Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Pollution Bulletin

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul

Characterization of the underwater noise produced by recreational and

small fishing boats (<14 m) in the shallow-water of the Cres-Lošinj Natura
2000 SCI
Marta Picciulin a, b, *, Enrico Armelloni c, Raffaela Falkner b, Nikolina Rako-Gospić b,
Marko Radulović b, Grgur Pleslić b, Stipe Muslim d, Hrvoje Mihanović d, Tomaso Gaggero e
a
CNR-National Research Council, ISMAR - Institute of Marine Sciences in Venice, Castello 2737/f, 30122 Venice, Italy
b
Blue World Institute of Marine Research and Conservation, Kaštel 24, 51551 VeliLošinj, Croatia
c
University of Parma, Department of Engineering and Architecture, Parco Area delleScienze 181/a, 43124 Parma, Italy
d
Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries, Šetalište I. Meštrovića 63, 21000 Split, Croatia
e
University of Genoa, Department of Telecommunications, Electrical and Electronics Engineering and Naval Architecture, Via Montallegro 1, 16145 Genova, Italy

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Recreational boats are a dominant source of underwater noise in coastal areas, but reliable boat noise assessment
Underwater Radiated Noise is generally lacking. Here the Underwater Radiated Noise (URN) of seven recreational and small fishing boats
Northern Adriatic Sea moving at two different speeds was measured in the shallow waters of the Cres-Lošinj Natura 2000 SCI (Croatia).
Soundscape
Measurements were undertaken considering the internationally recognized standards and published guidelines
Bottlenose dolphin
for shallow waters. URN was provided in 1/3 octave band spectra and in narrow band spectra, to highlight the
tonal components. Engine power and type rather than the boat length and design result to be more predictive of
URN. Highest speeds induce highest noise levels only in a very limited frequency range and different boats with
similar speed but different engines show a shift in the spectra. Relevance of the achieved results for the tested
area is further discussed.

1. Introduction relatively closed population of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)

Underwater anthropogenic noise is an emerging and remarkable
source of pollution, recognized by national and international legisla­
tions, as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS;
ICP-19, https://undocs.org/A/73/124) and the European Marine
Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD; 2008/56/EC). Boat noise is one of
the most dominant contributors of anthropogenic noise in the sea, with
negative consequences for the marine fauna, including masking
communication and perception of the soundscape, alteration of the
animals' behavior and increase of the stress levels (review by Duarte
et al., 2021). Such an underwater noise input is generated not only by
shipping and cruising at the open sea (e.g. McKenna et al., 2012) but also
by small boats in worldwide coastal areas. Recreational vessels were
found to have the single greatest influence on environmental noise levels
in the North Carolina Intracoastal Waterway (USA), an area supporting a
(Haviland-Howell et al., 2007). Rako et al. (2013a) demonstrated an
increase in the background noise in the Cres and Lošinj Archipelago
(Northern Adriatic Sea, NAS; Croatia) related to the seasonal variations
in the nautical tourism and fishing activities. Similar results were found
within the Inner Danish coastal waters, where the motorized recrea­
tional boats dominated the local soundscape due to their high number,
high speed of movement and proximity to the coast (Hermannsen et al.,
2019). More recently, long-term passive acoustic recordings at five
shallow coastal sites in the Hauraki Gulf (New Zealand), including two
MPAs, indicated that boat noise is an omnipresent source of anthro­
pophony, which has a clear impact on the broadband soundscape of
these habitats (Wilson et al., 2022a). Taken together, these data high­
light the potential of boat noise to negatively affect ecologically rich
coastal habitats.
Recreational boat noise has been demonstrated to impact the marine

* Corresponding author at: CNR-National Research Council, ISMAR - Institute of Marine Sciences in Venice, Castello 2737/f, 30122 Venice, Italy.
E-mail addresses: marta.picciulin@ve.ismar.cnr.it (M. Picciulin), enrico.armelloni@unipr.it (E. Armelloni), raffaela.falkner@googlemail.com (R. Falkner),
nikolina.rako@gmail.com (N. Rako-Gospić), marko.radulovic@blue-world.org (M. Radulović), grgur.pleslic@blue-world.org (G. Pleslić), stipe.muslim@izor.hr
(S. Muslim), hrvoje.mihanovic@izor.hr (H. Mihanović), tomaso.gaggero@unige.it (T. Gaggero).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114050
Received 16 April 2022; Received in revised form 12 August 2022; Accepted 13 August 2022
Available online 25 August 2022
0025-326X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Picciulin et al.
biota: in fish and invertebrates, for example, such noise causes alteration
of the schooling behavior, reduction in the defence of the own territory
and decrease in feeding frequency (corresponding to changes of physi­
ological conditions), in the anti-predator response and in the spawning
probability (reviewed by Di Franco et al., 2020). The effects of boats on
coastal populations of marine mammals have also been investigated
frequently. The most typical reactions involve shifts in vocalization
frequencies to increase the efficiency and detectability in the trans­
mission of their acoustic signals (May-Collado and Wartzok, 2008; Rako-
Gospić and Picciulin, 2016), increased vocalizing rate (Buckstaff, 2004;
Scheifele et al., 2005), and increased duration of calls (Foote et al.,
2004). Boat noise was found to have the potential to elicit behavioural
responses in harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) (Hermannsen et al.,
2019). In the long run, temporal or permanent habitat displacements
due to boat noise and presence have also been reported (Rako et al.,
2013b; Rako-Gospić and Picciulin, 2019).
Despite all these considerations, effective monitoring of recreational
boat distribution is currently limited by a lack of information on boat's
position and speed: while automatic information system (AIS) is
mandatory for ships over 300 gross tonnage and all passenger ships,
irrespective of size, (International Maritime Organization, 2015), rec­
reational boats are seldom AIS equipped and so far boat activity is
mostly manually tracked during short time periods (La Manna et al.,
2010; Lo et al., 2022).Visual monitoring has been recently expanded in
time for specific study areas by using stationary cameras coupled with
image processing algorithms that automatically detect boats (Magnier
and Gervaise, 2020; Wilson et al., 2022b).
Additionally, there is a general lack of reliable measurements of
noise radiated by small boats. Reviewing the published literature, Par­
sons et al. (2021) constructed a dataset of broadband source levels (SLs)
from only 17 studies, for 11 ‘Vessel Types’. This could also depend on the
lack of a shared, standardized way to determine the Underwater Radi­
ated Noise (URN) from recreational boats, although there are several
standards and notations for the assessment of URN from commercial
ships (Table 1), with different levels of accuracy in terms of estimated
source level. Additionally, the ship standards address mainly measure­
ments in deep waters, whereas most of the coastal areas are in shallow
waters, characterized by the significant influence of bottom reflections
on noise propagation, posing practical issues associated with underwa­
ter noise measurements (Brooker and Humphrey, 2016). These meth­
odological gaps, and the lack of accurate data on the spatial and
temporal distribution of small boats at sea, lead to the recreational
vessels not being accounted for in underwater noise models used to
predict the vessel impact on underwater background-noise levels, which
results in considerable noise underestimations in coastal areas (Her­
mannsen et al., 2019).
The purpose of the present study is to assess the noise radiated by
recreational and small fishing boats, which are typical for shallow
coastal areas such as the Cres and Lošinj archipelago. This area repre­
sents an important habitat for a resident bottlenose dolphin population
on one hand (Bearzi et al., 1997; Pleslić et al., 2015) and a popular
destination for recreational boating and tourism in NAS on the other.
Here the measurements were performed in partial compliance with the
shallow water ship Underwater Radiated Noise measurement standards
of Bureau Veritas (Bureau Veritas, 2018) as well as with inspiration of
the standards and notations mentioned in Table 1.The noise generated
by different boat types was characterized in the range of 50 Hz to 20
kHz, which includes the frequencies for which the main acoustic con­
tributions of boating is expected (Hildebrand, 2009) but also those used
by bottlenose dolphins for social communication (Janik et al., 2013;
Gridley et al., 2015).
2
Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050
Table 1
Underwater noise measurement standards.
Internationally recognized standards
ANSI/ASA S12.64-Part 1, 2009a Quantities and Procedures for description and
Measurement of Underwater Sound from Ships
– Part 1: General Requirements
ISO 17208-1, 2016 Underwater acoustics – Quantities and
procedures for description and measurement of
underwater sound from ships – Part 1:
Requirements for precision measurements in
deep water used for comparison purposes
ISO 17208-2, 2016 Underwater acoustics – Quantities and
procedures for description and measurement of
underwater sound from ships – Part 2:
Determination of source levels from deep water
measurements
ISO 17208-3, 2016 Underwater acoustics – Quantities and
procedures for description and measurement of
underwater noise from ships – Part 3:
Requirements for measurements in shallow
water
ISO 18405, 2017 Underwater acoustics — Terminology
ICES. Cooperative Research Underwater noise of research vessels: review
Report No. 209. and recommendations
ITTC recommended procedures Underwater noise from ships, full scale
and guidelines, 7.5-04, 04-01 measurements
Rules of classification society (selection)
DNV-GL, 2017 Silent Class Notation, Det Norske Veritas (DNV-GL), Rules for
Ships, January 2017, Pt 6, Ch. 2
Bureau Veritas, Underwater Radiated Noise (URN), Bureau Veritas Rule Note NR
2018 614 DT R02 E
Lloyd's register, Ship Right Design and Construction, Additional Design and
2018 Construction Procedure for the Determination of a Vessel's
Underwater Radiated Noise, February 2018.
RINA, 2017 Rules for the Classification of Pleasure Yachts, Dolphin Pleasure
Yachts, Registro Italiano Navale, 2017
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study area and target boats
The study has been conducted on a spot within the eastern coast of
the Cres and Lošinj archipelago (NAS); the latter is an area of approxi­
mately 545 km2, which includes steep rocky shores and a seabed
patched with muddy areas and sea grass flats. Sea depth is on average
about 70 m (Arko-Pijevac et al., 2003).
The recreational boat noise source level assessment was carried out
on the 22nd and 25th of October 2020 during the non-tourist season to
avoid the intense nautical traffic during the tourist season. The mea­
surement test site was east of the island Oruda (Lat 44.549567, Long
14.659367), within the Cres-Lošinj Natura 2000 Site of Community
Importance (SCI; HR3000161), away from the shore to prevent un­
wanted reflections (see hydrophone and the two test run locations in
Fig. 1): the closest land area is Bik (2 km away), a reef above the sea
level. The small island Palacol, around 200 m long, is located at a dis­
tance of 5 km; the next island is Oruda (6 km away), which is around 1
km long. Any other coast is 9 or more km away.
The seabed depth at the measurement test site was 80 m and all
recordings were made in the conditions of sea state <2 (Douglas Sea
scale), with no other boats visible on the horizon.
The target boats used during the recreational boat noise source level
assessment are reported in Table 2 (see also Table S2 in the Supple­
mentary material for further boat details). They were chosen to repre­
sent the most common boat types present or passing through the Cres
and Lošinj archipelago (Rako et al., 2013c). During the experiment the
boats were going (i) at their most common cruising speed in the study
area in order to mimic the real situation as close as possible as well as (ii)
at their maximum possible speed, which was supposed to produce the
M. Picciulin et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050

Fig. 1. Measurement 75 m and 150 m test-site (C), showing the hydrophone location (B) and the Natura 2000 Cres-Lošinj Site of Community Importance (SCI; A).

Table 2
Overview of the test boats and their technical specifications; * Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat.
Rhib*_5 m Rhib*_8m Motor Boat Sailing Boat on Trawler Gillnetter Tour Boat
engine

Boat length 5.75 m 8.5 m 5m 10 m 13.7 m 7.5 m 13 m

Horsepower (HP) and 100 HP outboard 250 HP outboard 15 HP outboard 29.5 HP inboard 220 HP inboard 87.7 HP inboard 150 HP inboard
mounting type gasoline gasoline gasoline gasoline diesel diesel diesel

Cruising speed
knots (kn) and 15.1 kn 19 kn 5.6kn 6.1 kn 7 kn 7.1kn 7.9 kn
revolutions per minute 3500 rpm 3700 rpm 2000 rpm 1100 rpm 1800 rpm
(rpm)

Maximum speed
knots (kn) and 24.9 kn 25 kn 6.3kn 6.6 kn 7.1 kn 8.1kn 8.4 kn
revolutions per minute 4900 rpm 4400 rpm 2400 rpm 1200 rpm 2100 rpm
(rpm)

noisiest emission for the given boat according to the literature (Matzner
et al., 2010). For some, but not all boats, the difference between the
cruising and the maximum speeds was very small (Table 2).
2.2. Underwater noise measurements
All standards and rules preferred measurements to be carried out
with three hydrophones mounted above each other, allowing smoothing
the influence of surface reflections (Lloyd's Mirror effect) by averaging
these three measured levels. However, most of those requirements were
for measurements in deep waters, while the current study area is rela­
tively shallow. In the present study, only one hydrophone has been used,
following Hasenpflug et al. (2019): these authors demonstrated that the
boat noise characterization obtained by one hydrophone at the optimal

3
M. Picciulin et al.
depth of 60 m is fully comparable to the average noise measured with
three hydrophones positioned at different depths and angles, which is
especially true when considering the Lloyd's mirror effect.
Recordings of underwater noise were made with a stationary
acoustic recorder (Develogic Sono.Vault) featured with an omnidirec­
tional Neptune Sonar D60 Hydrophone (Sensitivity around − 193 dB re
1 V/μPa with flat frequency response within ±3 dB), sampling at a rate
of 48 kHz, 24 bit and gain 5. The recorder was anchored to the bottom
with a rig design consisting of an anchor, an acoustic releaser, the logger
itself secured by polypropylene rope and extra flotations (e.g. sphere
with the diameter of 25 cm mounted at minimum of 100 cm from the
hydrophone), as illustrated in Fig. 2. The rig design above the anchor
was positively buoyant, which ensured that the logger was suspended
above the seabed. The hydrophone was at 60 m depth over an 80 m
muddy seabed.
The maneuvering of the target boat during the measurements fol­
lowed the relevant standards and classification society rules. The target
boat under test transited along a predetermined straight-line track from
the start point (COMEX) to the end point (FINEX). The distance between
COMEX and FINEX was 1000 m. The target boat was passing the closest
point of approach (CPA) to the hydrophone 500 m into the track (Fig. 3).
Fig. 2. Hydrophone setup.
4
Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050
The CPA was located at 75 m (dCPA1) and 150 m (dCPA2) from the hy­
drophone's vertical projection on the sea surface. After reaching FINEX,
a Williamson turn was performed to return along the same track so that
measurements of radiated noise from both port and starboard sides were
made. Between the COMEX and FINEX points the target boat maintained
a constant speed and course along the track. When the target boat was at
the CPA, the hydrophone was at the angle of 38◦ (first line track) and 22◦
(second line track) from the target boats acoustic reference point.
Boat noise source level measurements were recorded for cruising and
high speed for all seven target boats used in this study (see Table 2 for
details). Each target boat had 16 test runs in total. Eight test runs for
cruising and high speed separately, two port runs and two starboard runs
at dCPA1 and dCPA2. This helped to average test runs, to decrease mea­
surement uncertainty.
CTD measurements were taken on both test days in the morning,
before any target boat noise measurements were taken. A differential
GPS system was setup on the target boat that recorded the time and
location in 1 s intervals. The GPS time was synchronized with the hy­
drophone time before deployment so that the GPS data could subse­
quently be used during data post-processing to extract the data window
length (DWL) used for the analysis. The DWL is the distance between
M. Picciulin et al.
Fig. 3. Test site and target boat's course configuration; data window length (DWL) is indicated.
two points along the track either side of the CPA point here defined by a
±15◦ angle from the hydrophone's vertical projection on the sea surface
for the nearer track (dCPA1) and ±7◦ for the farer track (dCPA2) (Fig. 3).
At the end of each target boat run, the background noise was
recorded for 10 min. The target boat under test was at least 1000 m away
from the hydrophone with its engine turned off and no other boats or
man-made noise were present on the horizon.
2.3. Noise analysis
The noise analysis procedure started with the definition of the time
window in the recordings. The start and the end GPS coordinates of the
DWL were marked on the transect lines. The GPS coordinates from the
target boat tracks that fell between those two points represent the DWL.
The start and end time of the DWL was extracted from the time related to
the first and last coordinate recorded within the DWL for each test
transect. The DWL .wav files for each target boat and for two different
speeds (16 test runs for each target boat, see above) were extracted from
the acoustic recordings.
2.3.1. Calculation of the source levels
For each run, the time signal was cut in correspondence of the DWL.
Every run was characterized by the speed of the boat that was kept
constant during the measurement. Then every time signal was processed
by a MATLAB® script (version 2020a), performing a third-octave
filtering (according to IEC 61260) over the entire “DWL time”, in the
bands from 12.5 Hz to 20 kHz obtaining:
LpS+N (runn , hi , f )1/3
where LpS+N is the sound pressure level received by the hydrophone in
the 1/3 octave band comprised also the background noise (S + N stands
for signal + noise); runn is the n-the run; hi is the i-th hydrophone. Since
in the present research only one hydrophone was used (i = 1), the de­
pendency on the number of hydrophones will be further omitted.
A correction for the background noise was then carried out as fol­
lows. First, the difference from the signal with noise and the background
noise was performed for each 1/3 octave band:
ΔL = LpS+N (runn , f)1/3 − LN (f)
where LpS is the sound pressure level received by the hydrophone in the
1/3 octave band corrected for the background noise:
Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050
• If ΔL > 10 dB no correction was needed.
• If 3 ≤ ΔL ≤ 10 dB the corrected level was LpS = 10 log (10LpS+N/10 −
10LN/10)
• If ΔL < 3 dB the datum of the band was discarded, meaning that in
this band the noise was comparable to the background noise.
According to the present elaboration, all the boat noises were found
to largely exceed the background noise and no data was discarded; the
background noise levels measured at the end of each boat type recording
session are shown in Fig. S1 in the Supplementary materials.
Due to high flow noise contamination at frequencies below 50 Hz, in
agreement with Wladichuk et al. (2019), only the range from 50 Hz to
20 kHz was considered.
Different formulas can be used to estimate the propagation losses,
and therefore to find the source levels, when noise is measured at a large
distance from the source. The simplest way is to consider only a spher­
ical spreading:
( )
LRN (ru, f ) = LpS (runn , f ) + 20log
dTOTAL
(3)
dref
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
where LRN is the radiated noise level; dTOTAL = dCPA1 2 + dH 2 is the
total distance between the hydrophone and the boat reference point;
dref = 1 m. This approach was used for calculating the narrow band
spectra that is presented in Section 2.3.3. In order to estimate the
acoustic spreading, however, different approaches can be found in
literature, changing the coefficient multiplying the logarithm term of the
above reported equation. For example, a coefficient equal to 19 instead
(1) of 20 is proposed by BV rule (Bureau Veritas, 2018) and equal to 18 is
proposed by DNV-GL rule (DNV-GL, 2017). Furthermore, ISO 17208-
2:2019 and Lloyd's rules (Lloyd's register, 2018) suggest adding an
additional frequency dependent correction to consider the Lloyd's
mirror effect (i.e., the interaction with the free surface, which is
considered as a flat, perfectly reflecting surface). All the above-
mentioned documents, however, are focused on measurements in deep
water while in the present work measurements were carried out in
shallow water: in most of the cases it is impossible to bring small boats in
an area with large water depths, as prescribed by the standards. In the
light of this, and taking into account that propagation loss computations
(2)
are specifically allowed by, for example, the BV standard (Bureau Ver­
itas, 2018), such approach has been followed in the present work.
The source level for each frequency bins is therefore given by.
5
M. Picciulin et al.
LS (runn , f ) = LpS (runn , f ) + TLModeled (f ) (4)
where TLModeled(f) is the Transmission Loss term calculated and
explained in the next paragraph.
Considering the different runs, the boat source level was found as:
∑
M
LS (runn , f )
LS (f ) = n=1
(5)
M
where M is the total number of runs for the same operative conditions, i.
e. the same speed. In this case M is equal to four, corresponding to two
dCPA each with two passages (i.e., one port and one starboard side). This
approach was followed to calculate the boat source level in 1/3 octave
bands.
2.3.2. Transmission losses calculation
Transmission losses (TL) have been calculated for frequencies below
250 Hz with a model based on the parabolic equation RAM (Collins,
1993) and for frequencies above 250 Hz with a model based on ray
theory Bellhop (Porter and Liu, 1994) using MATLAB scripts freely
available at the ocean acoustic library (https://oalib-acoustics.org/).
The software models both the interaction with the sea surface (consid­
ered as a flat perfectly reflecting surface) and the bottom (considered as
flat with its own acoustic impedance). For this specific case, the
following parameters have been used: (i) source depth: 60 m (the source
is placed in the hydrophone position as reciprocity is valid); (ii) sound
velocity profile, as from Fig. 4 for the two trials days; (iii) 1/3 octave
bands from 12.5 Hz to 20 kHz for each band the lower, upper and central
frequency are simulated and the results averaged in order to smooth
very local effects linked to a single frequency as the values of TL will be
applied to noise band levels; (iv) a sea depth of 80 m; (v) bottom
composition, i.e. silt with the parameters taken from Jensen et al.
(2000).
For each frequency, a transmission loss versus range and depth ma­
trix was calculated: examples of TL versus range and depth are given in
Fig. 5 for 100 Hz and 8000 Hz, respectively.
The needed values of TL for each boat were then calculated by
considering the source depth and the distance from the hydrophone at
Fig. 4. Sound velocity profile as given by onsite CTD measurement for the two
test days in 22 and 25 October 2020.
6
Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050
the CPA. For a given boat, a TL correction curve was estimated for each
frequency, as shown in the example in Fig. 6: as it can be seen, for fre­
quencies higher than 400 Hz the Lloyd's mirror effect has a lower in­
fluence in respect to the 20log spreading, while at lower frequencies a
strong influence is present. Local maxima and minima are linked to the
complex interaction of sound speed profile, surface and bottom
reflections.
2.3.3. Noise analysis in the narrowband spectra
In order to have a clearer picture of the components of the under­
water noise from the analyzed boats, a narrow band analysis has been
carried out, at least in those cases in which the operative conditions in
terms of engine RPM (revolutions per minute) were known, i.e., for the
“Rhibs” (Rigid hull inflatable boats) and the boat type “Motor Boat”. The
narrowband spectrum has been obtained following the Welch method
(Welch, 1967) using 1 second time windows with no overlap. Engine
and propeller harmonics have been estimated by the formula reported in
Table 3. As the aim was to identify the various components and their
relative importance in the total boat emission, data were reported as
received levels, i.e., without distance correction. The analysis was
focused on a limited frequency range.
3. Results
3.1. Boat source levels
Table 4 reports the source levels of the tested boats moving at two
different speeds, calculated according to the transmission loss model
based on the local condition, in the frequency range 50 Hz–20 kHz. At
cruising speed, the measured source levels ranged from 147 to 163 dB re
1 μPa, while a range from 153 to about 180 dB re 1 μPa was obtained for
the maximum speed.
Low variation in speed could result in relatively high variation in the
source level, as the case of the sailing boat on engine (6 dB in <1 knot of
speed variation), but the opposite case is also true: an increase of about
10 knots in the Rhib speed resulted in 2 dB increase in the generated
noise.
Source levels as 1/3 octave band spectra, corrected for the back­
ground noise as described in Section 2.3.1., are represented in Fig. 7 and
are reported in tabulated form in Table S1 in the Supplementary mate­
rials. It is evident that larger boats with inboard diesel engines produce
underwater noise mostly below 1 kHz whereas Rhibs with outboard
gasoline engines generate high acoustic pressures up to about 5 kHz.
3.2. Noise analysis in the narrowband spectra
The main characteristics of the noise radiated from all the boats were
analyzed in the narrowband spectra calculated at cruising speed and
maximum speed, respectively (Fig. 8a and b). It can be noticed that most
of the spectra are dominated by tonal components for frequencies below
1000 Hz; this is particularly visible for boats equipped with outboard
engines, as it is the case of very high tonal component referred to the
Motor Boat running at very low speed (Fig. 8a, purple curve). It is also
interesting to notice that the speed is not a general indicator for the
generated noise: the Rhib_8m characterized by the highest speed among
the cruising ones (grey line, Fig. 8b) shows the highest SPL levels only in
a very limited frequency range at higher frequencies while it is hidden
among the other curves at lower frequencies. Additionally, the Motor
Boat (purple curve) and the Sailing Boat (cyan curve) have a shift in the
energy level of about 5 to 10 dB, even if they have very similar cruising
speeds. This is because the Sailing Boat has an inboard engine while the
Motor Boat has an outboard engine.
When considering the differences in the produced noise for the same
boat at different speeds, a shift of the tonal components towards higher
frequencies when speed is increased can be observed, accompanied by a
SPL levels increase. As shown in Fig. 9a, a small speed variation (less
M. Picciulin et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050

Fig. 5. Example of transmission loss (TL) versus Range and Depth at 100 Hz (A) and 8000 Hz (B). Values are given in dB re 1 μPa.

Fig. 6. Example of transmission loss (TL) correction; modelled TL for source depth = 0.3 m and distance at CPA = 150 m for day 22.10.2020 and spherical spreading.

can also be noticed in the narrowband part of the spectra. If a larger

Table 3
increase in the speed is performed, the effects are more complex but, as it
Main engine and propeller harmonics calculation; CFR stands for Cylinder Firing
can be seen from Fig. 9b, the effect of a level increase and a shift towards
Rate and EFR for Engine Firing Rate, while h is the order of the harmonic.
higher frequencies is present.
CFR and RPME RPME Engine
CFR = ⋅h, h = 1, 2, …, H
harmonics 120 revolutions per
minute
3.3. Analysis of the harmonics
EFR and EFR = CFR ⋅ N ⋅ h, h = 1, 2, …, H N Number of
harmonics cylinders
Blade passing RPMP RPME RPMP Propeller The main harmonics for the Rhibs and the Motor Boat at cruising
BLADE = ⋅Z⋅h = ⋅Z⋅h, h
frequency 60 GR 60 revolutions per speed are reported in Fig. 10. The various harmonics are represented by
and = 1, 2, …, H minute a mark and number of the harmonic order, whose color changes ac­
harmonics Z Number of
propeller
cording to the origin of the harmonic. It can happen that the mark does
blades not fall exactly in the peak of spectrum. This because the average value
GR Gearbox of RPM is not perfectly constant during the trial. Most of the narrowband
reduction ratio components can be clearly identified up to very high orders (we limited
the number of harmonic orders in order not to overcrowd the figures). In
the spectra of noise produced by the Rhib_5 m (Fig. 10a) Cylinder Firing
than a knot), for the Tour Boat causes a shift of the tonal components.
Rate (CFR) and Engine Firing Rate (EFR) overlap every 4 harmonics, as
This can be explained by considering that for ships equipped with fixed
expected due to 4 being the number of engine cylinders. Propeller har­
pitch propellers, as it is the case with recreational boats, the boat speed
monics (BLADE) are also visible: they do not overlap with the engine
is increased by increasing the engine and consequently the propeller
harmonics and are the highest components in the represented frequency
RPM. With an increase of the cruising speed, an increase in noise levels
range. When considering the Rhib_8m, it is interesting to notice how the

7
M. Picciulin et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050

Table 4
Source levels dB re 1 μ Pa @ 1 m for tested boat at cruising speed (CS) and maximum speed (MS).
Boat type Rhib_5 m Rhib_8m Motor Boat Sailing Boat on engine Trawler Gillnetter Tour Boat

CS MS CS MS CS MS CS MS CS MS CS MS CS MS

Boat speed (kn) 15.1 24.9 19 25 5.6 6.3 6.1 6.6 7 7.1 7.1 8.1 7.9 8.4
Source Level (dB re 1μPa) 162 164 167 170 173 180 147 153 159 160 166 170 173 176

Fig. 7. Source level represented as 1/3 octave band spectra for the larger boats characterized by inboard diesel engines (A) and smaller boats with outboard engines
plus sailing boat (B).

harmonics of engine (EFR) and propeller overlap for the specific oper­
ative condition generating very high tonal components, as highlighted
in the Fig. 10b. Fig. 10c shows the narrow band spectrum for the Motor
Boat equipped with an outboard engine with two cylinders. Again, the
EFR gives the highest level for the tonal components while the propeller
harmonics give slightly lower components below 600 Hz, having a
prominent peak around 75 Hz.
4. Discussion
4.1. Boat noise measurements, characterizations and lessons learned
From the methodological point of view, the main problem in car­
rying out measurements in shallow waters was represented by the esti­
mation of propagation losses. To overcome this problem in the present
work, propagation losses have been estimated considering the site
characteristics in terms of sound speed profile, bottom composition and
relative source-receiver position. A basis for a measurement guideline
for shallow area has been recently proposed (Svedendahl et al., 2021),
after measurements presented here were already concluded (October
2020). Nevertheless, data acquisition and processing we present fulfil
most of the requirements indicated in this guideline.
The source levels obtained for the tested boats are comparable to
those reported in literature for the corresponding boat types (reviewed
by Parsons et al., 2021). However, here the engine power and type
rather than the boat length and design seem to be more predictive of the
measured noise levels. Results indicate that even small boat with low
power engine can be very noisy, as it is the case for the motor boat tested
here. When analysing the noise spectrum of this boat, generally low
energy contribution above 100 Hz was observed and a noise spike at 75

8
M. Picciulin et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050

Fig. 8. Narrow band spectra for boats at cruising (A–B) and maximum (C–D) speed.

9
M. Picciulin et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050

Fig. 8. (continued).

Fig. 9. Speed increase effect for the Tour Boat (A) and Rhib_5 m (B).

Hz, recognized here as generated by the propeller. This highlighted the detailed description of their contribution to the local soundscape. This
importance of considering the spectra analysis along with boat source analysis, which is usually lacking in published datasets (Parsons et al.,
levels, at 1/3 octave bands and/or at narrow band, as it provides a more 2021), has been given here for all the tested boats, showing a dichotomy

10
M. Picciulin et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050

Fig. 10. Narrow band spectrum for the Rhib_5 m (A), Rhib_8 (B) and Motor Boat (C) at cruising speed.

11
M. Picciulin et al.
in the noise contribution according to their size and engine type, i.e.
inboard vs. outboard.
On the base of the provided spectra, boating contribution to the
background noise is evident in most of the considered frequency bands,
which is important information when their effects on biological targets
need to be considered. In fact, existing metrics for EU monitoring un­
derwater noise pollution, target1/3 octave bands of 63 Hz and 125 Hz as
indicators (Van der Graaf et al., 2012), which however are poorly
relevant as a recreational boat noise proxy, since the noise input is
significant across a much wider range of frequencies, with tonal com­
ponents being observed up to 5 kHz. A wider range of frequency bands
therefore needs to be considered when assessing acoustic habitat quality
for coastal, shallow waters.
The recorded boat noise was also analyzed for the narrowband
spectra, in order to show their tonal components. Generally speaking,
the main sources of URN are machinery and cavitation by the propeller
noise. The broadband noise is dominated by oscillating bubbles pro­
duced by vortex cavitation near the turning propeller (McKenna et al.,
2013), whereas commonly broadband and narrowband (tonal) compo­
nents below 1000 Hz characterize boat engine noise. Following Bartlett
and Wilson (2002), in small boats narrowband tones are associated with
individual cylinder firings and the overall engine firing rate. Unlike in
large ships, in most of the smaller boats the larger contribution to nar­
row band components is due to the revolutions per minute (RPM) and
other engine characteristics instead of the propeller (Matzner et al.,
2010; Pollara et al., 2017). Accordingly, in this study, harmonics pro­
duced by the engine rather than the propellers were the main contrib­
utor to the boat noise; this can be in particular related to the presence of
outboard engines, as in that case the engine is in direct contact with
water.
Tonal components tend to shift to higher frequencies as the engine
RPM increases, in accord to other studies (i.e. Bartlett and Wilson,
2002). A non-linear relationship between speed and source level was
additionally highlighted by the collected data. Although lower speed
generally results in lower noise levels, which is in accordance with the
literature (i.e. Matzner et al., 2010), here we clearly show that the
highest speed may induce highest SPL only in a very limited frequency
range. Conversely, a different boat with very similar speed but different
engine may feature a very different noise emission.
The above analysis that highlight the effect of a speed change on
radiated noise should be considered when setting speed limits in specific
areas in order to reduce the noise from boats. Speed limit approach re­
duces the amount of emitted noise when looking at a single boat.
However, when looking at the ensemble of analyzed data, setting a
speed limit for an area does not ensure that the boats are emitting levels
lower than a threshold, as every boat has different levels for very similar
speed ranges. Further, for small vessels the engine power cannot directly
be linked to the noise emitted, as it can be done for large commercial
ships. As a matter of fact, commercial ships are designed to sail at a
particular speed corresponding to the 95 % of the maximum continuous
rate of the engine, as they are optimized for that specific speed and that
is the sailing speed for 90 % of their travelling time. Conversely, small
recreational crafts sail at different speeds and only the noise emitted at
the maximum speed can be linked to the engine power. Altogether, these
considerations indicate that one of the best ways to be sure that a boat
does not introduce excessive noise in an area is to set noise limits for the
single boat type at the design phase, similarly to what is already
requested regarding noise emitted in air by recreational crafts (Directive
2003/44/EC).
4.2. Relevance of boat noise characterizations in the study area
The present study was performed in the larger framework of the EU
Interreg Italy-Croatia SOUNDSCAPE project (https://www.italy-croatia.
eu/web/soundscape). The project aimed at providing a transnational
assessment of the underwater noise by a year-round passive acoustic
12
Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050
monitoring study at nine different locations distributed along the NAS,
including the Cres and Lošinj waters; the latter represent a feeding and
nursing ground for a resident bottlenose dolphin population (Bearzi
et al., 1997, 1999; Pleslić et al., 2015). As a result, the Cres-Lošinj area
was designated as a Site of Community Importance (SCI) in 2014, as part
of the European Union NATURA 2000 ecological network (Cres-Lošinj
SCI, HR3000161; Mackelworth et al., 2013).
The SOUNDSCAPE monitoring results were used to fill the knowl­
edge gap on underwater noise levels in the NAS, but also to support an
underwater noise modelling. Noise mapping was provided for the Cres
and Lošinj area, giving insights into spatial and temporal distribution of
underwater noise. However, recreational boats were unaccounted for in
such noise models, where anthropogenic noise input was based on
Automatic Identification System (AIS) data. Quantifying the small boats
source levels, this study represents an important initial step towards the
inclusion of recreational boat noise in the local underwater noise
assessment and modelling. This is of particular interest since a massive
contribution of recreational and fishing boat noise in the local sound­
scape has been recently demonstrated (Picciulin et al., 2022) and the
present study confirms that noise emitted by these boats (i.e. Rhibs) is
characterized by quite high levels that extend up to a frequency range
used by bottlenose dolphins for social communication (Janik et al.,
2013; Gridley et al., 2015).
In the Cres-Lošinj area changes in dolphin whistle structure were
found to be related to underwater noise levels and small boat presence
(Rako-Gospić and Picciulin, 2016; Rako-Gospić et al., 2021) and sea­
sonal influence of nautical tourism on both female and male dolphins
through changes in their home range sizes was confirmed (Rako-Gospić
et al., 2017). Altogether, these studies stressed the relevance of
including the boating noise in future management plans for the Cres-
Lošinj Natura 2000 SCI.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Marta Picciulin: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data curation,
Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Enrico
Armelloni: Data curation, Formal analysis, Software, Validation. Raf­
faela Falkner: Methodology, Investigation, Writing – review & editing,
Project administration. Nikolina Rako-Gospić: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition. Marko
Radulović: Investigation, Writing – review & editing. Grgur Pleslić:
Investigation, Writing – review & editing, Project administration. Stipe
Muslim: Investigation, Writing – review & editing. Hrvoje Mihanović:
Investigation, Writing – review & editing. Tomaso Gaggero: Data
curation, Formal analysis, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft,
Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported through the project SOUNDSCAPE, funded
by the EU Interreg V-A Italy-Croatia CBC Programme 2014-2020
(Project ID:10043643).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
M. Picciulin et al.
org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114050.
References
Arko-Pijevac, M., Benac, Č., Kovačić, M., Kirinčić, M., Gržančić, Ž., 2003. In: Ecological
and Geological Valorization of the Coastal Line and Submarine Area of the Islands
Ćutin mail and Ćutin veli Aiming to Establish a Protected Area. Rapports et process
verbaux des réunions-Commission internationale pour l'exploration scientifique de la
merMéditerranée, p. 37.
Bartlett, M.L., Wilson, G.R., 2002. Characteristics of small boat signatures. J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 112 (5), 2221. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4778780.
Bearzi, G., di Sciara, G., Politi, E., 1997. Social ecology of bottlenose dolphins in the
Kvarnerić (northern Adriatic Sea). Mar. Mamm. Sci. 13, 650–668. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1748-7692.1997.tb00089.x.
Bearzi, G., Politi, E., di Sciara, G.N., 1999. Diurnal behavior of free-ranging bottlenose
dolphins in the Kvarnerić (Northern Adriatic Sea). Mar. Mammal Sci. 15,
1065–1097. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.1999.tb00878.x.
Brooker, A., Humphrey, V., 2016. Measurement of radiated underwater noise from a
small research vessel in shallow water. Ocean Eng. 120, 182–189. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.09.048.
Buckstaff, K.C., 2004. Effects of watercraft noise on the acoustic behavior of bottlenose
dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, in Sarasota Bay, Florida. Mar. Mammal Sci. 20,
709–725. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2004.tb01189.x.
Bureau Veritas, 2018. Rule Note NR614 DT R00E, Underwater Radiated Noise (URN).
Bureau Veritas. Oct.
Collins, M.D., 1993. A split-step Padé solution for the parabolic equation method.
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93 (4), 1736–1742. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.406739.
Di Franco, E., Pierson, P., Di Iorio, L., Calò, A., Cottalorda, J.M., Derijard, B., Di
Franco, A., Galvé, A., Guibbolini, M., Lebrun, J., Micheli, F., Priouzeau, F., Risso-de
Faverney, C., Rossi, F., Sabourault, C., Spennato, G., Verrando, P., Guidetti, P., 2020.
Effects of marine noise pollution on Mediterranean fishes and invertebrates: a
review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 159, 111450 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2020.111450.
DNV-GL, 2017. Det Norske Veritas-Germanischer Lloyd: Rules for Classification of Ships,
Silent Class Notation, Part 6, Chapter 24.
Duarte, C.M., Chapuis, L., Collin, S.P., Costa, D.P., Devassy, R.P., Eguiluz, V.M., Erbe, C.,
Gordon, T.A.C., Halpern, B.S., Harding, H.R., Havlik, M.N., Meekan, M.,
Merchant, N.D., Miksis-Olds, J.L., Parsons, M., Predragovic, M., Radford, A.N.,
Radford, C.A., Simpson, S.D., Slabbekoorn, H., Staaterman, E., Van Opzeeland, I.C.,
Winderen, J., Zhang, X., Juanes, F., 2021. The soundscape of the Anthropocene
Ocean. Science 371. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba4658.
Foote, A.D., Osborne, R.W., Hoelzel, A.R., 2004. Environment: whale-call response to
masking boat noise. Nature 428, 910. https://doi.org/10.1038/428910a.
Gridley, T., Nastasi, A., Kriesell, H.J., Elwen, S.H., 2015. The acoustic repertoire of wild
common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Walvis Bay, Namibia.
Bioacoustics 24 (2), 153–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/09524622.2015.1014851.
Hasenpflug, H., Homm, A., Schäl, S., Gilroy, L., 2019. Evaluation of range standards for
underwater radiated noise in beam aspect. In: Proceeding of the 23rd International
Congress on Acoustics.
Haviland-Howell, G., Frankel, A.S., Powell, C.M., Bocconcelli, A., Herman, R.L.,
Sayigh, L.S., 2007. Recreational boating traffic: a chronic source of anthropogenic
noise in the Wilmington, North Carolina intracoastal waterway. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
122, 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2717766.
Hermannsen, L., Mikkelsen, L., Tougaard, J., Beedholm, K., Johnson, M., Madsen, P.T.,
2019. Recreational vessels without automatic identification system (AIS) dominate
anthropogenic noise contributions to a shallow water soundscape. Sci. Rep. 9,
15477. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51222-9.
Hildebrand, J.A., 2009. Anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the
ocean. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 395, 5–20. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08353.
International Maritime Organization, 2015. International Convention for the Safety of
Life at Sea (SOLAS) 1974 (Amended December 2015).
Janik, V.M., King, S.L., Sayigh, L.S., Wells, R.S., 2013. Identifying signature whistles from
recordings of groups of unrestrained bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Mar.
Mammal Sci. 29, 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2011.00549.x.
Jensen, F.B., Kuperman, W.A., Porter, M.B., Schmidt, H., 2000. Computational Ocean
Acoustics. Springer Science & Business Media.
La Manna, G., Clo, S., Papale, E., Sarà, G., 2010. Boat traffic in Lampedusa waters (Strait
of Sicily, Mediterranean Sea) and its relation to the coastal distribution of common
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Cienc. Mar. 36, 71–81. https://doi.org/
10.7773/cm.v36i1.1457.
Lloyd’s register, 2018. Ship Right Design and Construction, Additional Design and
Construction Procedure for the Determination of a Vessel’s Underwater Radiated
Noise, February 2018.
Lo, C.F., Nielsen, K.A., Ashe, E., Bain, D.E., Mendez-Bye, A., Reiss, S.A., Bogaard, L.T.,
Collins, M.S., Williams, R., 2022. Measuring speed of vessels operating around
endangered southern resident killer whales (Orcinus orca) in Salish Sea critical
habitat. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 174, 113301 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2021.113301.
Mackelworth, P., Holcer, D., Fortuna, C.M., 2013. Unbalanced governance: the Cres-
Lošinj special marine reserve, a missed conservation opportunity. Mar. Policy 41,
126–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.12.017.
13
Marine Pollution Bulletin 183 (2022) 114050
Magnier, C., Gervaise, C., 2020. Acoustic and photographic monitoring of coastal
maritime traffic: influence on the soundscape. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 147, 3749–3757.
https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0001321.
Matzner, S., Maxwell, A., Myers, J., Caviggia, K., Elster, J., Foley, M., Jones, M.,
Ogden, G., Sorensen, E., Zurk, L., Tagestad, J., Stephan, A., Peterson, M., Bradley, D.,
2010. Small vessel contribution to underwater noise. In: Oceans 2010 MTS/IEEE
Seattle, Piscataway, Nj. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
PNNL-SA-74289. https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2010.5663818.
May-Collado, L.J., Wartzok, D., 2008. A comparison of bottlenose dolphin whistles in the
Atlantic Ocean: factors promoting whistle variation. J. Mammal. 89, 1229–1240.
https://doi.org/10.1644/07-MAMM-A-310.1.
McKenna, M.F., Ross, D., Wiggins, S.M., Hildebrand, J.A., 2012. Underwater radiated
noise from modern commercial ships. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131 (1), 92–103. https://
doi.org/10.1121/1.3664100.
McKenna, M.F., Wiggins, S.M., Hildebrand, J.A., 2013. Relationship between container
ship underwater noise levels and ship design, operational and oceanographic
conditions. Sci. Rep. 3, 1760. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep01760.
Parsons, M.J.G., Erbe, C., Meekan, M.G., Parsons, S.K., 2021. A Review and Meta-
Analysis of underwater noise radiated by small (<25 m Length) vessels. J. Mar. Sci.
Eng. 9, 827. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9080827.
Picciulin, M., Bolgan, M., Rako-Gospić, N., Petrizzo, A., Radulović, M., Falkner, R., 2022.
A Fish and Dolphin Biophony in the Boat Noise-Dominated Soundscape of the Cres-
Lošinj Archipelago (Croatia). J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 10, 300. https://doi.org/10.3390/
jmse10020300.
Pleslić, G., Rako-Gospić, N., Mackelworth, P., Wiemann, A., Holcer, D., Fortuna, C.,
2015. The abundance of common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the
former special marine reserve of the Cres-Lošinj Archipelago, Croatia. Aquat.
Conserv. 25, 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.2416.
Pollara, A., Sutin, A., Salloum, H., 2017. Modulation of high frequency noise by engine
tones of small boats. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 142, 30–34. https://doi.org/10.1121/
1.4991345.
Porter, M., Liu, Y.C., 1994. Finite-element ray tracing. In: Lee, D., Schulz, M.H. (Eds.),
Theoretical and Computational Acoustics, Vol 2. World Scientific, Singapore,
pp. 947–995.
Rako, N., Vilibić, I., Mihanović, H., 2013a. Mapping underwater sound noise and
assessing its sources by using a self-organizing maps method. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133
(3), 1368–1376. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4789003.
Rako, N., Fortuna, C.M., Holcer, D., Mackelworth, P., Nimak-Wood, M., Pleslić, G.,
Sebastianutto, L., Vilibić, I., Wiemann, A., Picciulin, M., 2013b. Leisure boating noise
as a trigger for the displacement of the bottlenose dolphins of the Cres-Lošinj
archipelago (northern Adriatic Sea, Croatia). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 68 (1–2), 77–84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.12.019.
Rako, N., Picciulin, M., Vilibic, I., Fortuna, C.M., 2013. Spatial and temporal variability
of sea ambient noise as an anthropogenic pressure index: the case of the Cres-Losinj
archipelago, Croatia. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 93 (1), 27. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0025315412001233.
Rako-Gospić, N., Picciulin, M., 2019. Underwater noise: sources and effects on marine
life. In: Sheppard, C. (Ed.), World Seas: An Environmental Evaluation. Academic
Press, London, pp. 367–389.
Rako-Gospić, N., Radulović, M., Vučur, T., Pleslić, G., Holcer, D., Mackelworth, P., 2017.
Factor associated variations in the home range of a resident Adriatic common
bottlenose dolphin population. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 124, 234–244. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.07.040.
Rako-Gospić, N., La Manna, G., Picciulin, M., Ceccherelli, G., 2021. Influence of foraging
context on the whistle structure of the common bottlenose dolphin. Behav. Proc.
182, 104281 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2020.104281.
Rako-Gospić, N.R., Picciulin, M., 2016. Changes in whistle structure of resident
bottlenose dolphins in relation to underwater noise and boat traffic. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 105, 193–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.02.030.
RINA, 2017 Rules for the Classification of Pleasure Yachts, Dolphin Pleasure Yachts,
Registro Italiano Navale, 2017.
Scheifele, P.M., Andrew, S., Cooper, R.A., Darre, M., Musiek, F.E., Max, L., 2005.
Indication of a Lombard vocal response in the St. Lawrence River beluga. J. Acoust.
Soc. Am. 117, 1486–1492. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1835508.
Svedendahl, M., Lalander, E., Sigray, P., Östberg, M., Andersson, M.H., 2021.
Underwater Acoustic Source Signatures From Recreation Boats - Field Measurement
and Guideline, FOI Report FOI-R–5115–SE, Stockholm, Sweden.
Van der Graaf, A.J., Ainslie, M.A., André, M., Brensing, K., Dalen, J., Dekeling, R.P.A.,
Robinson, S., Tasker, M.L., Thomsen, F., Werner, S., 2012. European marine strategy
framework directive - good environmental status (MSFD GES): report of the
technical subgroup on underwater noise and other forms of energy. online: http://ec.
europa.eu/environment/marine/pdf/MSFD_reportTSG_Noise.pdf.
Welch, P., 1967. The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra: a
method based on time averaging over short, modified periodgrams. IEEE Trans.
Audio Electroacoust. 15 (2), 70–73.
Wilson, L., Pine, M.K., Radford, C.A., 2022a. Small recreational boats: a ubiquitous
source of sound pollution in shallow coastal habitats. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 174, 113295
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.113295.
Wilson, L., Constantine, R., van der Boon, T., Radford, C.A., 2022b. Using timelapse
cameras and machine learning to enhance acoustic monitoring of small boat sound.
Ecol. Indic. 142, 109182 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109182.
Wladichuk, J., Hannay, D.E., Macgillivray, A.O., Li, Z., Thornton, S.J., 2019. Systematic
source level measurements of whale watching vessels and other small boats.
J. Ocean. Technol. 14, 110–126.