of dedicated shelf edge
cruises under the Cetaceans on the Frontier programme. These data have recently been used to
create an updated offshore atlas of the distribution and relative abundance of cetaceans within the
Irish EEZ (Wall et al. 2013). IWDG continue to exploit opportunities to carry out surveys in Ireland’s
offshore environment to fill in gaps in coverage and provide data useful for monitoring changes in
distribution and abundance.
Acoustic monitoring has been carried out in Irish waters for a number of years (O’Brien et al. 2009).
Most has been carried out in inshore waters but two large scale offshore acoustic surveys using
towed hydrophones have been undertaken over the past 10 years (de Soto et al. 2004; O’Brien et al.
2013). Most of this effort was over deep-water off the northwest and along the shelf edge with little
effort in the Porcupine Bight or slopes. Static acoustic monitoring (SAM) in the offshore environment
is much more recent. Extensive acoustic monitoring using bottom mounted hydrophones deployed
4. 4
by the US Navy (SOSUS) has been carried out for a number of years (Clark and Charif, 1998; 2009;
Charif and Clark 2000). These studies showed acoustic detections of fin, humpback and blue whales
were frequent off the shelf edge with peaks in detections between October and January suggesting
the western seaboard is used as a migratory path. More recently Wall (2012) targeted deep canyon
habitats off the northwest during a pilot project to assess the feasibility of monitoring beaked
whales with SAM. Two SAM devices were deployed at three sites off the NW shelf edge and one on
the M3 weather buoy. These provided data for over 200 days between August 2009 and 2011.
These and other recent surveys carried out as part of oil and gas licencing obligation (e.g. Baines et
al. 2013) have highlighted the Porcupine Bight and slopes as important habitats for cetaceans and
some seabirds. These include offshore bottlenose dolphins, Risso’s dolphins, deep-diving species
such as beaked bottlenose whales and fin and the critically endangered blue whale.
The Australian oil and gas company, Woodside, have recently entered the Irish exploration market
by taking an interest in four licensed blocks in the Porcupine Basin. As part of their commitment to
evidence based management they sought to deploy SAM gear at three sites in, and adjacent to, the
Porcupine Seabight and on the shelf break. The main aim of this cruise was to deploy the SAM gear
and to conduct concurrent cetacean and seabird surveys during transit to and from the monitoring
locations.
Seabird surveys in the offshore waters around Ireland began in the 1980’s (Stone et al. 1995) with an
intensive series of at-sea surveys taking place between August 1994 and September 1997 (Pollock et
al. 1997) and between July 1999 and September 2001 (Mackey et al. 2004). These surveys provided
important baseline seasonal data on seabird distribution, abundance and density in Irish waters with
the shelf slope around the Porcupine Seabight being identified by Mackey et al. (2004) as some of
the most species rich areas in the Irish EEZ. In recent years, these data have been supplemented by
surveys undertaken on board the Celtic Explorer and Celtic Voyager during dedicated research
cruises for cetaceans and seabirds (Cetaceans on the Frontier 2009-2010 and 2012-2014) and during
select annual fisheries monitoring programs (Celtic Sea Herring Acoustic Survey 2012-2013; Blue
Whiting Acoustic Survey 2014). By using standard European Seabirds at Sea (ESAS) survey methods,
further data on seabird numbers and distribution in the Irish EEZ has been collected during this
cruise.
METHODS
This survey was conducted on board the Marine Institute’s Celtic Voyager. Opportunistic surveying
was carried out between 17 and 20 May, 2014. The survey area covered waters over the Porcupine
Bank, Porcupine Seabight and Celtic Shelf. As the survey primary aim of the cruise was to deploy
acoustic monitoring equipment, the trackline was selected to maximise deployment opportunities
during a narrow weather window. Thus cetacean and seabird surveys were conducted as though on
a platform of opportunity. The areas surveyed were chosen by Woodside to accommodate the
deployment of static acoustic equipment at their chosen site allowing the team to survey deep-
water canyon and slope habitat.
5. 5
Static Acoustic Monitoring Deployments
Static Acoustic Monitoring (SAM) arrays were to be deployed at three sites. These involved two
loggers at two sites (Belgica and Hovland Mounds) and three loggers at one site (SW Porcupine)
(Table 1).
Table 1. SAM arrays to be deployed in the Porcupine Seabight and adjacent waters.
Site SAM equipment
Belgica Mound LF Shallow logger HF Curtin logger
Hovland Mound LF Shallow logger HF Wildlife Acoustics logger
SW Porcupine LF Deep Logger HF Wildlife Acoustics logger Deep CPOD
At each of the three stations where static acoustic monitoring equipment was being deployed, a CTD
cast was carried out. The CTD probe recorded temperature, depth and conductivity (salinity) data
throughout the drop and haul, giving duplicate data for any given depth at each station. The probe
was dropped to within 10m of the seabed
Figure 1. Locations of SAM deployments during cruise CV14020
Visual Cetacean Survey
Two marine mammal observers were present on board during the survey and conducted watches
from the ships bridge wings located 4.2m above sea level. Observer effort focused on a 90-degree
arc ahead of the ship; however sightings located up to 90 degrees to port and starboard were also
6. 6
included. The observer scanned the area by eye and using 10 X 40 binoculars. Bearings to sightings
were measured using an angle board and distances were estimated with the aid of distance
measuring stick (Heinmann, 1981). Environmental data were recorded every 30 minutes using
Logger 2000 software (IFAW 2000). Sightings were also recorded using Logger 2000. Automated
position data were obtained through a laptop computer linked to GPS receiver. As this was a survey
onboard a vessel of opportunity, the survey was conducted in ‘passing mode’ and cetaceans sighted
were not approached. Sightings were identified to species level where possible, with species
identifications being graded as definite, probable or possible. Where species identification could not
be confirmed, sightings were downgraded (e.g. unidentified dolphin/unidentified whale/unidentified
beaked whale etc.) according to criteria established for the IWDG’s cetacean sightings database
(Berrow et al. 2010).
Passive Acoustic Detection Cetacean Survey
A towed hydrophone array was deployed for the duration of the survey. This array consists of a
200m cable with four (2 low and 2 high frequency) hydrophone elements situated 250mm apart in a
fluid filled tube towards the end of the cable. The hydrophone connects to an interface unit with
Neutrik XLR inputs and a 2 kHz high pass filter for the high frequency channels. From the interface
box, the high frequency channels are connected to a National Instruments 9171 soundcard while the
low frequency channels feed into a Tascam US144 mk2 ASIO soundcard. Both the high and low
frequency channels are connected from their soundcards to separate laptops via USB. This allowed
for the detection of sounds outside the capability of the computers soundcard (i.e. harbour porpoise
high frequency echolocation clicks). Detection software used during survey was PAMGUARD (freely
available at www.pamguard.org) and IFAW´s, LOGGER and Rainbow click (freely available at
www.ifaw.org). The acoustic survey track line will be recorded via an external GPS receiver linked to
the Logger software. PAMGUARD is a fusion of the IFAW suite and Ishmael and therefore has
applications such as click detectors, tonal whistle detectors, capability to calculate bearings on maps,
record a track log, spectrogram viewer, detection energy display, and has built in filters. The
collection of acoustic data during visual surveys will add an extra dimension to the monitoring
dataset. Acoustic monitoring can detect cetaceans which are beyond the visual observers view and
therefore increase the capacity of a survey. Each day all acoustic files were backed up on a 1TB
external hard-drive.
A PAM operator was present with the monitoring station and listened to the data stream in real
time. This method served to reduce the amount of post processing and allowed for the species
identification of detections where visual sightings occurred. Data analyses included the visual
inspection of all sound files on spectrograms using IFAW‟s whistle detector and porpoise detector.
All characteristics associated with detections including, inter-click interval of click trains, as well as
frequency, shape and outline of whistles will be taken into account when identifying detections to
species level (example Fig. 3). The track of all acoustic effort was mapped, with acoustic detections
classed as “sightings”, and these were overlain on the track similar to those from visuals surveys.
Seabird Survey
Surveys of seabirds at sea were conducted from Celtic Voyager between 17 and 20 May 2014. A
standardised line transect method with sub-bands to allow correction for species detection bias and
7. 7
‘snapshots’ to account for flying birds was used (following the recommendations of Tasker et al.
1984; Komdeur et al. 1992; Camphuysen et al. 2004).
Two observers (a primary observer and a scribe, who also acted as a secondary observer) worked in
rotating one hour shifts, surveying between 08:00 and 21:00 hours. Environmental conditions,
including wind force and direction, sea state, swell height, visibility and cloud cover, and the ship’s
speed and heading were noted at regular intervals during surveys. No surveys were conducted in
conditions greater than sea state 6, when high swell made working on deck unsafe, or when visibility
was reduced to less than 300m.
Seabird surveys were conducted from the platform of the bridge-wings. The platform for
observation was changed to either the port or starboard side on the basis of suitable viewing
conditions at the time (e.g. presence of glare). The platform height was 4.2m above the waterline,
providing an uninterrupted view of the survey area. The survey area was defined as a 300m wide
band operated on one side (in a 90˚ arc from the bow) and ahead of the ship. This survey band was
sub- divided (A = 0-50m from the ship, B = 50-100m, C = 100-200m, D = 200-300m, E = >300m) to
subsequently allow correction of species differences in detection probability with distance from the
observer. A fixed-interval range finder (Heinemann 1981) was used to periodically check distance
estimates. The area was scanned by eye, with binoculars used only to confirm species identification.
All birds seen within the survey area were counted, and those recorded on the water noted as ‘in
transect’. All flying birds within the survey area were also noted, but only those recorded during a
‘snapshot’ were regarded as ‘in transect’. This method avoids overestimating bird numbers in flight
(Tasker et al. 1984). The frequency of the snapshot scan was ship-speed dependent, such that they
were timed to occur at the moment the ship passed from one survey area (300m long x 300m wide)
to the next. Any bird recorded within the survey area that was regarded as being associated with the
survey vessel was noted as such (to be excluded from abundance and density calculations). Survey
time intervals were set at 1 minute. Additional bird species observed outside the survey area, during
periods of casual observations were also recorded and added to the species list for the duration of
the survey. In this report we present our daily total count data for each species across all days along
with the daily survey effort.
SAM deployment at Belgica Mound
8. 8
RESULTS
Static Acoustic Monitoring Deployments
All three SAM arrays were successfully deployed in the assigned areas (Table 2).
Table 2. Location and water depth of SAM equipment to be deployed in the Porcupine Seabight and
adjacent waters.
Site Water Depth Location
Belgica Mound 538m 51° 22.904' N 11° 37.446' W
Hovland Mound 596m 52° 22.775' N 52° 22.775' N
SW Porcupine 767m 51° 52.660' N 15° 01.344' W
Temperature and Salinity Profiles
Static Acoustic Monitoring (SAM) equipment was deployed at three sites. At each site following
deployment a CTD cast was made to explore whether stratification was occurring which may
interfere with the transmission of sound signals in the deep ocean. Heavily stratified water, whether
it be through temperature or salinity barriers, can restrict sound transmission, especially of low
frequency cetacean vocalisations.
Belgica Mound: Sea temperature and salinity was quite consistent throughout the profile to a depth
of 538m. There was a slight drop from 11.1°C to 10.5°C between 68 and 108m after which it was
quite stable (Fig. 2a &b).
Figure 2a and b. Results of CTD casts at Belgica Mound SAM site
Hovland Mound: Similar to Belgica mound the water was well mixed with no sign of a thermo or
halocline. There were temperature drops between 16 and 24m and between 68-80m (Fig. 3a &b)
but only small drops suggesting little stratification.
SW Porcupine: Similar to the other sites there was great consistency in temperature and salinity
throughout these profiles down to 750m at the SW Porcupine site. Temperature drops of around 1°C
occurred around between 48-96m (Fig. 4a &b).
9. 9
Figure 3a and b. Results of CTD casts at Hovland Mound SAM site
Figure 4a and b. Results of CTD casts at SW Porcupine SAM site
Marine Mammal Visual Survey
A total of only nine sightings of around 60 individual animals were recorded. Cetacean species
identified comprised long-finned pilot whale (Globicephala melas), humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae), common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) and harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena).
Table 3. Sightings of marine mammals during cruise
Species No. Sightings No. Individuals Range of Group Size
Harbour porpoise
1 2 2
Humpback whale 1 1 -
Long-finned pilot whale 1 12 10-15
Common dolphin 1 20 -
Unidentified beaked whale 2 3 1-2
Unidentified large whale 1 1 -
Grey seal 2 2 -
Total 9 60
11. 11
Figure 5. Map showing visual survey effort and location of sightings.
Passive Acoustic Detection Survey
Survey effort using PAM was more extensive than visual effort as it was run at night during dark.
Also PAM is dependent on sea-state and thus while high sea-states mitigated against visual sightings
it would have a minimal effect on the ability of the towed hydrophone to record detections.
12. 12
Figure 6. Map showing acoustic survey effort and location of detections.
There were surprisingly few acoustic detections and only one concurrent sighting (common
dolphins) to confirm identification. High frequency clicks were detected on 18 May on the shelf edge
but they were only detected for <10 seconds and it was thought to be a false positive porpoise
densities are much greater closer to shore. On 18 May a seismic survey was detected (bang every 12
seconds) which was likely to be that being carried out by BGP Explorer. These airguns were heard
throughout the day and night for the next 26 hours. Some clicks which were assigned to probable
beaked whale were detected but it was felt they were unlikely to be beaked whale and are not
presented.
Table 4. Acoustic detections of cetaceans during cruise
Date/Time (UTC) Event Likely source Visual
Low frequency
18 May/10:58 clicks Possible harbour porpoise
18 May/22:17 whistles (faint) Unidentified dolphin
20 May/11:35 whistles (faint) Possible common dolphin
20 May/21:05 whistles (faint) Common dolphin sighting
20 May/22:34 Grunt Unidentified source
13. 13
Seabird Survey
A total 977 minutes (16 hours and 17 minutes) of seabird surveys were conducted across three days
between 18 and 20 May 2014 (Table 5). An uncorrected, cumulative total of 1594 individual seabirds
of 16 species were recorded. A total of 70 seabirds were noted as ‘off survey’, outside of dedicated
survey time or associating with the vessel and as such will be excluded from future analysis of
abundance and density. Thus, the corrected total of seabird recorded during dedicated survey time
was 1524. A synopsis of daily totals for all seabird species recorded is presented in Table 6. The
greatest number of seabirds and highest species richness was encountered on the Porcupine
Seabight area on 18 May (Table 6).
Table 5. Details of daily effort, species richness and location throughout the survey period.
Date Start End Effort (mins) Species Platform Area
18/05/2014 09:44 21:07 346 13 Bridge-wing Porcupine Seabight
19/05/2014 08:26 18:00 451 12 Bridge-wing Porcupine Bank Shelf Edge
20/05/2014 14:26 17:26 180 9 Bridge-wing Porcupine Bank
Total 977 16
Table 6. Daily totals for all seabird species recorded between 18 and 20 May 2014. Figures in italics
represent totals of birds recorded as ‘off survey’, i.e. in association with the survey vessel or outside
of dedicated survey time, thus separate to ‘on survey’ totals (non-italics) which are to be used for
abundance and density estimates.
Species 18 May 19 May 20 May Total
Great Northern Diver 2 2
Fulmar 91 201 6 47 3 339 9
‘Blue’ Fulmar 1 1 1 1
Bermuda Petrel (Cahow) 1 1
Sooty Shearwater 1 1
Manx Shearwater 423 105 6 534
European Storm-petrel 5 2 7 30 2 42 4
Gannet 79 5 11 3 42 132 8
Pomarine Skua 2 1 5 1 7 2
Long-tailed Skua 4 3 154 1 158 4
Great Skua (Bonxie) 6 1 6 1
Puffin 4 2 6
Arctic Tern 138 138
Kittiwake 123 15 26 2 4 153 17
Lesser Black-backed Gull 3 20 1 1 3 22
Yellow-legged Gull 1 1 1 1
Great Black-backed Gull 1 1
Total 875 49 518 12 131 9 1524 70
17. 17
Discussion
The objectives of the cruise were met. Static Acoustic Monitoring arrays were deployed at the three
sites identified before the cruise and simultaneous cetacean and seabird surveys conducted.
Cetacean sightings were low but this was to be expected at this time of year. Sightings inshore are
typically at a minimum during April and May (Berrow et al. 2010) and while seasonal changes in
offshore cetacean distribution is poorly known there are undoubtedly strong seasonal changes in the
occurrence of some species.
Resident species such as long-finned pilot whales were observed on the shelf edge while baleen
whales were largely absent. Fin, blue and humpback whale acoustic detections off the west coast
(Region D) are at a minimum in April – May (Clark and Charif, 1998; Charif and Clark, 2000). Although
sea-state was high on the western shelf edge, visibility was good and large whale blows would have
been observed if abundant. The seasonal occurrence of beaked whales is not known but two
sightings during this relatively short survey is quite high and the sighting of a Mesoplodon species at
the deployment site at Belgica Mound is very encouraging and it will be interesting to see if they are
recorded acoustically at this site.
The low number of dolphin sightings was a surprise. De Soto (2004) conducted a PAM survey to the
south of the porcupine in April to June 2000 and recorded numerous whistles presumably from
dolphins. Common dolphins are widespread and abundant off the southwest coast especially on the
continental shelf (Wall et al. 2013) but only one sighting was recorded during the present survey
around 30km to the west of the Aran Islands. We might have expected to record offshore bottlenose
dolphins but this population is highly mobile (Louis et al. 2013).
Previous offshore seabird surveys have shown that the area around the Porcupine Seabight can hold
some of the highest species diversity in the Irish EEZ (Mackey et al. 2004). The same study identified
shelf and shelf edge habitats either side of the Rockall Trough (the Hatton Bank in particular and to a
lesser extent, the Porcupine Seabight) as corridors for northbound skua migration, with greatest
numbers of long-tailed and pomarine skuas recorded in May. This cruise confirmed the presence of
both species in the study area during peak migration time with large numbers of long-tailed skuas in
particular observed along the western edge of the Porcupine Bank on 19 May. In addition, migrating
Arctic terns and great northern divers were also observed during the survey period en route to
breeding grounds in Iceland, Greenland or Arctic Canada.
The largest feeding aggregations of Irish breeding species such as gannet, kittiwake and Manx
shearwater were identified over the Porcupine Seabight. It was noted that a higher proportion of
immature or non-adult gannets and kittiwakes were recorded compared to surveys conducted in this
area during winter months (O’Brien et al. 2012; Ryan et al. 2013; O’Brien et al. 2014) suggesting that
the study area may form an important foraging area for non-breeding individuals during spring
months.
The record of a Bermuda petrel (Cahow) over the western edge of the Porcupine Bank on 19 May
represents the only at sea sighting of this species away from the eastern seaboard of North America
and certainly the first for Irish and European waters. Recent geolocators studies have shown that
failed breeding birds or non-breeding immatures can range as far East as the Porcupine Bank and the
area west of the Bay of Biscay between April and early June (Madeiros 2012). With a breeding
18. 18
population of 108 pairs in 2014 (Jeremy Madeiros pers. comm.) and a total global population of
perhaps 350 individuals, the Bermuda Petrel (Cahow) is classified as ‘Endangered’ by the IUCN Red
List (IUCN 2013). The confirmation of foraging ranges suggested in the geolocator study by the at sea
sighting during this cruise is of vital importance to better understanding the foraging ecology and
migration routes of one of the world’s rarest birds. Further surveying over deep water canyon
habitats in the Irish EEZ between April and June should hopefully provide more sightings of this
enigmatic seabird and shed light on its true status, distribution and habitat requirements here.
Continued recording over the study site through the breeding (April-June) and post-breeding (July-
September) seasons is also recommended in order to ascertain the full scale of usage as a migration
corridor for skuas and as a foraging area for both breeding and non-breeding species found at Irish
colonies.
19. 19
References
Baines, M., Reichelt, M., Coles, D., Williams, A., Griffin, D. and Corkhill, O. (2013) Marine Mammal
observers and Passive Acoustic Monitoring Operator’s Report during 3D seismic surveys off South
West Ireland for Kosmos. DCENR website [online] http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/B2ABEB7B-
2751-45DD-A91C-D071C8B1604C/0/201311FinalMMO1530Kosmos.pdf (accessed 17 Dec 2013).
Berrow, S. (2001) Biological diversity of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) in Irish waters. In
Marine Biodiversity in Ireland and adjacent waters. Ed. Nunn, J. Pages, 115-119.
Berrow, S., Whooley, P., O’Connell, M. and Wall, D. (2010) Irish Cetacean Review (2000-2009). Irish
Whale and Dolphin Group, 60pp. ISBN 0-9540552-4-1.
Camphuysen, K. J., Fox, A. D., Leopold, M. F. and Petersen, I. K. (2004) Towards standardised
seabirds at sea census techniques in connection with environmental impact assessments for offshore
wind farms in the U.K.: a comparison of ship and aerial sampling methods for marine birds, and their
applicability to offshore wind farm assessments. NIOZ report to COWRIE (BAM – 02-2002), Texel,
37pp.
Charif, R.A. and Clark, C.W. (2000) Acoustic monitoring of large whales to the west of Britain and
Ireland using bottom-mounted hydrophone arrays, October 1996-September 1998. JNCC Report No.
313, 1-35.
Charif, R.A. and Clark, C.W. (2009). Acoustic monitoring of large whales in deep waters north and
west of the British Isles: 1996-2005. Preliminary Report. Cornell University Lab of Ornithology
Bioacoustics Research Program, Technical Report 08-07 for UK Department of Energy and Climate
Change’s offshore energy Strategic Environmental Assessment programme.
Clark, C. W., Charif, R.A. (1998) Acoustic monitoring of large whales to the west of Britain and
Ireland using bottom-mounted hydrophone arrays, October 1996-September 1997. JNCC Report No.
281, 1-25.
Hammond, P. S., Benke, H., Berggren, P., Borchers, D.L., Buckland, S.T., Collet, A., Heide-Jorgensen,
M.P., Heimlich-Boran, S., Hiby, A.R., Leopold, M.F. and Oien, N. (2002) Abundance of harbour
porpoise and other cetaceans in the North Sea and adjacent waters. Journal of Applied Ecology 39,
361-376.
Hammond, P.S., K., Macleod, D., Gillespie, R., Swift, A., Winship, M.L. Burt A. Cañadas J.A. Vázquez V.
Ridoux, G. Certain, O. Van Canneyt S. Lens, B. Santos E. Rogan, A. Uriarte, C. Hernandez, R. Castro
(2009) Cetacean Offshore Distribution and Abundance in the European Atlantic (CODA). Final Report.
Hammond, P.S., Macleod, K., Berggren, P., Borchers, D.L., Burt, L., Cañadas, A., ... Vázquez, J.A.
(2013) Cetacean abundance and distribution in European Atlantic shelf waters to inform
conservation and management. Biological Conservation 164, 107-122.
20. 20
Heinemann, D. (1981) A Range Finder for Pelagic Bird Censusing. Journal of Wildlife Management
45(2): 489-493.
Irish Rare Bird Committee (2012) The Irish Bird List. www.irbc.ie/topbar/IrishList/IRBC_Irish
List(31122012).pdf (accessed May 2014).
IUCN (2013) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013.2
http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698088/0 (accessed May 2014).
Komdeur, J., Bertelsen, J. and Cracknell, G. (ed.) (1992) Manual for Aeroplane and Ship surveys of
Waterfowl and Seabirds, IWRB Special Publication No. 19. Ministry of the Environment, National
Environmental Research Institute, Dept. Of Wildlife Ecology, KalØ, Denmark.
Louis, M., Viricel, A., Lucas, T., Peltier, H., Alfonsi, E., Berrow, S., Brownlow, A., Covelo, P., Dabin, W.,
Deaville, R., de Stephanis, R., Gally, F., Gauffier, P., Penrose, R., Silva, M.A., Guinet, C. and Benoit S-B.
(2014) Habitat-driven population structure of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, in the North-
East Atlantic. Molecular Ecology. 23, 857-874.
Mackey, M., Ó Cadhla, O., Kelly, T.C., Aguilar de Soto, N. and Connolly, N. (2004) Cetaceans and
Seabirds of Ireland’s Atlantic Margin. Volume 1 – Seabird distribution, density and abundance.
Report on research carried out under the Irish Infrastructure Programme (PIP): Rockall Studies
Group (R SG) projects 98/6 and 00/13, Porcupine Studies Group project P00/15 and Offshore
Support Group (OSG) project 99/38. University College Cork.
Madeiros, J. (2012) 2011/2012 Cahow Recovery Program Breeding Season Report. Terrestrial
Conservation Division, Department of Conservation Services, Ministry of Public Works, Bermuda
Government.
O’Brien J., et al (2012) Cetaceans on the Frontier Survey 2012. Cruise Report to the Marine Institute,
Oranmore, Galway, Ireland.
O’Brien J., et al (2014) Cetaceans on the Frontier Survey 2014. Cruise Report to the Marine Institute,
Oranmore, Galway, Ireland.
O’Brien, J., Berrow, S.D., McGrath, D. and Evans, P.G.H. (2009) Cetaceans in Irish Waters: A Review of
Recent Research. Biology and Environment. 109B, No. 2, 63–88.
O’Brien, J., Beck, S., Wall, D. and Pierini, P. (2013) Developing Acoustic Monitoring Techniques. In
Marine Mammals and Megafauna in Irish Waters ‒ behaviour, distribution and habitat use (Final
report to the Mariner Institute under the SeaChange Programme and the National Parks and Wildlife
Service. PBA/ME/07/005(02).
Pollock, C.M., Reid, J.R., Webb, A., and Tasker, M.L. (1997) The distribution of seabirds and
cetaceans in the waters around Ireland. JNCC Report No. 267.
Reid, J.B., Evans, P.G.H. and Northridge, S.P. (2013) Atlas of Cetacean Distribution in Northwest
European Waters. Joint Nature Conservation Committee. UK
21. 21
Rogan, E. and Berrow, S.D. (1995) The management of Irish waters as a whales and dolphin
sanctuary. In Developments in Marine Biology, 4. Whales, seals, fish and man, Eds Blix, A.S., Walloe,
L. and Ulltang. O. Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Biology of Marine Mammals in
the North East Atlantic. Tromso, Norway, 29 November - 1 December 1994. Elsevier, Amsterdam,
Netherlands. p 671- 682.
Ryan, C., et al (2013) Cetaceans on the Frontier Survey 2013. Cruise Report to the Marine Institute,
Oranmore, Galway, Ireland.
De Soto, N., Rogan, E., O’Cadhla, O., Gordon, J.C.D., Mackey, M. and Connolly, N. (2004) Cetaceans
and seabirds of Ireland’s Atlantic Margin: Volume III Acoustic Surveys for Cetaceans. Report on
research carried out under the Irish Infrastructure Programme (PIP): Rockall Studies Group (RSG)
projects 98/6 and oo/3, Porcupine Studies Group project P00/15 and Offshore Support Group (OSG)
project 99/38. 51pp.
Stone C.J., Webb A., Barton C., Ratcliffe N., Reed T.C., Tasker M.L,. Camphuysen C.J and Pienkowski
M.W. (1995) An Atlas of seabird distribution in north-west European waters. Joint Nature
Conservation Committee, Monkstone House, City Road, Peterborough, PEI IJY United Kingdom.
Tasker, M.L., Jones, P.H., Dixon, T., & Blake, B.F. (1984) Counting seabirds at sea from ships: a review
of methods employed and a suggestion for a standardised approach. Auk 101: 567-577.
Wall, D. (2012) Pilot study to assess the feasibility of acoustic monitoring for beaked whales off the
NW shelf. Final report to the Petroleum Affairs Division.
Wall, D., Murray, C., O’Brien, J., Kavanagh, L., Wilson, C., Glanville, B., Williams, D., Enlander, I., Ryan,
C., O’Connor, I., McGrath, D., Whooley, P. and Berrow, S. (2013) Atlas of the distribution and relative
abundance of marine mammals in Irish offshore waters: 2005 – 2011. Irish Whale and Dolphin
Group.
