Following a published study by Michel André we reported on earlier this year about the impacts of Seismic Airgun Survey on the mortality giant squid, last week what might have been considered an obscure topic just a few years ago went “mainstream” in National Geographic.
It is an odd emotion to be pleased that so many readers are being exposed to such a tragic topic. On the one hand it is good that ocean noise pollution and the proliferation of human generated acoustic impacts are becoming part of the mainstream ocean conservation discussion. On the other hand it is a troubling indication of the global reach and increasing density of the problem.
Bearing down on the impacts of seismic surveys on squid is that someone has been making a lot of assumptions about the “nominal impacts” of these surveys because there has heretofore not been clear evidence of biological damage – i.e. animals floating up and washing ashore. Unfortunately Squid don’t really float when dead, so it would be hard to determine what great swaths of invertebrate destruction are left in the wake of the 40+ seismic survey sites that are occurring around the globe at any given time.
National Geographic has been increasingly covering ocean noise pollution issues. This is both encouraging and sad. Encouraging because when the general public becomes more conversant and more concerned about an issue, their understanding increases the likelihood that regulations and practices will change to mitigate the problem. Sad because it has come to this.