y NEL / REPORT 1290 0621 LUOday / 13N DDC AVAILABILITY NOTICE Qualified Requesters May Obtain Copies Of This Report From DDC PROBLEM Conduct surveys of biological sounds in the ocean. In particular, study effects of biological sound on observed base ambient noise levels in the San Nicolas Basin near San Clemente Island, using hourly recorded samples from two widely separated hydrophones resting on the bottom at 60 and 450 fathoms. RESULTS 1. Of the impressive variety and quantity of biological sound in the samples eight types were found to be most prevalent. 2. The sound types were assigned the following descriptive names: Click Chorus, Rhythmic Grunt, Motor- boating, Barking, Growl, Low-Frequency Groan, 20 c/s Long Pulses, and 20 c/s Short Pulses. 3. The first three types listed were strongly diurnal, all showing greatest prevalence at night. 4, Barking and 20 c/s Long Pulses were present during essentially all the 192 hours monitored, both at the shallow hydrophone and at the deep hydrophone. 5. An almost-continuous drone of Rhythmic Grunt appeared to be largely responsible for an increased base ambient noise level that occurred in the 80 c/s to 300 c/s region peaking just before midnight at the deep hydrophone. The cause of a high plateau observed in this frequency range at the shallow hydrophone from 2100 to 0300 hours was not identified. OT WME 0301 0040505 & 6. Peaks in the base ambient noise level at 2000 and 0400 hours in the 160 c/s to 1000 c/s range at the shallow hydrophone were mainly the result of increased activity of the Click Chorus. RECOMMENDATION Conduct further studies at the same locations during the same month of the year using additional equip- ment to obtaindirectional sound information and under- water visual information, in order to determine the sources of the sounds in the area. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION The work was assigned by BUSHIPS letter 688-057 of 9 Dec 1960 and was performed under SF 001 03 16, Task 8529 (NEL E11351) during the period January 1964 through December 1964. The report was approved for publication 24 May 1965. Acknowledgment is due G. M. Wenz, for general consultation and for furnishing the tape recordings and 3 -octave-band strip-chart records for this study. The author is also indebted to G. M. Wenz, M. A. Calderon, and T. F. Scanlan for the field data and other information in NEL Report 1260 which were helpful in writing this report. The field work described in NEL Report 1260 was accomplished under SR 004 03 01, Task 8119 (NEL L20451). OMANI HMOKhWN 10 11 12 13 CONTENTS INDRODUGRION: 1 page 5 THE CATEGORIES OF BIOLOGICAL SOUND... 6 PATTERNS OF OCCURRENCE. ..28 DISCUSSION... 33 CONCLUSIONS... 39 REFERENCES... 41 ILLUSTRATIONS Physical description of the cyclic Click Chorus...pages®@, 9 Physicaldescription of the Rhythmic Grunt... 72, 73 Physical description of the Motorboating sound...14, 15 Physical description of Barking...16, 17 Physical description of the Growl... 18, 19 Sonagrams of the Low-Frequency Groan...20, 21 Sonagram of 20 c/s Long Pulses... 22 Sonagram of 20 c/s Short Pulses... 23 Sonagrams showing 20 c/s Long and Short Pulses plus some other sounds with different degrees of time com- pression... 26, 27 Diurnal distribution results for three sound categories, by presence within a sampling... 29 Diurnal distribution results for three sparsely distributed sounds, by presence within a sampling...30 Diurnal distribution results for low-frequency sounds, based upon mean count per sample... 32 Ambient noise spectra for specific hours of peak ambient level, including comparison of Rhythmic Grunt Spectrum with peak ambient spectrum at deep hydro- phone (2300 hours)...34 REVERSE SIDE BLANK I Lee : ; pray Pi te 7s Ay if ‘ 27 vit LMiOD poet iT Oh mow AD Bite 1 VHT TAS ites Sar a LOC Tel cee ic mF! he i —~ 7 7 ~~ se INTRODUCTION This report records the results of a survey of the biological sound present in a set of tape recordings obtained during an 8-day period in July 1963 off San Clemente Island in the San Nicolas Basin during sound propagation experi- mentation. The results of studies of the signal and ambient background levels have already been reported by Wenz et al.” * The propagation experiment involved a ''shallow" hydrophone in 60 fathoms about 1 mile off Eel Point on the west shore of San Clemente Island and a ''deep'’ hydrophone in 450 fathoms of water about 4 miles farther offshore to the west. Both hydrophones were mounted on tripods which rested on the bottom. The outputs of the hydrophones were recorded side-by-side on magnetic tape. These recordings yielded an average of 12 minutes of ambient noise sampling each hour continuously over the 8 days, 15-23 July. Details on instrumentation and procedure can be found in reference 1. The data tapes were recorded at 3.75 inches/sec. The recordings were played back through a three-range speaker system, one channel at a time, using a variable band-pass filter for audio analysis when necessary. In addition to monitoring at normal and double tape speeds, listening was also performed at a playback ratio of 4 to 1 in order to raise the low-frequency sound (down to 20 c/s) to more suitable listening frequencies. The spectrographic equipment used was the Kay Electric Co. Sonagraph Model Recorder; the spectrum-time plots obtained are referred to in this report as ''Sonagrams."' * Superscript numbers denote references in the list at the end of this report. THE CATEGORIES OF BIOLOGICAL SOUND Table 1 and the first nine figures show some charac- teristics of the sounds found to be common in these San Nicolas Basin recordings. The meanings of the terminology used in the table will become more clear as each sound type is described. Each of the first five figures describes TABLE 1. MAIN TYPES OF BIOLOGICAL SOUND HEARD Frequency | Max. Sound Pulse Range S/N |Duration | Period | Duration | Period Assigned name (c/s) (c/s) (sec) (sec) (msec) | (msec) 2. Rhythmic Grunt 90-300 125 350 3. Motorboating | 120-1000 Rem enti arieser 75 4, Barking (''yelp") ca 2000 oe 6. Low-Freq. Groan 20-70 --- fi. 20%e/is tong Pulse I) O42 --- 8. 20c/s Short Pulse 19-40 20 0.6 = 600 ee one of the five most distinctive and common biological sounds in the recordings. Each figure consists of at least one Sonagram, which shows a combination of frequency, time, and gross relative amplitude; a spectrum plot froma single sound sample, which shows relative 3-octave level versus frequency; and an oscillographic photo, which shows voltage amplitude versus time. Included in each spectrum plot is a rough approximation of the relative ambient background level, indicated by a dashed-line curve. When the spectrum curve rises well above the dashed curve, the difference is due to the biological sound plus or minus the error of positioning of the background curve. However, a peak at 60 c/s due to equipment hum is sometimes present. The names assigned to the various sounds represent an attempt to be as descriptive as possible, yet brief. No means was available for connecting any sound positively to any particular source; so, for example, the barking was not called ''sea lion barking'' even though the source of the barking in all probability was the sea lion. Sound 1, the cyclic Click Chorus (fig. 1), has pre- viously been described.*’*’°'* The individual click could just as well be called a snap or a clap or a knock and is very similar to what is often heard by Navy sonarmen and commonly referred to as the ''carpenter'’ sound. The carpenter sound, however, does not have the cycling or surging characteristic of this chorus and usually has a wider frequency range. This sound during daylight hours may consist of single trains of pulses at a pulse repetition rate of 1.5 per second and comes in for only a few seconds during a 5-minute sampling period, for example. During nighttime hours, however, it always sounded like the result of hundreds of individuals knocking in concert typically for 20 seconds or so and then tapering off as the result of one individual after another momentarily stopping. During the next few seconds the number of individuals knocking would have decreased enough to reduce the ambient noise intensity by up to 10 dB. Sometimes the number clicking was much smaller than usual and the clicking part of the cycle was shorter. On the other hand, during the 2000 sample period, which was one hour after sunset, the apparent number of individuals clicking was at a maximum, and the density and intensity of the sound were at a constant high level without the characteristic cyclic variation. THIRD-OCTAVE BAND LEVEL, DB ' = oO 1 ipo) oO 1 Ww S) FREQUENCY, C/S ROU REA§ Iho Sonagrams, oscillogram, and spectrum DLO MO Sioumae ll’, Gwe iCricrarch Cel, ncicm Cvonau she According to the oscillogram the duration of a CHISTICH ar S hey DOOR Cen OM aTISNCICKs In the Sonagram the CEA CES A OMIA sGaliMe ta) SIEICIOU GIS” 1AiaeMGue NON 5 Gi Tala nig) activity. ine speed=up Of Ghe cape playback. was 4 to 1, which reduced the effective width of the Sowag maphied Saucy S sarvailauiz ira giaiauln ce Taine OMe lelenCy/ (Sie FREQUENCY, C/ —=s— 100 MSEC ——e PE OGYPE do TIME, SECONDS (Continued) 10 Sound 2, the Rhythmic Grunt (fig. 2), is similar to a frog croak and is very probably made by swim-bladder muscles, which are among the most important producers of sound in the fish world. The number of pulses in a grunt varied from one to five, and the number of pulses in a grunt from an individual source showed a tendency to repeat from one grunt to the next. Individual pulses were triangular in shape with a duration that varied between 100 and 300 msec. The grunt repeated at intervals that ranged between 4 and 6 seconds. The Rhythmic Grunt sound was present at both hydrophones, mainly during the night hours. Sound 3, Motorboating (fig. 3) resembles the noise of a one-cylinder engine running slowly. Similar sounds emanate from ride vehicles in amusement parks. Charac- teristically, the start of the Motorboating pulse train was not noticed because it was masked by background noise, but the sound gradually increased in intensity over its typical 4-second duration and then abruptly terminated. The pulse repetition rate was approximately 13 pulses per second. Motorboating was mainly prevalent at night in shallow water in groups of two or more pulse trains, usually in train pairs. The interval between the terminations of the first and second members of a pair was generally 7 or 8 seconds. This sound also is probably generated ina swim-bladder muscle system. Sound 4, Barking (fig. 4),is very similar to a dog's barking, and most people familiar with seals or sea lions would without hesitation identify it as originating in this type of animal. The Sonagram in figure 4 shows one com- bination of Barking (yelps and snorts, alternately one and then the other, the yelps being the patterns that are higher and more extensive in frequency). Actually, this figure represents just one vocalization combination. On other occasions the sounds could be described as chuckling, chattering, gargling, moaning, etc. For the purpose of this report all these sounds will be considered as Barking. Sound 5, the Growl (fig. 5), is another sound that can almost certainly be attributed to the sea lion, because it was closely interwoven with the other sounds typical of the sea lion in particular and pinnipeds in general, but was considered separately because of its possible echo-location function. The author has heard a sea lion making a very similar sound in air at the San Diego Zoo. The sound con- sists of a pulse train lasting several seconds and usually is preceded by a guttural vocalization as shown in figure 5 at time 0.5 second. The pulse repetition rate is about 30 per second. Sound 6, the Low-Frequency Groan (fig. 6), is a low- frequency tonal sound, beginning at from 60 to 100 c/s and ending 1 or 2 seconds later at from 20 to 40 c/s. At least some groans, such as that shown in figure 6, consist of two components, the fundamental and a strong second harmonic which dominates because of the positive correlation between frequency and aural response below 1000 c/s in man. Sonagrams A and B show the same groan, but with different frequency and time scale combinations, as received at the shallow hydrophone. The third Sonagram shows what was received at the deep hydrophone. It is matched with the shallow hydrophone presentation shown above it, and the pair illustrates a case in which the difference in time of arrival indicates that the source was seaward from the deep hydrophone (the time difference approximated the maximum possible with the 4-mile separation of the hydrophones), Figures 7 and 8 illustrate with Sonagrams the two kinds of 20 c/s Pulses, the Long and the Short. Such 20 c/s pulses, particularly short ones of approximately 1-second duration, have received much attention during the last 8 years. Beene ee SPB Oth types were prominent in the San Clemente recordings, especially the 20 c/s Long Pulses which were detected in all the recorded samples. These Long Pulses are of two types, which have already been designated Types I and II. + Samples of each are shown in figure 7. Examples of Type I occurred at times 1! 30'' and 3' 45" and a good example of Type II occurred at time 0. The second harmonic content of the Type Il Pulses is evident at 43 c/s and the second harmonic traces of the 11 THIRD-OCTAVE BAND LEVEL, DB 12 ! e S ' NO oO ' Ww oO 1 JS oO -50 l FREQUENCY, C/S TFB OBIPA ao Sonagrams, oscillogram, and spectrum plot of Sound 2, the Rhythmic Grunt. AS SeSiVonoreatie the 8-sec Sonagram these Grunts have little energy above 300 c/s and are composed of pulses perhaps averaging 200 msec in duration. Grunt pulses from one source can be seen from time 2 OMS ESIC CUM GIG mG Ua QICa CHUNG ma/Maun TOMO IME SHCICK The Grunt TTD RCC COMMONS) EXCH DICH Tanti ONC ards Smee paialOl 7a Oe SUCICION (Ome SIONWNaCAC, Ope GS GLC CLY BICGMEGr be frCGRACRE Yo The wavy (Homizontal) Dimes Wat S510) 1C/ Si niceavials) Ome mnaOnn Barking aetivity and the vertical striyations GBOEDG Gb EMG So7S SEC Gre-fromw® @ CYCLE OF wvhae Click Chorus. Ta UCC OI Tae EIC SOM UGAIG Ta COME CE RCRGIDNC playback speed was increased to 16 to 1 and the SOmMaignaGoi 4 Sixicy/1s) wy elatre aun CSMe A IE\C LCRA CLUE SMC AS wide. More Grunts can be seen tn this Sonagram ATVs SOIVE ala Ci ONUCTUCHU mG CXGIGN Tien S} SHO) alC1O Cm ONUSC an OMalCue TTC) NG AUTUG S= DICHON Us ncnue eR ChElC em CnC me CAI CMS C}TC MGS aera the lower Sonagram. TOW T= (Ok iC ChnG TaUlinnce SIONS) szem to ibe from the sidme siownmce. BEeEoee EEEss oS 0 100 1000 10,000 — 300. eas ae oe een eee eas ee eee I I ! I oS fan} oO oS N a $/9 ‘AONANDIY4 TIME, SECONDS nN I S S in 9 “AONINOIYS | 4 SECONDS TIME (Continued) Figure 2. 13 14 THIRD-OCTAVE BAND LEVEL, DB ' — oO 1 DO oO -30 PEM GIUTCINS 6 Sonagrams, oscillogramsS, and spectrum plot of Sound 3, Motorboating. The sound is DOGOSGOOGLNY CO jIBISG Crota WEG CG jwulSG TrOCe OF MS OICHTERMSIEICHs The 15-sec Sonagram with its effective 3 c/s filtering shows about 20 frequency com- DOME ILS) (OG LSC SiG CAGE Sac Me mlOnie Marto c/s DOUMRE) OY Gr CMe Seronges bo OREM EC GRYUBG BB C= ROL COn 32 SCCR Gb O5655 425655 18505 Grd 1557 8ee on this Sonagram. In the 4-sec Sonagram, which WAS MACE with Only a2) tO da Sedan (Ofa iven Cape playback (22 c/s effective filter-width), weak CUCM CTL ON GUSH. Gd eB Gvalndi GMSHIG ULL SNC Qe DCM STELeHTe cir the background. 10,000 uN re -4 | ? = © = Nn i—_ a Zz oO a oO Lu n ; ui => = = — im — © I =) S N S/9 “AININDI4 300— TIME, SECONDS —s— _ 5 SECONDS — oO lu Nn = (=) S eoeatne bole (=) { Se ee aS (OG CN! LGN S| S/d (Continued) IFEQDUPE Bo 15 ' ' ' Ww DN (= S&S oO Oo THIRD-OCTAVE BAND LEVEL, DB ' S Oo 16 FREQUENCY, C/S Figure 4. Sonagram, oscillogram, and spectrum plot of Sound 4, Barking. TEE OG Tahal TON OU Ce Cea tends to 3000 c/s can best be described as PUYUBMIIE 6 The QL FWAGEe Sounds eEuwcvending wp Go TOOOV cys) \clan ™belstemben Gelsicin i Dead as) isi1Omusiene S FREQUENCY, C/ a vw = oO 1000- a0) MSEC a TIME, SECONDS Figure 4. (Continued) Ld THIRD-OCTAVE BAND LEVEL, DB 18 ' ee S ' DO i=) 1 Ww So 100 FREQUENCY, C/S ipo WE OBE Oo Sonagram, oscillogram, and spectrum DLO Of SOUAG Do bae CGrowl> The pulse-train CUETAG YN USING SCR TaN UCEIE, Matava Cr) Om WIXI. US an CREW CLEN TIC IOaRGANG 27S Cpe VIO CHS > The preliminary sound between OWES Ooe Ge O58 SGC CS LUEC @ SROTE MOCRo The QWASEG OSG Diver Ck BrAIM BS WGCCIGEG IY WVOrEGOLE a TAOU mM OUIESNCH AC OMmaTOIURI SHOR. FREQUENCY, C/S — oS oS oOo — yw So oOo 500 —a— 200 MSEC —— —=i— 5 SECOND S —o— Figure Bo 2 TIME, SECONDS (Continued) US) 20 FREQUENCY, C TIME, SECONDS AG UM mCEm Oke Sonagrams showing the Low Frequency Groan sound. A. Groan from shallow hydrophone (between sec 4 and 7). B. Same groan with changed time and frequency scales (resulting from different tape playback speed). C. Same as Bonly from the deep hydrophone, arriving 4 sec earlier. LG SCrORG WOTUZOREBGL LURE 88 jVirOl- ably from equipment hum. WDE OBGLGICGH SerbOGosORS Lite AL Tal Conan Ta OY TCH TCH Celanc CH iam CHI VORTAUIS He FREQUENCY, C/S LUECGUPA Oo 5 TIME, SECONDS (Continued) 10 21 FREQUENCY, C/S 22 50 ; = fos) iS) SS ips) ‘> 10 { 1 2 3 TIME, MINUTES EAU ONUTIE) Ve) SOWA TAQ Olin OLN CY// Sum ON GN Ee UNIISTElS on GIN) TLOWVUG! -UAESTE SMG igCamO) MMC Cum ON aC: ChiamnOn/ gmt nOMMSHE CLOMUG Samcaie duration and are of two types. Tey els ONG) PUIG OCCU? G6 HYSO" Gad S’4O0"%, Kyjpje LL LOnRG oe PWNS OCCOUPF Gb Op O20", BIO", B"'S50"%, Gre 3°20". FREQUENCY, C/S 300 200 100 F 0 5 10 15 20 25 TIME, SECONDS Figure 8. Sonagram of 20 c/s Short Pulses. They OCCUP GE Op Oo 155 Gre BO SCCo CBUIOEE BRUPGjDUlSe frequency shift from as high as 40 c/s, and are OF bae Oreer Of L SCC bin Greg soiwo (The vertical striations are from the Rhythmic Grunt sound.) 23 24 Type Il tails are even more evident (38 c/s). The overlap of the pulses shown in this Sonagram is typical and suggests the probability that the pulses are from multiple sources. Sounds in the 20 c/s region pose difficulties not only in on-the-spot study, but also in detection and monitoring. The main problem is that below 100 c/s human audition is relatively insensitive and gets rapidly worse as frequency goes down. However, an increase of speed (and frequency) of recorded samples by a factor of four results in an auditory presentation suitable for monitoring the 20 c/s Pulse activity without losing perspective relative to the other sounds. Figure 8 shows a series of 20 c/s Short Pulses at time 0, 8, 15, and 20 seconds. The Short Pulse charac- teristically shows downward frequency shift and ends close to 20 c/s. Except for the average frequency and uniformly short duration, it is not greatly different from what has been called the Low-Frequency Groan. Although the pulse at time 24 seconds has the characteristic shortness of a 20 c/s Short Pulse, it is twice as high in frequency, and for the purposes of this survey is considered to be a Low- Frequency Groan. Characteristically, 20 c/s Short Pulses occur clustered in time. Sometimes the pulse intervals within a cluster are very regular and the clusters can be considered as pulse trains. Typical intervals range from about 20 seconds to 10 seconds. Sometimes the pulse intervals are very irregular and also not readily interpreted in terms of multiple sources. Usually, a pulse cluster begins abruptly and ends abruptly. The 20 c/s Short Pulses found in this survey generally had very low signal-to-noise ratio and some were almost completely masked by the 20 c/s Long Pulses. For this reason an attempt to establish the num- ber of sources and pulse interval would not be worthwhile. Figure 9 shows a mixture of 20 c/s Short and Long Pulses as well as other biological sound. In figure 9A Short Pulses can be seen at 0 and 13 seconds, while the Rhythmic Grunt sound is prominent throughout. The Grunt at -1.5 seconds is really four grunts in rapid succession with frequency components at 40 c/s intervals. In con- trast, the Grunter that sounds at 5, 9, 13, and 16 seconds makes a single grunt with frequency components at 25 c/s intervals. The Motorboating sound is illustrated at 2 sec- onds and 11 seconds as a series of harmonic-component lines. Component spacing corresponding to a pulse repe- tition rate of 13 per second is apparent. As mentioned above and illustrated in figure 9A, the onset of this sound is unobtrusive, and the pulse-train intensity gradually in- creases during its 5-second duration to a dramatic climax followed by 4 seconds of silence before a repetition of the pulse train. Pairing of Motorboating pulse trains, such as shown here, iS a common occurrence. Figures 9B and 9C show five 20 c/s Short Pulses from -7 seconds to +44 seconds. As shown in figure 9C, the first, third, and fourth seem to shift from 28 c/s down to 19 c/s and appear at intervals of 20 seconds, approxi- mately, a characteristic interval for 20 c/s Short Pulses in this part of the Pacific. On the other hand, the second and fifth Short Pulses seem to be two of a kind, shifting from about 35 c/s down to about 22 c/s, and are separated by a long 45-second interval. Figure 9C also shows a typical Type I 20 c/s Long Pulse beginning at time -68 seconds and lasting roughly 20 seconds, and a typical Type II 20 c/s Long Pulse begin- ning at -20 seconds, shifting from 22 to 19.5 c/s at -6 seconds, and terminating at -2 seconds. This latter sample also shows a strong second harmonic. The other 20 c/s Long Pulse activity is indistinct, probably because the sources involved are at greater distances. 295 LGU RE Nhe Sonagrams showing a@ combination of 20 c/s Short Pulses and Long Pulses, Rhythmic Grunts (vertical striations between 50 and 150 e/s) and Motorboating (closely-spaced horizontal lines in the top Sonagram between 120 and 180 c/s). The frequency detail of the Motorboating sound rather than the time detail of its individual pulses is emphasized in this case because of the great (16 to 1) speedup of the tape playback, which resulted in an effective analyzing filter bandwidth of 3 c/s and great time compression. All three Sonagrams are from the shallow hydro- phone output and have the same zero time reference. 26 | Oo N ol $/9 ‘ AINANOAYA TIME, SECONDS 27 28 PATTERNS OF OCCURRENCE The results shown in figures 10 and 11 indicate in how many days of the 8-day total the individual sounds were present during a particular hour of the day, but do not indicate the frequency of occurrence within the sample, the number of sources involved, or any measure of signal level. Because of the great fluctuation in the means from one hour to the next the curves were smoothed, using the method of running averages. ‘+ Three of the sounds tabu- lated were heard exclusively from the shallow hydrophone: the Click Chorus, Motorboating, and Growl. As suggested by figure 10, the cyclic Click Chorus was always present during night hours, while in only about half of the days was it present at all around midday. This type of graph does not do justice to the diurnal nature of this sound, since the number of sources and density of the sound are so much greater during the night hours. As can be seen in figure 10, the Rhythmic Grunt diurnal characteristic was different at the two hydrophones. The sound's frequency of occurrence increased gradually from early afternoon until early eve- ning at the shallow hydrophone and until late evening at the deep hydrophone. It seldom was noted after 0100 at the shallow hydrophone and after 0400 at the deep hydrophone. A sound that was always present was Barking. Barking was heard in all samples from both hydrophones. On the other hand, the least common of the sounds tabulated was the Growl sound. It was present in only 23 of the samples and all of these were from the shallow hydrophone. These data are shown in figure 11. The Growl sound seemed to be one of a large variety of pinniped-type sounds and was of interest because of its possible functional im- portance, for instance, to a pinniped pulse train Wsorcncem The fact that this sound was almost never heard during the night hours may be due to the higher ambient background levels at night, together with the relatively low signal level of the Growl. Weak pulse trains of similar pulse repetition rate and frequency range, but without the characteristic NUMBER OF SAMPLES tN 9 ts TT nd OD) secsccscoecess CLICK CHORUS (S) One GRUNT (S) SUNSET SUNRISE. GO: =====" GRUNT (D) ' NS Wal 16 8618 20 22 24 2 4 6 8 i WZ HOUR OF SAMPLE Figure 10. Diurnal distribution curves for three sound categories with marked diurnal patternings based on the number of hourly samples in which a particular sound was heard, regardless of how many times within a sample it was repeated. Two sound categories were peculiar to the shallow water hydrophone (S), while the Rhythmic Grunt sound was common at both the shallow hydrophone and the deep hydrophone (Dye The curves were arithmetically smoothed. Sunset and sunrise occurred during the 1900 and 0500 sample periods. MOTOR BOATING (S) 100 co Oo lon Oo oS Oo nN oO PERCENT OF SAMPLES 29 30 @------= LF GROANS O-———20C/S SHORT PULSES we —_ GROWL (S) fon) oO S oO PERCENT OF SAMPLES DO oO NUMBER OF SAMPLES =) INS ee, RW aD —~ oO 12 gl4 16 18 = 20 22 24 2 4 6 8 10 12 HOUR OF SAMPLE IPR OG PA Mo Dire al Tau mt Dut wom (CUTAVIES Oka ASOT as with little diurnal patterning, basied on the number of hourly samples in which @ particular sound was heard, regardless of how many times within a@ sample it was repeated. Although the Low Frequency Groans and 20 c/s Short Pulses were characteristically of low count per sample, they were well distributed throughout the samples. The distributions of 20 c/s Long Pulses and Bark- BOG FOL CSSCHEEGLLY On cee LOO Greene LURE Os the graph. The curves for 20 c/s Pulses and Low Frequency Groans are based upon presence of @ sound in either the deep or shallow hydrophone or both. The Growl sound was heard only from the shallow hydrophone. laryngeal quality of the Growl, were noticed in 17 of the deep hydrophone samples but were not dealt with further. The rest of the sounds tabulated were low-frequency sounds, made prominent aurally only by speedup of the playback transport. Those termed Low-Frequency Groans occurred only a limited number of times during a sample period, yet they showed great probability of occurring within sample periods during any time of the day, as shown in figure 11. The 20 c/s Short Pulses were also rather sporadic, but occurred in most samples listened to and during essentially all of the samples in the 2000 to 2200 period. The 20 c/s Long Pulses are not included in these graphs because they were always detectable, even if very weak, within some part of each sample period during every hour of the day. The mean maximum S/N per sample (in a one-third octave band centered at 20 c/s) was 18.7 dB at the deep hydrophone and 23.4 dB at the shallow hydrophone. The Groans and Short Pulses occurred at both hydrophones about equally, and the curves represent presence of the sound in either or both hydrophones. Figure 12 shows the mean number of 20 c/s Long Pulses, Short Pulses, and Low-Frequency Groans per sample as a function of time of day. As in figures 10 and 11 the curves here were plotted using the method of running averages. The number of Low-Frequency Groans increases sharply at 2000 at both hydrophones, while the peak num- ber of 20 c/s Short Pulses occurs at 2100. Around 0400, just before dawn, occurs a peak number of 20 e/s Long Pulses and what appear to be secondary peaks in the Short Pulses and Low-Frequency Groans. As explained earlier, the decision was made to include a short pulse well above 20 c/s but below 100 c/s, not with the 20 c/s Short Pulses, but rather with the Groans (with which the questionable pulses were compatible in frequencies, but not in duration). The 20 c/s Pulses and the Low-Frequency Groans are obviously from powerful, distant sources (judging from the fact that the same pulses are heard on hydrophones 4 miles apart at approximately the same S/N). A correlation in 31 32 MEAN NUMBER/ SAMPLE 20 C/S LONG PULSES — -— SHALLOW —=— DEEP 20 C/S SHORT PULSES SHALLOW === DEEP LF GROANS SUNRISE =— ——-— SHALLOW ac ae ——-=--= DEEP SUNSET 12 146 18 20 CCen oe 2 4 6 8 1) 2 HOUR OF SAMPLE IP BOP IRG. rao Total number of sounds heard of a particular category (20 CVish OMG uaa Sloat meus ers and Low Frequency Groans) during all samples of a particular time of day, divided by the number of aaySe The curves were smoothed arithmetically. count for the hydrophones appears to exist, as shown in figure 12; the difference between the deep and shallow water curves is very minor, as would be expected should most of the pulses heard at one hydrophone be the same as those heard at the other. DISCUSSION Reference 1 describes and discusses the cyclic Click Chorus, the Barking, and the 20 c/s Long Pulses. An effort will be made in the present discussion to avoid un- necessary repetition of material in that report. The listening performed in the study reported here has resulted in some conclusions as to the cause of certain diurnal variations in the minimum ambient background levels. Figures 2, 3, and 4 of reference 1, diurnal curves of (minimum) ambient levels, show the following phenomena: (1) In the shallow hydrophone output, increases in the ambient background were noted between 2000 and 0400 in the 125 to 1000 c/s region with sharp peaks at 2000 and 0400 hours (particularly in the 160 and 500 c/s region). (2) In the deep water the nocturnal increase was limited to the hours 2200 to 2400 in the frequency range 80 to 250 c/s, particularly between 100 and 160 c/s. Figure 13 was pre- pared from the 19-21 July data of reference 1 to emphasize these effects for shallow and deep hydrophones. In figure 13(S), the general background spectrum at the shallow hydrophone before 2000 and after 0400 is shown as the dashed-line base, and the other curves are the spectra of base background level for the times indicated. The listening session made it abundantly clear that the 2000 hours curve is a result of the Click Chorus, which at this time of day was strong and continuous without cyclic fluctuation with time. By 2100 hours the chorus was re- duced in density and intensity and was cyclic again. It 33 34 THIRD-OCTAVE BAND LEVEL, RELATIVE DB 2000 —-— 0400 eC0an000000 MIDNIGHT ——-—- <2000, >0400 RHYTHMIC GRUNT 50) <== 2300 20 Pat WUE Tia loa T 10 100 1000 10,000 FREQUENCY, C/S Figure 13. Relative ambient noise spectra during nighttime hours at the shallow-water hydrophone (S) and at the deep-water hydrophone (D). The curves are based upon data shown in figures 25 35 and 4 of reference 1 for the period 1200 on 19 July to 1200 on 21 Julye The Rhythmic Grunt spectrum is based on one sample (from the shallow hydrophone, 1900, 22 July) and is the same one shown in figure 2 of the present reporte The curve labeled 2300 is for the diurnal deep-water peak that extends roughly from 2200 to 2400. The base ambient noise level curve represents the general background level before and after this peak. remained subdued during the middle night hours and had little, if any, effect upon the midnight spectrum curve. By 0400 hours the Click Chorus had increased in intensity again and probably was the controlling agent for the base noise spectrum at this hour. However, it now was some- what cyclic in nature and was less intense than at 2000 hours. The question as to what the shallow hydrophone base spectrum around midnight [fig. 13(S)] should be attributed is unanswered at present. The Motorboating sound is probably responsible for the raised level in the 150-to-500 c/s region, since it was present in many of the samples representing this hour and in a wide range of intensities. But the cause of the raised spectrum below 150 c/s remains a mystery. In figure 13(D), the dashed-line base represents the minimum levels just before and after 2300 hours at the deep hydrophone. The curve for the peak in the base ambient noise occurring at approximately 2300 hours is compared here with the spectrum curve for the Rhythmic Grunt sound, which around this hour was a dominant drone at these frequencies. The Grunt whose spectrum is shown is from the shallow hydrophone output. Closer correspon- dence could have been obtained using a different Grunt sample, particularly one from the output of the deep hydro- phone. A typical grunt density during this period was 60 to 80 distinct grunts per minute, which, assuming a typical grunt duration of 500 msec, leaves very little time un- occupied by pulses of this sound. Presumably indistinct Rhythmic Grunts were also present, filling in the ''silent"’ intervals. The shallow hydrophone picked up fewer grunts, but a high proportion of them had a good S/N. Some shallow hydrophone Rhythmic Grunts had the spectrum shown, but others had a spectrum very similar to the 2300 curve between 60 and 300 c/s. On the other hand, all the Rhythmic Grunts recorded from the deep hydrophone seemed to be of the type having good level at 100 c/s like the 2300 spectrum. Consequently, the Rhythmic Grunt sound is a prime suspect as the main cause of the elevated base ambient noise spectrum at 2300 hours in the deep water case. In addition to being lower in frequency, on the average, the Rhythmic Grunts at the deep hydrophone were characterized by a slower repetition rate. Checks on widely scattered samples showed the following means of the Grunt repetition rate: at the shallow hydrophone, one per 4.39 sec +0.056 (SE), one per 4.55 sec +0.055 (SE), and one per 4.12 sec +0.054 (SE); at the deep hydrophone, one per 5.04 sec +0.053 (SE) and one per 5.68 sec +0.13 (SE). * An additional sample checked for timing was part of a 15- minute towed-array sample recorded on SALUDA (IX 87) sailing at 5 knots in 6-fathom water off Black Warrior Lagoon, B. C. This sample, which was recorded on 9 February 1965, seemed almost identical to some of the San Clemente shallow samples and also revealed a very similar repetition rate: one per 4.28 sec +0.060 (SE). The most mysterious of all the sounds, of course, were the 20 c/s Long Pulses. They were present in every sample. Although the mean maximum S/N per sample was 18.7 dB deep and 23.4 dB shallow, many other Long Pulses were just audible. One explanation for the generally greater S/N in the shallow-hydrophone channel for 20 c/s Pulses both Long and Short is the rapid slope off of the deep hydrophone response below 40 c/s, which for the analysis band centered at 20 c/s could emphasize the noise background in the top half of the band more than the 20 c/s Pulses. * SE = standard error of the mean The mean number of 20 c/s Long Pulses per sample (10.9 deep and 14.6 shallow) corresponds to about 55 and 73 per hour, respectively, or of the order of one per minute. The counting was influenced by interpretation as to what constituted a Pulse, because at times the sounds were superimposed on each other causing a continuous and multiple jumble of sound. Counting was particularly sub- jective when the sounds were barely audible. For these reasons quantitative description of the Long Pulses, such as in figure 12, is open to question. This report does not describe all the variety of sounds observed, but only the frequent, repetitive sounds, especially those that have substantial influence on overall ambient levels. Of the other sounds, infrequent and sometimes obscure, one de- serving at least passing comment can best be described as consisting of isolated clicks or pops doubtless from bio- logical sources. Although these clicks and pops were sparsely spread, so that they had no effect upon mean ambient levels, they were found in at least 50 percent of the deep samples and 10 percent of the shallow samples. They were also slightly more frequent from midnight to noon than from noon to midnight. Wenz’ has discussed the phenomenon of hearing pinniped barking from a bottom-mounted hydrophone at 360 ft depth, and the implication was that the pinniped may be capable of barking while completely submerged. In the present study the deep receiving hydrophone at 2700 feet (450 fathoms) picked up pinniped sounds with good S/N. DeVries and Wohlschlag”” have recorded dives of the Weddell seal in Antarctica to depths of approximately M50 feet: The National Science Foundation has recently re- ported (through a publicity release’) that: (1) The sub- merged Weddell seal produces a wide variety of noises without opening its mouth or nostrils. (2) The seal sounds are heard at depths of hundreds of feet. (3) Scuba divers associate certain throat and head movements with particu- lar sounds. In addition, Schusterman, Kellogg, and Rice oi 38 have reported barking from California sea lions submerged in a laboratory pool. From the foregoing observations and from the fact that the pinniped signal levels in the July 1963 San Clemente tests at the 450-fathom hydrophone were well above the background noise, it seems reasonable to assume that the pinniped sound sources were submerged and possibly deeply submerged. Finally, mention must be made of the fine listening conditions which resulted in such good S/N for the biological sound. In 69 percent of the hours sampled there was no noticeable propulsion sound at either hydrophone, and other man-made sounds such as sonar pinging were even more rare. Such conditions are remarkable for a coastal area so close to shipping lanes and show it to be a good site for further study of ambient noise phenomena. CONCLUSIONS Principal conclusions from analyzing the sounds in the recorded samplings of 192 hours, from both deep water and shallow water, are: 1. The Rhythmic Grunt sound was the cause of the raised level of the minimum ambient background noise in the 100-c/s-to-160-c/s frequency region at the deep hydro- phone just before midnight. 2. In shallow water the peaks in the minimum am- bient noise levels in the 160-c/s-to-1000-c/s frequency region at 2000 and 0400 hours were due to the Click Chorus sound. 3. The Motorboating sound is one of the agents responsible for the ambient noise hump at the shallow hydrophone during the hours around midnight. A dominant sound feature, which may have played a part in the base ambient noise levels at any hour and at either hydrophone, was the widely varied Barking sound. Furthermore, although at first ignored as an irrelevant and hardly heard, low-frequency disturbance, the 20 c/s Long Pulses were found to be an omnipresent fundamental in the symphony of sound in the San Nicolas Basin. REVERSE SIDE BLANK 39 g Varna be Patent werkaayr ral \ a! ca Pes * <3 pn ae 10) hoa = ‘ ae ne wis a a 5 ad Ph: a Dag hi ae a Ly Gaal aah Pa bad ants * a eae ig wiwtye ‘hal Ts Saree see BRO: SNE Shy {sul torte Geld Se ay teen Wee. eh eS re fig atta BL Etaree ba se. B £5. a, isi I eat can’ 1 fle Lede Sete tala: sidiaak Cs Ue Binh: testo reel ficeliel He lon a esetenae . Limite gees Lair go lohawe oie aan dew al cine ee belongs teat hia = 28 ee the Bult, ay ed whieh t0 ialeneh | sli A cries aay REFERENCES 1. Navy Electronics Laboratory Report 1260, Underwater Acoustic Ambient-Noise and Transmission Tests West of San Clemente Island, by G. M. Wenz, M. A. Calderon, and R. F. Scanlan, CONFIDENTIAL, 18 January 1965 2. Wenz, G. M., ''Curious Noises and the Sonic Environ- ment in the Ocean,'' p. 101-119 in Symposium on Marine Bio-Acoustics, Lerner Marine Laboratory, 1963, Marine Bio-Acoustics, Macmillan, 1964 3. Navy Electronics Laboratory Report 1115, Shallow Water Ambient Noise Survey at the NEL Oceanographic Tower, by G. A. Clapp, CONFIDENTIAL, 9 July 1962 4, Clapp, G. A., ‘Periodic Variations of the Underwater Ambient-Noise Level of Biological Origin (Abstract),"' Acoustical Society of America. JoumMalye vis 3 Ones 1994, October 1964 5. Calderon, M., ''Low-Frequency Underwater Pulsed Noise Observed in the Pacific Ocean,'' U. S. Navy Journal of Underwater Acoustics, v. 12, p. 729-742, CONFIDEN- TIAL, October 1962 6. Jensvold, R. D. and Wright, K. A., ''Some Very Low- Frequency Pulsed Noises in the Atlantic Ocean," U. S. Navy Journal of Underwater Acoustics, v. 9, p. 685-704, CONFIDENTIAL, October 1959 7. Patterson, B. and Hamilton, G. R., ''Low-Frequency Pulsed Signals Received on Bermuda Hydrophones,"' U. S. Navy Journal of Underwater Acoustics, v. 11, p. 89- 108, CONFIDENTIAL, January 1961 41 42 REFERENCES (Continued) 8. Patterson, B. and Hamilton, G. R., ''Repetitive 20 Cycle Per Second Biological Hydroacoustic Signals at Bermuda," p. 125-145 in Symposium on Marine Bio- Acoustics, Lerner Marine Laboratory, 1963, Marine Bio- Acoustics, Macmillan, 1964 9, Schevill, W. E. and others, ''The 20-Cycle Signals and Balaenoptera (Fin Whales),'' p. 147-152 in Symposium on Marine Bio-Acoustics, Lerner Marine Laboratory, 1963, Marine Bio-Acoustics, Macmillan, 1964 10. Bell Telephone Laboratories Contract NObsr-81018; Final Report, Ocean Noise Study, CONFIDENTIAL, December 1960 11. Guilford, J. P., Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education, p. 23, McGraw-Hill, 1942 12) DeVries, Aw i. and Wohischiag) Dy Es, _Divine Depths of the Weddell Seal,'' Science, v. 145, p. 292, 17 July 1964 13. Scientists Go Under Ice to Eavesdrop on Seals, San Diego Union, p. A-30, 13 December 1964 14. Schusterman, R. J. and others, ''Underwater Visual Discrimination by the California Sea Lion,'' Science, v. 147, p. 1594-1596, 26) March 960 Security Classification DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA - R&D (Security classification of title, body of abstract and indexing annotation must be entered when the overall report is classified) 1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY (Corporate author) 2a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Navy Electronics Laboratory U Califor 3. REPORT TITLE Marine Biological Sound West of San Clemente Island 4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES (Type of report and inclusive dates) Research Report January 1964 to December 1964 5. AUTHOR(S) (Last name, first name, initial) Thompson, P. O. 6. REPORT DATE 7a. TOTAL NO. OF PAGES 76. NO. OF REFS 24 May 1965 42 14 8a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. 94. ORIGINATOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) b. PRosEcTNO. SF OO] 03 16 1290 Task 8529 9b. OTHER REPORT NO(S) (Any other numbers that may be assigned NEL Problem Eval 1 351 this report) 10. AVAILABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES Qualified Requesters May Obtain Copies of This Report From DDC 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY Bureau of Ships Washington D.C. 20360 13. ABSTRACT A survey was made of the biological sound present in a set of tape recordings obtained from a hydrophone at 60 fathoms and another at 450 fathoms, over an 8-day period. A variety of types of biological sound were distinguished and analyzed. They were shown to have significant influence on the ambient noise level. DD ioe 1473 0101-807-6800 U Security Classification Security Classification KEY WORDS Marine Biological Noise Underwater Noise INSTRUCTIONS 1, ORIGINATING ACTIVITY: Enter the name and address of the contractor, subcontractor, grantee, Department of De fense activity or other organization (corporate author) issuing the report. 2a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION: Enter the over- all security classification of the report. Indicate whether “Restricted Data’’ is included. Marking is to be in accord- ance with appropriate security regulations. 2b. GROUP: Automatic downgrading is specified in DoD Di- rective 5200.10 and Armed Forces Industrial Manual. Enter the group number. Also, when applicable, show that optional markings have been used for Group 3 and Group 4 as author- ized. 3. REPORT TITLE: Enter the complete report title in all capital letters. Titles in all cases should be unclassified. If a meaningful title cannot be selected without classifica- tion, show title classification in all capitals in parenthesis immediately following the title. 4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES: If appropriate, enter the type of report, e.g., interim, progress, Summary, annual, or final. Give the inclusive dates when a specific reporting period is covered. 5. AUTHOR(S): or in the report. If military, show rank and branch of service. The name of the principal author is an ahsolute minimum requirement. 6. REPORT DATE: Enter the date of the report as day, month, year, or month, year If more than one date appears on the report, use date of publication. 7a. TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES: The total page count should follow normal pagination procedures, i.e., enter the number of pages containing information. 7b. NUMBER OF REFERENCES: Enter the total number of references cited in the report. 8a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER: If appropriate, enter the applicable number of the contract or grant under which the report was written 8b, 8, & 8d. PROJECT NUMBER: Enter the appropriate military department identification, such as project number, subproject number, system numbers, task number, etc. 9a. ORIGINATOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S): Enter the offi- cial report number by which the document will be identified and controlled by the originating activity. This number must be unique to this report. 9b. OTHER REPORT NUMBER(S): If the report has been assigned any other report numbers (either by the originator or by the sponsor), also enter this number(s). 10. AVAILABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES: Enter any lim- itations on further dissemination of the report, other than those Enter the name(s) of author(s) as shown on Enter last name, first name, middle initial. imposed by security classification, using standard statements such as: Q) “*Qualified requesters may obtain copies of this report from DDC.’’ “Foreign announcement and dissemination of this report by DDC is not authorized.’’ (2) (3) ‘‘U. S. Government agencies may obtain copies of this report directly from DDC. Other qualified DDC users shall request through “U.S. military agencies may obtain copies of this report directly from DDC. Other qualified users shall request through (5) ‘All distribution of this report is controlled. Qual- ified DDC users shall request through ” If the report has been furnished to the Office of Technical Services, Department of Commerce, for sale to the public, indi- cate this fact and enter the price, if known 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES: Use for additional explana- tory notes. 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY: Enter the name of the departmental project office or laboratory sponsoring (pay ing for) the research and development. Include address. 13. ABSTRACT: Enter an abstract giving a brief and factual summary of the document indicative of the report, even though it may also appear elsewhere in the body of the technical re- port. If additional space is required, a continuation sheet shall be attached. It is highly desirable that the abstract of classified reports be unclassified. Each paragraph of the abstract shall end with an indication of the military security classification of the in- formation in the paragraph, represented as (TS), (S), (C), or (U) There is no limitation on the length of the abstract. How- ever, the suggested length is from 150 to 225 words. 14. KEY WORDS: Key words are technically meaningful terms or short phrases that characterize a report and may be used as index entries for cataloging the report. Key words must be selected so that no security classification is required. Identi- fiers, such as equipment mode! designation, trade name, military project code name, geographic location, may be used as key words but will be followed by an indication of technical con- text. The assignment of links, rales, and weights is optional. Security Classification GAIdISSVIONN S! ped sty) (IS€T14 14N) 6268 ¥SEL “9T €0 100 4S 0 ‘d ‘uosdwoy) *| aS|OU Ja}eMJAPUA “Z pue|s| ajuawal9 ues - aSlou jed!bojoig aulueW ‘T GIIAISSWIONN S! p4ed siyy (IS€TT3 14N) 6258 1SE1 ‘9T €0 100 4S 0 ‘d ‘uosdwoy) aS|OU Ja}eMJapUy] pue|s| ajuawayg ues - 9SIOU jed1Hojolg ausse\\ *|AN9| aSioU jUaIque a4} UO adUaN JU! jUeIIJIUBIs aAeYy 0} UMOUS a4am Aayl “pazAjeue pue paysinbuljsip 94am punos jed!bojoig yo sadAy JO Ajalsen Y “poliad Aep-g ue J9A0 ‘SWOUje} OG Je Jayjoue pue swoujej 99 }e aUOYdoIPAY e Wo+J paule}go shulpsooa. ade} JO J8S eB UI JUaSaid pUNOS jed!bojoIg aU} Jo apew sem AaAANs VY daldISSWIONN G9 Aew v2 “d 2p ‘vosdwoy! ‘Oo “d Aq ‘GNV1S1 JLN3WI19 NYS 40 1S3M GNNOS 1V91901018 ININVW 062T j4oday "y1We9 ‘obaig ues ‘“qe] S91U04}99}9 Aven *|aNQ] aS|ou jUaIqwe ay} UO adUaN|jU! JUBDIJIUBJs AAeY 0} UMOUS d4aMm Agu “pazAjeue pue paysinbulysip 94am punos jed!bojolg jo sad} Jo Ayal4en Y “poliad Aep-g ue Jao ‘SWOU}e} NSP je JayjoUeR pue SWOu}e} 09 Je UOYdo4pAY e WojJ pauleygo shulpsooa4 ade} JO ]8S e UI JUasa4d puNoOS jed!bojolg ay; Jo apew sem Aadins y dalaISSVIONA G9 AeW 2 “d 2p ‘uosdwoyl “O “d Aq ‘GNV1S1 JLNIWIIO NYS JO 1S3M GNNOS 1V91901018 INI YYW 0621 }oday "y1e9 ‘obaiq ues ‘ “qe7 sdlu04}93}9 AneN GAIISSWIONN S! p4eo siyy (ISETT4 14N) 628 1SE1 ‘9T €0 100 4S 0 ‘d ‘uosdwoy, °*| as|ou Ja}eMsJapuly) ‘Z pue|s| ajuawialg ues - 9SJOU |edIHojolg aulue\ “T GAldISSVIONN S! p4ed siyy (IS€T1d 14N) 6258 1S21 ‘9T €0 100 4S ‘O ‘qd ‘uosdwou, *| aSIOU Jajemsapuy ‘2 puejs| ajuawas9 ues - ASIOU Jed!Hojolg aulseW “T *|AN9| AS|OU jUa!quie 84} UO adUaN|JUI }UeDIJ!UBIs aAey 0} UMOYS atam AJU “pazAjeue pue paysinbulysip a4am punos jedibojolg jo sadAy Jo Ajalsen Y ‘poliad Aep-g ue 4aA0 ‘SWOU}e) OS Je JayjoUe pue swoujej 09 ye aUOYdoIPAY e WoO.J pauleygo sbulpio9a4 ade} JO }aS e Ul JUaSAd PUNoOS jed!Hojolg a4} Jo apew sem AaANns Y GaldISSVIONN G9 AeW pz “d 2p ‘uosdwou) ‘O ‘a Aq ‘GNV1S! JLNIWITD NYS 40 1SIM GNNOS 1V9I901019 INI YVW 0621 }4oday “yyeQ ‘obaiq ues ‘ qe] sd1u04}99)9 Anen *JAA] AS|OU jUalqwe a4} UO adUAaN|JU! JUeIIJIUBIS AAeY 0} UMOYS a4am ABU] “pazAjeue pue paysinburjsip a4am punos jeo!bojo1g jo sadA} Jo Ayalwea Y ‘poliad Aep-g ue JaAO ‘swWOUje} OGp Je Jayjoue PUP SWOYIe) 09 ye aUOYdoIpPAY e Wor pauleyqo sbuipsode4 ade} JO J8S B UI JUaSadd pUNos jed!B0}01g a4} Jo apew sem AaAins GdIdISSVIONN G9 ABW be “d 2p ‘uosdwoy! ‘0 “d Aq ‘ONV1S1 JLNIWI1N NYS JO 1SIM GNNOS 1W9I9010I9 INI NVW 062T y40day "ye9 ‘obaiq ues ‘ qe] S9!u04}98|9 ANeN INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST SUPERVISOR OF SHIPBUILDING US NAVY GROTON US NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL LIBRARY (2) DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES NAVY REPRESENTATIVE MIT LINCOLN LABORATORY OFFIGE OF NAVAL RESEARCH LONDON BOSTON CHICAGO SAN FRANCISCO FLEET NUMERICAL WEATHER FACILITY US NAVAL APPLIED SCIENCE LABORATORY CODE 9832 US NAVAL ACADEMY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY R-D ONR SCIENTIFIC LIAISON OFFICER WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION INSTITUTE OF NAVAL STUDIES LIBRARY AIR DEVELOPMENT SQUADRON ONE /VX=1/ CHARLESTON NAVAL SHIPYARD DEFENSE DOCUMENTATION CENTER (20) DOD RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING TECHNICAL LIBRARY NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC DATA CENTER (2) NASA LANGLEY RESEARCH CENTER (3 COMMITTEE ON UNDERSEA WARFARE US COAST GUARD OCEANOGRAPHY — METEOROLOGY BRANCH ARCTIC RESEARCH LABORATORY WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION US COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY MARINE DATA DIVISION /ATTN=22/ (3) US WEATHER BUREAU US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY LIBRARY DENVER SECTION US BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES LA JOLLA DRe AHLSTROM WASHINGTON 25+ De Co POINT LOMA STATION WOODS HOLE» MASSACHUSETTS HONOLULU-JOHN C MARR LA JOLLA» CALIFORNIA HONOLULU» HAWAIT STANFORD» CALIFORNIA POINT LOMA STA=Je He JOHNSON ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND» MARYLAND US ARMY ELECTRONIC PROVING GROUND REDSTONE SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER BEACH EROSION BOARD CORPS OF ENGINEERS» US ARMY EDGEWOOD ARSENAL DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF» US AIR FORCE AFRST-SC AIR DEFENSE COMMAND ADOOA STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND. ROME AIR DEVELOPMENT CENTER HO AIR WEATHER SERVICE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI THE MARINE LABe LIBRARY (3) COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HUDSON LABORATORIES ELECTRONIC RESEARCH LABS LAMONT GEOLOGICAL OBSERVATORY DARTMOUTH COLLEGE THAYER SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING RADIOPHYSICS LABORATORY RUTGERS UNIVERSITY CORNELL UNIVERSITY OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF OCEANOGRAPHY UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ALLAN HANCOCK FOUNDATION UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF OCEANOGRAPHY FISHERIES-OCEANOGRAPHY LIBRARY NEW YORK UNIVERSITY DEPT OF METEOROLOGY ~ OCEANOGRAPHY UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN DR. JOHN Ce AYERS (2) UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON DIRECTOR» APPLIED PHYSICS LABORATORY UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA GEOPHYSICAL INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND NARRAGANSETT MARINE LABORATORY YALE UNIVERSITY BINGHAM OCEANOGRAPHIC LABORATORY FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAIT HAWAII INSTITUTE OF GEOPHYSICS ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING DEPT A-M COLLEGE OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF OCEANOGRAPHY THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS DEFENSE RESEARCH LABORATORY HARVARD UNIVERSITY SCRIPPS INSTITUTION OF OCEANOGRAPHY MARINE PHYSICAL LAB PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY ORDNANCE RESEARCH LABORATORY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA» SAN DIEGO slo MASSACHUSETTS INST OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING LIBRARY THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY APPLIED PHYSICS LABORATORY INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSIS CHIEF» BUREAU OF SHIPS CODE 1610 SODE 3458 CODE 1620 CODE 1631 CODE 210L (2) CODE 240C (2, CODE 320 CODE 360 CODE 452E CODE 670 (2) CHIEF» BUREAU OF NAVAL WEAPONS DLI=3 OLI=-31 FASS R-56 RUDC-2 RUDC-11 CHIEF» BUREAU OF YARDS AND DOCKS CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL PERS 118 CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS oP-07T OP-701E1 OP-71 OP-76C OP-03EG OPp-0985 CHIEF OF NAVAL RESEARCH CODE 416 CODE 455 CODE 461 CODE 466 CODE 468 COMMANDER IN CHIEF US PACIFIC FLEET COMMANDER IN CHIEF US ATLANTIC FLEET COMMANDER OPERATIONAL TEST ANO EVALUATION FORCE DEPUTY COMMANDER OPERATIONAL TEST - EVALUATION FORCE» PACIFIC COMMANDER CRUISER=DESTROYER FORCE» US ATLANTIC FLEET US PACIFIC FLEET COMMANDER SUBMARINE FORCE Us PACIFIC FLEET US ATLANTIC FLEET DEPUTY COMMANDER SUBMARINE FORCE» US ATLANTIC FLEET COMMANDER ANTISUBMARINE WARFARE FOR US PACIFIC FLEET COMMANDER TRAINING COMMAND US PACIFIC FLEET OCEANOGRAPHIC SYSTEM PACIFIC (2) COMMANDER SUBMARINE DEVELOPMENT GROUP TWO COMMANDER SERVICE FORCE US ATLANTIC FLEET COMMANDER KEY WEST TEST — EVALUATION DETACHMENT DESTROYER DEVELOPMENT GROUP PACIFIC FLEET AIR WINGS» ATLANTIC FLEET SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY TEAM US NAVAL AIR DEVELOPMENT CENTER NADC LIBRARY US NAVAL MISSILE CENTER TECHe LIBRARY» CODE NO 3022 CODE N3232 PACIFIC MISSILE RANGE /CODE 3250/ US NAVAL ORDNANCE LABORATORY LIBRARY US NAVAL ORDNANCE TEST STATION PASADENA ANNEX LIBRARY CHINA LAKE FLEET COMPUTER PROGRAMMING CENTER ATLANTIC» TECHNICAL LIBRARY US NAVAL WEAPONS LABORATORY KXL PORTSMOUTH NAVAL SHIPYARD PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD USN RADIOLOGICAL DEFENSE LABORATORY DAVID TAYLOR MODEL BASIN APPLIED MATHEMATICS LABORATORY /LIBRARY / US NAVY MINE DEFENSE LABORATORY US NAVAL TRAINING DEVICE CENTER HUMAN FACTORS DEPARTMENT CODE 365H» ASW DIVISION USN UNDERWATER SOUND LABORATORY LIBRARY (3) ATLANTIC FLEET ASW TACTICAL SCHOOL USN MARINE ENGINEERING LABORATORY US NAVAL CIVIL ENGINEERING LABe u54 US NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY CODE 2027 CODE 5120 US NAVAL ORDNANCE LABORATORY CORONA USN UNDERWATER SOUND REFERENCE LABe BEACH JUMPER UNIT ONE BEACH JUMPER UNIT TWO US FLEET ASW SCHOOL US FLEET SONAR SCHOOL USN UNDERWATER ORDNANCE STATION OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH PASADENA US NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON US NAVAL SHIP MISSILE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING STATION USN PERSONNEL RESEARCH ACTIVITY WASHINGTON» De Ce 20390 USN PERSONNEL RESEARCH ACTIVITY SAN DIEGO USN WEATHER RESEARCH FACILITY US NAVAL OCEANOGRAPHIC OFFICE (2)