Vancouver Fraser Port Authority

Burrard Inlet underwater noise study: 2019 final report ECHO Program study summary This study was undertaken for the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority-led Enhancing Cetacean Habitat and Observation (ECHO) Program and project partner Tsleil-Waututh Nation to learn more about underwater noise and cetacean presence in Burrard Inlet.

Burrard Inlet is used extensively for commercial shipping, port-related activities and the transportation of passengers by sea and air. The inlet is also home to marine mammals and other marine species. This project was initiated to monitor underwater noise and the presence of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoise) in the inlet for a one year period, with additional future monitoring needs to be evaluated annually.

This document summarizes why the project was conducted and describes the methods, key findings, and conclusions.

What questions was the study trying to answer? The Burrard Inlet underwater noise study investigated three main questions:  What are the underwater noise levels in Burrard Inlet and how do they vary by location and over time?  What are the underwater noise emissions of different sources in the inlet, such as the SeaBus, seaplanes and vessels at berth both on traditional on-board power supply and using electrical shore-side power supply (termed shore power)?  Can the presence of cetaceans in Burrard Inlet be evaluated using passive acoustic monitoring?

Who conducted the project? To address these research questions, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority retained SMRU Consulting North America (SMRU). SMRU deployed autonomous passive acoustic recorders (SoundTraps) for monitoring of total underwater noise over a one-year period. Coastal Acoustic Buoys (CABs) were deployed to estimate source levels (SL) for a container ship, a cruise ship, SeaBus passenger ferries and seaplanes.

What methods were used? SoundTrap recorders were deployed in five locations in the inner and outer harbour including Burrard Inlet West 1 near Canada Place, Burrard Inlet West 2 near Centerm Terminal, Burrard Inlet East near Burnaby petroleum terminals, Indian Arm northeast of Deep Cove, and English Bay between anchorages 1 and 3. For English Bay, data was collected between May 2019 and November 2019, for all other Soundtrap deployments, data was collected over a one year period between January 2019 and January 2020. The figure on the following page shows the approximate locations of the hydrophone deployments.

August 2020 | Page 1 of 3 Vancouver Fraser Port Authority ECHO Program study summary

Source: SMRU Consulting North America

For the SoundTraps, acoustic data was sampled at 96 kHz (for an effective frequency range of 48 kHz), on a seven-minute, 50% duty cycle. Power Spectral Density (PSD) and sound pressure level (SPL) were calculated for every minute of data. Broadband, decade band and 1/3-octave band levels were analyzed on monthly, daily and hourly time scales. L50 (medium), Leq (mean) and L5 were chosen as exceedance percentiles for SPL reporting.

SoundTraps are equipped with onboard “click detectors” capable of monitoring for and recording snippets of higher frequency impulsive sounds up to 150 kHz. PAMGuard software was then used to identify high frequency echolocation clicks and lower frequency marine mammal calls in the SoundTrap data, focusing on identification of harbour porpoise, killer whales, and other cetaceans.

Two Coastal Acoustic Buoys, each equipped with two hydrophones sampling at 250 kHz (125 kHz effective frequency), were deployed to estimate source level and acoustic characteristics for:  A container ship and a cruise ship switching between on board power generation and shore power  SeaBus transits, particularly accelerating away from the terminal  Seaplanes during takeoff

Source levels were determined indirectly by measuring received level at the hydrophones and back propagating to a reference distance of one metre. A transmission loss coefficient of 18, between spherical and cylindrical spreading, was assumed and PSD levels were averaged over 1 Hz bins to obtain 1/3-octave band levels and broadband source levels. Background or interfering noise sources were accounted for in source level calculations.

What were the key findings? The main findings of the Burrard Inlet underwater noise study are summarized as follows:  Burrard West 1 and 2 had the highest average monthly broadband sound pressure levels at 129.1 and 131.4 dB re 1μPa respectively, followed by the English Bay location at 121.0 dB re 1μPa. These three locations have soundscapes dominated by vessel noise and show little variability across seasons.  Indian Arm had the lowest average monthly broadband sound pressure level at 100.0 dB re 1μPa, while the Burrard East location had a level of 110.8 dB re 1μPa. Both locations recorded >7 dB variation in average monthly sound pressure levels, with peaks in August. These peaks are likely driven by recreational vessel traffic.

August 2020 | Page 2 of 3 Vancouver Fraser Port Authority ECHO Program study summary

 The effects of rain, wind, current and general construction activities (such as vibratory drilling and dredging) on the soundscape were difficult to identify at any of the hydrophone locations, because overall sound pressure levels were sufficiently high to mask these possible contributions.  Underwater noise from construction-related impact pile driving taking place at the Westridge Marine Terminal was measurable at the Burrard East hydrophone location. Such impulsive events cause short term, high amplitude increases in noise, but may difficult to discern when viewed at weekly or monthly time scales.  Of the four different noise sources measured by the short term Coastal Acoustic Buoys, the highest source level estimates (187.5 dB re 1μPa) resulted from a berthed cruise ship using an ultrasonic anti- fouling system.  Connecting to shore power resulted in a source level reduction of 5.8 dB for a container ship and 7.8 dB for a cruise ship. The larger reduction for the cruise ship on shore power may be due to the additional equipment to support passenger comfort (such as air conditioning) being switched to land-side electrical power supply.  When SeaBus vessels accelerated away from the southern terminal, the estimated source level was approximately 172 dB re 1μPa. The initial vessel acceleration source levels are likely driven by propeller cavitation during acceleration and are expected to be lower at other times during the crossing.  During take-off, seaplanes had source level estimates of approximately 156 dB re 1μPa. The duration of this effect on the underwater soundscape is very brief, and limited to the time the plane’s floats are in contact with the water surface and the plane’s engine is increasing its RPM in preparation for take-off.  During the one year monitoring period, Bigg’s (or transient) killer whales were visually observed in the study area on ten days, with corresponding acoustic detections on two of those days. Southern resident killer whales (SRKWs) were acoustically detected on only one occasion, at the English Bay hydrophone for an approximately two-hour period on September 23, 2019.  Acoustic detections of porpoises occurred on 57 days, with the Indian Arm location having the highest number of days with porpoise detections (25). There were no detections of other cetaceans.

Conclusions and next steps Considerable variation in monthly underwater noise levels was observed across all locations, with Burrard Inlet West, where there are high levels of marine activities (large vessel transits, terminal construction, seaplanes and SeaBus) recording the highest levels. The lowest levels were recorded in Indian Arm where there is limited large vessel traffic and industrial activity. Sound levels were generally consistent over the year of analysis, with areas east of Second Narrows seeing a peak in August, likely attributed to increased recreational boat traffic. At all locations, the presence of short-term, high-amplitude underwater noise sources are related to vessel transits.

Within Burrard Inlet, construction projects are underway on a regular basis. This study indicated that the impact of local construction activities on underwater noise was not clearly evident using monthly time scale metrics. This is a result of existing high ambient noise conditions and the dominating influence of vessel traffic on sound levels in Burrard Inlet.

Analysis of a berthed cruise ship and container ship switching from internal power to shore power indicated significant reductions in source level. Through the port authority’s EcoAction program, commercial vessels are incentivized to switch to shore power while calling at the Port of Vancouver in order to reduce underwater noise emissions and air emissions. Canada Place is equipped with three power connection points for cruise ships, and shore power facilities for container vessels are available at Deltaport in Delta and Centerm in Vancouver.

Passive acoustic monitoring was successful in detecting the presence of killer whales and porpoise, with the quietest location (Indian Arm) having the highest number of detections.

The ECHO Program and project partner Tsleil-Waututh Nation recognize the importance of better understanding and reducing underwater noise both in Burrard Inlet and the region as a whole. The port authority commits to continued investigation of underwater noise sources in the region and to working with stakeholders to reduce their contribution to underwater noise. Monitoring of underwater noise levels and cetacean presence in Burrard Inlet is intended to continue for the next several years.

August 2020 | Page 3 of 3

Burrard Inlet Underwater Noise Characterization: 2019 Final Report Prepared for the ECHO Program [July 2020]

SMRU Consulting North America PO Box 764 604 – 55 Water Street Friday Harbor, WA 98250 Vancouver, BC V6B 1A1 USA Canada

Burrard Inlet Underwater Noise Characterization: 2019 Final Report

20 July 2020

Prepared by SMRU Consulting NA

Authors:

Kanachi Angadi, MSc Research Scientist

Jason Wood, PhD Senior Research Scientist

Jesse Turner, BSc Field Engineer

Kaitlin Palmer, PhD Senior Research Scientist

Dominic Tollit, PhD Senior Research Scientist

For its part, the Buyer acknowledges that Reports supplied by the Seller as part of the Services may be misleading if not read in their entirety, and can misrepresent the position if presented in selectively edited form. Accordingly, the Buyer undertakes that it will make use of Reports only in unedited form, and will use reasonable endeavours to procure that its client under the Main Contract does likewise. As a minimum, a full copy of our Report must be appended to the broader Report to the client. Burrard Inlet 2019

Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Project Objectives ...... 1 2 Methods ...... 2 2.1 Characterize Underwater Noise Levels...... 2 2.2 Characterizing Select Source Levels...... 5 2.2.1 Acoustic metrics...... 5 2.2.2 Instrumentation and methods ...... 6 2.2.3 Source Levels ...... 6 2.3 Cetacean Presence Using PAM ...... 9 2.3.1 Echolocation Clicks ...... 9 2.3.2 Whistles and Moans...... 10 2.4 Ancillary and CTD data...... 10 3 Results ...... 12 3.1 Underwater Noise Levels ...... 12 3.1.1 Ambient Sound Over Time ...... 12 3.1.2 Monthly and One-Third Octave SPLs with PSD plots...... 17 3.1.3 Table of SPL Levels ...... 31 3.1.4 Diurnal Rhythm...... 32 3.1.5 Weekly Rhythm...... 34 3.1.6 SPL Box Plots ...... 36 3.1.7 Ancillary Data and Centerm/TMX Construction Activity ...... 38 3.2 Source Levels ...... 50 3.2.1 Container Ship ...... 51 3.2.2 Cruise Ship ...... 53 3.2.3 SeaBus ...... 55 3.2.4 Seaplane ...... 57 3.2.5 Vessel at Anchor ...... 59 3.2.6 Comparison of Source Levels...... 60 3.3 Cetacean Presence Using PAM ...... 63 3.3.1 Killer Whale Detections ...... 63 3.3.2 Humpback Whale and Dolphin Detections ...... 65 3.3.3 Porpoise Detections...... 65 4 Discussion ...... 67 5 Conclusions ...... 70 6 References ...... 71 7 Acknowledgements...... 71 8 Appendix...... 72

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 i

Burrard Inlet 2019

List of Figures

Figure 1. Maps of five SoundTrap deployment locations (see Table 2 for location names and coordinates). Satellite images illustrate vessel anchorage locations and transit routes...... 3 Figure 2. Schematic of SoundTrap hydrophone and EdgeTech acoustic release deployment method. .. 4 Figure 3. Mechanical drawing of the CAB system with dimensions (left) and Reson TC 4014 hydrophone (right)...... 6 Figure 4. A typical porpoise click - Click Waveform Display, Click Spectrum and Wigner Plot displayed using PAMGuard software...... 10 Figure 5. Probability distribution of median (L50) monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) at each location for broadband and decade frequency bands...... 13 Figure 6. Median (L50) broadband monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) at each location. Average values for the year with standard deviations are provided to the right of each monthly trend...... 14 Figure 7. Burrard West 1 broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa)...... 14 Figure 8. Burrard West 2 broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa)...... 15 Figure 9. Burrard East broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa)...... 15 Figure 10. Indian Arm broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa)...... 16 Figure 11. English Bay broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa)...... 16 Figure 12. February broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade band SPL (top panel) and spectrogram (bottom panel) by location. Plots are at 1-hour resolution...... 18 Figure 13. August broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade band SPL (top panel) and spectrogram (bottom panel) by location. Plots are at 1-hour resolution...... 19 Figure 14. June and August English Bay broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade band SPL (top panel) and spectrogram (bottom panel). Plots are at 1-hour resolution...... 20 Figure 15. Burrard West 1 (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 21 Figure 16. Burrard West 2 (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 22 Figure 17. Burrard East (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 23 Figure 18. Indian Arm (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 24 Figure 19. English Bay (June), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 25 Figure 20. Burrard West 1 (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 26 Figure 21. Burrard West 2 (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 27 SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 ii

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 22. Burrard East (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 28 Figure 23. Indian Arm (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 29 Figure 24. English Bay (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom)...... 30 Figure 25. Median SPL across the month of February for each hour of day by location...... 33 Figure 26. Median SPL across the month of August for each hour of day by location...... 34 Figure 27. Median SPL across the month of February for each day of the week by location...... 35 Figure 28. Median SPL across the month of August for each day of the week by location...... 36 Figure 29. Boxplots of broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade frequency band SPL for the month of February by location. The black lines are the Leq...... 37 Figure 30. Boxplots of broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade frequency band SPL for the month of August by location. The black lines are the Leq...... 38 Figure 31. Sound speed profile for May (Left) and August (right) 2019 by location...... 39 Figure 32. Sound speed profile for November 2019 (Left) and January 2020 (right) by location...... 39 Figure 33. Daily AIS signal densities by location based on AIS data (Class A) within 3 km of each hydrophone. Panels depict moving vessels only (top) and all vessels (bottom) including moored, anchored, and vessels travelling < 1 knot. Median AIS densities are provided at the top of each plot...... 40 Figure 34. Relationship between the density of AIS signals per day within 3 km of each deployment and SPL for L50, Leq and L5 values at each location...... 41 Figure 35. Average (and standard deviation) daily rainfall (mm; top) and wind speed (km/h; bottom) by month for Vancouver...... 42 Figure 36. Indian Arm SPL (1-10 kHz) versus daily rainfall (mm) and average wind speed (km/h). Color scale indicates number of observations...... 43 Figure 37. Indian Arm SPL (10-100 Hz) versus SoundTrap tilt angle (considered a proxy for current speed). Color scale indicates number of observations...... 44 Figure 38. Broadband and decade band SPL (top) a spectrogram (bottom) at Burrard West 2 in August 2019. Black vertical line indicates the start of the construction period...... 45 Figure 39. Boxplots of broadband and decade band SPL at Burrard West 2 across six months...... 46 Figure 40. Broadband and decade band SPL (top) a spectrogram (bottom) at Burrard East in October 2019...... 47 Figure 41. Broadband and decade band SPL (top) a spectrogram (bottom) at Burrard East in December 2019...... 48 Figure 42. Boxplots of broadband and decade band SPL at Burrard East across four months...... 49 Figure 43. Time series (top) and spectrogram (bottom) of impact pile driving recorded on the Burrard East hydrophone on 28 November 2019. Shown are ~13 seconds of data...... 50 Figure 44. Broadband (10Hz – 100 kHz) SPL from the CAB closest to the container ship (top) and a spectrogram of the same data (bottom). The red vertical line (top plot) indicates the time the vessel changed from being off shore power to being on shore power...... 52 Figure 45. Comparison of one-third octave band source level estimates of a container ship with shore power off and on shore power...... 53 Figure 46. Spectrogram of recordings from the CAB nearest the cruise ship...... 54 SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 iii

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 47. Decade band SPL of recordings from the CAB nearest the cruise ship...... 54 Figure 48. Source level estimates of cruise ship on and off shore power. Data gaps are due to SNR being less than 3 dB in those one-third octave bands. The 23 kHz tone is included in this plot. ...55 Figure 49. Broadband (10 Hz – 100 kHz) SPL from the CAB near the SeaBus (top) and a spectrogram of the same data (bottom). Only the deep hydrophone data are shown...... 56 Figure 50. One-third octave median source level estimates of SeaBus...... 57 Figure 51. Broadband (10 Hz – 100 kHz) SPL from the CAB near the seaplanes (top) and a spectrogram of the same data (bottom)...... 58 Figure 52. One-third octave source level estimates of seaplanes take off...... 59 Figure 53. One-third octave RL and ambient noise for the three bulk carriers measured while at anchor...... 60 Figure 54. Comparison plot of one-third octave band source level estimates of four different vessel types. For cruise ship source levels, the 23 kHz tone caused by the antifouling device was removed...... 61 Figure 55. Example of a porpoise detection bout using PAMGuard software. Top panel shows amplitude of clicks increasing as the animal passes by (on and off axis clicks). Lower panels provide click diagnostics including waveform (left), click spectrum (middle) and Wigner plot (right)...... 66

List of Tables

Table 1. SoundTrap deployment and retrieval dates. Acoustic data were collected across 359 deployment days in total, with 18 of 19 deployed SoundTraps recovered (the English Bay SoundTrap was lost during Deployment 4)...... 3 Table 2. Latitude and longitude of SoundTraps deployed in Burrard Inlet (BI), Indian Arm and English Bay (See Figure 1)...... 3 Table 3. SoundTrap settings used for each deployment. In the Deployment column, ‘a’ indicates Burrard Inlet West 1 & 2 and ‘b’ indicates Burrard Inlet East, Indian Arm and English Bay locations...... 4 Table 4. Source level measurement summary. RL and NL indicate the hydrophones used to measure received level and background noise level, respectively...... 7 Table 5. Average monthly SPL (median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 in dB re 1μPa) by location...... 12 Table 6. Broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade frequency band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) by location...... 31 Table 7. Details of data collected from five different sources...... 51 Table 8. Median Broadband Source Levels by vessel type and activity...... 61 Table 9. One-third octave band centre frequency source level estimates for four vessel types...... 62 Table 10. Observed visual sightings of killer whales and whether they were detected via PAM...... 64 Table 11. Confirmed killer whale detections made using PAM...... 65 Table 12. Number of days with porpoise detection by location and month...... 66

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 iv

Burrard Inlet 2019

1 Introduction 1.1 Background The Enhancing Cetacean Habitat and Observation (ECHO) Program, led by Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) had previously focused underwater noise monitoring, research and mitigation efforts in areas most used by cetaceans, such as the Strait of Georgia and Haro Strait. However, Burrard Inlet, which is used extensively for shipping and other port-related activities, is also frequented by some marine mammals and other noise sensitive marine species. The port authority and project partner Tsleil-Waututh Nation are interested in a better characterization of noise levels and cetacean presence in Burrard Inlet. This project was therefore initiated to conduct passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) in Burrard Inlet for a period of one year.

1.2 Project Objectives Based on the interests of the ECHO Program and the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, the following project objectives were identified:

1) Characterize underwater noise levels within Burrard Inlet both spatially and temporally over the course of a year.

The ECHO Program has provided high level guidance on analytical methods that have been adopted by this study and are reported here. These noise level metrics are consistent with those used by the European Union under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.

2) Characterize the source levels of sounds of interest in the port that have not yet been measured.

Source level characterization of various port activities within Burrard Inlet, such as the SeaBus, seaplanes, and vessels at berth on shore power, were conducted.

3) Evaluate the presence of cetaceans in Burrard Inlet using PAM.

The port authority and Tsleil-Waututh Nation have an interest in understanding cetacean presence within Burrard Inlet. Given recent sightings, killer whales and porpoise were the focus of this effort.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 1

Burrard Inlet 2019

2 Methods The methods and results section are divided by the objectives identified above. 2.1 Characterize Underwater Noise Levels This report includes spectrum levels in monthly spectrograms and power spectral density (PSD) exceedance plots, reporting sound pressure levels (SPLs) using broadband, decade-band, and one- third octave bands and investigated using monthly, diurnal, and weekly plots. SPLs are described in the form of exceedance percentiles including median (L50), and the arithmetic mean (Leq) of the squared sound pressure (the metric recommended by the European Union’s Marine Strategy Framework Directive as an environmental indicator to assess trends in ambient noise caused by anthropogenic sources (Dekeling et al. 2014)). Merchant et al. (2016) reviewed multiple metrics and also concluded that environmental indicators of anthropogenic noise should use exceedance percentiles to ensure statistical robustness and recommended high exceedance metrics (L10 or L5) may be an appropriate metric for tracking levels of anthropogenic noise in the marine environment. Consequently, this study has focused reporting of underwater noise levels using L50, Leq and L5.

To measure underwater sound, SoundTrap autonomous recorders (http://www.oceaninstruments.co.nz/SoundTrap-300/) were deployed in four locations around Burrard Inlet. A fifth location in English Bay was added starting with the second deployment (Figure 1). The hydrophone module included the hydrophone fastened vertically in a floatation collar attached to an anchor weight. This setup was attached to an acoustic release with a trawl float and anchor weight via a float line ~2 times the water depth for retrieval (Figure 2). Deployments involved manually lowering the hydrophone package via the float line, then manually lowering the acoustic release module via a separate line. Manually lowering each module ensured desired placement on the seafloor. Communications with the acoustic release were then verified.

The systems were deployed and retrieved as noted in Table 1. Hydrophone locations and depths are provided in Table 2 and hydrophone settings can be found in Table 3. Both Burrard Inlet West locations required low gain settings (to ensure noise levels did not exceed the hydrophones sensitivity limits and avoid exceeding internal data storage), while the remaining locations had high gain settings.

A total of 18 of 19 deployed hydrophones were recovered. After the loss of the English Bay hydrophone after Deployment 4, a side-scan survey of the English Bay location was conducted by CANPAC, but no hydrophone unit was found.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 2

Burrard Inlet 2019

Table 1. SoundTrap deployment and retrieval dates. Acoustic data were collected across 359 deployment days in total, with 18 of 19 deployed SoundTraps recovered (the English Bay SoundTrap was lost during Deployment 4).

Deployment Deployment Retrieval Deployment Recovery rate (n=number of SoundTraps Number Date Date Duration (days) recovered/deployed) 1 1/29/2019 4/29/2019 90 n=4/4 2 5/1/2019 7/30/2019 90 n=5/5 (English Bay location added) 3 8/1/2019 11/5/2019 96 n=5/5 4 11/7/2019 1/28/2020 83 n=4/5 (No unit recovered at English Bay)

Table 2. Latitude and longitude of SoundTraps deployed in Burrard Inlet (BI), Indian Arm and English Bay (See Figure 1).

SoundTrap hydrophone location Latitude (N) Longitude (W) Water depth (m) Burrard Inlet West 1 (Near Canada Place) 49.29307 -123.10268 28-30 Burrard Inlet West 2 (Near Centerm Terminal) 49.29124 -123.08093 37-41 Burrard Inlet East 49.29670 -122.97928 58-61 Indian Arm (NE of Deep Cove) 49.33354 -122.92122 69-71 English Bay (between Anchorages 1 & 3) 49.30385 -123.23130 55-62

Figure 1. Maps of five SoundTrap deployment locations (see Table 2 for location names and coordinates). Satellite images illustrate vessel anchorage locations and transit routes. SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 3

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 2. Schematic of SoundTrap hydrophone and EdgeTech acoustic release deployment method.

Table 3. SoundTrap settings used for each deployment. In the Deployment column, ‘a’ indicates Burrard Inlet West 1 & 2 and ‘b’ indicates Burrard Inlet East, Indian Arm and English Bay locations.

Deployment High Pass Preamp Gain Sample Rate Duty Cycle Detector Detector Filter (kHz) threshold (dB) 1 Off Low (~184 96 50% (7 minutes on - 7 Click 22 dB max) minutes off Detector 2 Off High (~172 96 50% (7 minutes on - 7 Click 16 dB max) minutes off Detector 3a Off Low (~184 96 50% (7 minutes on - 7 Click 16 dB max) minutes off Detector 3b Off High (~172 96 50% (7 minutes on - 7 Click 16 dB max) minutes off Detector 4a Off Low (~184 96 50% (7 minutes on - 7 Click 16 dB max) minutes off Detector 4b Off High (~172 96 50% (7 minutes on - 7 Click 16 dB max) minutes off Detector

We used custom Matlab scripts to calculate median PSD and SPL (in broadband, decade band and one-third octave bands) for every minute of data. These results were then used to calculate monthly, daily, and hourly results (see SMRU Consulting 2019).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 4

Burrard Inlet 2019

2.2 Characterizing Select Source Levels 2.2.1 Acoustic metrics Source Level (SL) is the measure of the intensity of sound that a source emits at a standard reference distance of 1 m. For point sources, such as a small transducer, SLs can be measured directly with a hydrophone at 1 m distance. For larger sources, SLs must be determined indirectly by first measuring Received Levels (RL) at larger distances and back propagating the levels to a reference distance of 1 m.

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) ship source level standard (ANSI/ASA S12.64- 2009) uses the following equation-

Where푆표푢푟푐푒 TL 퐿푒푣푒푙 is defined (푆퐿) as= the 푅푒푐푒푖푣푒푑 transmission 푙푒푣푒푙 (loss푅퐿) between− 퐵푎푐푘푔푟표푢푛푑 the sound 푙푒푣푒푙 source (푁퐿 and) + 푇푟푎푛푠푚푖푠푠푖표푛the receiver, in this푙표푠푠 case (푇퐿 ) the hydrophones due to spreading, reflection and refraction of the sound. In the simplest case, transmission loss is the dispersion of power as a sound radiates away from the source. This can be approximated by 15 dB log(r) where sound spreads cylindrically and 20 log(r) where sound spreads spherically. The small ‘r’ above is range in meters. The value preceding the logarithmic transform is referred to as the transmission loss coefficient. In lieu of extensive modeling of transmission characteristics, we assume a transmission loss coefficient of 18. Received Level of the signal plus background Noise Level at the hydrophone. For this equation, all levels must be measured in decibels (dB) measured over the same bandwidth and with the same reference pressure, in this case 1 µPa.

For all estimates we calculated the signal to noise ratio and excluded measurements from time periods where the SNR was less than 3 dB (ANSI/ASA S12.64-2009). A transmission loss coefficient of 18, between spherical and cylindrical spreading, was assumed. Background noise levels were subtracted before adding transmission loss to estimate source level in one-third octave bands and broadband (10 Hz – 100 kHz). Where a single recording device was available to measure source levels, noise levels were obtained by selecting periods of time when the sound source was not present. When two instruments were available, background noise levels were from the distant unit simultaneous with the received level recordings. For details on these procedures see section 2.2.3.

All metrics were obtained by processing the data in Matlab 2018. The PSD levels were averaged over 1 Hz bins spanning the entire frequency range of interest to obtain one-third octave and broadband source levels (Merchant et al. 2016).

A high amplitude, narrow-band 23 kHz tone was observed in the data collected from the cruise ship and in recordings for other source levels. Upon further investigation, it was determined that this was caused by acoustic anti-fouling systems used by some cruise ships. Considering this finding we report cruise ship source level both with and without this tone. We removed the tone by interpolating from PSD data above and below 23 kHz.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 5

Burrard Inlet 2019

2.2.2 Instrumentation and methods Coastal Acoustic Buoys (CAB, http://www.smruconsulting.com/products-tools/cab/, Figure 3) were used to measure received levels for the container ship, cruise ship, SeaBus, and seaplane. Each CAB included two Reson 4014 hydrophones and data were sampled at 250 kHz, 16-bit resolution. One hydrophone was deployed at mid water depth and the second hydrophone was deployed close to the bottom of the inlet (Table 4). The near CAB was typically within 100 m of the sound source and was used to estimate the source level. The far CAB was typically farther than 200 m of the sound source and was used to estimate background noise levels. Summary data were sent in real-time to the research vessel to verify data quality while audio recordings were retained onboard the CABs for further analysis. The hydrophones were calibrated before they were deployed and after their retrieval with a GRAS 42AA pistonphone.

Figure 3. Mechanical drawing of the CAB system with dimensions (left) and Reson TC 4014 hydrophone (right).

2.2.3 Source Levels CABs were used to estimate source level for a container ship, cruise ship, SeaBus, and seaplanes (Table 4). Ranges from the recording instruments to the vessels were obtained by visual estimation, AIS data or laser range finder (Table 4) depending on the vessel type. To determine if there are differences between noise emitted when vessels were on shore power vs. running internal generators/engines, we report two source level for cruise ships and container ships, on shore power and off shore power. AIS data for range measurements between CABs and the SeaBus were collected in real time from a receiver station set up in the SMRU Consulting office overlooking the study area.

We also report on efforts to estimate source level for ‘at anchor’ vessels that include three bulk carriers at Anchorage # 3 in English Bay. Measurements for this vessel type were obtained from the SoundTrap deployed at the English Bay location (see Section 2.1).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 6

Burrard Inlet 2019

Table 4. Source level measurement summary. RL and NL indicate the hydrophones used to measure received level and background noise level, respectively.

Source Type Container Cruise Ship SeaBus Seaplane Ship Range Estimation Range Ranger Visual AIS Method Finder Finder Estimation Near Range to Source (m) 64 73 Variable Variable CAB Hydrophone 1 Depth (m) 10 (RL) 7 (RL) 8 (RL) 8 (RL) Hydrophone 2 Depth (m) 19 14 14 (NL) 16 Far CAB Range to Source (m) 364 237 NA Variable Hydrophone 1 Depth (m) 18 10 NA 10 Hydrophone 2 Depth (m) 32 (NL) 20 (NL) NA 20 (NL)

2.2.3.1 Container Ship To evaluate the potential underwater noise benefits of a containership on shore power, a vessel berthed at the Centerm Terminal in April 2019 was evaluated. The source level estimates were measured as closely as possible to the ANSI standard (ANSI/ASA S12.64-2009) using two CAB units. One CAB was deployed <100 m from the source and another was deployed >100 m from the container ship (Table 4). Received levels were taken from the shallower hydrophone on the CAB nearest the source and background noise levels were assessed using data from the deeper hydrophone of the CAB farther from the source. The shore power was turned on for the container ship from 10:15 am to 6 pm (local time). The below equipment was still turned on in the engine room when connected to shore power. • Auxiliary boiler feed water pump • • • Boiler water circulation pump • • Main compressor • • • • Fuel oil boost pump • • • Fuel oil supply pump • • • Main sea water pump • • • Jacket water pump • • • Low Temperature freshwater pump

• Engine Room supply fan • • HVAC • • • • Auxiliary Engine, oil pump

For source level estimates we identified analysis periods when there were no other obvious sources contributing to the soundscape. These periods of time were selected from the near and far CABs to provide received level and noise level measurements, respectively.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 7

Burrard Inlet 2019

2.2.3.2 Cruise Ship To evaluate the potential underwater noise benefits of a cruise ship on shore power, a vessel berthed at Canada Place in May 2019 was measured. Cruise ship source level estimates were measured as closely as possible to the ANSI standard (ANSI/ASA S12.64-2009) using two CAB units. As with the container ship, one CAB was deployed near the cruise ship to measure received level and another was deployed further away to measure noise level (Table 4). As with the container ship, we report a source level estimates for periods when the cruise ship was on and off shore power. The below equipment was turned on after disconnection from the shore power.

• Engines • Pumps • All engine fans • Compressors • Bow and stern thrusters • HVAC

Additional ship-based sources that could have contributed to the underwater noise levels include deck-based activities such as music and/or concerts.

For source level analysis we identified times when there were no other obvious sources contributing to the underwater soundscape. These periods were selected from the near and far CAB to provide received level and noise level, respectively.

2.2.3.3 SeaBus SeaBus measurements were carried out on April 14th, 2019. Because this is a moving sound source, a single CAB unit could be used to measured received level when the SeaBus was close by and noise level when it was not (Table 4). The CAB was deployed near the southern terminal and the range between the CAB and the two operating SeaBus vessels was computed using AIS information for each minute of recordings compared to the GPS unit onboard the CAB.

Background noise level estimates were taken from periods between source presence (e.g. when the SeaBus was on the opposite side of the inlet) and excluded periods when there was obvious contamination from other sources such as small vessel traffic, as determined by manually reviewing spectrograms, audio files and AIS data.

2.2.3.4 Seaplane Many seaplanes took part in the source level measurements on May 15th, 2019. Ranges between seaplanes and the CABs were visually estimated during fieldwork and limited to periods of takeoff when the engines were most likely to generate underwater noise. As with the SeaBus, background noise levels were obtained when the seaplanes or other nearby noise sources were not present and received levels were taken from times when the seaplanes were present.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 8

Burrard Inlet 2019

2.2.3.5 Vessel at Anchor Estimates of source levels from vessels at anchor were conducted for three bulk carriers. To do this we estimated both received level and noise level from the SoundTrap deployed at the English Bay location, nearest Anchorage # 3 (Figure 1).

To isolate received level of vessels at Anchorage #3 from other sources, we restricted audio data to periods where there were 1) no moving vessels in English Bay (evaluated using purchased AIS data from www.marinetraffic.com) 2) late night (11pm local) to early morning (5am local) to remove the effect of smaller vessels without AIS and 3) no other vessels moored at locations adjacent to anchorage #3. The quality of these recordings was then assessed by listening to the data. Noise level estimates were taken from periods that matched the above criteria as well when there were no vessels moored at anchorage #3. The ranges between the anchored vessels and the hydrophone were estimated using AIS data and the GPS location of the SoundTrap.

2.3 Cetacean Presence Using PAM PAMGuard V2.00.16 software (www.pamguard.org ) was used to detect potential echolocation clicks and calls from marine mammals in the SoundTrap data. Detections were validated by a trained analyst using PAMGuard Viewer Mode and Audacity software (https://www.audacityteam.org/). During this process, the analysist created acoustic events consisting of all calls occurring with less than 30-minute inter-call interval. This process was done for both echolocation clicks and whistles contours.

PAMGuard Viewer Mode was used to identify and log cetacean events. All high and moderate probability events were validated by a human listener using PAMGuard playback mode or via Audacity when signals were less audible. In addition, common signal patterns and a random selection of lower probability tonal detections were reviewed. Furthermore, for days with known killer whale visual observations, all tonal detections were reviewed as well as a period of 12 hours either side of the observation day. Visual sighting data were obtained from the Whale Report Alert System (http://wildwhales.org/wras), Trevor Andrews, Environmental Specialist with Vancouver Fraser Port Authority, Rod MacVicar, captain of the research vessel used in this study, as well as a search of press releases from the study period.

2.3.1 Echolocation Clicks Odontocetes produce a variety of sounds including impulsive signals used for communication and echolocation. Porpoises produce narrowband high frequency clicks centered at ~120 kHz. A typical click waveform and spectrum are shown in Figure 4. Capturing these signals can provide logistical challenges as continuously recording at these high sample rates drains storage and energy resources more quickly than continuously recording at lower sample rates.

To address this capacity issue, SoundTraps are provisioned with an onboard ‘click detector’ capable of monitoring for impulsive sounds. When impulsive sounds are detected, a high frequency (fs = 300 kHz) recording is triggered capturing a ‘snipit’ of the wave form. Snipits are referred to as ‘click detection’s by the manufacturer regardless of the source of the impulse. SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 9

Burrard Inlet 2019

PAMGuard software was used to identify click detections in the frequency range and duration representative of harbor porpoise. Porpoise detection parameters were set to 0.22 milliseconds (ms) duration, peak frequency range between 100-125 kHz, and the control band of 40-90 kHz. A search and integration band had a lower range of 40 kHz, while peak frequency was set to 110-125 kHz. A threshold of 6 dB was set to ensure detection of high or moderate probability porpoise detections while limiting false positive detection.

Figure 4. A typical porpoise click - Click Waveform Display, Click Spectrum and Wigner Plot displayed using PAMGuard software.

2.3.2 Whistles and Moans Tonal sounds are produced by a variety of marine mammals including both odontocetes (whistles) and mystecetes (moans). These lower frequency calls are captured in the continuous recordings and detected by tonal contour tracking software. The ‘whistle and moan’ detector was run on the 96 kHz continuous recordings over the frequency range of 800 Hz to 30 kHz. The sensitivity threshold was set to 5 dB to ensure that marine mammal calls were not missed (SMRU Consulting, 2018).

All whistle and moan detections were visually scanned for the presence of killer whales. Where killer whales could be confirmed in the recordings, events were annotated. Killer whale events were reviewed a final time to provide a final ecotype identification (SRKW, Biggs, unknown Ecotype) when possible. In addition to reviewing all potential killer whale detections a careful review of acoustic data was done for days during which there were reported visual sightings of killer whales in the area.

2.4 Ancillary and CTD data Ancillary data were used to contextualize and interpret trends and patterns in noise levels. AIS data for the wider Burrard Inlet area were purchased to use as covariate data in noise analyses. Vessel density based on AIS transmissions was compiled for each day within a 3 km radius of each hydrophone location. This range was selected to encompass the bulk of noise contributions from the relatively slow-moving commercial vessels transiting the area. The data set was partitioned using AIS data into a) Class A vessels moving at least one knot of speed and b) all Class A vessels including those that were moored or anchored. For each day we calculated the number of AIS transmissions detected within 3 km of each hydrophone and divided that value by the total marine area represented in the 3 km range. This value is referred to as signal density and was correlated with L50, Leq and L5 SPLs.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 10

Burrard Inlet 2019

Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth (CTD) measurements were made during each deployment using a RBR Concerto (https://rbr-global.com/products/standard-loggers/rbrduo-ct). Weather statistics (https://www.weatherstats.ca/) provided data on daily rainfall (mm) and average wind speeds (km/h) for the Vancouver area. These were plotted to compare monthly trends and a visual inspection of monthly spectrograms was undertaken for the top ten rainiest and windiest days to assess potential patterns in SPLs. Additional analyses were undertaken for the Indian Arm SoundTrap as this location has the lowest vessel density and so was thought to have the best ability to detect the effect of environmental covariates on SPLs. Daily rainfall and average winds were thus correlated against daily SPLs (1-10 kHz) and the SoundTraps internal tilt recorder’s data were used as a proxy for current speed to assess potential current flow noise effects. A correlation analysis comparing hourly SPLs (10-100 Hz) and tilt angle was therefore undertaken. Choice of optimal frequency band to detect covariate effect patterns was based on Wenz (1962) curve data for each environmental factor.

Industrial activity schedules for dredging and marine construction operations at Centerm Terminal (Burrard Inlet West locations) and Trans Mountain impact and vibro-piling operations were provided by VFPA staff. Following assessment of monthly SPLs and spectrograms before, during and after construction activity, a finer temporal scale analysis was undertaken to investigate contributions to SPLs from these activities.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 11

Burrard Inlet 2019

3 Results 3.1 Underwater Noise Levels A total of 359 days (across the period January 29, 2019 – January 28, 2020) of PAM data were collected at Burrard East and Indian Arm locations, 346 days at Burrard West 2, 341 days at Burrard West 1 and 186 days at English Bay (the monitoring location added part-way through the study on Deployment 2). The 13 and 18-day acoustic data loss at the two Burrard West locations was because of high gain settings used in Deployment 2 that led to exceeding the internal memory on the units. Thus, low gain settings were used at both Burrard West locations for Deployments 3 and 4. A day was required between hydrophone recovery and re-deployment to allow for data download and for data QA review protocols.

3.1.1 Ambient Sound Over Time The maximum broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) SPL was 165.7 dB re 1μPa observed at Burrard Inlet West 1 in September 2019, a location ~480 m NE of the cruise ship terminal at Canada Place and in close proximity to the SeaBus route (Figure 1). The minimum broadband SPL was 79 dB lower (86.7 dB re 1μPa), observed in Indian Arm in May 2019. Leq (arithmetic mean) and L5 (value that is exceeded 5% of the time) monthly broadband SPL were both also highest at Burrard Inlet West 1 (135.4 and 141.0 dB re 1μPa) and lowest in Indian Arm (113.4 and 118.3 dB re 1μPa; Table 5). In all months, Leq monthly broadband SPL exceeded 132 dB re 1μPa at both Burrard Inlet West locations, while at Indian Arm it remained below 118 dB re 1μPa.

Table 5. Average monthly SPL (median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 in dB re 1μPa) by location.

Location Number of months L50 Leq L5 Burrard West 1 12 129.1 135.4 141.0 Burrard West2 12 131.4 134.8 139.1 Burrard East 12 110.8 124.1 129.4 Indian Arm 12 100.0 113.4 118.3 English Bay 6 121.0 124.6 128.4

In all months analysed (February 2019 – January 2020), the Burrard West 2 hydrophone location had the highest median (L50) broadband SPL (L50 = 131.4 ± 1.3 S.D., dB re 1μPa), followed closely by Burrard West 1 SPL (L50 = 129.1 ± 0.8 dB re 1μPa, Figure 6). The English Bay location had a lower median SPL of 121.0 ± 0.8 dB re 1μPa. A low degree of monthly variability in L50 was observed at these three locations, despite dredging and construction operations at Centerm Terminal starting August 2019 onwards. The quietest location was at the Indian Arm location (SPL L50 = 100.0 ± 2.5 dB re 1μPa), followed by the Burrard East location (SPL L50 = 110.8 ± 2.8 dB re 1μPa). Considerable monthly variation in L50 (>7 dB) was observed at both these locations, with peaks in August at both (Figure 6).

Noise levels from sites furthest from the mouth of the inlet, Burrard East and Indian Arm, were consistently lower than the western sites. This trend was most prevalent in the lowest frequency decade bands. In the 10 Hz to 1 kHz range, median noise levels were 10-20 dB lower than for the English bay, or Burrard West sites. Noise level distributions in the upper two-decade bands at Indian SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 12

Burrard Inlet 2019

Arm showed bi-modality with a lower peak near 85 dB re 1μPa and a higher one 95 dB re 1μPa. The cause for this is not immediately clear but Figure 12 indicates an upward shift in noise regime between February 14th and the 24th.

The English Bay site had disproportionately high energy in the lower decade bands but lower noise in the upper frequency decade bands. This is likely attributable to the lower number of small vessels outside of the harbor as well as deeper deployment depth than the Burrard West sties. Causes of observed trends are explored further in Section 3.1.7.

Noise level distributions for Burrard West Sites were consistently higher than the remaining locations across all decade bands (Figure 5). In the two lower decade bands, median noise levels at Burrard West 2 were higher than Burrard West 1. The trend was reversed in the upper decade bands, in which the median noise levels at the Burrard West 1 site were greater than the Burrard West 2. Noise level distributions at the Burrard West 1 site also displayed bi-modal tendencies in the upper decade bands. In these bands, the noise levels were most often between 100 and 110 dB re 1μPa. However, noise levels in these bands frequently exceeded 110 dB re 1μPa. This was likely caused by the proximity of the instrument to the SeaBus and represent periods of maximum received level from the SeaBus.

Figure 5. Probability distribution of median (L50) monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) at each location for broadband and decade frequency bands.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 13

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 6. Median (L50) broadband monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) at each location. Average values for the year with standard deviations are provided to the right of each monthly trend.

Figure 7. Burrard West 1 broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 14

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 8. Burrard West 2 broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa).

Figure 9. Burrard East broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 15

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 10. Indian Arm broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa).

Figure 11. English Bay broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 16

Burrard Inlet 2019

3.1.2 Monthly and One-Third Octave SPLs with PSD plots Monthly SPLs and spectrograms for February (Figure 12) and August (Figure 13) at the four year- round locations and June and August (Figure 14) at English Bay location illustrate several clear patterns.

• A notable band of energy between 30-300 Hz at all five locations, but especially the Burrard Inlet location. • Consistent tones between 30-100 Hz at all locations except Indian Arm. These are most likely vessel noise related. • Clear diurnal patterns, most prominent at Burrard West 1 and Indian Arm. • Regular daytime low frequency (<15 Hz) energy at Indian Arm (Mid-February and March only). • Irregular low frequency (<30 Hz) periods most clearly in winter and spring months.

Monthly Power Spectral Density (PSD) exceedance plots for February (Figure 15 through Figure 18) and August (Figure 20 through Figure 23) at the four year-round locations and June (Figure 19) and August (Figure 24) at the English Bay location illustrate a number of clear patterns.

• Strong oscillations in PSD between 30-100 Hz, with continued weaker oscillations beyond 200 Hz at all locations except Indian Arm. • A clear roll off at ~ 400 Hz at all locations. • A significant spike at 23 kHz only at the Burrard West 1 location and only in August. • Spikes at 4-5 kHz at the Burrard West locations only in February. • Peak PSD at very low frequencies (10-15 Hz) at the Indian Arm and Burrard East location in February. • At Burrard East and Indian Arm, the noise floor (lower amplitude limit of the hydrophone) was reached above 10 kHz. This is indicated by the absence of lower limits on the one-third octave box and whisker plots. This results in a lower ability to detect quiet sounds above this frequency. • Peak L50 within one-third octave bands were similar across seasons but varied by location. Burrard West 1 and Indian Arm peaked at 251 Hz in February and August, while Burrard East peaked between 316-398 Hz. Far lower one-third octave peaks were observed at Burrard West 2 and English Bay which peaked in both February and August at 63 Hz and 50 Hz, respectively.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 17

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Feb) Burrard West 2 (Feb)

Burrard East (Feb) Indian Arm (Feb)

Figure 12. February broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade band SPL (top panel) and spectrogram (bottom panel) by location. Plots are at 1-hour resolution.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 18

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Aug) Burrard West 2 (Aug)

Burrard East (Aug) Indian Arm (Aug)

Figure 13. August broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade band SPL (top panel) and spectrogram (bottom panel) by location. Plots are at 1-hour resolution.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 19

Burrard Inlet 2019

English Bay (June) English Bay (Aug)

Figure 14. June and August English Bay broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade band SPL (top panel) and spectrogram (bottom panel). Plots are at 1-hour resolution.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 20

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 15. Burrard West 1 (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 21

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 16. Burrard West 2 (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 22

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 17. Burrard East (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 23

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 18. Indian Arm (Feb), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 24

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 19. English Bay (June), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 25

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 20. Burrard West 1 (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 26

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 21. Burrard West 2 (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 27

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 22. Burrard East (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 28

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 23. Indian Arm (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 29

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 24. English Bay (Aug), percentiles of 1-minute one-third octave band levels (top). Red line is rms mean (Leq). Percentiles of 1-minute PSD levels (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 30

Burrard Inlet 2019

3.1.3 Table of SPL Levels SPL for key broadband and decade frequency bands are provided in Table 6 for each month and location. Complete monthly SPL results are provided in the Appendix. Electronic copies of all one- third octave levels by month and location have been provided to VFPA. See Figure 6 through Figure 11 for monthly trends at each location.

Table 6. Broadband median (L50), mean (Leq) and L5 and median (L50) decade frequency band monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) by location.

Location Month L50, L50, L50, L50, L50, Leq, L5, 0.01-48 0.01-0.1 0.1-1 1-10 10-48 0.01-48 0.01-48 kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz Burrard West 1 FEB 128.3 122.8 125.3 118.4 104.3 132.9 138.8 Burrard West 1 MAR 127.9 121.7 125.3 118.5 104.7 132.8 138.9 Burrard West 1 APR 127.8 121.5 125.3 117.8 103.8 133.7 139.0 Burrard West 1 MAY 129.6 123.8 126.7 119.0 107.8 136.4 141.6 Burrard West 1 JUN 129.3 123.9 126.3 118.5 106.9 136.4 141.3 Burrard West 1 JUL 129.1 123.4 126.0 118.1 107.2 136.2 141.4 Burrard West 1 AUG 129.6 124.4 126.7 118.2 107.5 136.2 141.4 Burrard West 1 SEP 130.7 126.2 127.6 119.3 109.4 137.2 142.4 Burrard West 1 OCT 130.1 124.9 126.7 118.6 108.1 137.4 142.7 Burrard West 1 NOV 129.0 123.3 125.2 116.8 106.5 135.0 140.7 Burrard West 1 DEC 128.3 122.0 125.9 117.4 106.9 133.6 140.1 Burrard West 1 JAN 129.9 123.6 127.7 119.1 108.9 137.1 143.6 Burrard West 2 FEB 130.9 126.8 126.8 120.0 103.0 134.8 139.4 Burrard West 2 MAR 129.8 124.7 126.3 121.5 102.3 133.5 137.4 Burrard West 2 APR 130.8 126.0 127.7 121.6 102.4 133.8 137.8 Burrard West 2 MAY 130.7 126.9 126.4 122.3 102.3 134.6 139.7 Burrard West 2 JUN 131.6 128.6 126.8 121.5 100.6 134.7 139.5 Burrard West 2 JUL 131.0 128.3 126.5 120.6 100.0 134.7 139.7 Burrard West 2 AUG 131.3 127.9 127.1 121.0 101.4 135.9 139.0 Burrard West 2 SEP 134.6 133.0 127.4 121.5 104.7 135.9 139.4 Burrard West 2 OCT 131.7 127.8 127.8 122.7 105.4 135.6 139.9 Burrard West 2 NOV 132.4 128.5 129.3 120.1 104.1 134.7 138.5 Burrard West 2 DEC 129.7 125.7 126.5 119.3 103.7 134.2 139.9 Burrard West 2 JAN 132.0 129.5 127.6 120.4 103.7 134.7 139.6 Burrard East FEB 108.4 103.9 101.0 96.5 91.6 124.3 128.1 Burrard East MAR 108.0 103.2 102.0 96.8 91.6 123.1 128.4 Burrard East APR 110.6 104.6 102.7 97.3 92.4 123.3 128.2 SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 31

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard East MAY 110.8 105.0 105.4 100.4 88.6 123.9 129.4 Burrard East JUN 112.1 105.8 106.7 102.0 89.2 124.2 130.0 Burrard East JUL 113.7 106.8 108.3 103.5 92.3 124.7 130.6 Burrard East AUG 115.3 108.3 110.6 105.1 94.2 126.1 131.7 Burrard East SEP 113.3 107.3 108.6 100.5 92.7 125.6 131.0 Burrard East OCT 111.8 107.1 106.7 98.7 90.2 125.1 130.6 Burrard East NOV 109.5 105.0 102.7 96.9 88.0 123.3 128.9 Burrard East DEC 108.0 104.0 101.0 97.3 91.8 123.5 128.5 Burrard East JAN 108.2 104.2 101.7 98.0 92.2 122.8 128.0 Indian Arm FEB 102.6 96.5 88.7 91.2 92.1 110.8 115.2 Indian Arm MAR 103.0 96.7 88.1 90.4 92.0 112.5 117.2 Indian Arm APR 98.9 88.7 90.4 92.4 92.5 112.5 117.6 Indian Arm MAY 100.1 90.7 95.8 92.4 86.4 114.7 120.7 Indian Arm JUN 101.4 91.9 97.4 94.5 85.6 115.2 121.7 Indian Arm JUL 102.6 93.2 97.6 95.0 87.3 116.4 122.9 Indian Arm AUG 104.4 95.2 100.6 95.8 89.8 117.7 124.2 Indian Arm SEP 99.5 89.8 93.2 89.8 87.8 114.6 120.4 Indian Arm OCT 96.2 87.3 88.8 87.5 85.6 111.9 116.4 Indian Arm NOV 97.1 87.3 88.3 85.8 84.6 112.6 116.7 Indian Arm DEC 97.4 85.6 89.1 88.9 88.5 110.1 114.3 Indian Arm JAN 97.2 84.9 89.4 91.4 89.6 111.6 112.0 English Bay MAY 121.4 119.5 113.8 104.4 89.4 125.0 128.6 English Bay JUN 119.8 117.3 114.5 103.2 89.7 123.3 127.2 English Bay JUL 120.5 118.8 113.5 102.0 89.2 123.5 127.4 English Bay AUG 121.9 120.0 115.7 101.9 90.7 125.3 128.6 English Bay SEP 120.8 118.7 115.5 101.9 92.5 126.4 130.1 English Bay OCT 121.6 120.0 115.4 103.9 93.5 124.3 128.4

3.1.4 Diurnal Rhythm Plots showing diurnal patterns are provided in Figure 25 for February and Figure 26 for August at each location. Based on these plots we find the following patterns. • At Burrard West 1, lower noise levels and low variability between 02:00 and 06:00 and reduced levels 21:00-02:00 (both February and August). Likely due to the SeaBus schedule. • At Burrard West 2 and English Bay low variability observed and slightly higher levels during daylight hours. • At Burrard East, higher levels 06:00 to 20:00 in August only (more variability in February levels). • At Indian Arm, higher levels 08:00 to 18:00 in February and 07:00 to 20:00 in August.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 32

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Feb) Burrard West 2 (Feb)

Burrard East (Feb) Indian Arm (Feb)

Figure 25. Median SPL across the month of February for each hour of day by location.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 33

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Aug) Burrard West 2 (Aug)

Burrard East (Aug) Indian Arm (Aug)

English Bay (Aug)

Figure 26. Median SPL across the month of August for each hour of day by location.

3.1.5 Weekly Rhythm Plots showing weekly patterns are provided in Figure 27 for February and Figure 28 for August at each location. Based on these plots we find the following patterns. • At Burrard West 1, the increased 10-48 kHz band SPL on Wednesday and Saturday in August is caused by the ultrasonic antifouling used by some cruise ships. • Little rhythm was observed at Burrard West 2 (possibly due to 24-hour operations), while weekly rhythms at Burrard East and Indian Arm were most clear in summer. • Notable change in decade band importance at Indian Arm occurred between February and August. On further investigation, the pattern observed in February also occurred in March and then reverted to a pattern similar to August (See Figure 10).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 34

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Feb) Burrard West 2 (Feb)

Burrard East (Feb) Indian Arm (Feb)

Figure 27. Median SPL across the month of February for each day of the week by location.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 35

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Aug) Burrard West 2 (Aug)

Burrard East (Aug) Indian Arm (Aug)

English Bay (Aug)

Figure 28. Median SPL across the month of August for each day of the week by location.

3.1.6 SPL Box Plots SPL box plots helped identify trends and variability within and across locations in February and August (Figure 29 and Figure 30). Maximum SPLs were all below 165 dB re 1μPa, while minimum SPLs were above 80 dB re 1μPa. Variability was low at Burrard West 2 and English Bay. At all other locations, variability was higher in August than February. Ranges exceeded 50 dB in February and 70 dB in August.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 36

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Feb) Burrard West 2 (Feb)

Burrard East (Feb) Indian Arm (Feb)

Figure 29. Boxplots of broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade frequency band SPL for the month of February by location. The black lines are the Leq.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 37

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 (Aug) Burrard West 2 (Aug)

Burrard East (Aug) Indian Arm (Aug)

English Bay (Aug)

Figure 30. Boxplots of broadband (10 Hz – 48 kHz) and decade frequency band SPL for the month of August by location. The black lines are the Leq.

3.1.7 Ancillary Data and Centerm/TMX Construction Activity 3.1.7.1 CTD Data Plots of sound speed profiles (SSP) for four periods (covering spring, summer and winter seasons) are found in Figure 30 and Figure 31. Summer SSPs were largely faster than in spring and winter. In winter SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 38

Burrard Inlet 2019 at all locations there was a distinct layer of cold surface water (thermocline) resulting in a sharp change in sound speed as a function of depth. Large changes in sound speed can act to trap sound at different depths, causing ducting effects. During the summer CTD casts, the sound speed decreased with depth at all locations likely due to high air temperatures and decreased precipitation. This type of SSP typically results in decreased transmission loss at a bottom moored hydrophone as sound waves are refracted from the surface towards the bottom. In contrast, the opposite trend can be seen in winter casts with a slight increase in sound speed with depth. In this case, some of the sound waves originating from distant sources are refracting up and away from the bottom moored hydrophone, resulting in increased transmission loss. The spring SSPs show less of a gradient resulting in less refraction and subsequently lower transmission loss for most locations. However, the spring SSP at Indian Arm exhibited differences caused by the freshwater input to this area. The freshwater incursion was significant enough to cause a shallow surface duct at ~4 m depth. This duct acts to greatly increase transmission loss between surface sources and the bottom moored receiver by refracting sounds towards the surface while simultaneously decreasing transmission loss from deeper sources by refracting sounds produced below the duct towards the bottom-moored recorders. With these observations in mind it is likely that a portion of the increased noise levels in summer relative to winter could be attributed to the seasonality of the SSP, especially at Indian Arm.

Figure 31. Sound speed profile for May (Left) and August (right) 2019 by location.

Figure 32. Sound speed profile for November 2019 (Left) and January 2020 (right) by location. SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 39

Burrard Inlet 2019

3.1.7.2 Vessel Density Violin plots (Figure 33) depict daily vessel density by location based on AIS data within 3 km of each hydrophone. Highest densities were observed at Burrard West 1, followed closely by Burrard West 2. Lowest densities are observed at Indian Arm, followed by English Bay. Both these locations had lower variability across days, compared with the Burrard Inlet locations.

Figure 33. Daily AIS signal densities by location based on AIS data (Class A) within 3 km of each hydrophone. Panels depict moving vessels only (top) and all vessels (bottom) including moored, anchored, and vessels travelling < 1 knot. Median AIS densities are provided at the top of each plot.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 40

Burrard Inlet 2019

A strong correlation between noise levels and AIS density was observed. This trend held both for the moving vessels (not shown) and the larger dataset including moored, anchored, and vessels moving less than 1 knot (Figure 34). The trend was slightly stronger for the analysis including moored and anchored ships suggesting that noise emanating from stationary vessels such as cruise ships and container ships waiting to unload still demonstrably contribute to the soundscape, especially at higher SPL metrics (L5). The regression lines predict an increase of 12 to 16 dB in broadband SPL as AIS signal density increases from 10 to 400 AIS signals per km2/day.

Figure 34. Relationship between the density of AIS signals per day within 3 km of each deployment and SPL for L50, Leq and L5 values at each location.

3.1.7.3 Currents, Wind and Rain Average daily rainfall and wind speed patterns by month for Vancouver (Figure 35) highlight higher rainfall in April 2019 and September 2019 through January 2020, while wind speeds peak in January 2020 and April 2019. These patterns do not help explain high summer SPLs observed at Indian Arm and Burrard East. Visual inspection of monthly spectrograms for the top ten rainiest and windiest days in 2019 showed no clear patterns in ambient noise intensity compared to other time periods at the Indian Arm location. Indian Arm SPL (1-10 kHz) at daily scales were plotted with both daily rainfall and average wind speed, but no consistent patterns were observed (Figure 36). Given that Indian Arm was the lowest SPL location and no clear impact of rain or wind was detected, it is reasonable to conclude that these environmental factors are not major contributors to long term trends and seasonal patterns in Burrard Inlet under current conditions. SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 41

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 35. Average (and standard deviation) daily rainfall (mm; top) and wind speed (km/h; bottom) by month for Vancouver.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 42

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 36. Indian Arm SPL (1-10 kHz) versus daily rainfall (mm) and average wind speed (km/h). Color scale indicates number of observations.

SoundTrap internal tilt recorder documents the pitch, angle and roll of the instrument. Tilt angle was considered a proxy for current speed as the instrument is vertical when no current is present and SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 43

Burrard Inlet 2019 tilted as increasing current forces the tethered instrument downward. Tilt angles were correlated with SPLs (10-100 Hz) at the Indian Arm location (where the influence of other confounding factors was thought to be least). A very weak positive relationship was identified but only at the quietest time periods where SPLs were < 90 dB re 1μPa (Figure 37).

Figure 37. Indian Arm SPL (10-100 Hz) versus SoundTrap tilt angle (considered a proxy for current speed). Color scale indicates number of observations.

3.1.7.4 Construction Activities: Centerm Terminal The Burrard West 1 location was ~750 m from the Centerm Terminal while Burrard West 2 was ~540 m away. Given the closer proximity of the Burrard West 2 hydrophone and its greater distance from the SeaBus route, we focused our analyses on Burrard West 2. Construction at Centerm began August 7, 2019 and continued through the end of the study. Most of the activity included dredging and infilling with a little demolition work and occurred at various locations across multiple months. The onset of construction activities did not show dramatic changes in the SPL or spectrogram at Burrard West 2 (Figure 38) but this was expected as dredging and infill produce continuous sounds at moderate amplitudes with the main energy below 1 kHz (Todd et al. 2015). Inspection of monthly SPL boxplots at Burrard West 2 shows that broadband and the first two decade band SPL L95 are mostly >120 dB and L5 < 140 dB re 1μPa (Figure 39).

Source levels of a variety of different types of dredging reviewed by Todd et al. (2015) range from 163 to 190 dB re 1μPa at 1 m. If we assume a source level of 180 dB re 1μPa at 1 m and a transmission loss coefficient of 18 dB, the received level 540 m away (the minimum distance from the Centerm Terminal to the Burrard West 2 hydrophone), at the hydrophone resulting from dredging activity would be ~130.8 dB re 1μPa. This received level is within the broadband interquartile range (e.g. L25- L75) for this location (Figure 39). Therefore, noise levels at this location are high enough that the SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 44

Burrard Inlet 2019 addition of moderate sound sources appears to have little effect on long term SPL. To find the noise influence of these construction activities, detailed information of when, where and what activities took place would be needed, as well as a much finer temporal analysis window (i.e. on the order of minutes rather than months).

Figure 38. Broadband and decade band SPL (top) a spectrogram (bottom) at Burrard West 2 in August 2019. Black vertical line indicates the start of the construction period.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 45

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 39. Boxplots of broadband and decade band SPL at Burrard West 2 across six months.

3.1.7.5 Construction Activity: Trans Mountain Vibratory pile driving occurred October 2019 through January 2020 (14-20 days per month). Impact pile driving occurred at the end of November for one day and then for 15 days in December 2019, six of which were in offshore areas. Visual inspection of monthly spectrograms and SPLs from Burrard East showed no clear pattern linked to this construction activity (Figure 40 and Figure 41). Inspection of the monthly SPL boxplots also did not show any clear changes in the soundscape due to these construction activities (Figure 42). Visual inspection of the acoustic time series and spectrograms on the scale of minutes, as well as a trained analyst listening did not locate any definitive time periods when the Burrard East hydrophone recorded vibratory pile driving activity. The Burrard East hydrophone is ~1.9 km from the Trans Mountain facility. Caltrans (2009) provide estimates of vibratory pile driving at ~191 dB re 1μPa at 1 m (rms). Assuming a transmission loss coefficient of 18 dB, the received level from the vibratory pile driving at the Burrard East hydrophone would be ~131 dB re 1μPa, which places it in the upper percentiles of the broadband noise levels at this location (Figure 42). Without detailed knowledge of the timing and location of the vibratory pile driving, it is difficult to identify this specific noise source.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 46

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 40. Broadband and decade band SPL (top) a spectrogram (bottom) at Burrard East in October 2019.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 47

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 41. Broadband and decade band SPL (top) a spectrogram (bottom) at Burrard East in December 2019.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 48

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 42. Boxplots of broadband and decade band SPL at Burrard East across four months.

The impulsive nature of impact pile driving did however lend itself to identification in the Burrard East hydrophone data. Figure 43 shows ~13 seconds of audio data recorded on 28 November 2019 which clearly shows the impulses of seven pile driving blows space just over 1 second apart. These are an example of a few pile driving blows that are part of a longer series. The source level of these is dependent on the size of the pilings and the energy used to drive the pile (neither of which we know), but assuming representative source levels of Caltrans (2009) of 225 dB re 1μPa at 1 m (peak) and a transmission coefficient of 18 dB, then the received levels at the Burrard East hydrophone may be ~165 dB 1μPa (peak). This would explain why they are clearly visible in the time series (Figure 43). While these pile driving events will have caused large short term increases in ambient noise levels, they do not appear to have caused changes in noise trends when viewed at the monthly time scale.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 49

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 43. Time series (top) and spectrogram (bottom) of impact pile driving recorded on the Burrard East hydrophone on 28 November 2019. Shown are ~13 seconds of data. 3.2 Source Levels Source level data were successfully collected from four different noise sources using CABs. However, source levels could not be accurately calculated for vessels at anchor using the English Bay SoundTrap (Table 7). Source levels are presented for each source in separate sections below.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 50

Burrard Inlet 2019

Table 7. Details of data collected from five different sources.

Source Start Recording End Recording Sample Size (UTC) (UTC) Container ship 15:15 18:14 CAB: 120 minutes off shore power; 68 minutes on shore power. Cruise ship 17:01 22:58 CAB: 40 minutes off shore power; 339 minutes on shore power. SeaBus 17:24 20:10 CAB: 8 transits per hour (4 transits north bound, and 4 transits south bound). Seaplanes 18:15 23:51 CAB: Average of 15 takeoffs/landings per hour in proximity of CABs. Vessel at Between 06:00 Between 06:00 SoundTrap: Three anchor and 12:00 and 12:00 different vessels at (night) (night) English Bay anchorage # 3.

3.2.1 Container Ship Figure 44 shows the broadband (10 Hz – 100 kHz) SPLs for the entire set of recordings for the near CAB (closest to the container ship) as well as the spectrogram. The red line demarcates the time the vessel changed from being off shore power to being on shore power. A decrease in received level is clearly observable when the shore power was connected. There are clear higher amplitude sounds between 10 and 100 Hz before connection to shore power which may be related to generator and other equipment that was shut off on connection to shore power. We estimated a broadband source level of 159 dB re 1µPa at 1 m with the vessel off shore power and 153.2 dB re 1µPa at 1 m when on shore power which indicates a reduction of 5.8 dB due to using shore power. The one-third octave source level estimates for this vessel on and off shore power are provided in Figure 45. The reduction in SPL from switching to shore power occurs between 100 Hz and 10 kHz.

On a 15 to 30-minute cycle, there are clear increases in SPL on both CABs, but with larger amplitude changes on the far CAB, suggesting this is caused by a noise source closer to the far CAB (i.e. not the container ship and most likely the SeaBus). Both the far and near CAB show a reduction in received levels after the vessel connected to shore power. Periods where the SeaBus was near either CAB were excluded from the source level analysis to avoid this confound.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 51

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 44. Broadband (10Hz – 100 kHz) SPL from the CAB closest to the container ship (top) and a spectrogram of the same data (bottom). The red vertical line (top plot) indicates the time the vessel changed from being off shore power to being on shore power.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 52

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 45. Comparison of one-third octave band source level estimates of a container ship with shore power off and on shore power.

3.2.2 Cruise Ship A consistent high amplitude tone at 23 kHz was evident throughout the cruise ship recordings (Figure 46) and is attributed to an ultrasonic antifouling device. This tone was higher amplitude than the passing SeaBus in the 10-100 kHz band (Figure 47). The drop in the 10-100 kHz band in Figure 47 is presumed to be a period when the antifouling device was being turned off or maintained. The antifouling device increased the source level in upper octave bins by approximately 40 dB. As with the container ship estimates, recordings by the far and near CAB were affected by the SeaBus passing (8 times per hour) and these time periods were therefore removed from source level analyses.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 53

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 46. Spectrogram of recordings from the CAB nearest the cruise ship.

Figure 47. Decade band SPL of recordings from the CAB nearest the cruise ship.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 54

Burrard Inlet 2019

When the 23 kHz tone is included in source level estimates, broadband levels were 187.5 dB re 1μPa at 1 m when the vessel was off shore power and 187.4 dB re 1µPa at 1 m when on shore power. However, removing the 23 kHz tone led to broadband source level estimates of 171.6 dB re 1μPa at 1 m when the vessel was off shore power and 163.8 dB re 1μPa at 1 m on shore power. There appears to be reduction in all one-third octave bins lower than 20 kHz when the vessel is on shore power, however the SNR was not sufficiently high is some one-third octave bins to estimate source level (Figure 48).

Figure 48. Source level estimates of cruise ship on and off shore power. Data gaps are due to SNR being less than 3 dB in those one-third octave bands. The 23 kHz tone is included in this plot.

3.2.3 SeaBus SeaBus received level varied considerably with both range and the behavior of the vessel (Figure 49). As the vessels depart the southern terminal, they accelerate quickly to remain on schedule and create higher amplitude noise, presumably from cavitation. When they return to the southern terminal they slow and sometimes place their propellers in reverse. These approach periods create lower noise levels. In addition, there were two different vessels operating during our recordings, with two different captains, hence our source level estimates include variability introduced by difference in two

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 55

Burrard Inlet 2019 vessels and two captains. For our source level estimates we focused mostly (but not exclusively) on periods when the SeaBus was departing the southern terminal. The median broadband source level estimate for the SeaBus was 171.5 dB re 1µPa at 1 m. Source level estimates peaked around 200 Hz and were highest between 100 Hz and 10 kHz (Figure 50).

Figure 49. Broadband (10 Hz – 100 kHz) SPL from the CAB near the SeaBus (top) and a spectrogram of the same data (bottom). Only the deep hydrophone data are shown.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 56

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 50. One-third octave median source level estimates of SeaBus.

3.2.4 Seaplane Seaplanes are most likely to generate underwater sounds when they are taking off. During this time, they are in contact with the water surface and increase their engine RPM and therefore generate some of their highest amplitude sounds. We focused our analyses on these times, and it should be emphasized that these estimates of underwater source level are for brief periods of time. After takeoff, transfer of their airborne noise into the water will be restricted to periods when the plane is directly overhead and not much of the acoustic energy will transfer across the media.

Brief increases in underwater SPL are evident during seaplane take offs (Figure 51). These are visible as small peaks in the SPL levels after 20:00. Because there was a cruise ship at Canada Place that was using a 23 kHz antifouling device during these recordings, this tone is evident in the spectrogram (Figure 51). This tone was removed from seaplane source level estimates as it is not generated by the seaplanes. Based on approximate estimates of range between the hydrophones and the seaplane, the median broadband estimate of source level was 155.6 dB re 1µPa at 1 m. The one-third octave band source level estimates peak at ~600 Hz which may be related to propeller design and RPM (Figure 52). Most of the acoustic energy from the planes taking off was between 50 and 2,000 Hz.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 57

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 51. Broadband (10 Hz – 100 kHz) SPL from the CAB near the seaplanes (top) and a spectrogram of the same data (bottom).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 58

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 52. One-third octave source level estimates of seaplanes take off.

3.2.5 Vessel at Anchor The signal to noise ratio of vessels at anchor was too low to estimate source level for any of the three case studies (Figure 53). For some frequency bands, noise levels taken from the background noise periods exceeded received levels during the signal period. This could either be due to a low overall contribution to the soundscape from bulk carriers at this anchorage, or that the distance between the SoundTrap and the vessel at anchor was too large, or a combination of both. The distance between the vessel at anchor and the SoundTrap varied from 410 to 760 m.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 59

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 53. One-third octave RL and ambient noise for the three bulk carriers measured while at anchor.

3.2.6 Comparison of Source Levels Broadband source level are provided in Table 8. The highest estimated source level was the cruise ship with the 23 kHz anti-fouling tone included. This source level estimate should more so be considered the source level estimate for this particular anti-fouling device, and is not representative of cruise ships that do not use this technology. A more representative source level estimate would be the values provided with the 23 kHz tone removed. There was a large reduction of 7.8 dB in source level when the cruise ship was on shore power. The reduction from being on shore power for the container ship was a slightly lower at 5.8 dB. The smaller reduction for the container ship is likely due to having fewer systems that are needed for the vessel (i.e. container ships don’t have the same HVAC and other systems needed for large numbers of passengers). The SeaBus generates relatively high source level, but this is mostly when they are accelerating as they leave the terminal. At other times, they will generate lower SL. As expected, the seaplanes generate some of the lowest SL. These seaplane sounds will only transfer into the water during short periods of time and are therefore not likely to be large contributors to the underwater soundscape of Burrard Inlet.

One-third octave source level plots and values are provided in Figure 54 and Table 9. The SeaBus generates the highest noise levels above 100 Hz which is likely due to cavitation while accelerating

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 60

Burrard Inlet 2019 away from the terminal. Peaks in one-third octave source level are around 100 Hz for both the container and cruise ship while on shore power and the peak for seaplanes is at ~600 Hz.

Table 8. Median Broadband Source Levels by vessel type and activity.

Vessel Type Activity Median Source Level (dB re 1μPa at 1 m) Container ship Off shore power 159.0 On shore power 153.2 Cruise ship Off shore power (23 kHz tone included) 187.5 Off shore power (23 kHz tone removed) 171.6 On shore power (23 kHz tone removed) 163.8 SeaBus Under way (accelerating from terminal) 171.5 Seaplane Taking off 155.6

Figure 54. Comparison plot of one-third octave band source level estimates of four different vessel types. For cruise ship source levels, the 23 kHz tone caused by the antifouling device was removed.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 61

Burrard Inlet 2019

Table 9. One-third octave band centre frequency source level estimates for four vessel types.

1/3 Octave Container Cruise ship SeaBus Seaplanes band centre vessel (on (on shore (accelerating (during frequency shore power, 23 from take-off) (Hz) power) kHz tone terminal) removed) 25.1 136.4 132.4 139.2 134.7 31.6 135.4 141.6 144.7 133.8 39.8 139.7 149.8 148.7 137.8 50.1 140.7 147 149.1 137.5 63.1 145.1 150.1 149.6 143.6 79.4 140.5 147.6 152.3 141.3 100 142.2 153.8 153.6 139.9 126 145.3 153.3 156.8 141.2 158 139.7 153.8 157.8 141.1 200 139.5 151.2 160 142.5 251 139.6 151.9 156.8 143.6 316 141.4 151.3 155.1 143.1 398 141.6 150.4 157.3 143.8 501 139.1 151.7 158.6 147.3 631 138.9 152.2 157.1 144.6 794 139.1 152.5 158.8 142.1 1000 139 150 158.7 142.3 1260 138.6 150 158.3 145 1580 135.7 148.8 158.5 143.3 2000 133.2 148.6 157 139.5 2510 132.7 146.7 157.4 139.6 3160 131.5 145.4 155.7 137 3980 131.8 144.5 155.8 133.6 5010 139.7 143.3 156.1 132.3 6310 133.3 141.8 155 131.6 7940 131.3 140.9 153.7 131.6 10000 125.7 139.5 152.7 130.5 12600 135.2 137.4 152 128.9 15800 133.4 134.1 150.8 127.5 20000 134.8 132.7 150.7 126.2 25100 134.7 132.1 150.9 124.8 31600 131.7 132.2 149.2 124.2 39800 129.7 126.7 148.7 121.7 50100 126.9 130.9 149 119.6 63100 126.7 131.8 145.9 116.6 79400 125.4 130.4 145.6 112.8

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 62

Burrard Inlet 2019

3.3 Cetacean Presence Using PAM 3.3.1 Killer Whale Detections Killer whales were seen in the study area on 10 days (Table 10). Of these days, two also had acoustic detections, including at two hydrophone locations on one of those days. All these visual and acoustic detections were of Biggs killer whales. On the evening of 23 September 2019 Southern Resident killer whales (probable members of L-Pod) were detected acoustically on the English Bay hydrophone (Table 11). Acoustic verification of ecotypes (SRKW vs Biggs) were provided by Jason Wood and Tina Yack. We did not received reports of visual sightings during this time. This acoustic encounter lasted much longer than the Biggs acoustic encounters (Table 11). Biggs are known to typically hunt in silence and only vocalize immediately after a kill.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 63

Burrard Inlet 2019

Table 10. Observed visual sightings of killer whales and whether they were detected via PAM.

Date Time Notes/comments Burrard Burrard Burrard Indian English (UTC) West 1 West 2 East Arm Bay

2019-02-11 15:20 Biggs KW present (near Y Y N N N/A seaplane landing)

2019-02-18 15:00 Biggs KW 7:00 to 7:45 N N N N N/A am local

2019-04-16 17:00 Biggs KW ~9am local N N N N N/A time

2019-04-23 15:35 Biggs KW went through N N N N N/A inner harbor and past the Second Narrows 2019-04-23 17:30 5 Biggs KW observed N N N N N/A killing a sea lion

2019-04-23 20:25 Passing Centerm N N N N N/A Terminal and Canada Place heading west 2019-05-23 17:20 Family of Biggs KW in N N N N N harbor again at 9:20 off Berry Point 2019-05-27 15:00 Biggs KW near SeaBus N N N N N

2019-05-31 19:00 7 Killer whales close to N N N N Y Centerm Terminal

2019-06-04 14:50 1 Killer whale was N N N N N reported 06:50 am eastbound past the Second Narrows 2019-06-04 16:19 2 Killer whales spotted N N N N N at 8:19 am near Seaspan dry dock close to Canada Place 2019-06-12 23:00 Pod of 4 killer whales N N N N N spotted (1 Juvenile) at False creek (16:48 local) and English Bay (16:00 local) 2019-06-29 Day 4 killer whales spotted N N N N N time during daytime near Stanley Park

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 64

Burrard Inlet 2019

Table 11. Confirmed killer whale detections made using PAM.

Deployment Location Start time of End time of Event Species Number recording recording Duration (local) (local) 1 Burrard West 1 2019-02-11 2019-02-11 0:12:53 Biggs Killer Whales 5:17:07 5:30:00

1 Burrard West 2 2019-02-11 2019-02-11 0:05:56 Biggs Killer Whales 5:28:04 5:34:00

2 English Bay 2019-05-31 2019-05-31 00:00:46 Biggs Killer Whales 09:43:02 09:43:48

3 English Bay 2019-09-23 2019-09-23 2:09:32 SRKW (probable L-Pod) 2:00:02 4:09:34

3.3.2 Humpback Whale and Dolphin Detections There were no confirmed detections of Humpback whales or delphinid species (other than killer whales) on any of the hydrophones deployed.

3.3.3 Porpoise Detections PAMGuard detections of porpoise echolocation clicks (Figure 55) have been summarised by location and month in Table 12. A total of 57 location days with porpoise detections were confirmed, amounting to less than 9 hours of acoustic activity overall. This count of days includes days when porpoise were detected at multiple locations (e.g. detection at two locations on the same day is two location days). Indian Arm had the highest number of detection days overall (n=25), with a peak in August. Low detection rates were observed at both Burrard Inlet West locations (n<3). May and August both had at least 13 detection days. Detection bouts were typically short (median of 2 minutes), occurring 1-3 times on any one day. Extended bouts of over an hour were noted only at English Bay and this location had the highest number of detection minutes.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 65

Burrard Inlet 2019

Figure 55. Example of a porpoise detection bout using PAMGuard software. Top panel shows amplitude of clicks increasing as the animal passes by (on and off axis clicks). Lower panels provide click diagnostics including waveform (left), click spectrum (middle) and Wigner plot (right). Table 12. Number of days with porpoise detection by location and month.

Month Burrard Burrard Burrard Indian English All West 1 West 2 East Arm Bay locations FEB 2019 None None None 1 NA 1 MAR None None None 2 NA 2 APR None None None None NA 0 MAY None 1 4 3 6 14 JUN None None 1 1 2 4 JUL None None None None 2 2 AUG 1 None 3 7 2 13 SEP 1 None 2 3 None 6 OCT 1 None 2 3 1 7 NOV None None None 1 NA 1 DEC None 1 1 1 NA 3 JAN None None 1 3 NA 4 All months 3 2 14 25 13 57 Total Duration 0:02:15 0:08:12 0:20:50 1:00:59 7:10:46 8:43:02 (h:min:sec)

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 66

Burrard Inlet 2019

4 Discussion This one-year (29 January 2019 – 28 January 2020) monitoring project had three primary objectives. 1) characterize underwater ambient noise in Burrard Inlet, 2) estimate source levels of vessels and activities of interest to VFPA and 3) evaluate the presence of cetaceans in the area using PAM.

We monitored five locations using SoundTrap autonomous hydrophones which were deployed for periods of approximately three months. Eighteen of nineteen (95%) SoundTrap deployments were recovered. This resulted in good temporal coverage at all locations except for English Bay which was added as a location after the start of the project and because one of the deployments at this location was never recovered. Based on the results of a recovery effort, the unrecovered SoundTrap was likely removed by a vessel that dragged anchor during a storm. All SoundTraps recorded at a sample rate of 96 kHz and on a 50% duty cycle with 7 min on and 7 min off. From these data, we measured broadband, decade band, and one-third octave band sound pressure levels (SPL) and power spectral densities. We report the median (L50) and L5 values representing the broadband level that was exceeded 50% and 5% of the recorded time, respectively, as well as the arithmetic mean (Leq). We report temporal trends in ambient noise levels over diurnal, weekly, and monthly periods and investigated potential environmental and anthropogenic contributors to the soundscape.

Considerable differences in monthly SPL were observed between the five locations. The maximum broadband SPL was 165.7 dB re 1μPa observed at Burrard West 1 in September (a location <0.5 km NE of the cruise ship terminal at Canada Place and near the SeaBus route). The minimum recorded broadband SPL was 86.7 dB re 1μPa in Indian Arm in May. In all months, the Burrard West 2 location (NE of Centerm Terminal) had the highest median (L50) broadband SPL (L50 = 131.4 dB re 1μPa), followed closely by Burrard West 1 (L50 = 129.1 dB re 1μPa). The English Bay location had a lower median SPL of 121.0 dB re 1μPa. Little monthly variability was observed at these three locations. The lowest SPL location was at Indian Arm (L50 = 100.0 dB re 1μPa), followed by the location at Burrard East (L50 = 110.8 dB re 1μPa). Considerable monthly variation (>7 dB broadband) was observed at both these locations, with peaks in August at both.

Mean (Leq) SPL were below L5 SPL values, but typically well above median SPL at all locations. This indicates short-term, but high-amplitude, noise sources were present (i.e. vessels). Notably, Leq and L5 values were highest at Burrard West 1 (likely due to proximity to the SeaBus) and the Burrard East values for these two metrics was closer to levels observed in English Bay. The Burrard East hydrophone is located closer to the transit route taken by commercial vessels (and recreational vessels) than English Bay, which likely explains higher values in metrics that indicate high amplitude short duration events.

A strong correlation (R2 0.92) was detected between both Leq and L5 SPLs AIS signal density (3 km range) indicating that differences in large (AIS) vessel traffic activity are a significant factor in explaining between-location≥ broadband SPLs. Other acoustic features identified also highlight large vessel related noise. Consistent tonal low frequency (< 500 Hz) sounds were present at all locations except Indian Arm and SPLs were highest between 10-1000 Hz at all locations, except for Indian Arm during winter months. Peak median SPL within one-third octave bands were similar across seasons

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 67

Burrard Inlet 2019 but varied by location. Burrard West 1 and Indian Arm peaked at 251 Hz in February and August, while Burrard East peaked between 316-398 Hz. Far lower one-third octave peaks were observed at Burrard West 2 and English Bay which peaked in both February and August at 63 Hz and 50 Hz, respectively.

The effects of local construction activities were not clearly detected using monthly metrics, likely due to the dominating influence of vessel traffic, which was frequently found to vary across days of the week and showed clear diurnal patterns (notably Burrard West 1 due to the SeaBus) that correspond to daytime human activity.

Even at finer timescales, dredging and vibratory piling was not easily identified. This was due to the distance between these construction activities and the hydrophone locations, as well as the already high ambient noise conditions. Impact pile driving was detected at finer time scales at the Burrard East location in the winter months that this activity occurred.

Seasonal CTD castes indicated downward refraction in summer and upward refracting conditions in winter. Consequently, it is likely that a portion of the increased noise levels in summer relative to winter could be attributed to the seasonality of the SSP, especially at Indian Arm. This effect was not easily discernable in other locations because it was small in comparison to the effects of vessel traffic.

Rain, wind and current had little or no effect on SPLs at monthly scales. The lack of noticeable effects of rain, wind and current could be attributed to 1) localized rainfall patterns not being picked up on these scales and 2) limited effects in comparison to other sources of noise.

It is likely that August SPL peaks in Indian Arm and Burrard East are due to small boat activity, which were clearly noted on listening to audio files. These vessels often do not carry AIS data and were subsequently not included in the density analysis.

A clear roll-off at ~400 Hz was notable on all SoundTraps and this is thought due to destructive interference as that sound is reflected off the seafloor. The noise floor was reached at two locations (Indian Arm and Burrard East) at frequencies above 10 kHz, limiting detection of low amplitude sound sources. Electrical noise interference at high frequencies was low on all units.

We successfully recorded examples of four vessel sources: a container and cruise ship on/off shore power, the SeaBus arriving/departing the southern terminal, and multiple seaplanes taking off using Coastal Acoustic Buoy (CAB) deployments. Signal to noise ratios were insufficient to provide a source level of bulk carriers at anchor using the English Bay SoundTrap. The highest Source level estimates (187.5 dB re 1μPa at 1 m) were of the 23 kHz antifouling tone used by some cruise ships. When that tone is removed, the cruise ship at berth and off shore power and the SeaBus have similar broadband Source level estimates (171.6 and 171.5 dB re 1μPa at 1 m, respectively). Use of shore power by the cruise ship drops estimates of source level by 7.8 dB (to 163.8 dB re 1μPa at 1 m). Container ship source level estimates dropped from 159.0 to 153.2 dB re 1μPa at 1 m when shore power was used, a drop of 5.8 dB. The seaplanes had one of the lowest source level estimates at 155.6 dB re 1μPa at 1 m and it must be emphasized that this will only occur for short durations and is therefore not a large SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 68

Burrard Inlet 2019 contributor to the underwater soundscape of Burrard Inlet. In addition, precise distances between the CAB and the seaplane taking off were not possible, so this source level estimate contains greater error than other estimates.

The PAMGuard software ‘whistle and moan’ detector was used to detect tonal sounds (such as calls and whistles from killer whales or humpback whales) between 0.8 and 30 kHz. Most detections were false positives, which we expected given detectors were set at a sensitive threshold (5 dB). Similarly, the ‘click’ detector was used to detect click trains (used in echolocation by cetaceans). Human validation of ‘whistle and moan’ detections identified Biggs killer whales on 2/11/2019 at both Burrard West locations and on 5/31/2019 in English Bay. SRKW (Probable L-Pod) were detected for more than a two-hour period in English Bay on 9/23/2019 at 2 am. No other delphinid species or Humpback whales were detected acoustically. Visual detections of Biggs killer whales were made on 8 additional days between February and June 2019. Porpoise were detected on 57 different days (< 9 hours overall), with 25 of these detected in Indian Arm and just 5 across the two locations in Burrard Inlet West. May and August were the peak months for porpoise detections. Detection bouts were typically short (median of 2 minutes), occurring 1-3 times on any one day. Extended bouts of over an hour were noted only at English Bay and this location had the highest amount of total detection minutes.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 69

Burrard Inlet 2019

5 Conclusions • The Burrard West 1 and 2 locations had the highest average monthly broadband SPL at 129.1 and 131.4 dB re 1μPa, followed by the English Bay location at 121.0 dB re 1μPa. These three locations have soundscapes dominated by vessel noise and show little variability across seasons. • Indian Arm had the lowest average monthly broadband SPL at 100.0 dB re 1μPa, while the Burrard East location had a higher level of 110.8 dB re 1μPa. Both locations have >7 dB variation in average monthly SPL with peaks in August which are likely driven by recreational vessel traffic. • There is a strong (R2=0.95) positive relationship between broadband L5 SPL and vessel density at each location with an increase of 12-15 dB in L5 SPL as AIS signal density increases from 10 to 100 Class A moving vessels per day. • The effects of rain, wind, current and construction activities on the soundscape were difficult to identify because SPL levels are high at most locations. • The highest source level estimates (187.5 dB re 1μPa at 1 m) were of the cruise ship including the 23 kHz tone used for anti-fouling on some cruise ships. • Connecting to shore power resulted in improvement (i.e. drops) in source levels of 5.8 dB for a container ship and 7.8 dB for a cruise ship. It is assumed the larger improvement for cruise ships is due to the need for more equipment to support passenger comfort, and the transition of this equipment to shore-side electrical power. • SeaBus source levels depend on how the vessel is maneuvering. Focusing on times when these vessels are accelerating away from the southern terminal results in estimated source levels of 171.5 dB re 1μPa at 1 m. These levels are likely driven by propeller cavitation and will not be consistent during each part of the crossing. • Seaplanes taking off had low source level estimates of 155.6 dB re 1μPa at 1 m and it must be emphasized that the duration of this effect on the underwater soundscape will be brief. • Short acoustic detections of Biggs killer whales were made at two location (Burrard West 1 & 2) in February and one location (English Bay) in May 2019. • Southern Resident killer whales were acoustically detected for longer than two hours at English Bay during the evening 9/23/2019. • Porpoise acoustic detections occurred on 57 different days. The Indian Arm location had the highest number of days with porpoise detections (25) and Burrard West 2 the lowest (2). Although English Bay had only 13 days with detections, the total duration of porpoise detections was the highest at this location (> 7 hours).

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 70

Burrard Inlet 2019

6 References ANSI/ASA S12.64-2009/Part 1. Quantities and Procedures for Description and Measurement of Underwater Sound from Ships – Part 1: General Requirements. American National Standard Institute. Caltrans (2009). Final Technical Guidance for Assessment & Mitigation of the Hydroacoustic Effects of Pile Driving on Fish (p. 298). Prepared by ICF Jones & Stokes and Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. for: California Department of Transportation. Dekeling RPA, Tasker ML, Ainslie MA, Andersson M, André M, Castellote M, Borsani JF, Dalen J, Folegot T, Leaper R, Liebschner A, Pajala J, Robinson SP, Sigray P, Sutton G, Thomsen F, van der Graaf AJ, Werner S, Wittekind D, Young JV (2014). Monitoring guidance for underwater noise in the European seas, Part II: Monitoring guidance specifications. JRC Scientific and Policy Report EUR 26555 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2014, doi:10.2788/27158. Merchant ND, Brookes KL, Faulkner RC, Bicknell AW, Godley BJ, and Witt MJ (2016). Underwater noise levels in UK waters, Scientific Reports 10:6:36942. doi:10.1038/srep36942. SMRU Consulting, Wood J, Tollit DJ, Joy, R. and Yack T (2019). ECHO Slowdown 2018: Ambient Noise and SRKW Acoustic Detections Report. Prepared on behalf of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority ECHO Program (May 13, 2019). Todd, VLG, Todd, IB, Gardiner, JC, Morrin, ECN, MacPherson NA, DiMarzio, NA, Thomsen, F (2015). A review of impacts of marine dredging activities on marine mammals. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 72(2), 328-340. doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsul87. Wenz, GM (1962). Acoustic ambient noise in the ocean—spectra and sources. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 34(12), 1936-1956.

7 Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge funding from the ECHO Program of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority and the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. Scheduling and coordinating this project with numerous groups would not have been possible without Megan McCann, Trevor Andrews and Krista Trounce of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority and Spencer Taft of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. VFPA Operations kindly allowed us access to VFPA facilities. We also thank the staff and operators of the vessels and planes we recorded. They allowed us to record their vessels and provided crucial metadata to contextualize our measurements. Without their help we could not have measured source levels of interest. Harbor Air, their pilots and the Vancouver Harbour Air Control Tower were instrumental in the safe collection of data from seaplanes. Support vessels and crew from Tymac, Petro Bulk and Cerescorp allowed us to work safely near the vessels they were servicing. We are extremely grateful for the able assistance provided in the field by Rod MacVicar, Ruth Joy, Kamil Szlachta, Alex Harris and Serena Moore and Kalup George.

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 71

Burrard Inlet 2019

8 Appendix Appendix 1. Burrard West 1, monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) by study month for each broadband and decade frequency band metric. Month of study 1 is February 2019. Location SPL Month 0.01-48 0.01-0.1 0.1-1 1-10 10-48 Metric of study kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz Burrard West 1 Min 1 118.25 113.09 113.38 105.20 91.32 Burrard West 1 L95 1 122.78 118.43 118.66 110.61 93.56 Burrard West 1 L75 1 125.43 120.83 121.78 114.15 97.38

Burrard West 1 L50 1 128.30 122.82 125.31 118.35 104.27 Burrard West 1 L25 1 131.87 125.75 129.28 123.83 113.28 Burrard West 1 L5 1 138.80 131.76 136.10 131.49 124.50 Burrard West 1 Max 1 152.13 149.44 148.57 144.83 137.65 Burrard West 1 Mean 1 132.87 127.22 130.12 125.14 117.65 Burrard West 1 Min 2 115.84 111.97 111.71 101.71 91.30 Burrard West 1 L95 2 120.95 116.17 117.22 108.71 93.08 Burrard West 1 L75 2 124.26 119.54 121.12 113.32 96.72

Burrard West 1 L50 2 127.86 121.71 125.27 118.46 104.65 Burrard West 1 L25 2 131.70 124.32 129.42 124.09 113.48 Burrard West 1 L5 2 138.94 130.71 136.55 132.03 124.50 Burrard West 1 Max 2 153.59 150.21 150.75 146.30 140.85 Burrard West 1 Mean 2 132.83 126.27 130.35 125.52 117.68 Burrard West 1 Min 3 112.97 108.75 109.53 101.34 91.93 Burrard West 1 L95 3 119.69 115.33 116.56 107.10 93.65 Burrard West 1 L75 3 124.21 118.76 121.20 112.36 97.19

Burrard West 1 L50 3 127.82 121.47 125.29 117.77 103.78 Burrard West 1 L25 3 131.72 124.40 129.50 124.06 112.52 Burrard West 1 L5 3 138.96 130.52 136.62 132.38 123.82 Burrard West 1 Max 3 158.56 152.60 157.96 150.91 138.94 Burrard West 1 Mean 3 133.65 126.99 131.35 126.17 116.71 Burrard West 1 Min 4 114.78 109.90 112.24 102.33 88.42 Burrard West 1 L95 4 120.89 116.87 117.08 107.90 92.57 Burrard West 1 L75 4 125.45 120.87 121.99 112.47 97.17

Burrard West 1 L50 4 129.55 123.84 126.74 118.95 107.83 Burrard West 1 L25 4 133.70 126.96 131.12 125.41 117.21 Burrard West 1 L5 4 141.59 135.81 139.30 132.95 126.46 Burrard West 1 Max 4 162.46 152.61 157.05 149.81 161.92 Burrard West 1 Mean 4 136.38 130.24 133.76 126.67 126.64 Burrard West 1 Min 5 113.76 110.95 108.97 100.41 89.99 Burrard West 1 L95 5 119.98 116.01 116.34 106.45 93.42 Burrard West 1 L75 5 125.13 120.47 121.59 111.83 97.15

Burrard West 1 L50 5 129.32 123.89 126.31 118.48 106.85

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 72

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 L25 5 133.47 127.50 130.57 124.46 116.78

Burrard West 1 L5 5 141.26 135.84 138.70 131.89 124.33 Burrard West 1 Max 5 163.50 155.13 156.56 148.73 163.33 Burrard West 1 Mean 5 136.43 131.02 133.62 126.01 126.53 Burrard West 1 Min 6 117.94 115.59 113.11 101.32 89.33 Burrard West 1 L95 6 120.71 117.86 116.43 105.12 92.23

Burrard West 1 L75 6 124.69 120.52 121.44 110.83 96.33 Burrard West 1 L50 6 129.12 123.40 125.99 118.05 107.17 Burrard West 1 L25 6 133.11 127.08 130.53 124.17 117.17

Burrard West 1 L5 6 141.39 135.47 138.75 131.82 127.25 Burrard West 1 Max 6 163.34 155.03 155.74 149.87 162.59 Burrard West 1 Mean 6 136.24 130.25 133.17 125.56 128.58 Burrard West 1 Min 7 94.64 89.71 81.37 85.79 90.91 Burrard West 1 L95 7 120.79 117.51 116.65 104.74 93.30

Burrard West 1 L75 7 125.85 121.60 122.33 111.51 97.63 Burrard West 1 L50 7 129.63 124.39 126.72 118.20 107.46 Burrard West 1 L25 7 133.57 127.62 130.96 124.16 118.01

Burrard West 1 L5 7 141.37 134.55 138.98 132.45 126.94 Burrard West 1 Max 7 162.62 157.58 157.09 151.84 162.27 Burrard West 1 Mean 7 136.22 130.98 133.64 126.00 123.78 Burrard West 1 Min 8 110.87 105.36 108.13 100.47 92.05 Burrard West 1 L95 8 123.20 119.42 118.32 106.39 93.93

Burrard West 1 L75 8 127.40 123.63 123.25 112.69 100.18 Burrard West 1 L50 8 130.73 126.23 127.56 119.31 109.36 Burrard West 1 L25 8 134.66 128.64 132.01 124.92 118.54

Burrard West 1 L5 8 142.40 135.47 140.19 133.20 129.26 Burrard West 1 Max 8 165.71 161.29 161.20 159.61 158.52 Burrard West 1 Mean 8 137.15 131.53 134.63 127.57 124.98 Burrard West 1 Min 9 118.32 113.98 113.71 101.95 91.71 Burrard West 1 L95 9 122.45 117.96 118.94 108.01 93.20

Burrard West 1 L75 9 126.59 121.68 122.96 112.89 98.60 Burrard West 1 L50 9 130.11 124.92 126.74 118.63 108.10 Burrard West 1 L25 9 134.21 128.45 130.90 123.78 117.42 Burrard West 1 L5 9 142.66 138.35 139.48 133.47 128.01 Burrard West 1 Max 9 160.13 156.30 157.39 152.61 152.43 Burrard West 1 Mean 9 137.35 133.62 133.73 127.64 122.99 Burrard West 1 Min 10 93.35 87.27 82.75 84.85 89.85 Burrard West 1 L95 10 119.68 114.74 116.49 105.42 92.46

Burrard West 1 L75 10 124.89 119.49 121.14 111.27 98.00 Burrard West 1 L50 10 128.99 123.30 125.24 116.83 106.47 Burrard West 1 L25 10 133.15 128.42 129.64 122.17 114.29

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 73

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 1 L5 10 140.69 135.31 138.01 132.65 127.07 Burrard West 1 Max 10 160.62 154.76 156.96 154.09 153.47 Burrard West 1 Mean 10 134.97 130.30 131.67 126.77 121.15 Burrard West 1 Min 11 116.61 112.30 113.52 102.45 91.26

Burrard West 1 L95 11 120.71 116.10 117.46 107.45 93.29 Burrard West 1 L75 11 124.80 119.35 122.04 112.41 99.04

Burrard West 1 L50 11 128.27 121.97 125.92 117.43 106.88 Burrard West 1 L25 11 132.25 125.56 129.98 122.43 114.35 Burrard West 1 L5 11 140.12 132.69 137.85 132.48 126.85 Burrard West 1 Max 11 157.52 153.92 154.91 140.91 136.88 Burrard West 1 Mean 11 133.59 127.28 131.28 125.16 119.31 Burrard West 1 Min 12 99.79 97.51 92.81 85.06 89.79

Burrard West 1 L95 12 121.83 118.20 118.31 108.47 94.57 Burrard West 1 L75 12 125.79 120.86 123.16 113.23 100.54

Burrard West 1 L50 12 129.94 123.60 127.72 119.10 108.93 Burrard West 1 L25 12 136.52 129.12 134.56 126.14 116.42 Burrard West 1 L5 12 143.59 139.03 140.94 133.84 127.30 Burrard West 1 Max 12 158.27 158.26 150.49 144.98 141.82 Burrard West 1 Mean 12 137.06 132.29 134.53 126.86 119.98

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 74

Burrard Inlet 2019

Appendix 2. Burrard West 2, monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) by study month for each broadband and decade frequency band metric. Month of study 1 is February 2019. Location SPL Month 0.01-48 0.01-0.1 0.1-1 1-10 10-48 Metric of study kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz Burrard West 2 Min 1 119.89 114.91 116.81 111.46 92.32

Burrard West 2 L95 1 125.41 120.76 121.18 114.59 95.10 Burrard West 2 L75 1 128.03 124.53 123.90 117.30 99.11 Burrard West 2 L50 1 130.86 126.83 126.77 119.97 103.01

Burrard West 2 L25 1 133.98 130.26 130.16 123.01 107.20 Burrard West 2 L5 1 139.40 137.33 136.22 127.14 114.82 Burrard West 2 Max 1 158.90 157.49 153.69 147.67 143.76 Burrard West 2 Mean 1 134.80 131.75 131.05 123.65 112.96 Burrard West 2 Min 2 115.94 110.47 113.17 105.97 92.66

Burrard West 2 L95 2 123.14 119.28 119.12 112.05 94.42 Burrard West 2 L75 2 127.00 122.55 123.52 117.09 98.20 Burrard West 2 L50 2 129.83 124.70 126.33 121.50 102.33

Burrard West 2 L25 2 131.77 127.36 128.60 123.82 107.39 Burrard West 2 L5 2 137.44 132.21 135.27 127.79 115.00 Burrard West 2 Max 2 163.44 159.60 158.33 157.14 150.10 Burrard West 2 Mean 2 133.50 129.17 130.37 124.75 114.55 Burrard West 2 Min 3 113.24 107.11 109.05 105.88 93.06

Burrard West 2 L95 3 122.90 119.23 118.69 111.84 95.24 Burrard West 2 L75 3 128.16 123.25 124.89 117.96 98.11 Burrard West 2 L50 3 130.77 126.02 127.65 121.56 102.38

Burrard West 2 L25 3 132.85 128.09 129.91 123.95 106.90 Burrard West 2 L5 3 137.83 132.52 135.79 128.04 114.25 Burrard West 2 Max 3 156.22 155.35 151.84 147.45 140.17 Burrard West 2 Mean 3 133.80 129.70 130.79 124.06 111.48 Burrard West 2 Min 4 118.84 111.63 115.15 106.96 91.05

Burrard West 2 L95 4 123.87 119.68 119.30 114.15 94.84 Burrard West 2 L75 4 127.95 123.53 123.65 119.50 98.58 Burrard West 2 L50 4 130.70 126.89 126.38 122.33 102.29

Burrard West 2 L25 4 133.48 130.06 129.12 124.40 106.58 Burrard West 2 L5 4 139.71 135.92 137.04 128.45 115.33 Burrard West 2 Max 4 154.38 153.23 151.65 145.43 138.34 Burrard West 2 Mean 4 134.62 131.48 130.84 124.37 111.05 Burrard West 2 Min 5 118.43 114.46 114.23 107.41 89.60

Burrard West 2 L95 5 126.53 121.97 121.79 115.53 93.48 Burrard West 2 L75 5 129.29 126.00 124.56 119.12 96.89 Burrard West 2 L50 5 131.60 128.64 126.80 121.50 100.64

Burrard West 2 L25 5 134.02 131.51 129.20 123.43 105.10

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 75

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 2 L5 5 139.48 136.11 136.39 127.83 115.10 Burrard West 2 Max 5 154.84 151.22 152.76 146.52 143.13 Burrard West 2 Mean 5 134.74 131.79 130.78 124.10 112.06 Burrard West 2 Min 6 122.04 116.53 115.35 109.54 89.51

Burrard West 2 L95 6 126.64 123.69 121.74 114.86 92.84 Burrard West 2 L75 6 129.67 126.85 124.73 118.54 95.87

Burrard West 2 L50 6 131.02 128.27 126.46 120.62 100.03 Burrard West 2 L25 6 132.73 129.79 128.88 122.50 104.23 Burrard West 2 L5 6 139.68 135.99 136.85 126.96 114.07 Burrard West 2 Max 6 154.79 151.16 152.23 146.62 142.51 Burrard West 2 Mean 6 134.66 131.66 130.87 123.53 111.82 Burrard West 2 Min 7 94.47 89.26 81.10 86.04 91.06

Burrard West 2 L95 7 123.18 118.34 118.60 110.92 95.02 Burrard West 2 L75 7 128.52 124.98 124.37 117.43 97.99

Burrard West 2 L50 7 131.28 127.92 127.07 120.99 101.41 Burrard West 2 L25 7 133.08 129.87 129.28 123.30 105.27 Burrard West 2 L5 7 139.01 134.97 136.48 127.24 114.67 Burrard West 2 Max 7 163.55 162.70 160.60 151.15 144.28 Burrard West 2 Mean 7 135.87 132.58 132.60 123.81 111.95 Burrard West 2 Min 8 114.20 109.08 111.31 105.71 93.02

Burrard West 2 L95 8 125.15 119.94 120.97 112.78 96.24 Burrard West 2 L75 8 132.18 130.08 125.58 118.99 100.43

Burrard West 2 L50 8 134.55 133.01 127.38 121.48 104.67 Burrard West 2 L25 8 135.86 134.30 129.83 123.91 109.11 Burrard West 2 L5 8 139.40 136.42 136.13 128.36 116.67 Burrard West 2 Max 8 157.27 153.62 155.26 151.23 148.76 Burrard West 2 Mean 8 135.88 133.58 131.14 124.48 113.54 Burrard West 2 Min 9 118.15 113.96 114.42 107.11 94.20

Burrard West 2 L95 9 125.59 120.51 121.25 113.86 96.99 Burrard West 2 L75 9 129.68 125.49 125.71 119.95 100.82

Burrard West 2 L50 9 131.70 127.78 127.84 122.71 105.38 Burrard West 2 L25 9 135.68 132.41 130.63 124.32 109.37 Burrard West 2 L5 9 139.85 137.33 136.94 128.02 116.48 Burrard West 2 Max 9 154.87 154.02 152.30 147.51 142.43 Burrard West 2 Mean 9 135.60 132.66 131.69 124.75 113.04 Burrard West 2 Min 10 93.42 86.30 82.51 85.03 89.91

Burrard West 2 L95 10 125.30 121.31 120.95 111.74 95.35 Burrard West 2 L75 10 129.44 125.20 125.98 116.64 99.77

Burrard West 2 L50 10 132.39 128.51 129.27 120.08 104.09 Burrard West 2 L25 10 134.32 130.74 131.47 122.08 108.38 Burrard West 2 L5 10 138.49 134.63 136.00 126.59 115.32

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 76

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard West 2 Max 10 157.15 154.38 153.21 148.08 142.75 Burrard West 2 Mean 10 134.68 131.20 131.51 122.92 111.83 Burrard West 2 Min 11 119.14 112.80 115.87 104.75 92.08 Burrard West 2 L95 11 123.91 119.38 120.51 111.29 94.61 Burrard West 2 L75 11 127.72 123.99 124.21 116.18 99.04 Burrard West 2 L50 11 129.67 125.69 126.48 119.29 103.67

Burrard West 2 L25 11 133.33 129.10 130.43 121.79 108.05 Burrard West 2 L5 11 139.89 136.07 136.64 128.51 117.15 Burrard West 2 Max 11 156.73 156.24 154.03 145.17 139.24 Burrard West 2 Mean 11 134.20 130.85 130.88 122.68 111.27 Burrard West 2 Min 12 96.98 93.05 89.85 85.24 89.89 Burrard West 2 L95 12 127.94 124.00 123.10 116.54 95.59

Burrard West 2 L75 12 130.64 127.99 125.63 118.98 99.40 Burrard West 2 L50 12 132.03 129.54 127.55 120.37 103.74

Burrard West 2 L25 12 133.75 130.94 129.89 121.99 107.41 Burrard West 2 L5 12 139.57 135.68 136.41 128.54 115.97 Burrard West 2 Max 12 156.32 155.05 149.85 143.23 136.08 Burrard West 2 Mean 12 134.65 131.74 130.85 123.12 110.59

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 77

Burrard Inlet 2019

Appendix 3. Burrard East, monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) by study month for each broadband and decade frequency band metric. Month of study 1 is February 2019. Location SPL Month 0.01-48 0.01-0.1 0.1-1 1-10 10-48 Metric of study kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz Burrard East Min 1 101.31 99.15 93.16 87.93 90.49

Burrard East L95 1 102.26 100.07 94.90 89.10 90.64 Burrard East L75 1 104.25 101.65 96.37 92.03 90.81 Burrard East L50 1 108.39 103.91 100.98 96.47 91.62

Burrard East L25 1 116.56 110.02 110.75 106.25 96.64 Burrard East L5 1 128.13 121.50 125.55 121.50 111.70 Burrard East Max 1 155.79 153.92 150.99 146.15 140.75 Burrard East Mean 1 124.31 118.26 121.60 117.06 109.19 Burrard East Min 2 101.17 98.83 93.70 87.32 90.50

Burrard East L95 2 103.02 101.24 95.41 88.39 90.65 Burrard East L75 2 104.26 102.10 96.64 90.79 90.82 Burrard East L50 2 107.98 103.20 102.04 96.80 91.62

Burrard East L25 2 116.13 107.45 112.07 108.16 97.62 Burrard East L5 2 128.39 119.47 125.66 122.23 112.63 Burrard East Max 2 146.07 142.40 143.54 141.06 135.57 Burrard East Mean 2 123.08 115.70 120.55 116.60 108.71 Burrard East Min 3 102.24 100.68 93.56 86.84 90.54

Burrard East L95 3 103.34 101.66 95.11 88.21 90.73 Burrard East L75 3 105.24 102.49 97.02 91.40 90.92 Burrard East L50 3 110.63 104.59 102.74 97.34 92.40

Burrard East L25 3 116.77 111.21 112.36 108.31 99.36 Burrard East L5 3 128.17 119.37 125.38 122.29 112.62 Burrard East Max 3 150.86 147.54 147.39 142.01 136.77 Burrard East Mean 3 123.29 116.62 120.59 116.65 108.60 Burrard East Min 4 103.36 102.44 93.89 82.05 83.01

Burrard East L95 4 104.20 103.28 95.05 85.28 83.70 Burrard East L75 4 105.57 103.87 97.40 89.60 84.39 Burrard East L50 4 110.84 105.03 105.41 100.38 88.63

Burrard East L25 4 118.49 109.93 114.67 111.36 100.81 Burrard East L5 4 129.35 120.18 126.77 123.39 114.62 Burrard East Max 4 149.41 146.76 146.00 140.59 134.01 Burrard East Mean 4 123.91 116.96 121.37 117.16 108.87 Burrard East Min 5 103.18 102.13 93.96 82.31 83.13

Burrard East L95 5 104.48 103.49 95.22 85.20 83.87 Burrard East L75 5 106.19 104.25 98.14 90.48 84.62 Burrard East L50 5 112.11 105.80 106.73 102.00 89.18

Burrard East L25 5 119.62 110.90 115.93 112.63 101.80

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 78

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard East L5 5 130.01 121.36 127.46 123.98 115.13 Burrard East Max 5 147.53 145.10 144.83 140.36 132.56 Burrard East Mean 5 124.19 116.77 121.75 117.55 109.42 Burrard East Min 6 103.13 101.83 93.36 81.75 83.65

Burrard East L95 6 104.76 103.77 94.97 84.33 84.25 Burrard East L75 6 107.01 104.76 99.10 91.82 85.52

Burrard East L50 6 113.68 106.79 108.33 103.46 92.28 Burrard East L25 6 120.84 112.31 117.40 113.97 104.43 Burrard East L5 6 130.58 121.26 128.11 124.75 116.03 Burrard East Max 6 153.29 149.37 148.56 146.95 138.45 Burrard East Mean 6 124.68 117.25 122.14 118.30 110.22 Burrard East Min 7 91.87 89.86 79.23 79.21 83.02

Burrard East L95 7 106.94 105.80 97.99 85.47 85.56 Burrard East L75 7 108.92 106.73 102.47 90.94 86.75

Burrard East L50 7 115.30 108.26 110.60 105.11 94.24 Burrard East L25 7 122.78 113.34 119.01 115.65 106.59 Burrard East L5 7 131.67 123.51 129.08 125.82 117.75 Burrard East Max 7 150.99 147.19 147.54 143.06 138.80 Burrard East Mean 7 126.10 119.09 123.50 119.39 112.11 Burrard East Min 8 104.77 103.76 96.23 81.55 84.23

Burrard East L95 8 106.43 105.21 98.09 84.90 84.93 Burrard East L75 8 107.97 106.06 101.07 89.99 86.40

Burrard East L50 8 113.32 107.32 108.64 100.52 92.74 Burrard East L25 8 121.07 112.48 117.67 112.00 103.62 Burrard East L5 8 130.97 123.06 128.56 124.50 116.50 Burrard East Max 8 150.68 144.42 149.58 141.66 137.22 Burrard East Mean 8 125.62 118.53 123.34 118.18 111.08 Burrard East Min 9 102.27 101.06 89.41 82.82 83.74

Burrard East L95 9 106.30 105.31 97.24 85.61 84.19 Burrard East L75 9 107.52 106.12 99.34 90.30 85.38

Burrard East L50 9 111.80 107.08 106.74 98.66 90.15 Burrard East L25 9 119.19 111.23 116.36 109.25 100.25 Burrard East L5 9 130.56 121.95 128.37 122.70 114.14 Burrard East Max 9 151.41 145.59 148.26 144.59 138.32 Burrard East Mean 9 125.06 118.40 122.87 116.96 109.54 Burrard East Min 10 88.57 85.35 80.74 78.57 82.19

Burrard East L95 10 103.78 102.96 93.53 84.33 83.13 Burrard East L75 10 105.35 103.80 96.07 89.02 84.14

Burrard East L50 10 109.49 104.98 102.74 96.94 88.04 Burrard East L25 10 116.58 109.55 112.81 107.22 99.51 Burrard East L5 10 128.92 120.59 126.08 121.33 113.49

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 79

Burrard Inlet 2019

Burrard East Max 10 148.58 143.71 146.44 140.94 136.82 Burrard East Mean 10 123.26 116.62 120.78 115.88 109.04 Burrard East Min 11 102.55 101.71 92.91 80.89 82.65 Burrard East L95 11 103.72 102.69 94.31 85.96 83.05 Burrard East L75 11 104.82 103.27 95.79 90.61 84.25 Burrard East L50 11 107.97 103.97 101.03 97.30 91.77

Burrard East L25 11 115.41 107.37 112.26 107.25 100.77 Burrard East L5 11 128.48 118.84 126.44 121.19 111.90 Burrard East Max 11 150.08 147.25 146.32 140.25 133.10 Burrard East Mean 11 123.49 116.59 121.29 115.73 107.75 Burrard East Min 12 97.06 95.48 88.70 79.12 82.11 Burrard East L95 12 104.06 102.78 95.03 87.70 82.90

Burrard East L75 12 105.36 103.43 96.96 93.01 85.62 Burrard East L50 12 108.23 104.15 101.72 98.03 92.17

Burrard East L25 12 115.17 107.43 111.56 106.80 99.86 Burrard East L5 12 127.96 119.23 125.36 120.12 110.51 Burrard East Max 12 151.88 151.81 144.79 141.04 134.61 Burrard East Mean 12 122.79 116.78 120.38 114.62 106.61

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 80

Burrard Inlet 2019

Appendix 4. Indian Arm, monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) by study month for each broadband and decade frequency band metric. Month of study 1 is February 2019. Location SPL Month 0.01-48 0.01-0.1 0.1-1 1-10 10-48 Metric of study kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz Indian Arm Min 1 92.95 85.08 80.01 85.50 90.61

Indian Arm L95 1 94.10 87.56 81.04 86.26 91.24 Indian Arm L75 1 96.93 90.21 83.03 86.95 91.49 Indian Arm L50 1 102.62 96.48 88.69 91.15 92.11

Indian Arm L25 1 108.58 104.41 98.15 98.71 94.92 Indian Arm L5 1 115.18 112.37 109.23 110.27 101.40 Indian Arm Max 1 137.55 127.23 135.98 131.50 128.42 Indian Arm Mean 1 110.77 105.34 106.58 105.15 98.52 Indian Arm Min 2 93.23 85.59 80.55 85.91 90.81

Indian Arm L95 2 94.19 87.35 81.01 86.44 91.40 Indian Arm L75 2 96.83 90.10 82.28 86.85 91.60 Indian Arm L50 2 103.00 96.68 88.08 90.43 91.99

Indian Arm L25 2 110.59 104.85 99.65 100.69 95.27 Indian Arm L5 2 117.22 113.10 111.38 114.18 104.65 Indian Arm Max 2 135.04 128.87 134.31 133.91 129.56 Indian Arm Mean 2 112.50 106.06 107.66 108.30 100.71 Indian Arm Min 3 93.12 85.32 80.23 85.67 90.75

Indian Arm L95 3 93.84 86.41 81.26 86.29 91.23 Indian Arm L75 3 94.60 87.29 83.93 86.92 91.48 Indian Arm L50 3 98.87 88.66 90.42 92.38 92.50

Indian Arm L25 3 106.15 93.63 100.71 101.54 97.15 Indian Arm L5 3 117.58 103.87 112.52 114.61 105.47 Indian Arm Max 3 138.55 130.93 137.58 133.15 130.21 Indian Arm Mean 3 112.54 99.88 108.79 108.90 102.17 Indian Arm Min 4 86.72 82.17 77.48 78.31 82.13

Indian Arm L95 4 87.64 82.95 80.24 78.57 82.23 Indian Arm L75 4 93.46 85.94 88.57 79.98 82.37 Indian Arm L50 4 100.13 90.69 95.81 92.40 86.37

Indian Arm L25 4 110.13 98.22 104.94 105.62 98.19 Indian Arm L5 4 120.67 107.42 116.07 117.48 108.45 Indian Arm Max 4 138.54 133.11 138.28 136.22 133.84 Indian Arm Mean 4 114.70 102.17 111.06 110.93 104.39 Indian Arm Min 5 86.94 82.10 77.89 78.34 82.16

Indian Arm L95 5 88.20 83.37 80.61 78.60 82.25 Indian Arm L75 5 95.54 87.60 93.21 80.64 82.46 Indian Arm L50 5 101.43 91.91 97.42 94.51 85.64

Indian Arm L25 5 111.49 99.93 106.50 107.34 97.45

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 81

Burrard Inlet 2019

Indian Arm L5 5 121.67 108.83 117.35 118.30 108.13 Indian Arm Max 5 139.40 128.96 138.95 134.09 131.29 Indian Arm Mean 5 115.18 103.32 111.75 111.45 102.81 Indian Arm Min 6 87.20 83.15 77.74 78.46 82.22

Indian Arm L95 6 88.30 84.33 79.69 78.72 82.31 Indian Arm L75 6 90.50 85.53 85.50 80.64 82.58

Indian Arm L50 6 102.58 93.24 97.60 95.02 87.30 Indian Arm L25 6 112.62 100.93 107.66 108.56 99.60 Indian Arm L5 6 122.93 109.73 118.89 119.47 109.87 Indian Arm Max 6 141.69 129.33 141.41 132.06 130.13 Indian Arm Mean 6 116.38 104.25 113.22 112.34 104.31 Indian Arm Min 7 88.58 84.24 78.65 78.96 82.99

Indian Arm L95 7 90.30 85.31 85.33 79.70 83.17 Indian Arm L75 7 93.52 87.65 90.14 80.81 83.40

Indian Arm L50 7 104.42 95.22 100.55 95.85 89.82 Indian Arm L25 7 114.37 102.61 110.04 109.57 102.78 Indian Arm L5 7 124.21 110.73 120.60 119.98 112.65 Indian Arm Max 7 144.15 135.58 144.03 134.63 131.36 Indian Arm Mean 7 117.67 106.43 114.75 113.04 106.22 Indian Arm Min 8 87.76 83.35 78.57 79.24 83.05

Indian Arm L95 8 89.14 84.40 81.86 79.56 83.16 Indian Arm L75 8 92.12 85.85 87.75 81.36 83.57

Indian Arm L50 8 99.47 89.78 93.24 89.82 87.80 Indian Arm L25 8 108.73 97.82 104.64 102.54 98.88 Indian Arm L5 8 120.38 107.84 116.70 116.13 108.96 Indian Arm Max 8 138.76 133.35 138.00 133.26 129.50 Indian Arm Mean 8 114.63 103.49 111.89 109.62 103.55 Indian Arm Min 9 87.43 83.06 78.07 79.05 82.90

Indian Arm L95 9 87.85 83.63 78.68 79.31 83.04 Indian Arm L75 9 89.29 84.30 81.49 80.18 83.24

Indian Arm L50 9 96.20 87.30 88.81 87.50 85.63 Indian Arm L25 9 104.26 94.58 99.79 97.43 94.18 Indian Arm L5 9 116.44 103.52 112.86 111.82 105.10 Indian Arm Max 9 136.47 128.25 135.85 131.73 127.87 Indian Arm Mean 9 111.94 99.42 109.56 106.56 100.78 Indian Arm Min 10 86.86 82.23 77.55 78.48 82.37

Indian Arm L95 10 87.25 82.74 78.06 78.94 82.53 Indian Arm L75 10 89.11 83.79 80.87 79.69 82.83

Indian Arm L50 10 97.06 87.33 88.28 85.79 84.62 Indian Arm L25 10 104.02 95.45 97.89 95.86 93.31 Indian Arm L5 10 116.68 105.66 111.07 109.67 103.93

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 82

Burrard Inlet 2019

Indian Arm Max 10 139.05 139.01 133.51 133.56 131.52 Indian Arm Mean 10 112.57 107.07 108.80 105.42 102.85 Indian Arm Min 11 86.84 82.19 77.50 78.56 82.40 Indian Arm L95 11 87.26 82.68 78.19 78.87 82.52 Indian Arm L75 11 90.90 83.29 83.55 81.79 83.14 Indian Arm L50 11 97.37 85.59 89.14 88.89 88.46

Indian Arm L25 11 102.81 92.96 96.73 96.07 95.33 Indian Arm L5 11 114.26 102.94 109.90 109.22 102.95 Indian Arm Max 11 139.49 136.70 136.33 131.04 127.64 Indian Arm Mean 11 110.05 101.34 107.30 104.22 98.83 Indian Arm Min 12 86.77 82.16 77.50 78.51 82.36 Indian Arm L95 12 87.55 82.75 78.53 78.89 82.49

Indian Arm L75 12 91.65 83.51 84.17 83.81 83.84 Indian Arm L50 12 97.24 84.89 89.39 91.36 89.57

Indian Arm L25 12 101.69 88.69 95.05 96.55 94.86 Indian Arm L5 12 112.04 100.38 108.41 106.59 102.38 Indian Arm Max 12 148.16 146.31 146.42 135.41 131.59 Indian Arm Mean 12 111.62 106.74 108.46 103.42 98.05

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 83

Burrard Inlet 2019

Appendix 5. English Bay, monthly SPL (dB re 1μPa) by study month for each broadband and decade frequency band metric. Month of study 4 is May 2019. Location SPL Month 0.01-48 0.01-0.1 0.1-1 1-10 10-48 Metric of study kHz kHz kHz kHz kHz English Bay Min 4 106.88 105.45 99.97 82.55 82.72

English Bay L95 4 112.67 110.69 105.99 92.00 83.65 English Bay L75 4 118.15 115.66 110.86 98.90 86.38 English Bay L50 4 121.41 119.48 113.81 104.39 89.36

English Bay L25 4 124.08 122.77 116.87 110.95 94.14 English Bay L5 4 128.62 127.12 123.26 115.66 106.49 English Bay Max 4 157.71 157.64 146.85 141.76 132.71 English Bay Mean 4 124.97 123.48 118.65 112.14 103.67 English Bay Min 5 109.83 107.63 101.84 84.50 82.82

English Bay L95 5 113.60 111.69 106.89 93.21 84.25 English Bay L75 5 116.59 114.53 110.95 99.55 87.27 English Bay L50 5 119.79 117.33 114.54 103.18 89.69

English Bay L25 5 122.72 120.18 117.96 108.90 94.04 English Bay L5 5 127.17 124.35 122.85 115.92 106.36 English Bay Max 5 147.29 147.20 139.82 135.78 130.79 English Bay Mean 5 123.32 121.18 118.40 111.26 102.72 English Bay Min 6 109.94 107.84 101.18 80.80 82.83

English Bay L95 6 114.86 112.99 108.12 90.31 84.01 English Bay L75 6 117.85 115.99 111.05 96.89 86.61 English Bay L50 6 120.50 118.82 113.48 101.96 89.22

English Bay L25 6 123.09 121.39 116.77 107.79 93.40 English Bay L5 6 127.38 125.52 122.63 116.75 106.10 English Bay Max 6 146.33 143.77 142.55 135.80 134.25 English Bay Mean 6 123.49 121.54 118.07 111.78 103.30 English Bay Min 7 91.57 89.64 78.83 79.41 83.41

English Bay L95 7 116.03 113.91 109.46 89.88 84.61 English Bay L75 7 119.72 117.79 113.23 97.38 87.52 English Bay L50 7 121.86 120.04 115.65 101.86 90.73

English Bay L25 7 123.84 121.96 118.54 106.35 95.42 English Bay L5 7 128.55 126.05 124.49 115.83 107.50 English Bay Max 7 150.18 148.44 150.15 141.78 134.50 English Bay Mean 7 125.25 123.06 120.59 112.01 105.16 English Bay Min 8 104.58 103.48 97.19 81.22 83.69

English Bay L95 8 113.59 111.13 107.51 90.83 84.82 English Bay L75 8 117.73 115.36 112.29 97.67 88.51 English Bay L50 8 120.83 118.68 115.45 101.91 92.50

English Bay L25 8 123.88 121.87 118.28 106.84 97.96

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 84

Burrard Inlet 2019

English Bay L5 8 130.13 127.36 126.16 115.15 108.65 English Bay Max 8 151.78 149.55 147.25 143.68 140.96 English Bay Mean 8 126.36 124.54 121.12 111.85 106.26 English Bay Min 9 110.78 109.96 101.70 90.54 83.99

English Bay L95 9 117.34 115.92 109.80 97.13 86.60 English Bay L75 9 119.87 118.30 113.30 100.70 89.87

English Bay L50 9 121.58 119.96 115.35 103.92 93.53 English Bay L25 9 124.21 122.34 118.24 107.49 97.68 English Bay L5 9 128.44 126.60 123.94 113.81 106.75 English Bay Max 9 145.87 144.49 145.20 138.91 133.02 English Bay Mean 9 124.30 122.24 119.50 110.49 103.36

SMRU Consulting NA Final Version 2020-07-20 85