Ocean Noise Pollution (ONP) is a source of marine pollution in the form of acoustic energy that has garnered international recognition in recent years. In fact, a number of fora including the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), International Maritime Organization, Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas, Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans in the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and contiguous Atlantic area and International Whaling Commission, have by now acknowledged that ONP is capable of negatively impacting on marine ecosystems and marine living resources.

The diversity of the sources of ONP, which include shipping and seismic airguns used in the exploration of offshore oil and gas resources, let alone military activities, is arguably the main reason why no mitigation measures have been agreed by states so far. Indeed, it is difficult to envisage a one size fits all approach when it comes to the impacts of ONP. For instance, a number of scientific studies have shown that noise generated by shipping produces behavioural deviations in bluefin tuna schools, affecting the accuracy of their migrations to spawning and feeding grounds, with potentially significant effects on their fitness and survivability (Sarà, 2007). On the other hand, noise generated by seismic airguns can reduce catch rates by 40 to 80% for fish species such as cod, haddock, rockfish, herring, sand eel and blue whiting (Engas et alt 1996, Slotte et alt 2004). Finally, low frequency sonar has been known to cause strandings of marine mammals.

However, each of these sources of ONP raises different legal problems and calls for the involvement of different specialised organisations in view of the possible adoption of mitigation measures.

Recently though, at the UN General Assembly, a very encouraging development occurred: there seems to be momentum for the negotiations of an implementation agreement to the UN Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) pertaining to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

The proposal to negotiate for such an agreement was first submitted to the attention of the UN General Assembly by the EU but it was not supported by many states. The situation appears to differ at present and it should not be ruled out that political endorsement for such a move might be seized in the near future, perhaps in Rio de Janeiro next June. From the standpoint of ONP, it would be of paramount importance that the implementation agreement empowers the international community with a kit of area-based management tools to be employed on the high seas. Environmental impact assessments and marine protected areas, among others, could prove efficient in reducing the impacts of ONP and have been already linked to ONP within the remit of discussions that took place at various regional fora. Also, they could be potentially used to mitigate the impacts produced by each source.

OceanCare supports the efforts of those that are in favour of an implementation agreement to the UNCLOS and, thanks to its observer status to the UN General Assembly, will continue to do so in connection with relevant meetings that will be held in the months to come. The road to Rio, after all, is still a fairly long one.

Source: publicservice.co.uk