Abstract
Since the first plans to develop offshore wind farms (OWFs), concerns have been raised about the impacts on marine megafauna. Today, it is required to assess these impacts over the whole lifecycle of the OWF. Before construction, initial assessments are often conducted by visual surveys, but subsequent monitoring over the lifecycle of the OWF has to be digital due to safety requirements, leading to challenges in data comparability. The aim of this study was to attempt to establish generalizable intercalibration factors for this transition between visual and digital monitoring methods. To this end, intercalibration surveys were conducted at five different sites and at different times of the year within a site, using both visual monitoring at low-altitude and digital monitoring at both low and high altitudes. We tested the potential for intercalibration of the results based on the ratio of abundance estimated from data collected by the different methods. We explored factors such as the species under study and site-specific conditions that may influence intercalibration. We computed more than 100 intercalibration factors and found that, on average, abundance estimates from digital methods were higher than those from visual methods and that flight altitude for digital monitoring did not significantly influence abundance estimates. Aside from divergent abundance estimates depending on monitoring method, the findings also revealed significant heterogeneity, only one-third of which was explained by contextual factors such as taxonomy or the sea conditions. This outcome presents a pessimistic outlook on the prospect for the intercalibration of results between an initial assessment carried out with visual observations and subsequent monitoring with digital methods after OWF construction and until decommissioning. The high heterogeneity prevents seamless transferability of intercalibration factors and highlights the importance of local context.