Summary

Multiple complaints have been received from local fishermen regarding voices in the water.

The voices are described as melodic, persistent and “a bit smug”.

Affected parties report the following losses:

• Bait, removed directly from hooks.
• One fishing net, subsequently returned neatly folded but inside out.
• Several hours of sleep.
• A sense of professional dignity.

At least two witnesses admit to throwing additional bait towards the voices “to see what happened”.

They have been asked to stop.

This request has now been upgraded to departmental guidance.

The report does not presently identify the source of the singing. This is deliberate.

Initial Observations

Singing has been recorded at dawn, dusk and, on one occasion, at 02:14 “for no reason anyone could justify”.

The sound carries both with the wind and against it.

Three distinct vocal lines have been identified.

Harmony has been confirmed.

One fisherman attempted to sing back.

This was a mistake.

He has since been advised not to participate further in the investigation.

No confirmed physical manifestation has occurred above the waterline, aside from a series of ripples which appeared to be listening.

Terminology Review

Page one avoids the word mermaids.

Page two continues to avoid the word mermaids.

Page three contains the following sentence, subsequently amended by Legal:

“While the entities resemble what folklore would describe as [REDACTED] and behave in a manner consistent with [REDACTED], the Department will not be using the term [REDACTED] until Legal stops shouting.”

For operational purposes, staff should use coastal vocal entities until instructed otherwise.

Staff should not shorten this to “the singers” within hearing distance of the water.

Jurisdiction Notes

Division A/B has asserted authority on the grounds of border proximity and historical precedent involving tides, thresholds and an incident in 1978 that all surviving departments continue to pretend did not occur.

The Morrigan Department has asserted authority on the grounds that:

• The entities are clearly not human.
• The entities are clearly singing.
• Someone has already attempted to flirt.

A joint task force was proposed.

The joint task force immediately became deadlocked over which division would be responsible for speaking to the sea.

The sea was not consulted.

Incident Addendum | 09:32

A junior member of staff attempted to issue a written warning to the incoming tide.

The document was placed above the expected waterline and weighted with a departmental clipboard.

Seven minutes later, the warning was returned.

It was damp but otherwise intact.

A handwritten annotation had appeared in the margin:

“No.”

Handwriting analysis is inconclusive.

The staff member responsible has been reassigned to Stationery Inventory until further notice.

Risk Assessment

1. Civilians: Low immediate physical danger.
2. Anyone carrying bait: Moderate risk.
3. Anyone inclined to answer the singing: Elevated risk.
4. Anyone who believes departmental procedure applies to oceans: High risk of disappointment.

Provisional Guidance

Until the entities have been identified and jurisdiction formally established, all personnel are instructed as follows:

• Do not feed the singing.
• Do not answer the singing.
• Do not harmonise.
• Do not accept compliments from the sea.
• Do not promise to meet anyone “just beyond the rocks”.

If the sea compliments your voice, leave.

Current Assessment

The anomaly remains active.

No agreement has been reached regarding terminology, jurisdiction or whether three-part harmony constitutes aggravating behaviour.

Local fishermen have been asked to secure bait, avoid unnecessary conversation with the water and report any change in repertoire.

The Department is maintaining observation.

The tide is maintaining its own schedule.

Filed by: Name withheld

Reason: They live near the coast.