Marine Mammals; Incidental Take During Specified Activities, 35928-35944 [06-5589]
Download as PDF
35928
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
platform. Management for the benefit of
Aleutian Canada geese is also central to
the other three Alternatives. However,
they also expand Refuge management
for the benefit of additional wildlife and
habitats. Alternative B places greater
emphasis on wetland restoration and
management and would expand visitor
services for all priority public uses,
including fishing and hunting.
Alternative C focuses on restoration and
management of riparian habitats and
providing non-consumptive wildlifedependant recreation opportunities.
Alternative D, the preferred alternative,
includes a balance of wetland and
riparian restoration and management
and expands opportunities for all
priority public uses, including fishing
and hunting.
Public Comments
After the review and comment period
ends for this Draft CCP/EA, comments
will be analyzed by the Service and
addressed in the Final CCP. All
comments received from individuals,
including names and addresses, become
part of the official public record and
may be released. Requests for such
comments will be handled in
accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act, the Council on
Environmental Quality’s NEPA
regulations and other Service and
Departmental policies and procedures.
Dated: June 16, 2006.
Ken McDermond,
Acting Manager, California/Nevada
Operations, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. E6–9848 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Marine Mammals; Incidental Take
During Specified Activities
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of application
and proposed incidental harassment
authorization; request for comments.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) has received an application
from the University of Texas at Austin
Institute for Geophysics (UTIG) for
authorization to take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment
incidental to conducting a marine
seismic survey in the Arctic Ocean,
including the Chukchi Sea, from
approximately July 15 through August
25, 2006. In accordance with provisions
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
(MMPA), as amended, the Service
requests comments on its proposed
authorization for the applicant to
incidentally take, by harassment, small
numbers of Pacific walrus and polar
bears in the Chukchi Sea during the
seismic survey.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received by July 24, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
1. By mail to: Craig Perham, Office of
Marine Mammals Management, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East
Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503.
2. By fax to: 907–786–3816.
3. By electronic mail (e-mail) to:
FW7MMM@FWS.gov. Please submit
comments as an ASCII file avoiding the
use of special characters and any form
of encryption. Please also include your
name and return address in your
message. If you do not receive a
confirmation from the system that we
have received your message, contact us
directly at U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Office of Marine Mammals
Management, 907–786–3810 or 1–800–
362–5148.
4. By hand-delivery to: Office of
Marine Mammals Management, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East
Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Perham, Office of Marine
Mammals Management, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road,
Anchorage, Alaska 99503; telephone
907–786–3810 or 1–800–362–5148; or email craig_perham@FWS.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA, as amended, (16 U.S.C.
1371(a)(5)(A) and (D)) authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region provided that
certain findings are made and either
regulations are issued or, if the taking is
limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed authorization is provided to
the public for review and comment.
Authorization to incidentally take
marine mammals may be granted if the
Service finds that the taking will have
a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), and will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses. Permissible methods
of taking and other means of affecting
the least practicable impact on the
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
species or stock and its habitat, and
requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
takings, are prescribed as part of the
authorization process.
The term ‘‘take,’’ as defined by the
MMPA, means to harass, hunt, capture,
or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt,
capture, or kill any marine mammal.
Harassment, as defined by the MMPA,
means ‘‘any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which—(i) has the potential
to injure a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild [the MMPA
calls this Level A harassment]; or (ii)
has the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering [the MMPA calls
this Level B harassment].’’
The terms ‘‘small numbers,’’
‘‘negligible impact,’’ and ‘‘unmitigable
adverse impact’’ are defined in 50 CFR
18.27, the Service’s regulations
governing take of small numbers of
marine mammals incidental to specified
activities. ‘‘Small numbers’’ is defined
as ‘‘a portion of a marine mammal
species or stock whose taking would
have a negligible impact on that species
or stock.’’ ‘‘Negligible impact’’ is
defined as ‘‘an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
‘‘Unmitigable adverse impact’’ is
defined as ‘‘an impact resulting from the
specified activity (1) that is likely to
reduce the availability of the species to
a level insufficient for a harvest to meet
subsistence needs by (i) causing the
marine mammals to abandon or avoid
hunting areas, (ii) directly displacing
subsistence users, or (iii) placing
physical barriers between the marine
mammals and the subsistence hunters;
and (2) that cannot be sufficiently
mitigated by other measures to increase
the availability of marine mammals to
allow subsistence needs to be met.’’
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the United States can
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals where the take will be
limited to harassment. Section
101(a)(5)(D)(iii) establishes a 45-day
time limit for Service review of an
application followed by a 30-day public
notice and comment period on any
proposed authorizations for the
incidental harassment of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close
of the comment period, the Service must
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
either issue or deny issuance of the
authorization. The Service refers to
these authorizations as Incidental
Harassment Authorizations (IHAs).
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Summary of Request
On March 17, 2006, the Service
received an application from UTIG for
the taking by harassment of Pacific
walrus and polar bears incidental to
conducting, with research funding from
the National Science Foundation (NSF),
a marine seismic survey in the Western
Canada Basin, Chukchi Borderland, and
Mendeleev Ridge of the Arctic Ocean
during July through August, 2006. The
seismic survey will be operated in
conjunction with a sediment coring
project, which will obtain data
regarding crustal structure, and will take
place far north of the Chukchi Sea. A
description of the coring activities is
provided in the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA)
proposed IHA for this same research
cruise in the Federal Register of May
15, 2006 (71 FR 27997). Walrus do not
occur in the area of the coring activities
and there is no potential for harassment
of walrus. There is a potential that
coring activities may encounter a very
few isolated members of the Chukchi
Sea polar bear stock; however, the
effects to those individuals would be no
more than minimal. This authorization,
therefore, assesses the incidental
harassment of walrus and polar bear
resulting from the seismic survey
activity in the Chukchi Sea.
The purpose of the proposed study is
to collect seismic reflection and
refraction data and sediment cores that
reveal the crustal structure and
composition of submarine plateaus in
the western Amerasia Basin in the
Arctic Ocean. Past studies have led
many researchers to support the idea
that the Amerasia Basin opened about a
pivot point near the Mackenzie Delta.
However, the crustal character of the
Chukchi Borderlands could determine
whether that scenario is correct, or
whether more complicated tectonic
scenarios must be devised to explain the
presence of the Amerasia Basin. These
data will assist in the determination of
the tectonic evolution of the Amerasia
Basin and Canada Basin, which is
fundamental to such basic concerns as
sea level fluctuations and paleoclimate
in the Mesozoic era.
Description of the Activity
The Healy, a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
Cutter ice-breaker, will rendezvous with
the science party off Barrow, Alaska, on
or around July 15, 2006. Trained marine
mammal observers will also be onboard
during the cruise. The Healy will sail
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
north and arrive at the beginning of the
seismic survey, which will start more
than 150 kilometers (km) (93 miles [mi])
north of Barrow. The cruise will last for
approximately 40 days, and it is
estimated that the total seismic survey
time will be approximately 30 days
depending on ice conditions. Seismic
survey work is scheduled to terminate
west of Barrow about August 25, 2006.
The vessel will then sail south to Nome,
Alaska, where the science party will
disembark. In conjunction with the
seismic survey, a sediment coring
project will be conducted in the Arctic
Ocean, north of the Chukchi Sea. The
NOAA’s proposed IHA for this same
research cruise, published in the
Federal Register of May 15, 2006,
describes the coring project activities.
The majority of seismic survey
activities will take place in the Arctic
Ocean. The Chukchi Sea segment of the
survey is approximately 478 km, located
between 75° N and 70.9° N and will
occur in mid- to late August. The bulk
of the seismic survey will not be
conducted in any country’s territorial
waters. However, the survey will occur
within the Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ) of the United States for
approximately 563 km.
The Healy will use a portable MultiChannel Seismic (MCS) system to
conduct the seismic survey. A cluster of
eight airguns will be used as the energy
source during most of the cruise,
especially in deep water areas. The
airgun array will have four 500-cubic
inches (in3) Bolt airguns and four
210-in3 G. guns for a total discharge
volume of 2,840-in3. In shallow water,
occurring during the first and last
portions of the cruise, a four 105-in3 GI
gun array with a total discharge volume
of 420 in3 will be used. Other sound
sources (see below) will also be
employed during the cruise. The
seismic operations during the survey
will be used to obtain information on
the history of the ridges and basins that
make up the Arctic Ocean.
The airgun arrays will discharge about
once every 60 seconds. The compressed
air will be supplied by compressors
onboard the source vessel. The Healy
will also tow a hydrophone streamer
100 to 150 meters (328 to 492 feet [ft])
behind the ship, depending on ice
conditions. The hydrophone streamer
will be up to 200 m (656 ft) long. As the
source operates along the survey lines,
the hydrophone receiving system will
receive and record the returning
acoustic signals. In addition to the
hydrophone streamer, sea ice
seismometers (SIS) will be deployed on
ice floes ahead of the ship using a
vessel-based helicopter, and then
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35929
retrieved from behind the ship once it
has passed the SIS locations.
The SISs will be deployed as much as
120 km (74 mi) ahead of the ship, and
recovered when as much as 120 km (74
mi) behind the ship. The seismometers
will be placed on top of ice floes with
a hydrophone lowered into the water
through a small hole drilled in the ice.
These instruments will allow seismic
refraction data to be collected in the
heavily ice-covered waters of the region.
The program will consist of a total of
approximately 3,625 km (2,252 mi) of
surveys, not including transits when the
airguns are not operating. The area
included in this proposal is the
southwest leg, which extends 478 km
into the Chukchi Sea (south of 75° N).
Water depths within the study area are
40 to 3,858 m (131 to 12,657 ft). Little
more than 15 percent (approximately 73
km [45 mi]) of the Chukchi Sea survey
segment will occur in water deeper than
1,000 m (3,280 ft); 21 percent
(approximately 102 km [63 mi]) will be
conducted in water 100 to 1,000 m (328
to 3,280 ft) deep. Most of the Chukchi
survey track, 64 percent (approximately
303 km [188 mi]), will occur in water
less than 100 m (328 ft). The Principal
Investigators (PIs) plan to use the larger,
8-airgun array for only 24 km (15 mi)
along the northernmost reach of the
Chukchi survey line in deep water
(greater than 1,000 m). There will be
additional seismic operations associated
with airgun testing, start up, and repeat
coverage of any areas where initial data
quality is sub-standard. In addition to
the airgun array, a multibeam sonar and
sub-bottom profiler will be used during
the seismic profiling and continuously
when underway.
Vessel Specifications
The Healy has a length of 128 m (420
ft), a beam of 25 m (82 ft), and a full load
draft of 8.9 m (29 ft). The Healy is
capable of traveling at 5.6 km/h (3
knots) through 1.4 m (4.6 ft) of ice. A
Central Power Plant, consisting of four
Sultzer 12Z AU40S diesel generators,
provides electric power for propulsion
and ship’s services through a 60 Hz, 3phase common bus distribution system.
Propulsion power is provided by two
electric AC Synchronous, 11.2 MW
drive motors, fed from the common bus
through a cycloconverter system, that
turn two fixed-pitch, four-bladed
propellers. The operation speed during
seismic acquisition is expected to be
approximately 6.5 km/hr (hour) (3.5
knots). When not towing seismic survey
gear or breaking ice, the Healy cruises
at 22 km/hr (12 knots) and has a
maximum speed of 31.5 km/hr (17
knots). It has a normal operating range
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
35930
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
of about 29,650 km (18,423 mi) at 23.2
km/hr (12.5 knots).
Seismic Source Description
A portable MCS system will be
installed on the Healy for this cruise.
The source vessel will tow along
predetermined lines one of two different
airgun arrays (an 8-airgun array with a
total discharge volume of 2,840 in3 or a
four GI gun array with a total discharge
volume of 420 in3), as well as a
hydrophone streamer. Seismic pulses
will be emitted at intervals of
approximately 60 seconds and recorded
at a 2 millisecond (ms) sampling rate.
The 60-second spacing corresponds to a
shot interval of approximately 120 m
(394 ft) at the anticipated typical cruise
speed.
As the airgun array is towed along the
survey line, the towed hydrophone
array receives the reflected signals and
transfers the data to the onboard
processing system. The SISs will store
returning signals on an internal
datalogger and also relay them in realtime to the Healy via a radio transmitter,
where they will be recorded and
processed.
The 8-airgun array will be configured
as a four-G. gun cluster with a total
discharge volume of 840 in3 and a four
Bolt airgun cluster with a total discharge
volume of 2,000 in3. The source output
is from 246 to 253 dB re 1 µPa m. The
two clusters are four meter apart, which
will result in less downward directivity
than is often present during seismic
surveys and more horizontal
propagation of sound. The clusters will
be operated simultaneously for a total
discharge volume of 2,840 in3. The 4-GI
gun array will be configured the same as
the four G. gun portion of the 8-airgun
array. The energy source (source level
239–245 dB re 1 µPa m) will be towed
as close to the stern as possible to
minimize ice interference. The 8-airgun
array will be towed below a depressor
bird at a depth of 7–20 m (23–66 ft)
depending on ice conditions; the
preferred depth is 8–10 m (26–33 ft).
The highest sound level measurable at
any location in the water from the
airgun arrays would be slightly less than
the nominal source level because the
actual source is a distributed source
rather than a point source. The depth at
which the source is towed has a major
impact on the maximum near-field
output, and on the shape of its
frequency spectrum. In this case, the
source is expected to be towed at a
relatively deep depth of up to 9 m (30
ft).
The rms (root mean square) received
sound levels that are used as impact
criteria for marine mammals are not
directly comparable to the peak or peakto-peak values normally used to
characterize source levels of airguns.
The measurement units used to describe
airgun sources, peak or peak-to-peak dB,
are always higher than the rms dB
referred to in much of the biological
literature. A measured received level of
160 dB rms in the far field would
typically correspond to a peak
measurement of about 170 to 172 dB,
and to a peak-to-peak measurement of
about 176 to 178 decibels, as measured
for the same pulse received at the same
location (Greene 1997; McCauley et al.
1998, 2000). The precise difference
between rms and peak or peak-to-peak
values for a given pulse depends on the
frequency content and duration of the
pulse, among other factors. However,
the rms level is always lower than the
peak or peak-to-peak level for an airguntype source. Additional discussion of
the characteristics of airgun pulses is
included in Appendix A of UTIG’s
application.
Safety Radii Proposed by UTIG
Received sound fields have been
modeled by Lamont-Doherty Earth
Observatory (L–DEO) for the 8-airgun
and 4–GI gun arrays that will be used
during this survey. For deep water,
where most of the present project is to
occur, the L–DEO model has been
shown to be precautionary, i.e., it tends
to overestimate radii for 190, 180, 170,
160 dB re 1 µPa rms (Tolstoy et al.
2004a, b).
Predicted sound fields were modeled
using sound exposure level (SEL) units
(dB re 1 µPa2-s), because a model based
on those units tends to produce more
stable output when dealing with mixedgun arrays like the one to be used
during this survey. The predicted SEL
values can be converted to rms received
pressure levels, in dB re 1 µPa by adding
approximately 15 dB to the SEL value
(Greene 1997; McCauley et al. 1998,
2000). The rms pressure is an average
over the pulse duration. This is the
measure commonly used in studies of
marine mammal reactions to airgun
sounds. The rms level of a seismic pulse
is typically about 10 dB less than its
peak level.
Empirical data concerning 190, 180,
170, and 160 dB (rms) distances in deep
and shallow water were acquired for
various airgun array configurations
during the acoustic verification study
conducted by L–DEO in the northern
Gulf of Mexico (Tolstoy et al. 2004a, b).
The proposed Chukchi Sea survey track
will occur mainly in shallow water with
approximately 64 percent of trackline in
water depths greater than 100 m, 21
percent in intermediate water depths
(100–1,000 m), and 15 percent in water
deeper than 1,000 meter.
The L–DEO model does not allow for
bottom interactions, and thus, is most
directly applicable to deep water and to
relatively short ranges. In intermediatedepth water a precautionary 1.5×
correction factor will be applied to the
values predicted by L–DEO’s model, as
has been done in other recent NSFsponsored seismic studies. In shallow
water, larger precautionary factors
derived from the empirical shallowwater measurements will be applied
(see Table 1).
TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED DISTANCES TO WHICH SOUND LEVELS (dB RE 1µ Pa) MIGHT BE RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS GUNTYPES USED DURING THE HEALY ARCTIC CRUISE
Estimated distances for received levels (m)
190 dB (shutdown criterion for
pinnipeds)
Water depth
105 in3 GI gun ..........................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Seismic source volume
180 dB (shutdown criterion for
cetaceans)
170 dB (alternate
behavioral harassment criterion
for delphinids &
pinnipeds)
10
15
125
20
30
250
75
27
41
200
78
117
578
246
90
135
375
222
333
925
771
>1,000 m ..................................
100–1,000 m .............................
<100 m .....................................
>1,000 m ..................................
100–1,000 m .............................
<100 m .....................................
>1,000 m ..................................
210 in3 G. gun ..........................
420 in3 (4-GI gun array) ...........
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
160 dB (assumed onset of
behavioral harassment)
275
413
750
698
1,047
1,904
2,441
35931
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED DISTANCES TO WHICH SOUND LEVELS (dB RE 1µ Pa) MIGHT BE RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS GUNTYPES USED DURING THE HEALY ARCTIC CRUISE—Continued
Estimated distances for received levels (m)
190 dB (shutdown criterion for
pinnipeds)
Seismic source volume
Water depth
2,840 in3 (8-airgun array) .........
180 dB (shutdown criterion for
cetaceans)
170 dB (alternate
behavioral harassment criterion
for delphinids &
pinnipeds)
113
938
230
*NA
*NA
369
1,822
716
*NA
*NA
1,157
3,213
2,268
*NA
*NA
100–1,000 m .............................
<100 m .....................................
>1,000 m ..................................
100–1,000 m .............................
<100 m .....................................
160 dB (assumed onset of
behavioral harassment)
3,662
6,657
7,097
*NA
*NA
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
* The 8-airgun array will only be operated in deep (greater than 1,000 m) water for approximately 24 km at the northern extent of the Chukchi
Sea portion of the survey.
The empirical data indicate that, for
deep water (greater than 1,000 m), the
L–DEO model tends to overestimate the
received sound levels at a given
distance (Tolstoy et al. 2004a, b).
However, to be precautionary pending
acquisition of additional empirical data,
it is proposed that safety radii during
airgun operations in deep water will be
the values predicted by L–DEO’s
modeling, after conversion from SEL to
rms (Table 1). The estimated 190 dB
(rms) radii for 8-airgun and 4–GI gun
arrays are 230 (745 ft) and 75 m (246 ft),
respectively.
Empirical measurements were not
taken for intermediate depths (100–
1,000 m). On the expectation that results
would be intermediate between those
from shallow and deep water, a 1.5×
correction factor is applied to the
estimates provided by the model for
deep water situations. This is the same
factor that has been applied to the
model estimates during L–DEO
operations in intermediate-depth water
from 2003 through early 2005. The
assumed 190 dB (rms) radius in
intermediate-depth water is 113 m for
the 4–GI gun array (Table 1). The 8airgun array will only be used in deep
water, i.e., greater than 1,000 m.
Empirical measurements were not
made for the 4 GI guns that will be
employed during the proposed survey
in shallow water (less than 100 m). (The
8-airgun array will not be used in
shallow water.) The empirical data on
operations of two 105 in3 GI guns in
shallow water showed that modeled
values underestimated the distance to
the actual 160 dB sound level radii in
shallow water by a factor of
approximately 3 (Tolstoy et al. 2004b).
Sound level measurements for the 2 GI
guns were not available for distances
less than 0.5 km (.31 mi) from the
source. The radii estimated here for the
4–GI guns operating in shallow water
are derived from the L–DEO model,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
with the same adjustments for depthrelated differences between modeled
and measured sound levels as were used
for 2–GI guns in earlier applications.
Correction factors for the different
sound level radii are approximately 12×
the model estimate for the 190 dB radius
in shallow water, approximately 7× for
the 180 dB radius, and approximately
4× for the 170 dB radius (Tolstoy 2004a,
b). Thus, the 190 dB radius in shallow
water is assumed to be 938 m (3,077 ft)
for the 4–GI gun array (Table 1).
Pursuant to the mitigation measures
of this proposed authorization, the
airguns will be powered down (or shutdown if necessary) immediately when
walrus or polar bears are detected
within or about to enter the appropriate
radii. The 190 dB safety criteria are
consistent with guidelines listed for
pinnipeds, by the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) (2000) and
other guidance by NMFS. The UTIG will
conservatively apply the same 190 dB
criterion to polar bears in water in this
IHA request. Although sound effects on
the walrus and polar bears have not
been studied, the 190 dB criterion was
selected because walrus, which are
pinnipeds, are expected to react
similarly to other pinnipeds. Polar bears
normally swim with their heads above
the surface and are likely to be less
sensitive than pinnipeds to humancaused underwater sounds.
Other Acoustic Devices
Along with the airgun operations,
additional acoustical systems will be
operated during much of or the entire
cruise. The ocean floor will be mapped
with a multibeam sonar, and a subbottom profiler will be used. These two
systems are commonly operated
simultaneously with an airgun system.
An acoustic Doppler current profiler
will also be used through the course of
the project.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
A SeaBeam 2112 multibeam 12 kHz
bathymetric sonar system will be used
on the Healy, with a maximum source
output of 237 dB re 1 µPa at one meter.
The transmit frequency is a very narrow
band, less than 200 Hz, and centered at
12 kHz. Pulse lengths range from less
than one ms to 12 ms. The transmit
interval ranges from 1.5 to 20 seconds,
depending on the water depth, and is
longer in deeper water. The SeaBeam
system consists of a set of underhull
projectors and hydrophones. The
transmitted beam is narrow
(approximately 2°) in the fore-aft
direction but broad (approximately
132°) in the cross-track direction. The
system combines this transmitted beam
with the input from an array of
receiving hydrophones oriented
perpendicular to the array of source
transducers, and calculates bathymetric
data (sea floor depth and some
indications about the character of the
seafloor) with an effective 2° by 2°
footprint on the seafloor. The SeaBeam
2112 system on the Healy produces a
useable swath width of slightly more
than 2 times the water depth. This is
narrower than normal because of the
ice-protection features incorporated into
the system on the Healy.
The Knudsen 320BR will provide
information on sedimentary layering,
down to between 20 and 70 m,
depending on bottom type and slope. It
will be operated with the multibeam
bathymetric sonar system that will
simultaneously map the bottom
topography.
The Knudsen 320BR sub-bottom
profiler is a dual-frequency system with
operating frequencies of 3.5 and 12 kHz:
Low frequency—Maximum output
power into the transducer array, as
wired on the Healy (125 ohms), at 3.5
kHz is approximately 6,000 watts
(electrical), which results in a maximum
source level of 221 dB re 1 µPa at 1 m
downward. Pulse lengths range from 1.5
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
35932
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
to 24 ms with a bandwidth of 3 kHz (FM
sweep from 3 kHz to 6 kHz). The
repetition rate is range dependent, but
the maximum is a 1-percent duty cycle.
Typical repetition rate is between onehalf second (in shallow water) to 8 s in
deep water.
High frequency—The Knudsen 320BR
is capable of operating at 12 kHz, but
the higher frequency is rarely used
because it interferes with the SeaBeam
2112 multibeam sonar, which also
operates at 12 kHz. The calculated
maximum source level (downward) is
215 dB re 1 µPa at 1 m (3.28 ft). The
pulse duration is typically 1.5 to 5 ms
with the same limitations and typical
characteristics as the low-frequency
channel.
A single 12 kHz transducer and one
3.5 kHz, low-frequency (sub-bottom)
transducer array, consisting of 16
elements in a 4-by-4 array will be used
for the Knudsen 320BR. The 12 kHz
transducer (TC–12/34) emits a conical
beam with a width of 30°, and the 3.5
kHz transducer (TR109) emits a conical
beam with a width of 26°.
The 150 kHz acoustic Doppler current
profiler (ADCPTM) has a minimum ping
rate of 0.65 ms. There are four beam
sectors, and each beamwidth is 3°. The
pointing angle for each beam is 30° off
from vertical with one each to port,
starboard, forward, and aft. The four
beams do not overlap. The 150 kHz
ADCPTM’s maximum depth range is 300
m.
The Ocean Surveyor 75 is an ADCPTM
operating at a frequency of 75 kHz,
producing a ping every 1.4 s. The
system is a four-beam phased array with
a beam angle of 30°. Each beam has a
width of 4°, and there is no overlap.
Maximum output power is 1 kW with a
maximum depth range of 700 m (2,297
ft).
Plan of Cooperation
The UTIG will consult with
representatives of the communities
along the Chukchi Sea coast to identify
any areas or issues of potential conflict.
These communities are Point Hope,
Point Lay, Wainwright, and Barrow. A
Plan of Cooperation (POC) for the 2006
seismic survey in the Chukchi Sea will
be developed if identified as warranted
during these consultations and
determined to be necessary by the
Service. The POC would cover the
phases of UTIG’s seismic surveys
planned in the Chukchi Sea when
appropriate for the 2006 project. The
purpose of the POC will be to identify
measures that will be taken to minimize
any adverse effects on the availability of
marine mammals for subsistence uses,
and to ensure good communication
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
between the project scientists and the
native communities along the coast.
Subsequent meetings with community
representatives and any other parties to
the POC will be held as necessary to
negotiate the terms of the plan and to
coordinate the planned seismic survey
operation with subsistence hunting. The
POC may address: Operational
agreement and communications
procedures; where and when the
agreement becomes effective; the
general communications scheme;
onboard observers; conflict avoidance;
seasonally sensitive areas; vessel
navigation; air navigation; marine
mammal monitoring activities; measures
to avoid impacts to marine mammals;
measures to avoid conflicts in areas of
active hunting; emergency assistance;
and the dispute resolution process.
In addition, one (or more) Alaska
Native knowledgeable about the
mammals and fish of the area is
expected to be included as a member of
the observer team aboard the Healy.
Although the primary responsibilities
encompass implementing the
monitoring and mitigation
requirements, duties will also include
acting as a liaison with hunters and
fishers if they are encountered at sea. In
the unlikely event subsistence hunting
or fishing is occurring within 5 km (3
mi) of the Healy’s trackline, the airgun
operations will be suspended until the
Healy is approximately 5 km (3 mi)
away.
Description of Habitat and Marine
Mammals Affected by the Activity
A detailed description of the Chukchi
Sea ecosystem and the associated
marine mammals can be found in
several documents (Corps of Engineers
1999; NMFS 1999; Minerals
Management Service (MMS) 2006, 1996,
and 1992). MMS’ Programmatic
Environmental Assessment (PEA)-Arctic
Ocean Outer Continental Shelf Seismic
Surveys 2006—may be viewed at:
https://www.mms.gov/alaska.
The marine mammals that occur in
the proposed survey area belong to three
taxonomic groups: odontocetes (toothed
cetaceans, such as beluga whale and
narwhal whale), mysticetes (baleen
whales), and carnivora (pinnipeds and
polar bears). Cetaceans and pinnipeds,
with the exception of walrus, are
managed by the NMFS and are being
addressed by that agency (71 FR 27997;
May 15, 2006). Pacific walrus and polar
bear, which are managed by the Service,
are the subject of this proposed IHA.
Pacific Walrus
Concentrations of walrus might be
encountered in certain areas, depending
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
on the location of the edge of the pack
ice relative to their favored shallowwater foraging habitat. There are two
recognized subspecies of walrus: the
Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus
divergens) and Atlantic walrus (O. r.
rosmarus). Only the Pacific subspecies
is potentially within the planned
seismic survey study area.
The Pacific walrus is represented by
a single stock of animals that inhabits
the shallow continental shelf waters of
the Bering and Chukchi Seas,
occasionally moving into the East
Siberian and Beaufort Seas. The
population ranges across the
international boundaries of the United
States and Russia, and both nations
share common interests with respect to
the conservation and management of
this species.
Walrus are migratory, moving south
with the advancing ice in autumn and
north as the ice recedes in spring (Fay
1981). In the summer, most of the
population of Pacific walrus moves to
the Chukchi Sea, but several thousands
aggregate in the Gulf of Anadyr and in
Bristol Bay (Angliss and Lodge 2004).
Limited numbers of walrus inhabit the
Beaufort Sea during the open water
season, and they are considered
extralimital east of Point Barrow (Sease
and Chapman 1988).
The northeast Chukchi Sea west of
Barrow is the northeastern extent of the
main summer range of the walrus, and
only a few are seen farther east in the
Beaufort Sea (e.g., Harwood et al. 2005).
Walrus observed in the Beaufort Sea
have typically been lone individuals.
The reported subsistence harvest of
walrus by Barrow hunters for the 5-year
period of 1994–1998 was 99 walrus
(USDI 2000a). Most of these were
harvested west of Point Barrow. In
addition, between 1988 and 1998,
Kaktovik hunters harvested one walrus
(USDI 2000b).
Walrus are most commonly found
near the southern margins of the pack
ice as opposed to deep in the pack
where few open leads (polynyas) exist
to afford access to the sea for foraging
(Estes and Gilbert 1978; Gilbert 1989;
Fay 1982). Walrus are not typically
found in areas of greater than 80 percent
ice cover (Fay 1982). Ice serves as an
important mobile platform, floating the
walrus on to new foraging habitat and
providing a place to rest and nurse their
young.
This close relationship to the ice
largely determines walrus distribution
and the timing of their migrations. As
the pack ice breaks up in the Bering Sea
and recedes northward in May and June,
a majority of subadults, females, and
calves migrate with it, either by
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
swimming or resting on drifting ice
sheets. Many males will choose to stay
in the Bering Sea for the entire year,
with concentrations near Saint
Lawrence Island and further south in
Bristol Bay. Two northward migration
pathways are apparent, either toward
the eastern Chukchi Sea near Barrow or
northwestward toward Wrangel Island.
By late June to early July, concentrations
of walrus migrating northeastward
spread along the Alaska coast
congregating within 200 km of the shore
from Saint Lawrence Island to
southwest of Barrow. In August, largely
dependent on the retreat of the pack ice,
walrus are found further offshore with
principal concentrations to the
northwest of Barrow. By October, a
reverse migration occurs out of the
Chukchi Sea, with animals swimming
ahead of the developing pack ice, as it
is too weak to support them (Fay 1982).
Estimates of the pre-exploitation
population of the Pacific walrus range
from 200,000 to 400,000 animals
(USFWS 2000a). Over the past 150
years, the population has been depleted
by overharvesting and then periodically
allowed to recover (Fay et al. 1989). An
aerial survey flown in 1990 produced a
population estimate of 201,039 animals;
however, large confidence intervals
associated with that estimate precluded
any conclusions concerning population
trend (Gilbert et al. 1992). The most
current minimum population estimate is
188,316 walrus (USFWS 2000a). This
estimate is conservative, because a
portion of the Chukchi Sea was not
surveyed due to lack of ice. The Service
and U.S. Geological Survey, in
partnership with Russian scientists, will
conduct a rangewide survey to estimate
population size. The results of these
survey efforts should be available in
2007 (USFWS 2006).
Pacific walrus feed primarily on
benthic invertebrates, occasionally fish
and cephalopods, and more rarely, some
adult males may prey on other
pinnipeds (reviewed in Riedman 1990).
Walrus typically feed in depths of 10 to
50 m (Vibe 1950; Fay 1982). Though the
deepest dive recorded for a walrus was
133 m, they are more likely to be found
in depths of 80 m or less in coastal or
continental shelf habitats, where the
clams and other mollusks that walrus
prefer are found (Fay 1982; Fay and
Burns 1988; Reeves et al. 2002). In a
recent study in Bristol Bay, 98 percent
of satellite locations of tagged walrus
were foraging in water depths of 60 m
or less (Chadwick and Hills 2005).
Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) are
known to prey on walrus calves, and
killer whales (Orcinus orca) have been
known to take all age classes of animals.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
Predation levels are thought to be
highest near terrestrial haulout sites
where large aggregations of walrus can
be found; however, few observations
exist for off-shore environs.
Pacific walrus have been hunted by
coastal Natives in Alaska and Chukotka
for thousands of years. Exploitation of
walrus by Europeans has also occurred
in varying degrees since first contact.
Presently, walrus hunting in Alaska and
Chukotka is restricted to meet the
subsistence needs of aboriginal peoples.
The Service, in partnership with the
Eskimo Walrus Commission (EWC) and
the Association of Traditional Marine
Mammal Hunters of Chukotka,
administers subsistence harvest
monitoring programs in Alaska and
Chukotka.
Intraspecific trauma is also a known
source of walrus injury and mortality.
Disturbance events can cause walrus to
stampede into the water and have been
known to result in injuries and
mortalities. The risk of stampede-related
injuries increases with the number of
animals hauled out. Calves and young
animals at the perimeter of these herds
are particularly vulnerable to trampling
injuries.
Most (64 percent or 303 km) of the
proposed Chukchi Sea seismic work
will take place in water less than 100 m
deep. Of those 303 km, 220 km will be
surveyed in water greater then 60 m,
where walrus prefer to forage (Chadwick
and Hills 2005). During a survey
through open water in the northern
Chukchi Sea in early August of 2005,
only three walrus were sighted south of
72.8° N in water 47 to 69 m deep (Haley
and Ireland 2006).
The probability of encountering
Pacific walrus along the proposed
survey line in the Chukchi Sea will
depend on the location of the southern
margin of the pack ice and the timing of
spring break-up. If the Healy crosses the
margin when the ice margin is close to
depths where walrus prefer to feed, it is
likely that walrus will be encountered.
Polar Bear
Polar bears have a circumpolar
distribution throughout the northern
hemisphere (Amstrup et al. 1986) and
occur in relatively low densities
throughout most ice-covered areas
(DeMaster and Stirling 1981). Polar
bears are divided into six major
populations and many sub-populations
based on mark-and-recapture studies
(Lentfer 1983), radio telemetry studies
(Amstrup and Gardner 1994), and
morpho-metrics (Manning 1971; Wilson
1976). Polar bears are common in the
Chukchi and Beaufort Seas north of
Alaska throughout the year, including
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35933
the late summer period (Harwood et al.
2005). They also occur throughout the
East Siberian, Laptev, and Kara Seas of
Russia and the Barent’s Sea of northern
Europe. They are found in the northern
part of the Greenland Sea, and are
common in Baffin Bay, which separates
Canada and Greenland, as well as
through most of the Canadian Arctic
Archipelago.
In Alaska, they have been observed as
far south in the eastern Bering Sea as St.
Matthew Island and the Pribilof Islands,
but they are most commonly found
within 180 miles of the Alaskan coast of
the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, from the
Bering Strait to the Canadian border.
Two stocks occur in Alaska: (1) The
Chukchi/Bering Seas stock; and (2) the
Southern Beaufort Sea stock. The
Chukchi/Bering Seas stock is defined as
polar bears inhabiting the area as far
west as the eastern portion of the
Eastern Siberian Sea, as far east as Point
Barrow, and extending into the Bering
Sea, with its southern boundary
determined by the extent of annual ice.
The world population estimate of
polar bears ranges from 20,000–25,000
individuals (ICUN, in prep). Amstrup
(1995) estimated the minimum
population of polar bears for the
Beaufort Sea to be approximately 1,500
to 1,800 individuals, with an average
density of about one bear per 38.6 to
77.2 square miles (100 to 200 km2).
Previous population estimates have put
the Chukchi/Bering Seas population at
2,000 to 5,000; however, there are no
reliable data on the population status of
polar bears in the Bering/Chukchi Seas.
An estimate was derived by subtracting
the total estimated Alaska polar bear
population from the Beaufort Sea
population, thus yielding an estimate of
1,200–3,200 animals (Amstrup 1995).
The Alaskan polar bear population is
considered to be stable or increasing
slightly (USFWS 2000b, c). Polar bear
populations located in the Southern
Beaufort Sea have been estimated to
have an annual growth rate of 2.2 to 2.4
percent with an annual harvest of only
1.9 percent (Amstrup 1995). The
Southern Beaufort Sea population
ranges from the Baillie Islands, Canada,
in the east to Point Hope, Alaska, in the
west. The Chukchi/Bering Seas
population ranges from Point Barrow,
Alaska, in the east to the Eastern
Siberian Sea in the west. These two
populations overlap between Point
Hope and Point Barrow, Alaska,
centered near Point Lay (Amstrup 1995).
Both of these populations have been
extensively studied by tracking the
movement of tagged females (Garner et
al. 1990). Radio-tracking studies
indicate significant movement within
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
35934
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
populations and occasional movement
between populations (Garner et al. 1990;
Amstrup 1995).
Although insufficient data exist to
accurately quantify polar bear denning
along the Alaskan Chukchi Sea coast,
dens in the area are less concentrated
than for other areas in the Arctic. The
majority of denning of Chukchi Sea
polar bears occurs on Wrangel Island,
Herald Island, and certain locations on
the northern Chukotka coast. Females
without dependent cubs breed in the
spring, and pregnant females enter
maternity dens by late November; the
young are usually born in late December
or early January. Female bears can be
quite sensitive to disturbances during
this denning period.
Greater than 90 percent of a polar
bear’s diet is ringed (Phoca hispida) and
bearded (Erignathus barbatus) seals;
walrus calves are hunted occasionally.
Polar bears hunt in areas where there
are high concentrations of ringed and
bearded seals (Larsen 1985; Stirling and
McEwan 1975). This includes areas of
land-fast ice, as well as moving pack ice.
They hunt along leads and other areas
of open water, or by waiting at a
breathing hole, or by breaking through
the roof of a seal’s lair. Lairs are
excavated in snow drifts on top of the
ice. Bears also stalk seals in the spring
when they haul out on the ice in warm
weather. The relationship between ice
type and bear distribution is as yet
unknown, but it is suspected to be
related to seal availability. Polar bears
are opportunistic feeders and feed on a
variety of foods and carcasses, including
other marine mammals, reindeer, arctic
cod, and geese and their eggs (Smith
1985; Jefferson et al. 1993; Smith and
Hill 1996; Derocher et al. 2000). Polar
bears are also known to eat nonfood
items including styrofoam, plastic,
antifreeze, and hydraulic and
lubricating fluids.
The most significant source of
mortality is man. Before the MMPA was
passed, polar bears were taken by sport
hunters and residents. Between 1925
and 1972, the mean reported kill was
186 bears per year. Since 1972, only
Alaska Natives have been allowed to
hunt polar bears for their subsistence
uses or for handicraft and clothing items
for sale. From 1980 to 2005, the total
annual harvest for Alaska averaged 101
bears: 64 percent from the Chukchi Sea
and 36 percent from the Beaufort Sea.
MMS bowhead whale aerial surveys
since 1979 have documented an
increase, starting in 1992, in the
proportion of polar bears associated
with land vs. sea-ice in the fall season
(Monnett et al. 2005). In 2004, a large
number of bears were observed
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
swimming more than 2 km offshore, and
a number of polar bear carcasses were
subsequently observed offshore.
Monnett et al. (2005) suggest that, as the
pack ice edge moves northward,
drowning deaths of polar bears may
increase. The number of polar bears
encountered in open water may,
therefore, be slightly higher than
previously reported.
Polar bears typically range as far north
as 88° N (Ray 1971; Durner and
Amstrup 1995); at about 88° N their
population thins dramatically. However,
polar bears have been observed across
the Arctic, including close to the North
Pole (van Meurs and Splettstoesser
2003). Stirling (1990) reported that, of
181 sightings of bears, only 3 were
above 82° N. Three polar bears were
observed from the Healy in the northern
Chukchi Sea during a survey through
this area in August of 2005 (Haley and
Ireland 2006). These three sightings
occurred along 2,401 km of observed
trackline over 14 days between 70° N
and 81° N.
Historically, polar bears have
preferred the pack ice over coastal areas
during the summer (Stirling 1988;
Amstrup 1995). However, since the late
1980s, polar bears have been observed
in greater numbers near coastal areas
during late summer and fall in the
central Beaufort Sea (Schliebe et al.
2004). This recent observation of bear
behavior may be related to the 30-year
moratorium on polar bear hunting and
the recent success of subsistence whale
harvests, the scraps of which appear to
have become a reliable, annual food
source for polar bears (Schliebe et al.
2004). The Healy is likely to encounter
polar bears when it enters the pack ice,
and small numbers of bears could be
encountered anywhere along the entire
trackline, as well as in the course of
coring activities.
Potential Impacts of Activities on
Pacific Walrus and Polar Bear
Potential Effects of Airguns
The effects of sounds from airguns
might include one or more of the
following: noise, behavioral
disturbance, and, at least in theory,
temporary or permanent hearing
impairment, or non-auditory physical
effects (Richardson et al. 1995). Because
the airgun sources planned for use
during the present project involve only
4 or 8 airguns, the effects are anticipated
to be less than would be the case with
a large array of airguns. It is very
unlikely that there would be any cases
of temporary or especially permanent
hearing impairment, or non-auditory
physical effects. Also, behavioral
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
disturbance is expected to be limited to
relatively short distances.
Species Perception of Sound and
Masking Effects
The underwater hearing of a walrus
has been measured at frequencies from
13 Hz to 1,200 Hz. The range of best
hearing was from 1 to 12 kHz, with
maximum sensitivity (67 dB re 1 µPa)
occurring at 12 kHz (Kastelein et al.
2002). Most of the energy in the sound
pulses emitted by airgun arrays is at low
frequencies, with the strongest spectrum
levels below 200 Hz and considerably
lower spectrum levels above 1,000 Hz.
These low frequencies are not generally
used by Pacific walrus. Masking effects
of pulsed sound (even from large arrays
of airguns) on Pacific walrus calls and
other natural sounds are expected to be
limited, and given the intermittent
nature of these seismic pulses, masking
effects are expected to be negligible.
Any sound levels received by polar
bears in the water would be attenuated
because polar bears generally swim with
their heads out of the water or at the
surface and polar bears do not dive
much below 4.5 m. Received levels of
airgun sounds are reduced near the
surface because of the pressure release
effect at the water’s surface (Greene and
Richardson 1988; Richardson et al.
1995). Walrus and polar bears on the ice
would be unaffected by underwater
sound.
Disturbance Reactions
Disturbance includes a variety of
effects, including subtle changes in
behavior, more conspicuous changes in
activities, and displacement. Reactions
to sound depend on species, state of
maturity, experience, current activity,
reproductive state, time of day, and
many other factors. If a marine mammal
does react briefly to a disturbance by
changing its behavior or moving a small
distance, the impacts of the change are
unlikely to be significant to the
individual, let alone the stock or the
species as a whole. Alternatively, if a
sound source displaces marine
mammals from an important area for a
prolonged period, impacts on the
animals are most likely significant.
Numerous studies have shown that
pulsed sounds from airguns are often
readily detectable in the water at
distances of many kilometers; however,
numerous studies have shown that
marine mammals at distances more than
a few kilometers from operating seismic
vessels often show no apparent
response. That is often true even in
cases when the pulsed sounds must be
readily audible to the animals based on
measured received levels and the
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
hearing sensitivity of that mammal
group.
Seismic operations are expected to
create significantly more noise than
general vessel and icebreaker traffic;
however, data specific to the potential
response of walrus to seismic operations
is limited. Therefore, we rely on
observations of walrus and other
pinniped reactions to similar activities
and apply these conservatively to
determine expected reactions. Potential
effects of prolonged or repeated
disturbances to Pacific walrus include
displacement from preferred feeding
areas, increased stress levels, increased
energy expenditure, masking of
communication, and impairment of
thermoregulation of neonates that spend
too much time in the water. There are
some uncertainties in predicting the
quantity and types of impacts of noise
on marine mammals; however,
appropriate mitigation measures
minimize the potential for
displacement.
The response of walrus to sound
sources may be either avoidance or
tolerance. It is possible that noises
produced by the icebreaking or seismic
activities may cause avoidance behavior
in walrus. Walrus on ice have been
observed to become alert and dive into
the water when icebreakers passed over
2 km (1.2 mi) away (Fay et al. 1984;
Brueggeman et al. 1990, 1991, 1992). In
addition, Brueggeman et al. (1990)
suggest that walrus on ice floes may
avoid icebreakers by 10 to 15 km (6.2 to
9.3 mi). Anecdotal observations by
walrus hunters and researchers suggest
that males tend to be more tolerant of
disturbances than females and
individuals tend to be more tolerant
than groups. Females with dependent
calves are considered least tolerant of
disturbances.
Pacific walrus are not likely to show
a strong avoidance reaction to the
medium-sized airgun sources that will
be used. Studies in the Beaufort Sea
based on visual monitoring from seismic
vessels has shown only slight (if any)
avoidance of airguns by pinnipeds in
general, and only slight (if any) changes
in behavior. These studies have shown
that pinnipeds frequently do not avoid
the area within a few hundred meters of
operating airgun arrays (e.g., Miller et
al. 2005, Harris et al. 2001). However,
visual studies have their limitations,
and initial telemetry work suggests that
avoidance and other behavioral
reactions to small airgun sources may at
times be stronger than evident to date
from visual studies of pinniped
reactions to airguns (Thompson et al.
1998). Even if reactions of the species
occurring in the present study area are
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
as strong as those evident in the
telemetry study, reactions are expected
to be confined to relatively small
distances and durations, with no longterm effects on pinniped individuals or
populations.
Quantitative research on the
sensitivity of walrus to noise has been
limited because no audiograms (a test to
determine the range of frequencies and
minimum hearing threshold) have been
done on walrus. Hearing range is
assumed to be within the 13 Hz and
1,200 Hz range of their own
vocalizations, with maximum hearing
sensitivity in the 1 to 12 kHz range
(Kastelein et al. 2002). Walrus hunters
and researchers have also noted that
walrus tend to react to the presence of
humans and machines at greater
distances from upwind approaches than
from downwind approaches, suggesting
that odor may also be a stimulus for a
flight response. The visual acuity of
walrus is thought to be less than for
other species of pinnipeds. The reaction
of walrus to vessels is highly dependent
on distance, vessel speed, and possibly
vessel smell (Richardson et al. 1995; Fay
et al. 1984), as well as previous
exposure to hunting (D.G. Roseneau In
Malme et al. 1989). Walrus in the water
appear to be less readily disturbed by
vessels than walrus hauled out on land
or ice (Fay et al. 1984).
Seismic activities may affect polar
bears in a number of ways. Seismic
ships and icebreakers may be physical
obstructions to polar bear movements,
although these impacts are of short-term
and localized effect. Noise, sights, and
smells produced by exploration
activities may repel or attract bears,
either disrupting their natural behavior
or endangering them by threatening the
safety of seismic personnel.
In the Chukchi Sea, during the openwater season, polar bears spend the
majority of their time on pack ice,
which limits the chance of impacts from
seismic activities. Occasionally, polar
bears can be found in open water, miles
from the ice edge or ice floes.
Vessel traffic could result in shortterm behavioral disturbance to polar
bears. During the open-water season,
most polar bears remain offshore in the
pack ice and are not typically present in
the area of vessel traffic. If a ship is
surrounded by ice, it is more likely that
curious bears will approach. Any on-ice
activities create the opportunity for
bear-human interactions. In relatively
ice-free waters, polar bears are less
likely to approach ships, although bears
may be encountered on ice floes.
Ships and icebreakers may act as
physical obstructions in the spring if
they transit through a restricted lead
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35935
system, such as the Chukchi Polynya.
Polynyas are important habitat for
marine mammals, which makes them
important hunting areas for polar bears.
Ship traffic in these ice conditions may
intercept or alter movements of bears. A
similar situation could occur in the fall
when the pack ice begins to expand.
Little research has been conducted on
the effects of noise on polar bears. Polar
bears are curious and tend to investigate
novel sights, smells, and possibly
noises. Noise produced by seismic
activities could elicit several different
responses in polar bears. It may act as
a deterrent to bears entering an area of
operation, or potentially attract curious
bears. Underwater noises are probably
not a relevant form of disturbance
because bears spend most of their time
on the ice or at the surface of the water.
Hearing Impairment and Other Physical
Effects
Temporary or permanent hearing
impairment is a possibility when marine
mammals are exposed to very strong
sounds, but there has been no specific
documentation of this for marine
mammals exposed to sequences of
airgun pulses. Currently, the Service
does not have specific guidelines
regarding ‘‘allowable’’ received sound
levels for either walrus or polar bears;
however, we have adopted the NMFS
criterion for Pacific walrus that
pinnipeds should not be exposed to
impulsive sounds greater or equal to 190
dB re 1 µPa (rms) (NMFS 2000). As a
conservative measure, this criterion is
also applied to polar bear. This criterion
defines the safety (shut-down) radii
planned for the proposed seismic
survey.
Several aspects of the planned
monitoring and mitigation measures for
this project are designed to detect
animals occurring near the airguns (and
multi-beam bathymetric sonar), and to
avoid exposing them to sound pulses
that might cause hearing impairment.
Marine mammal observers will be on
watch during seismic operations. In
addition, walrus and polar bears are
likely to show some avoidance of the
area with high received levels of airgun
sound. In those cases, the avoidance
responses of the animals themselves
will reduce or (most likely) avoid any
possibility of hearing impairment.
Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS):
TTS is the mildest form of hearing
impairment that can occur during
exposure to a strong sound (Kryter
1985). While experiencing TTS, the
hearing threshold rises and a sound
must be stronger in order to be heard.
TTS can last from minutes or hours to
(in cases of strong TTS) days. For sound
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
35936
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
exposures at or somewhat above the
TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity
recovers rapidly after exposure to the
noise ends. Few data on sound levels
and durations necessary to elicit mild
TTS have been obtained for marine
mammals, and none of the published
data concern TTS elicited by exposure
to multiple pulses of sound. In Pacific
walrus, TTS thresholds associated with
exposure to brief pulses (single or
multiple) of underwater sound have not
been measured.
A marine mammal within a radius of
100 m around a typical large array of
operating airguns might be exposed to a
few seismic pulses with levels of 205
dB, and possibly more pulses if the
mammal moved with the seismic vessel.
However, based on the implementation
of the mitigation measures required by
this proposed authorization, several of
the considerations that are relevant in
assessing the impact of typical seismic
surveys with arrays of airguns are not
directly applicable here. These
considerations include the effects on
polar bear and walrus of:
Ramping up (soft start), which is
standard operational protocol during
startup of large airgun arrays in many
jurisdictions. Ramping up involves
starting the airguns in sequence, usually
commencing with a single airgun and
gradually adding additional airguns.
This practice, which will be employed
when the airgun array is operated,
requires that the safety radius be visible
for 30 minutes prior to the start of
operations and that no walrus or polar
bear has been sighted within or near the
safety radius during the final 15
minutes, thereby avoiding exposure of
walrus and polar bears to potential
effects of ramping up.
Longer term exposure to airgun pulses
at a sufficiently high level for a
sufficiently long period to cause more
than mild TTS. Because the mitigation
measures require that the operation of
airguns either shut-down or powerdown (which procedure is followed
depends on the circumstances as
described in the section on Mitigation)
if a walrus or polar bear approaches or
nears the safety radius, long term
exposure to airgun pulses at high levels
will be avoided.
The predicted 190 dB distances for
the airguns operated by UTIG vary with
water depth. They are estimated to be
230 m in deep water for the 8-airgun
system, and 75 m in deep water for the
4–GI gun system. In intermediate
depths, this distance is predicted to
increase to 113 m for the 4–GI gun
system. The 8-airgun array will only be
used in deep water (greater than 1,000
m). The predicted 190 dB distance for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
the 4–GI gun system in shallow water is
938 m (Table 1). Shallow water (less
than 100 m) will occur along 303 km (64
percent) of the planned trackline in the
Chukchi Sea. Those sound levels are not
considered to be the levels above which
TTS might occur.
Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS):
When PTS occurs, there is physical
damage to the sound receptors in the
ear. In some cases, there can be total or
partial deafness; in other cases, the
animal has an impaired ability to hear
sounds in specific frequency ranges.
There is no specific evidence that
exposure to pulses of airgun sound can
cause PTS in any marine mammal, even
with large arrays of airguns. However,
given the possibility that mammals
close to an airgun array might incur
TTS, there has been further speculation
about the possibility that some
individuals occurring very close to
airguns might incur PTS. Single or
occasional occurrences of mild TTS are
not indicative of permanent auditory
damage in terrestrial mammals.
Relationships between TTS and PTS
thresholds have not been studied in
marine mammals, but are assumed to be
similar to those in humans and other
terrestrial mammals. PTS might occur at
a received sound level at least several
decibels above that inducing mild TTS
if the animal were exposed to the strong
sound pulses with very rapid rise time.
It is unlikely that walrus or polar
bears could receive sounds strong
enough (and over a sufficient duration)
to cause permanent hearing impairment
during a project employing the mediumsized airgun sources planned here. In
the proposed project, walrus or bears are
unlikely to be exposed to received levels
of seismic pulses strong enough to cause
TTS, as they would probably need to be
within 100 to 200 m of the airguns for
that to occur. Given the higher level of
sound necessary to cause PTS, it is even
less likely that PTS could occur. In fact,
even the levels immediately adjacent to
the airgun may not be sufficient to
induce PTS, especially because an
animal would not be exposed to more
than one strong pulse unless it swam
immediately alongside the airgun for a
period longer than the inter-pulse
interval. The planned monitoring and
mitigation measures, including visual
monitoring, power-downs, and shutdowns of the airguns when walrus and
bears are seen within the safety radii,
will minimize the already minimal
probability of exposure of animals to
sounds strong enough to induce PTS.
Non-auditory Physiological Effects:
Non-auditory physiological effects or
injuries that theoretically might occur in
Pacific walrus or polar bears exposed to
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
strong underwater sound include stress,
neurological effects, and other types of
organ or tissue damage. However,
studies examining such effects are very
limited. If any such effects do occur,
they probably would be limited to
unusual situations when animals might
be exposed at close range for unusually
long periods. It is doubtful that any
single walrus or bear would be exposed
to strong seismic sounds long enough
for significant physiological stress to
develop. That is especially so in the
case of the proposed project where the
airgun configuration is moderately
sized, the ship is moving at 3 to 4 knots
(5.5 to 7.4 km/hr), and for the most part,
the tracklines will not double back
through the same area.
In general, little is known about the
potential for seismic survey sounds to
cause auditory impairment or other
physical effects in Pacific walrus or
polar bears. Available data suggest that
such effects, if they occur at all, would
be limited to short distances and
probably to projects involving large
arrays of airguns. Marine mammals that
show behavioral avoidance of seismic
vessels, including some pinnipeds, are
especially unlikely to incur auditory
impairment or other physical effects.
Also, the planned monitoring and
mitigation measures include shutdowns of the airguns, which will reduce
any such effects that might otherwise
occur.
Pacific walrus or polar bears close to
underwater detonations of high
explosives can be killed or severely
injured, and auditory organs would be
especially susceptible to injury (Ketten
et al. 1993; Ketten 1995). However,
airgun pulses are less energetic and
have slower rise times, and there is no
evidence that they can cause serious
injury, or death, even in the case of large
airgun arrays.
Potential Effects of Bathymetric Sonar
Signals
A SeaBeam 2112 multibeam 12 kHz
bathymetric sonar system will be
operated from the source vessel
essentially continuously during the
planned study. Sounds from the
multibeam are very short pulses,
depending on water depth. Most of the
energy in the sound pulses emitted by
the multibeam is at moderately high
frequencies, centered at 12 kHz. The
beam is narrow (approximately 2°) in
fore-aft extent and wide (approximately
130°) in the cross-track extent.
The area of possible influence of the
bathymetric sonar is a narrow band
oriented in the cross-track direction
below the source vessel. Walrus or polar
bears that encounter the bathymetric
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
sonar at close range are unlikely to be
subjected to repeated pulses because of
the narrow fore-aft width of the beam,
and will receive only small amounts of
pulse energy because of the short
pulses. In assessing the possible impacts
of a similar multibeam system (the 15.5
kHz Atlas Hydrosweep multibeam
bathymetric sonar), Boebel et al. (2004)
noted that the critical sound pressure
level at which TTS may occur is 203.2
dB re 1 µPa (rms). The critical region
included an area of 43 m (141 ft) in
depth, 46 m (151 ft) wide athwartship,
and 1 m (3.3 ft) fore-and-aft (Boebel et
al. 2004). In the more distant parts of
that (small) critical region, only slight
TTS could potentially be incurred.
Walrus communications will not be
masked appreciably by the bathymetric
sonar signals given the low duty cycle
of the sonar and the brief period when
an individual mammal is likely to be
within the sonar beam. Furthermore, the
12 kHz multibeam will not overlap with
the predominant frequencies in walrus
calls, further reducing any potential for
masking in that group.
We are not aware of any data on the
reactions of Pacific walrus to sonar
sounds at frequencies similar to those of
the multibeam sonar (12 kHz). Based on
observations of other pinniped
responses to other types of pulsed
sounds, and the likely brevity of
exposure to the bathymetric sonar
sounds, Pacific walrus reactions to the
sonar sounds are expected to be limited
to startle or otherwise brief responses of
no lasting consequence to the animals.
Polar bears would not occur below the
Healy or elsewhere at sufficient depth to
be in the main beam of the bathymetric
sonar, so would not be affected by the
sonar sounds.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Potential Effects of Sub-bottom Profiler
Signals
A Knudsen 320BR sub-bottom profiler
will be operated from the source vessel
at nearly all times during the planned
study. The Knudsen 320BR produces
sound pulses with lengths of up to 24
ms every 0.5 seconds to approximately
8 seconds, depending on water depth.
The energy in the sound pulses emitted
by this sub-bottom profiler is at mid-to
moderately high frequency, depending
on whether the 3.5 or 12 kHz transducer
is operating. The conical beam-width is
either 26°, for the 3.5 kHz transducer, or
30°, for the 12 kHz transducer, and is
directed downward. Source levels for
the Knudsen 320 operating at 3.5 and 12
kHz have been measured as a maximum
of 221 and 215 dB re 1 µPa m,
respectively. Received levels would
diminish rapidly with increasing depth.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
Walrus communications will not be
masked appreciably by the sub-bottom
profiler signals given its relatively low
duty cycle, directionality, and the brief
period when an individual animal is
likely to be within its beam. The 12 kHz
transducer for the Knudsen 320BR will
rarely be used because its frequency
interferes with the multibeam sonar;
however, neither the 3.5 kHz nor the 12
kHz sonar signals overlap with the
predominant frequencies in walrus
calls, which would avoid significant
masking.
The pulsed signals from the Knudsen
320BR while the 3.5 kHz transducer is
operating are weaker than those from
the bathymetric sonar and those from
the proposed 4-or 8-airgun arrays.
Therefore, behavioral responses are not
expected unless an animal is close to
the source. Exposure would be brief and
any response would likely be limited
and have no lasting consequence to the
animals.
Source frequencies of the Knudsen
320BR are much lower than those of the
bathymetric sonar when the 3.5 kHz
transducer is engaged. When the 12.5
kHz transducer is operating (which will
be seldom because it interferes with the
SeaBeam), the source frequency is
similar to that of the bathymetric sonar.
As with the SeaBeam, the pulses are
brief and concentrated in a downward
beam. An animal would be in the beam
of the sub-bottom profiler only briefly,
reducing its received sound energy.
Thus, it is unlikely that the sub-bottom
profiler produces pulse levels strong
enough to cause hearing impairment or
other physical injuries even in a walrus
that is (briefly) in a position near the
source.
Polar bears would not occur below the
Healy or elsewhere at sufficient depth to
be in the main beam of the sub-bottom
profiler, so would not be affected by the
sonar sounds.
The sub-bottom profiler is usually
operated simultaneously with other
higher-power acoustic sources. Many
marine mammals will move away in
response to the approaching higherpower sources or the vessel itself before
the animal would be close enough for
there to be any possibility of effects
from the sub-bottom profiler. In the case
of Pacific walrus and polar bears that do
not avoid the approaching vessel and its
various sound sources, mitigation
measures that would be applied to
minimize effects of the higher-power
sources would further reduce or
eliminate any minor effects of the subbottom profiler.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35937
Effects of Helicopter Activities
Collection of seismic refraction data
requires the deployment of
hydrophones at great distances from the
source vessel. In order to accomplish
this in the ice-covered waters, the
science party plans to deploy SISs along
seismic lines in front of the Healy and
then retrieve them off the ice once the
vessel has passed. Vessel-based
helicopters will be used to shuttle SISs
along seismic track lines. Deployment
and recovery of SISs every 10 to 15 km
(6.2 to 9.3 mi) along the track line and
as far as 120 km (75 mi) ahead or behind
the vessel will require as many as 24 onice landings per 24-hr period during
seismic shooting.
Levels and duration of sounds
received underwater from a passing
helicopter are a function of the type of
helicopter used, orientation of the
helicopter, the depth of the marine
mammal, and water depth. A civilian
helicopter service will be providing air
support for this project; however, the
type of helicopter has not been
determined. Helicopter sounds are
detectable underwater at greater
distances when the receiver is at
shallow depths. Generally, sound levels
received underwater decrease as the
altitude of the helicopter increases
(Richardson et al. 1995). Helicopter
sounds are audible for much greater
distances in air than in water.
Few systematic studies of Pacific
walrus reactions to aircraft overflights
have been completed. Documented
reactions of pinnipeds range from
simply becoming alert and raising the
head to escape behavior such as hauled
out animals rushing to the water.
Disturbances caused by low-flying air
traffic may cause walrus groups to
abandon land or ice haulouts or to
stampede. Reactions of walrus to aircraft
vary with range, aircraft type, and flight
pattern, as well as walrus age, sex, and
group size. Fixed-winged aircraft are
less likely to elicit a response than
helicopter overflights. Adult females,
calves, and immature walrus tend to be
more sensitive to aircraft disturbance
(Loughrey 1959; Salter 1979). Walrus
are particularly sensitive to changes in
engine noise and are more likely to
stampede when planes turn or fly low
overhead. Severe disturbance events
could result in trampling injuries or
cow-calf separations, both of which are
potentially fatal.
Although specific details of altitude
and horizontal distances are lacking
from many largely anecdotal reports,
escape reactions to a low flying
helicopter (lower than 150 m altitude)
can be expected from walrus
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
35938
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
encountered during the proposed
operations. These responses would
likely be relatively minor and brief in
nature. Researchers conducting aerial
surveys for walrus in sea ice habitats
have observed little reaction to aircrafts
above 1,000 ft (304 m).
In order to limit behavioral reactions
of Pacific walrus during deployment of
SISs, helicopters will maintain a
minimum altitude of 1,000 ft (304 m)
above the sea ice except when taking off
or landing. Sea-ice landings within
1,000 ft (304 m) of any observed walrus
will not occur, and the helicopter flight
path will remain along the seismic track
line. Three or four SIS units will be
deployed/retrieved before the helicopter
returns to the vessel. This should
minimize the number of disturbances
caused by repeated over-flights.
While researching the effects of
human disturbances on denning polar
bears, Amstrup (1993) noted that
repeated overflights and the capture and
handling of study animals was likely to
seriously disturb the bears. In addition,
the effects of fleeing from aircraft on a
warm spring or summer day may be
enough to overheat a well-insulated
polar bear. Nonetheless, the studied
female’s cubs were not smaller and did
not suffer decreased recruitment
(Amstrup 1993). Aerial surveyors
observed 24 polar bears while
monitoring marine mammals during
BP’s Northstar oil development project.
One polar bear was sitting on the ice, 6
were looking at the aircraft, 3 were
walking, and 14 were running. The
surveyors concluded that the running or
walking bears had been displaced from
a small area and that the bears were not
impacted over the long term (Moulton
and Williams 2003). Recurring aircraft
overflights could result in short-term
behavioral disturbances to polar bears.
However, reactions will vary among
individuals and are not likely to be
significant to the individual.
Repeated overflights of any individual
polar bear during the helicopter
operations are unlikely with the
monitoring provisions that are in place.
Any reaction to the helicopter work is
expected to be limited and of no
consequence to the fitness or health of
individual animals. However, in order
to further limit any potential behavioral
reactions of polar bears, the same
requirements applied for helicopter
operations around observed walrus will
be applied to those operations when
polar bears are sighted.
Effects of Coring Activities
The sediment coring project to be
conducted in the Arctic Ocean north of
the Chukchi Sea will have no effect on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
walrus, because it will not encounter
walrus. Walrus do not occur in the areas
of the coring project, which are far north
of the southern edge of the pack ice. The
coring project may encounter a few
individual polar bears. The effects of the
coring activities on any bears that are
encountered would be minimal,
consisting of temporary disturbance.
The presence of humans and the nature
of the activity would likely prevent any
encounters because individual bears are
expected to alter their course to avoid
the coring activity due to unfamiliar
scents and noises.
Mitigation
Several important mitigation
measures have been built into the
design of the project. The UTIG has
stated that these mitigation measures
will be implemented to avoid or
minimize effects on Pacific walrus and
polar bear encountered along the
tracklines.
(1) No seismic surveys will take place
in the Chukchi Sea before July 15, 2006.
(2) Airgun operations will be limited
to offshore waters, i.e., greater than 120
km (93 miles) from shore;
(3) When operating in shallower parts
(less than 100 m) of the study area,
airgun operations will be limited to the
smaller source (4 GI guns);
(4) Seismic vessels must observe a
0.5-mile (800-m) exclusion zone around
walrus and polar bears observed on land
or ice when not conducting seismic
operations.
(5) Trained vessel-based observers
will be required onboard to monitor
marine mammals near the seismic
source vessel during all airgun
operations. When marine mammals are
observed within, or about to enter,
designated safety radius (i.e., the
distance from the sound source at which
the received level of sound would
correspond to the acoustic threshold of
190 dB at any given depth), airgun
operations will be powered down (or
shut-down, if necessary) immediately.
Vessel-based observers will watch for
walrus and polar bears near the seismic
vessel during all periods of shooting and
for a minimum of 30 minutes prior to
the planned start of airgun operations
after an extended shut-down.
(6) If a Pacific walrus or polar bear is
detected outside the safety radius and,
based on its position and the relative
motion, is likely to enter the safety
radius, the vessel’s speed and/or direct
course may, when practical and safe, be
changed in a manner that also
minimizes the effect on the planned
science objectives. The animal’s
activities and movements relative to the
seismic vessel will be closely monitored
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to ensure that it does not approach
within the safety radius. If the animal
appears likely to enter the safety radius,
further mitigative actions will be taken,
i.e., either further course alterations, or
power-down or shut-down of the
airgun(s).
(7) A power-down involves
decreasing the number of airguns in use
such that the radius of the 190-dB zone
is decreased to the extent that marine
mammals are no longer within the
safety radius. A power-down may also
occur when the vessel is moving from
one seismic line to another. During a
power-down, one airgun (or some other
number of airguns less than the full
airgun array) is operated. The continued
operation of one airgun will alert marine
mammals to the presence of the seismic
vessel in the area.
If a Pacific walrus or polar bear is
detected outside the safety radius but is
likely to enter the safety radius, and if
the vessel’s speed and/or course cannot
be changed to avoid having the mammal
enter the safety radius, the airguns will
be powered down before the animal is
within the safety radius. Likewise, if a
walrus or polar bear is already within
the safety zone when first detected, the
airguns will immediately be powered
down. During a power-down of the 4-or
8-airgun array, one airgun (either a
single 105 in3 GI gun or one 210 in3 G.
gun, respectively) will be operated. If a
Pacific walrus or polar bear is detected
within or near the smaller safety radius
around that single airgun (see Table 1),
it will be shut-down. Power-downs will
only be used in deep water. In shallow
and intermediate depth water, an
immediate shutdown will occur when
Pacific walrus or polar bears are sighted
within the designated safety radii.
(8) The operating airgun(s) will be
shut-down completely if a Pacific
walrus or polar bear approaches or
enters the safety radius and a powerdown is not practical (or shut-down is
specifically prescribed, see Table 1).
The operating airgun(s) will also be
shut-down completely if a walrus or
polar bear approaches or enters the
estimated safety radius around the
source that would be used during a
power-down.
(9) Following a power-down or shutdown, airgun activity will not resume
until the walrus or polar bear has
cleared the safety zone. The animal will
be considered to have cleared the safety
zone if it is visually observed to have
left the safety zone or has not been seen
within the zone for 15 minutes.
(10) A ramp-up procedure will be
followed when the airgun array begins
operating after a specified-duration
period without airgun operations. The
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
specified period depends on the speed
of the source vessel and the size of the
airgun array that is being used. Rampup will begin with one of the G. guns
(210 in3) or one of the Bolt airguns (500
in3) for the 8-airgun array, or one of the
105 in3 GI guns for the 4–GI gun array.
One additional airgun will be added
after a period of 5 minutes. Two more
airguns will be added after another 5
minutes, and the last four airguns (for
the 8-airgun array) will all be added
after the final 5 minute period. During
the ramp-up, the safety zone for the full
airgun array in use at the time will be
maintained.
If the complete 190-dB safety radius
has not been visible for at least 30
minutes prior to the start of operations,
ramp up will not commence unless at
least one airgun has been operating
during the interruption of seismic
survey operations. This means that it
will not be permissible to ramp up the
4–GI gun or 8-airgun source from a
complete shut-down in thick fog or
darkness (which may be encountered
briefly in late August), when the outer
part of the 190 dB safety zone is not
visible. If the entire safety radius is
visible, then start up of the airguns from
a shut-down may occur at night (if any
periods of darkness are encountered
during seismic operations). If one airgun
has operated during a power-down
period, ramp up to full power will be
permissible in poor visibility, on the
assumption that walrus and polar bears
will be alerted to the approaching
seismic vessel by the sounds from the
single airgun and could move away.
Ramp up of the airguns will not be
initiated during the day or at night if a
walrus or polar bear has been sighted
within or near the applicable safety
radii during the previous 15 minutes.
(11) To limit disturbance, helicopters
will follow the survey track line. The
UTIG would avoid landing within 1,000
ft (304 m) of an observed walrus or bear,
and maintain a minimum altitude of
1,000 ft (304 m), unless weather or other
circumstances require a closer landing
for human safety. For efficiency, each
helicopter excursion will be scheduled
to deploy/retrieve three or four SIS
units. This will minimize the number of
flights and the number of potential
disturbances to walrus and polar bears
in the area.
(12) The applicant will be required to
develop a Service-approved site-specific
polar bear and walrus interaction plan
prior to initiation of activities. These
plans outline the contingency steps that
the applicant will take, such as the
chain of command for reporting and
responding to polar bear or walrus
sightings.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
(13) No seismic activities will occur
within a 40-mile radius of affected
communities. This condition will limit
potential interactions with walrus
hunters in near-shore environments.
(14) Prior to seismic activities, UTIG
will contact and consult with the
communities of Point Hope, Point Lay,
Wainwright, and Barrow to identify any
necessary measures to be taken to
minimize adverse impacts to
subsistence hunters in these
communities. A POC will be developed
if there is concern from the community
that the activities will impact
subsistence uses of Pacific walrus and
polar bears.
The POC must outline how applicants
will work with the affected Native
communities and what actions will be
taken to avoid interference with
subsistence hunting of walrus and polar
bear. The POC will address: Operational
agreement and communications
procedures; where and when the
agreement becomes effective; the
general communications scheme;
onboard observers; conflict avoidance;
seasonally sensitive areas; vessel
navigation; air navigation; marine
mammal monitoring activities; measures
to avoid impacts to marine mammals;
measures to avoid conflicts in areas of
active hunting; emergency assistance;
and the dispute resolution process. The
Service will review the POC prior to
issuance of the final IHA to ensure any
potential adverse effects on the
availability of the animals are
minimized.
(15) At least one Alaska Native
knowledgeable about the mammals and
fish of the area will be a member of the
observer team and will serve as a liaison
with subsistence users encountered at
sea. Air gun operations will be
suspended if the Healy’s trackline is less
than 5 km (3 miles) from ongoing
subsistence hunting or fishing activities.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment Due to Chukchi Sea
Seismic Survey
All anticipated takes would be nonlethal harassment involving temporary
changes in behavior. In the sections
below, we estimate take by harassment
of the numbers of walrus and polar
bears that are likely to be affected
during the proposed seismic study in
the Chukchi Sea with the
implementation of the mitigation
measures described above. The
estimates are based on data obtained
during marine mammal surveys in and
near the Chukchi Sea by Brueggeman et
al. (1990) and Evans et al. (2003).
This section provides estimates of the
number of potential exposures to sound
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35939
levels greater than or equal to 160 dB
and 170 dB re 1 µpa (rms). The 160 dB
criterion is applied as a maximum
estimate for both species, and the 170
dB criterion is applied as a more
accurate criterion based on studies that
have determined pinnipeds tend to be
less responsive than many other marine
mammal species. As a conservative
measure, this sound level criteria is also
applied to polar bears.
The following estimates are based on
a consideration of the number of walrus
and polar bears that might be disturbed
appreciably by approximately 478 line
kilometers of seismic surveys in the
Chukchi Sea. An assumed total of 598
km of trackline includes a 25 percent
allowance over and above the planned
478 km to allow for turns, lines that
might have to be repeated because of
poor data quality, or minor changes to
the survey design.
The anticipated radii of influence of
the bathymetric sonar and sub-bottom
profiler are less than those for the airgun
configurations. It is assumed that,
during simultaneous operations of the
airgun array, sonar, and profiler, any
walrus or polar bear close enough to be
affected by the sonars would already be
affected by the airguns. However,
whether or not the airguns are operating
simultaneously with the sonar or with
the profiler, walrus and polar bears are
expected to exhibit no more than shortterm and inconsequential responses to
the sonar or profiler given their
characteristics (e.g., narrow downwarddirected beam) and other considerations
described above. Such reactions are not
considered to constitute taking and,
therefore, no additional allowance is
included for animals that might be
affected by the sound sources other than
the airguns.
Few surveys of walrus and polar bears
have been conducted in the Chukchi
Sea area of the proposed project. The
best polar bear density data are from one
pilot study in the eastern Chukchi Sea
testing the viability of aerial surveys
from an icebreaker as a tool for
monitoring polar bear stock (Evans et al.
2003). Most of the survey (90.7 percent)
was flown over areas of ice cover greater
than 10 percent. The density of bears
was calculated to be 0.0068/km2. It is
expected that the density estimate is
greater than that which may be
encountered in the Chukchi Sea in open
water. In recent years, many polar bears
have concentrated near bowhead
harvesting sites on land during late
summer and would, therefore, not be
affected by the proposed seismic survey.
Polar bears are not expected to be
encountered in areas of open water
(Haley and Ireland 2006, Harwood et al.
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
35940
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
2005, Evans et al. 2003), but an
estimated density of 0.0001 has been
used to allow for the chance encounter
of a few individuals traversing open
water areas (Monnett et al. 2005).
The estimates of walrus densities
most relevant to the proposed project
are reported by Brueggeman et al. (1990)
from seven aerial surveys of ice pack
areas occurring in late June through
early July. These surveys took place in
the Chukchi Sea area of the proposed
Healy trackline in optimal ice habitat for
walrus, and near the center of the
northern migration concentration of the
summer population of Chukchi walrus.
Brueggeman et al. (1990) reported an
average density in open water near the
ice margin of 0.0731 walrus/km2. This
value was used as the average density
for walrus in open water during the
proposed survey. Brueggeman et al.
(1990) reported a walrus density along
the pack ice edge of 0.62 walrus/km2.
This value was considered to be the
maximum density of walrus that will be
encountered as the Healy crosses the ice
margin in the Chukchi Sea. Pacific
walrus most frequently feed in shallow
waters (less than 60 to 80 m) (Chadwick
and Hills 2005; Reeves et al. 2002), and
the deepest recorded walrus dive was to
133 m (Reeves et al. 2002). Because of
these reasons, walrus densities have
only been applied to areas along the
seisimic survey line that are less than
200 m deep.
The potential number of occasions
when walrus and polar bears species
might be exposed to received levels 160
dB re 1 µPa (rms) was calculated for
each of three water depth categories
(less than 100 m, 100 to 1,000 m, and
greater than 1,000 m) within the
Chukchi Sea (south of 75° N) by
multiplying:
the expected species density, either
average (i.e., best estimate) or
maximum; the anticipated linekilometers of operations with both the
4–GI and 8-airgun array in each waterdepth category after applying a 25
percent allowance for possible
additional line kilometers;
the cross-track distances within which
received sound levels are predicted to
be greater than or equal to 160 dB for
each water-depth category.
During the Chukchi Sea portion of the
survey, 1,931 km2 would be ensonified
within the 170 dB isopleths and 6,455
km2 would be ensonified within the 160
dB isopleths. After adding the 25
percent contingency to the expected
number of line kilometers, the number
of exposures is calculated based on
2,414 km2 for the 170 dB sound level
and 8,069 for the 160 dB sound level.
The numbers of exposures in the three
depth categories were then summed for
each species (Table 2).
TABLE 2.—ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF WALRUS AND POLAR BEAR EXPOSURES TO 160 DB AND 170 DB
DURING UTIG’S PROPOSED SEISMIC PROGRAM IN THE CHUKCHI SEA, ALASKA
Number of exposures to sound levels
Species
Best estimate
>160 dB
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Walrus ......................................................................................................................................
Polar bear ................................................................................................................................
Unlike polar bears, whose best and
maximum density estimates were
multiplied by the entire trackline within
the Chukchi Sea survey area to estimate
exposures, walrus densities were only
multiplied by the proposed seismic
trackline in water depths less than 200
m in the Chukchi Sea survey area.
Walrus are known to occur offshore but
generally remain in waters less than 200
m deep and mostly along the pack ice
margin where ice concentrations are less
than 80 percent (Fay 1982; Fay and
Burns 1988). The location of the ice
edge has shown a high degree of
interannual variation, but is rarely
found north of 75° N. Calculating
exposures of walrus along the entire
southwestern seismic trackline south of
75° N should somewhat overestimate
the number of exposures since
concentrations of walrus are only likely
to be at the proposed densities for a
short distance at the margin of the ice
pack.
Based on this method, the best and
maximum estimates of the numbers of
Pacific walrus and polar bears
exposures to airgun sounds with
received levels greater than or equal to
160 dB re 1 µPa (rms) were obtained
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
using the average and maximum
densities described above and are
presented in Table 2.
Based upon information supplied by
the applicant, the impact of conducting
the seismic survey in the Chukchi Sea
it is likely to result in the temporary
modification in behavior (Level B
Harassment) of up to 143 Pacific walrus
and 2 polar bears. The walrus may be
exposed to airgun sounds at received
levels greater than or equal to 160 dB re
1 µPa (rms) during the seismic survey.
It is probable that only a small
percentage of those would actually be
disturbed.
For polar bears that may be
encountered during the survey, almost
all of these are expected to be on the ice,
and therefore unaffected by underwater
sound from the airguns. For the few
bears that are in the water, levels of
airgun and sonar sound would be
attenuated because polar bears generally
do not dive much below the surface.
Bears on the ice may be impacted by
short-term displacements as the vessel
traverses the area near the bear.
In addition, we note that the coring
project activities to be conducted to the
north of the Chukchi Sea in the Arctic
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Maximum estimate
>170 dB
470
8
143
2
>160 dB
3,960
55
>170 dB
1,203
16
Ocean will cause no take of Pacific
walrus because no walrus will be
encountered that far north. There is a
possibility that a few individual polar
bears will be encountered; however, any
potential disturbance would be limited
to temporary behavior changes and does
not affect the take estimate for polar
bear.
Although current population
estimates for the Pacific walrus
population and Chukchi Sea polar bear
stocks are not available, the best
available information indicates that the
number of potentially affected animals
is small. Furthermore, any impacts to
individuals are expected to be relatively
short term in duration, are anticipated
to be minor behavioral reactions, and
are not expected to impact animal
health or reproduction.
In 2005, the Healy conducted similar
research that began in the same region,
but continued across the Arctic Basin to
Norway (Haley and Ireland 2006).
During the 2005 cruise, seven live
walrus were encountered in the Bering
Sea. No walrus were encountered in the
northern Chukchi Sea (B. Haley, LGL
Alaska Research Associates, Inc., pers.
comm.). In addition, a total of 24 polar
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
bears were visually recorded and the
Service considers all observations to be
takes. Three separate groups consisting
of 5 bears were observed north of the
Alaska coast between 74° and 79° N
latitude. These bears were most likely
from the southern Beaufort Sea or
Chukchi/Bering Seas polar bear stocks.
The remainder of the bears were
observed near Svalbard and Franz
Joseph Land. These bears most likely
belonged to the Svalbard and Franz
Joseph-Novaya Zemlya polar bear
stocks. The takes for both species during
the 2005 cruise through the Chukchi Sea
appeared to be limited to Level B
harassment of a relatively small number
of animals and of relatively a short-term
duration.
Potential Effects on Habitat
The proposed airgun operations will
not result in any permanent impact on
habitats used by Pacific walrus or polar
bears, or to the food sources they utilize.
The main impact associated with the
proposed activities will be temporarily
elevated noise levels and the associated
direct effects.
One of the reasons for the adoption of
airguns as the standard energy source
for marine seismic surveys was that,
unlike explosives, they do not result in
any appreciable fish kill. However, the
existing body of information relating to
the impacts of seismic on marine fish
and invertebrate species is very limited.
In water, acute injury and death of
organisms exposed to seismic energy
depends primarily on two features of
the sound source: (1) The received peak
pressure; and (2) the time required for
the pressure to rise and decay (Hubbs
and Rechnitzer 1952 in Wardle et al.
2001). Generally, the higher the received
pressure and the less time it takes for
the pressure to rise and decay, the
greater the chance of acute pathological
effects. Considering the peak pressure
and rise/decay time characteristics of
seismic airgun arrays used today, the
pathological zone for fish and
invertebrates would be expected to be
within a few meters of the seismic
source (Buchanan et al. 2004). For the
proposed survey, any injurious effects
on fish would be limited to very short
distances.
During the seismic study only a small
fraction of the available habitat would
be ensonified at any given time.
Disturbance to benthic invertebrates,
fish, and marine mammals would be
short term, and they would return to
their pre-disturbance behavior once the
seismic activity passes or otherwise
ceases. Thus, the proposed survey
would have little effect on these prey
items and, therefore, little, if any,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
impact on the abilities of walrus and
polar bears to feed in the area where
seismic work is planned. In addition,
the proposed activity is not expected to
have any habitat-related effects that
could cause significant or long-term
consequences for prey species or for
individual walrus or polar bears or their
populations, since operations at any one
location will be limited in duration.
Potential Impacts on Subsistence Needs
Subsistence hunting and fishing
continue to be prominent in the
household economies and social welfare
of some Alaskan residents, particularly
among those living in small, rural
villages (Wolfe and Walker 1987).
Subsistence remains the basis for Alaska
Native culture and community. In rural
Alaska, subsistence activities are often
central to many aspects of human
existence, including patterns of family
life, artistic expression, and community
religious and celebratory activities.
Pacific walrus and polar bear are
legally hunted in the Chukchi Sea by
coastal Alaska Natives. For thousands of
years, hunting has been an important
source of food and raw materials for
equipment and handicrafts. Today,
hunting remains an important part of
the culture and economy of many
coastal villages in Alaska. Rural
communities in the vicinity of the
proposed Chukchi Sea seismic survey
area include Point Hope, Point Lay,
Wainwright, and Barrow.
Any activity that displaces Pacific
walrus beyond the range of coastal
hunters has the potential to adversely
impact subsistence harvests in these
communities. Walrus hunting may
occur anywhere along the Chukchi Sea
coastline from Cape Lisburne to Point
Barrow. Walrus hunting by these
communities is generally limited to
conditions when sea ice occurs within
the range of small hunting boats,
typically less than 48 km (30 mi) from
shore.
Point Hope hunters typically begin
their hunt in late May and June as
walrus migrate north. The sea ice is
usually well off shore of Point Hope by
July and does not bring animals back
into the range of hunters until late
August and September. Between 2000
and 2004, the average annual reported
harvest at Point Hope was 11 animals
per year.
Walrus hunting in Point Lay occurs
primarily in July. Point Lay hunters
reported an average of six walrus per
year between 2000 and 2004.
Wainwright residents hunt walrus
from June through August as the ice
retreats northward. Walrus are plentiful
in the pack ice near the village this time
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35941
of year. Wainwright hunters have
consistently harvested more walrus than
other subsistence communities; the
village averaged 62 animals per year for
2000 through 2004.
In Barrow, most walrus hunting
occurs from June through September,
peaking in August, when the land-fast
ice breaks up and hunters can access the
walrus by boat as they migrate north on
the retreating pack ice. The average
annual walrus harvest for Barrow from
2000 to 2004 was 32 animals.
Although it is possible that
accessibility to walrus for subsistence
harvest could be impacted during the
seismic surveys, it is unlikely. The
majority of Pacific walrus are taken less
than 48 km (30 mi) from shore, and the
Healy will conduct its survey operations
significantly farther offshore, i.e.,
approximately 150 km (93 mi) to 200
km (124 mi) offshore. In addition, the
applicant will implement necessary
mitigation measures as described above
to further minimize or avoid any
potential impact.
Depending upon ice conditions, the
subsistence harvest of polar bears can
occur year-round in the northern
Chukchi Sea villages, with peaks in the
spring and winter. The period with the
lowest harvest of bears occurs in June
and July. Hunting success varies
considerably from year to year because
of variable ice and weather conditions.
For Point Hope, the average annual
reported harvest between 2000 and 2004
was eight polar bears. The average for
Point Lay during this same time period
was less than one bear per year. In
Wainwright, the average was four bears
per year from 2000 through 2004. And,
in Barrow, the average annual polar bear
harvest from 2000 to 2004 was 16
animals.
Disruption of polar bear subsistence
hunting is not expected because the
timing of polar bear hunting occurs
primarily during the winter and spring
when pack ice is present nearshore and
the seismic surveys will take place
during the summer and fall open-water
seasons. Furthermore, the applicant will
implement necessary mitigation
measures as described above to insure
any potential impact is minimized or
avoided.
The harvest information provided for
Pacific walrus and polar bears is based
on reports provided through the
Service’s Marking, Tagging, and
Reporting Program. Harvest data for
2005 is not presently available. Harvest
totals are not corrected for struck and
lost animals.
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
35942
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Basis for Findings
Negligible Impact on Species
The Service has determined that the
seismic survey in the Chukchi Sea will
cause a temporary modification in
behavior of small numbers of Pacific
walrus and polar bears. Based upon
information supplied by the applicant,
the seismic survey in the Chukchi Sea
could potentially result in the
temporary modification in behavior of
up to 143 Pacific walrus and 2 polar
bears. Any impacts to individuals are
expected to be limited to Level B
harassment and short term in duration.
The potential for temporary or
permanent hearing impairment is very
low and any potential for hearing
impairment will be avoided through the
incorporation of the proposed
mitigation measures mentioned in this
document. We also considered the
sediment coring projects potential effect
on walrus and polar bears in making the
negligible impact finding. Because the
coring project will not affect the
estimated take of the overall survey, it
does not affect the negligible impact
finding. No take by injury or death is
anticipated. The Service finds that the
anticipated harassment caused by the
proposed activities are not expected to
adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rate of
recruitment or survival and, therefore,
will have a negligible impact on Pacific
walrus and polar bears.
Our finding of negligible impact is
based on the total level of activity
proposed by UTIG and the Service’s
analysis of the effects of all activities. In
making this finding, we considered the
following: (1) The distribution of the
species; (2) the biological characteristics
of the species; (3) the nature of seismic
survey program; (4) the potential effects
of seismic activities on the species; (5)
the documented impacts of seismic
activities on the species; and (6) the
mitigation measures that will be
conditions of the authorization.
Although Pacific walrus are expected
to occur in the area of the proposed
seismic surveys, the surveys would not
be concentrated in any location for
extended periods. Most of the proposed
activities would occur in areas of open
water where walrus densities are
expected to be relatively low. In
addition, mitigation measures will be
followed when walrus are observed
within the safety radius.
The number of polar bears present in
the open water of the Chukchi Sea
during the time of the seismic surveys
will also be minimal. Individual polar
bears may be observed in the open water
during seismic activities, but the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
majority of the population will be found
on the pack ice during this time of year.
If polar bears are observed in the area
prior to, or even during, seismic
surveys, appropriate mitigation
measures will be followed.
Based on our review of these factors,
we conclude that, while incidental
harassment of polar bears and walrus is
reasonably likely to or reasonably
expected to occur as a result of
proposed seismic surveys, the overall
impact would be negligible on polar
bear and Pacific walrus populations. In
addition, we find that any takes are
likely to be limited to Level B
harassment of a relatively small number
of animals and of relatively a short-term
duration. Furthermore, we do not expect
the anticipated level of harassment from
these proposed activities to affect the
rates of recruitment or survival of
Pacific walrus and polar bear
populations.
While the actual number of incidental
harassment takes will depend on the
distribution and abundance of Pacific
walrus and polar bears in the vicinity of
the survey activity, the number of
harassment takings will be small.
Furthermore, the previously mentioned
mitigation measures that will be
implemented by the applicant insures
these measures will provide additional
means of effecting the least level
practicable impact on Pacific walrus
and polar bears.
Impact on Subsistence
Based on the results of harvest data,
including affected villages, the number
of animals harvested, the season of the
harvests, and the location of hunting
areas, we find that the anticipated
harassment caused by the proposed
seismic surveys will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of Pacific walrus and polar
bears for taking for subsistence uses
during the period of the activities. In
making this finding, we considered the
following: (1) Records on subsistence
harvest from the Service’s Marking,
Tagging, and Reporting Program
(historical data regarding the timing and
location of harvests); (2) anticipated
effects of UTIG’s proposed activities on
subsistence hunting; (3) development of
Plans of Cooperation between the
applicants and affected Native
communities, as appropriate; (4)
reliance on an Alaska Native to serve as
a liaison with subsistence users
encountered at sea; and (5) and
suspending air gun operations when the
Healy’s trackline is less than 5 km (3
miles) from ongoing subsistence hunting
or fishing activities.
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Most subsistence walrus hunting
occurs less than 48 km (30 mi) from
shore. Although walrus hunters may
encounter vessels and aircraft in openwater areas, these interactions are
expected to be limited in area and
duration and are not expected to affect
overall hunting success.
Only a small fraction of the polar bear
harvest occurs during the open-water
season. In addition, most polar bears are
harvested outside of the area that would
be covered by this authorization.
Because the polar bear is hunted almost
entirely during the ice-covered season,
it is unlikely that open-water seismic
activities would have any effect on the
harvest of that species.
In addition, helicopter operations will
occur far offshore where the seismic
operations take place in the ice-pack.
Thus any reaction of walrus or polar
bears to the helicopter operations will
have no effect on their availability for
subsistence. These helicopter operations
will be conducted in a manner that will
minimize effects on walrus and polar
bears.
Finally, UTIG will develop a POC for
the proposed 2006 seismic survey in the
Chukchi Sea, as appropriate, in
consultation with representatives of
communities along the Chukchi Sea
coast including Point Hope, Point Lay,
Wainwright, and Barrow.
Monitoring
The UTIG will conduct marine
mammal monitoring during the seismic
surveys, in order to implement the
mitigation measures that require realtime monitoring, and to satisfy
monitoring called for under the MMPA.
Vessel-based observers will monitor
Pacific walrus and polar bears near the
seismic source vessel during all seismic
operations. There will be little or no
darkness during this cruise. Airgun
operations will be shut-down when
Pacific walrus or polar bears are
observed within, or about to enter,
designated safety radii. Vessel-based
observers will also watch for Pacific
walrus and polar bears near the seismic
vessel for at least 30 minutes prior to the
planned start of airgun operations after
an extended shut-down of the airgun.
When feasible, observations will also be
made during daytime periods without
seismic operations (e.g., during transits
and during coring operations).
During seismic operations in the
Chukchi Sea, four observers will be
based aboard the vessel. These observers
will be appointed by UTIG with Service
concurrence. An Alaska native resident
knowledgeable about the mammals and
fish of the area is expected to be
included as one of the team of observers
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
aboard the Healy. At least one observer,
and when practical, two observers, will
monitor Pacific walrus and polar bears
near the seismic vessel during ongoing
operations and nighttime startups (if
darkness is encountered in late August).
Observers will normally be on duty in
shifts of duration no longer than 4
hours. The USCG crew will also be
instructed to assist in detecting Pacific
walrus and polar bears and
implementing mitigation requirements
(if practical). The necessary instructions
will be provided to the crew prior to the
start of the seismic survey.
The Healy is a suitable platform for
marine mammal observations. When
stationed on the flying bridge, the eye
level will be approximately 27.7 m (91
ft) above sea level, and the observer will
have an unobstructed view around the
entire vessel. If surveying from the
bridge, the observer’s eye level will be
19.5 m (64 ft) above sea level and
approximately 25° of the view will be
partially obstructed directly to the stern
by the stack (Haley and Ireland 2006).
The observers will scan the area around
the vessel systematically with reticle
binoculars (e.g., 7 × 50 Fujinon), Big-eye
binoculars (25 × 150), and with the
naked eye. During any periods of
darkness (minimal, if at all, in this
cruise), NVDs will be available (ITT
F500 Series Generation 3 binocularimage intensifier or equivalent), if and
when required. The survey will take
place at high latitude in the summer
when there will be continuous daylight,
but night (darkness) is likely to be
encountered briefly at the southernmost
extent of the survey in late August.
Laser rangefinding binoculars (Leica
LRF 1200 laser rangefinder or
equivalent) will be available to assist
with distance estimation; these are
useful in training observers to estimate
distances visually, but are generally not
useful in measuring distances to
animals directly.
When walrus or polar bears are
detected within, or are about to enter,
the designated safety radius, the
airgun(s) will be powered down or shutdown immediately. To assure prompt
implementation of shut-downs,
additional channels of communication
between the observers and the airgun
technicians will be established. During
power-downs and shut-downs, the
observers will continue to maintain
watch to determine when the animal(s)
are outside the safety radius. Airgun
operations will not resume until the
animal is outside the safety radius. The
animal will be considered to have
cleared the safety radius if it is visually
observed to have left the safety radius,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
or if it has not been seen within the
radius for 15 minutes.
All observations and airgun power or
shut-downs will be recorded in a
standardized format. Data will be
entered into a custom database using a
notebook computer. The accuracy of the
data entry will be verified by
computerized validity data checks as
the data are entered and by subsequent
manual checking of the database. These
procedures will allow initial summaries
of data to be prepared during and
shortly after the field program, and will
facilitate transfer of the data to
statistical, graphical, or other programs
for further processing and archiving.
Results from the vessel-based
observations will provide:
(1) The basis for real-time mitigation
(airgun power or shut-down).
(2) Information needed to estimate the
number of Pacific walrus and polar
bears potentially taken by harassment,
which must be reported to FWS.
(3) Data on the occurrence,
distribution, and activities of Pacific
walrus and polar bears in the area where
the seismic study is conducted.
(4) Information to compare the
distance and distribution of Pacific
walrus and polar bears relative to the
source vessel at times with and without
seismic activity.
(5) Data on the behavior and
movement patterns of Pacific walrus
and polar bears seen at times with and
without seismic activity.
Development and participation in a
cooperative research program is not a
requirement for obtaining an IHA.
However, the Service encourages
research of walrus and polar bear, such
as projects funded and supported by the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
The UTIG stated it will coordinate the
planned marine mammal monitoring
program associated with the seismic
survey in the Chukchi Sea with other
parties that may have interest in this
area and/or be conducting marine
mammal studies in the same region
during operations. This type of
coordination could provide additional
insight into the relationship between
seismic activities and the basic
biological requirements of the two
species of concern. The UTIG will also
coordinate with other applicable
Federal, State, and Borough agencies,
and will comply with their
requirements.
Reporting
Polar bear and walrus observation
forms will be provided by the Service to
the applicant. Any walrus or polar bear
sighting that occurs during the seismic
surveys must be submitted to the
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35943
Service within 24 hours of the animal
sighting or as soon as practicable. A
report must be submitted to the Service
within 90 days after the end of the
cruise. The report will describe the
operations that were conducted and the
walrus and polar bears that were
detected near the operations. The report
will be submitted to the Service,
providing full documentation of
methods, results, and interpretation
pertaining to all monitoring. The 90-day
report will summarize the dates and
locations of seismic operations, and all
walrus and polar bear sightings (dates,
times, locations, activities, associated
seismic survey activities). The report
will also include estimates of the level
and type of take, numbers of walrus and
polar bears observed, direction of
movement of observed individuals, and
any observed changes or modifications
in behavior or travel direction resulting
from the seismic surveys.
Proposed Authorization
The Service proposes to issue an IHA
for small numbers of Pacific walrus and
polar bears harassed incidentally by
UTIG while conducting marine seismic
surveys in the Arctic Ocean from July 15
through August 25, 2006. The purpose
of the surveys is to collect seismic
reflection and refraction data in the
western Amerasia Basin in the Arctic
Ocean. The final IHA would incorporate
the mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements discussed in this
proposal. The UTIG will be responsible
for following those requirements. All
activities would be conducted during
the 2006 open-water season.
Authorization for the seismic surveys
would be for approximately 40 days.
These authorizations do not allow the
intentional taking of polar bear or
Pacific walrus.
If the level of activity exceeds that
described by the UTIG, or the level or
nature of take exceeds those projected
here, the Service would reevaluate its
findings. The Secretary may modify,
suspend, or revoke an authorization if
the findings are not accurate or the
conditions described herein are not
being met.
Endangered Species Act
The Service has determined that no
species under its jurisdiction listed as
threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended, would be affected by issuing
an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA to the applicants for the
proposed open-water seismic surveys.
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
35944
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Notices
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
The applicant provided a Draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) of a
Marine Geophysical Survey by the
USCG Healy of the Western Canada
Basin, Chukchi Borderland and
Mendeleev Ridge, Arctic Ocean, JulyAugust 2006, prepared by LGL Alaska
Research Associates, Inc. of Anchorage,
Alaska and LGL Ltd., environmental
research associates of King City, Ontario
dated March 1, 2006. The Service has
adopted this draft EA as the foundation
of the Service’s EA and finds that it
meets NEPA standards for analyzing the
effects of the issuance of this IHA. For
a copy of the EA, contact the individual
identified under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
Government-to-Government Relations
With Native American Tribal
Governments
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive
Order 13175, Secretarial Order 3225,
and the Department of the Interior’s
manual at 512 DM 2, we readily
acknowledge our responsibility to
communicate meaningfully with
federally recognized Tribes on a
Government-to-Government basis. We
have evaluated possible effects on
federally recognized Alaska Native
tribes. Through the POC identified
above, applicants will work with the
Native Communities most likely to be
affected and will take actions to avoid
interference with subsistence hunting.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Public Comments Solicited
The Service requests interested
persons to submit comments and
information concerning this proposed
IHA. Consistent with section
101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA, we are
opening the comment period on this
proposed authorization for 30 days (see
DATES).
Our practice is to make comments,
including names and home addresses of
respondents, available for public review
during regular business hours.
Individual respondents may request that
we withhold their home address from
the record, which we will honor to the
extent allowable by law. If you wish us
to withhold your name and/or address,
you must state that prominently at the
beginning of your comment. However,
we will not consider anonymous
comments. We will make all
submissions from organizations or
businesses, and from individuals
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:08 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety.
Dated: June 15, 2006.
Tom Melius,
Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 06–5589 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Advisory Board for Exceptional
Children
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs is announcing
that the Advisory Board for Exceptional
Children will hold its next meeting in
Denver, Colorado. The purpose of the
meeting is to meet the mandates of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education
Improvement Act of 2004 on Indian
children with disabilities.
DATES: The Board will meet on
Saturday, July 22, 2006, from 6 p.m. to
9 p.m., Sunday, July 23, 2006, from 8
a.m. to 4 p.m., and Monday July 24,
2006, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Local Time.
ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at
the Marriott Denver Tech Center, 4900
South Syracuse, Denver, Colorado
80237.
Written statements may be submitted
to Mr. Thomas M. Dowd, Director,
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of
Indian Education Programs, 1849 C
Street, NW., Mail Stop 3609–MIB,
Washington, DC 20240; Telephone (202)
208–6123; Fax (202) 208–3312.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lyann Barbero, Acting Supervisor,
Education Specialist—Special
Education, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Office of Indian Education Programs,
Division of Compliance, Monitoring and
Accountability, P.O. Box 1088, Suite
332, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87104;
Telephone (505) 563–5270.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Advisory Board was established to
advise the Secretary of the Interior,
through the Assistant Secretary—Indian
Affairs, on the needs of Indian children
with disabilities, as mandated by the
Individuals with Disabilities Education
Improvement Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108–
446).
The following items will be on the
agenda:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• State Performance Plan.
• Special Education Supervisor
Report.
• Part B allocation.
• Parent Involvement Activities.
• Updates on priority issues.
• Office of Special Education new
organizational information.
• Compliance and Monitoring.
• Procedural Safeguards.
• Title Programs.
• Institutionalized Handicapped
Program.
• Coordinated Service Plan.
• Update on meeting between State
Education Agency and Bureau of Indian
Affairs.
The meetings are open to the public.
The Advisory Board will accept public
comments during a teleconference
session.
Dated: June 15, 2006.
Debbie Clark,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—
Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 06–5581 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–6W–M
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[WO–310–1310–PB–24 1A; OMB Control
Number 1004–0185]
Information Collection Submitted to
the Office of Management and Budget
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
The Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) has submitted the proposed
collection of information listed below to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for approval under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). On
September 20, 2005, the BLM published
a notice in the Federal Register (70 FR
55160) requesting comments on this
proposed collection. The comment
period ended on November 21, 2005.
The BLM received no comments. You
may obtain copies of the proposed
collection of information and related
forms and explanatory material by
contacting the BLM Information
Collection Clearance Officer at the
telephone number listed below.
The OMB is required to respond to
this request within 60 days but may
respond after 30 days. For maximum
consideration your comments an
suggestions on the requirement should
be made within 30 days directly to the
Office of Management and Budget,
Interior Department Desk Officer (1004–
0185), at OMB–OIRA via facsimile to
(202) 395–6566 or e-mail to
OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov. Please
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 120 (Thursday, June 22, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35928-35944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-5589]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Marine Mammals; Incidental Take During Specified Activities
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of application and proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has received an
application from the University of Texas at Austin Institute for
Geophysics (UTIG) for authorization to take small numbers of marine
mammals by harassment incidental to conducting a marine seismic survey
in the Arctic Ocean, including the Chukchi Sea, from approximately July
15 through August 25, 2006. In accordance with provisions of the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, the Service requests comments
on its proposed authorization for the applicant to incidentally take,
by harassment, small numbers of Pacific walrus and polar bears in the
Chukchi Sea during the seismic survey.
DATES: Comments and information must be received by July 24, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
1. By mail to: Craig Perham, Office of Marine Mammals Management,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska
99503.
2. By fax to: 907-786-3816.
3. By electronic mail (e-mail) to: FW7MMM@FWS.gov. Please submit
comments as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and
any form of encryption. Please also include your name and return
address in your message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the
system that we have received your message, contact us directly at U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Marine Mammals Management, 907-
786-3810 or 1-800-362-5148.
4. By hand-delivery to: Office of Marine Mammals Management, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska
99503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Perham, Office of Marine Mammals
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road,
Anchorage, Alaska 99503; telephone 907-786-3810 or 1-800-362-5148; or
e-mail craig--perham@FWS.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA, as amended, (16 U.S.C.
1371(a)(5)(A) and (D)) authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region provided that certain findings are made and either
regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a
notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review
and comment.
Authorization to incidentally take marine mammals may be granted if
the Service finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the
species or stock(s), and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on
the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses.
Permissible methods of taking and other means of affecting the least
practicable impact on the species or stock and its habitat, and
requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such
takings, are prescribed as part of the authorization process.
The term ``take,'' as defined by the MMPA, means to harass, hunt,
capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any
marine mammal. Harassment, as defined by the MMPA, means ``any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which--(i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [the MMPA calls this
Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of
behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration,
breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [the MMPA calls
this Level B harassment].''
The terms ``small numbers,'' ``negligible impact,'' and
``unmitigable adverse impact'' are defined in 50 CFR 18.27, the
Service's regulations governing take of small numbers of marine mammals
incidental to specified activities. ``Small numbers'' is defined as ``a
portion of a marine mammal species or stock whose taking would have a
negligible impact on that species or stock.'' ``Negligible impact'' is
defined as ``an impact resulting from the specified activity that
cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to,
adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates
of recruitment or survival.'' ``Unmitigable adverse impact'' is defined
as ``an impact resulting from the specified activity (1) that is likely
to reduce the availability of the species to a level insufficient for a
harvest to meet subsistence needs by (i) causing the marine mammals to
abandon or avoid hunting areas, (ii) directly displacing subsistence
users, or (iii) placing physical barriers between the marine mammals
and the subsistence hunters; and (2) that cannot be sufficiently
mitigated by other measures to increase the availability of marine
mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met.''
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals where the take
will be limited to harassment. Section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) establishes a
45-day time limit for Service review of an application followed by a
30-day public notice and comment period on any proposed authorizations
for the incidental harassment of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the
close of the comment period, the Service must
[[Page 35929]]
either issue or deny issuance of the authorization. The Service refers
to these authorizations as Incidental Harassment Authorizations (IHAs).
Summary of Request
On March 17, 2006, the Service received an application from UTIG
for the taking by harassment of Pacific walrus and polar bears
incidental to conducting, with research funding from the National
Science Foundation (NSF), a marine seismic survey in the Western Canada
Basin, Chukchi Borderland, and Mendeleev Ridge of the Arctic Ocean
during July through August, 2006. The seismic survey will be operated
in conjunction with a sediment coring project, which will obtain data
regarding crustal structure, and will take place far north of the
Chukchi Sea. A description of the coring activities is provided in the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) proposed IHA
for this same research cruise in the Federal Register of May 15, 2006
(71 FR 27997). Walrus do not occur in the area of the coring activities
and there is no potential for harassment of walrus. There is a
potential that coring activities may encounter a very few isolated
members of the Chukchi Sea polar bear stock; however, the effects to
those individuals would be no more than minimal. This authorization,
therefore, assesses the incidental harassment of walrus and polar bear
resulting from the seismic survey activity in the Chukchi Sea.
The purpose of the proposed study is to collect seismic reflection
and refraction data and sediment cores that reveal the crustal
structure and composition of submarine plateaus in the western Amerasia
Basin in the Arctic Ocean. Past studies have led many researchers to
support the idea that the Amerasia Basin opened about a pivot point
near the Mackenzie Delta. However, the crustal character of the Chukchi
Borderlands could determine whether that scenario is correct, or
whether more complicated tectonic scenarios must be devised to explain
the presence of the Amerasia Basin. These data will assist in the
determination of the tectonic evolution of the Amerasia Basin and
Canada Basin, which is fundamental to such basic concerns as sea level
fluctuations and paleoclimate in the Mesozoic era.
Description of the Activity
The Healy, a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Cutter ice-breaker, will
rendezvous with the science party off Barrow, Alaska, on or around July
15, 2006. Trained marine mammal observers will also be onboard during
the cruise. The Healy will sail north and arrive at the beginning of
the seismic survey, which will start more than 150 kilometers (km) (93
miles [mi]) north of Barrow. The cruise will last for approximately 40
days, and it is estimated that the total seismic survey time will be
approximately 30 days depending on ice conditions. Seismic survey work
is scheduled to terminate west of Barrow about August 25, 2006. The
vessel will then sail south to Nome, Alaska, where the science party
will disembark. In conjunction with the seismic survey, a sediment
coring project will be conducted in the Arctic Ocean, north of the
Chukchi Sea. The NOAA's proposed IHA for this same research cruise,
published in the Federal Register of May 15, 2006, describes the coring
project activities.
The majority of seismic survey activities will take place in the
Arctic Ocean. The Chukchi Sea segment of the survey is approximately
478 km, located between 75[deg] N and 70.9[deg] N and will occur in
mid- to late August. The bulk of the seismic survey will not be
conducted in any country's territorial waters. However, the survey will
occur within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the United States for
approximately 563 km.
The Healy will use a portable Multi-Channel Seismic (MCS) system to
conduct the seismic survey. A cluster of eight airguns will be used as
the energy source during most of the cruise, especially in deep water
areas. The airgun array will have four 500-cubic inches
(in3) Bolt airguns and four 210-in3 G. guns for a
total discharge volume of 2,840-in3. In shallow water,
occurring during the first and last portions of the cruise, a four 105-
in3 GI gun array with a total discharge volume of 420
in3 will be used. Other sound sources (see below) will also
be employed during the cruise. The seismic operations during the survey
will be used to obtain information on the history of the ridges and
basins that make up the Arctic Ocean.
The airgun arrays will discharge about once every 60 seconds. The
compressed air will be supplied by compressors onboard the source
vessel. The Healy will also tow a hydrophone streamer 100 to 150 meters
(328 to 492 feet [ft]) behind the ship, depending on ice conditions.
The hydrophone streamer will be up to 200 m (656 ft) long. As the
source operates along the survey lines, the hydrophone receiving system
will receive and record the returning acoustic signals. In addition to
the hydrophone streamer, sea ice seismometers (SIS) will be deployed on
ice floes ahead of the ship using a vessel-based helicopter, and then
retrieved from behind the ship once it has passed the SIS locations.
The SISs will be deployed as much as 120 km (74 mi) ahead of the
ship, and recovered when as much as 120 km (74 mi) behind the ship. The
seismometers will be placed on top of ice floes with a hydrophone
lowered into the water through a small hole drilled in the ice. These
instruments will allow seismic refraction data to be collected in the
heavily ice-covered waters of the region.
The program will consist of a total of approximately 3,625 km
(2,252 mi) of surveys, not including transits when the airguns are not
operating. The area included in this proposal is the southwest leg,
which extends 478 km into the Chukchi Sea (south of 75[deg] N). Water
depths within the study area are 40 to 3,858 m (131 to 12,657 ft).
Little more than 15 percent (approximately 73 km [45 mi]) of the
Chukchi Sea survey segment will occur in water deeper than 1,000 m
(3,280 ft); 21 percent (approximately 102 km [63 mi]) will be conducted
in water 100 to 1,000 m (328 to 3,280 ft) deep. Most of the Chukchi
survey track, 64 percent (approximately 303 km [188 mi]), will occur in
water less than 100 m (328 ft). The Principal Investigators (PIs) plan
to use the larger, 8-airgun array for only 24 km (15 mi) along the
northernmost reach of the Chukchi survey line in deep water (greater
than 1,000 m). There will be additional seismic operations associated
with airgun testing, start up, and repeat coverage of any areas where
initial data quality is sub-standard. In addition to the airgun array,
a multibeam sonar and sub-bottom profiler will be used during the
seismic profiling and continuously when underway.
Vessel Specifications
The Healy has a length of 128 m (420 ft), a beam of 25 m (82 ft),
and a full load draft of 8.9 m (29 ft). The Healy is capable of
traveling at 5.6 km/h (3 knots) through 1.4 m (4.6 ft) of ice. A
Central Power Plant, consisting of four Sultzer 12Z AU40S diesel
generators, provides electric power for propulsion and ship's services
through a 60 Hz, 3-phase common bus distribution system. Propulsion
power is provided by two electric AC Synchronous, 11.2 MW drive motors,
fed from the common bus through a cycloconverter system, that turn two
fixed-pitch, four-bladed propellers. The operation speed during seismic
acquisition is expected to be approximately 6.5 km/hr (hour) (3.5
knots). When not towing seismic survey gear or breaking ice, the Healy
cruises at 22 km/hr (12 knots) and has a maximum speed of 31.5 km/hr
(17 knots). It has a normal operating range
[[Page 35930]]
of about 29,650 km (18,423 mi) at 23.2 km/hr (12.5 knots).
Seismic Source Description
A portable MCS system will be installed on the Healy for this
cruise. The source vessel will tow along predetermined lines one of two
different airgun arrays (an 8-airgun array with a total discharge
volume of 2,840 in\3\ or a four GI gun array with a total discharge
volume of 420 in\3\), as well as a hydrophone streamer. Seismic pulses
will be emitted at intervals of approximately 60 seconds and recorded
at a 2 millisecond (ms) sampling rate. The 60-second spacing
corresponds to a shot interval of approximately 120 m (394 ft) at the
anticipated typical cruise speed.
As the airgun array is towed along the survey line, the towed
hydrophone array receives the reflected signals and transfers the data
to the onboard processing system. The SISs will store returning signals
on an internal datalogger and also relay them in real-time to the Healy
via a radio transmitter, where they will be recorded and processed.
The 8-airgun array will be configured as a four-G. gun cluster with
a total discharge volume of 840 in\3\ and a four Bolt airgun cluster
with a total discharge volume of 2,000 in\3\. The source output is from
246 to 253 dB re 1 [mu]Pa m. The two clusters are four meter apart,
which will result in less downward directivity than is often present
during seismic surveys and more horizontal propagation of sound. The
clusters will be operated simultaneously for a total discharge volume
of 2,840 in\3\. The 4-GI gun array will be configured the same as the
four G. gun portion of the 8-airgun array. The energy source (source
level 239-245 dB re 1 [mu]Pa m) will be towed as close to the stern as
possible to minimize ice interference. The 8-airgun array will be towed
below a depressor bird at a depth of 7-20 m (23-66 ft) depending on ice
conditions; the preferred depth is 8-10 m (26-33 ft).
The highest sound level measurable at any location in the water
from the airgun arrays would be slightly less than the nominal source
level because the actual source is a distributed source rather than a
point source. The depth at which the source is towed has a major impact
on the maximum near-field output, and on the shape of its frequency
spectrum. In this case, the source is expected to be towed at a
relatively deep depth of up to 9 m (30 ft).
The rms (root mean square) received sound levels that are used as
impact criteria for marine mammals are not directly comparable to the
peak or peak-to-peak values normally used to characterize source levels
of airguns. The measurement units used to describe airgun sources, peak
or peak-to-peak dB, are always higher than the rms dB referred to in
much of the biological literature. A measured received level of 160 dB
rms in the far field would typically correspond to a peak measurement
of about 170 to 172 dB, and to a peak-to-peak measurement of about 176
to 178 decibels, as measured for the same pulse received at the same
location (Greene 1997; McCauley et al. 1998, 2000). The precise
difference between rms and peak or peak-to-peak values for a given
pulse depends on the frequency content and duration of the pulse, among
other factors. However, the rms level is always lower than the peak or
peak-to-peak level for an airgun-type source. Additional discussion of
the characteristics of airgun pulses is included in Appendix A of
UTIG's application.
Safety Radii Proposed by UTIG
Received sound fields have been modeled by Lamont-Doherty Earth
Observatory (L-DEO) for the 8-airgun and 4-GI gun arrays that will be
used during this survey. For deep water, where most of the present
project is to occur, the L-DEO model has been shown to be
precautionary, i.e., it tends to overestimate radii for 190, 180, 170,
160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa rms (Tolstoy et al. 2004a, b).
Predicted sound fields were modeled using sound exposure level
(SEL) units (dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s), because a model based on those units
tends to produce more stable output when dealing with mixed-gun arrays
like the one to be used during this survey. The predicted SEL values
can be converted to rms received pressure levels, in dB re 1 [mu]Pa by
adding approximately 15 dB to the SEL value (Greene 1997; McCauley et
al. 1998, 2000). The rms pressure is an average over the pulse
duration. This is the measure commonly used in studies of marine mammal
reactions to airgun sounds. The rms level of a seismic pulse is
typically about 10 dB less than its peak level.
Empirical data concerning 190, 180, 170, and 160 dB (rms) distances
in deep and shallow water were acquired for various airgun array
configurations during the acoustic verification study conducted by L-
DEO in the northern Gulf of Mexico (Tolstoy et al. 2004a, b). The
proposed Chukchi Sea survey track will occur mainly in shallow water
with approximately 64 percent of trackline in water depths greater than
100 m, 21 percent in intermediate water depths (100-1,000 m), and 15
percent in water deeper than 1,000 meter.
The L-DEO model does not allow for bottom interactions, and thus,
is most directly applicable to deep water and to relatively short
ranges. In intermediate-depth water a precautionary 1.5x correction
factor will be applied to the values predicted by L-DEO's model, as has
been done in other recent NSF-sponsored seismic studies. In shallow
water, larger precautionary factors derived from the empirical shallow-
water measurements will be applied (see Table 1).
Table 1.--Estimated Distances to Which Sound Levels (dB re 1[mu] Pa) Might Be Received From Various Gun-Types Used During the Healy Arctic Cruise
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated distances for received levels (m)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
170 dB
(alternate
Seismic source volume Water depth 190 dB (shut- 180 dB (shut- behavioral 160 dB (assumed
down criterion down criterion harassment onset of
for pinnipeds) for cetaceans) criterion for behavioral
delphinids & harassment)
pinnipeds)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
105 in\3\ GI gun.............................. >1,000 m........................ 10 27 90 275
100-1,000 m..................... 15 41 135 413
<100 m.......................... 125 200 375 750
210 in\3\ G. gun.............................. >1,000 m........................ 20 78 222 698
100-1,000 m..................... 30 117 333 1,047
<100 m.......................... 250 578 925 1,904
420 in\3\ (4-GI gun array).................... >1,000 m........................ 75 246 771 2,441
[[Page 35931]]
100-1,000 m..................... 113 369 1,157 3,662
<100 m.......................... 938 1,822 3,213 6,657
2,840 in\3\ (8-airgun array).................. >1,000 m........................ 230 716 2,268 7,097
100-1,000 m..................... *NA *NA *NA *NA
<100 m.......................... *NA *NA *NA *NA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The 8-airgun array will only be operated in deep (greater than 1,000 m) water for approximately 24 km at the northern extent of the Chukchi Sea
portion of the survey.
The empirical data indicate that, for deep water (greater than
1,000 m), the L-DEO model tends to overestimate the received sound
levels at a given distance (Tolstoy et al. 2004a, b). However, to be
precautionary pending acquisition of additional empirical data, it is
proposed that safety radii during airgun operations in deep water will
be the values predicted by L-DEO's modeling, after conversion from SEL
to rms (Table 1). The estimated 190 dB (rms) radii for 8-airgun and 4-
GI gun arrays are 230 (745 ft) and 75 m (246 ft), respectively.
Empirical measurements were not taken for intermediate depths (100-
1,000 m). On the expectation that results would be intermediate between
those from shallow and deep water, a 1.5x correction factor is applied
to the estimates provided by the model for deep water situations. This
is the same factor that has been applied to the model estimates during
L-DEO operations in intermediate-depth water from 2003 through early
2005. The assumed 190 dB (rms) radius in intermediate-depth water is
113 m for the 4-GI gun array (Table 1). The 8-airgun array will only be
used in deep water, i.e., greater than 1,000 m.
Empirical measurements were not made for the 4 GI guns that will be
employed during the proposed survey in shallow water (less than 100 m).
(The 8-airgun array will not be used in shallow water.) The empirical
data on operations of two 105 in\3\ GI guns in shallow water showed
that modeled values underestimated the distance to the actual 160 dB
sound level radii in shallow water by a factor of approximately 3
(Tolstoy et al. 2004b). Sound level measurements for the 2 GI guns were
not available for distances less than 0.5 km (.31 mi) from the source.
The radii estimated here for the 4-GI guns operating in shallow water
are derived from the L-DEO model, with the same adjustments for depth-
related differences between modeled and measured sound levels as were
used for 2-GI guns in earlier applications. Correction factors for the
different sound level radii are approximately 12x the model estimate
for the 190 dB radius in shallow water, approximately 7x for the 180 dB
radius, and approximately 4x for the 170 dB radius (Tolstoy 2004a, b).
Thus, the 190 dB radius in shallow water is assumed to be 938 m (3,077
ft) for the 4-GI gun array (Table 1).
Pursuant to the mitigation measures of this proposed authorization,
the airguns will be powered down (or shut-down if necessary)
immediately when walrus or polar bears are detected within or about to
enter the appropriate radii. The 190 dB safety criteria are consistent
with guidelines listed for pinnipeds, by the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) (2000) and other guidance by NMFS. The UTIG will
conservatively apply the same 190 dB criterion to polar bears in water
in this IHA request. Although sound effects on the walrus and polar
bears have not been studied, the 190 dB criterion was selected because
walrus, which are pinnipeds, are expected to react similarly to other
pinnipeds. Polar bears normally swim with their heads above the surface
and are likely to be less sensitive than pinnipeds to human-caused
underwater sounds.
Other Acoustic Devices
Along with the airgun operations, additional acoustical systems
will be operated during much of or the entire cruise. The ocean floor
will be mapped with a multibeam sonar, and a sub-bottom profiler will
be used. These two systems are commonly operated simultaneously with an
airgun system. An acoustic Doppler current profiler will also be used
through the course of the project.
A SeaBeam 2112 multibeam 12 kHz bathymetric sonar system will be
used on the Healy, with a maximum source output of 237 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
at one meter. The transmit frequency is a very narrow band, less than
200 Hz, and centered at 12 kHz. Pulse lengths range from less than one
ms to 12 ms. The transmit interval ranges from 1.5 to 20 seconds,
depending on the water depth, and is longer in deeper water. The
SeaBeam system consists of a set of underhull projectors and
hydrophones. The transmitted beam is narrow (approximately 2[deg]) in
the fore-aft direction but broad (approximately 132[deg]) in the cross-
track direction. The system combines this transmitted beam with the
input from an array of receiving hydrophones oriented perpendicular to
the array of source transducers, and calculates bathymetric data (sea
floor depth and some indications about the character of the seafloor)
with an effective 2[deg] by 2[deg] footprint on the seafloor. The
SeaBeam 2112 system on the Healy produces a useable swath width of
slightly more than 2 times the water depth. This is narrower than
normal because of the ice-protection features incorporated into the
system on the Healy.
The Knudsen 320BR will provide information on sedimentary layering,
down to between 20 and 70 m, depending on bottom type and slope. It
will be operated with the multibeam bathymetric sonar system that will
simultaneously map the bottom topography.
The Knudsen 320BR sub-bottom profiler is a dual-frequency system
with operating frequencies of 3.5 and 12 kHz:
Low frequency--Maximum output power into the transducer array, as
wired on the Healy (125 ohms), at 3.5 kHz is approximately 6,000 watts
(electrical), which results in a maximum source level of 221 dB re 1
[mu]Pa at 1 m downward. Pulse lengths range from 1.5
[[Page 35932]]
to 24 ms with a bandwidth of 3 kHz (FM sweep from 3 kHz to 6 kHz). The
repetition rate is range dependent, but the maximum is a 1-percent duty
cycle. Typical repetition rate is between one-half second (in shallow
water) to 8 s in deep water.
High frequency--The Knudsen 320BR is capable of operating at 12
kHz, but the higher frequency is rarely used because it interferes with
the SeaBeam 2112 multibeam sonar, which also operates at 12 kHz. The
calculated maximum source level (downward) is 215 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at 1 m
(3.28 ft). The pulse duration is typically 1.5 to 5 ms with the same
limitations and typical characteristics as the low-frequency channel.
A single 12 kHz transducer and one 3.5 kHz, low-frequency (sub-
bottom) transducer array, consisting of 16 elements in a 4-by-4 array
will be used for the Knudsen 320BR. The 12 kHz transducer (TC-12/34)
emits a conical beam with a width of 30[deg], and the 3.5 kHz
transducer (TR109) emits a conical beam with a width of 26[deg].
The 150 kHz acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCPTM)
has a minimum ping rate of 0.65 ms. There are four beam sectors, and
each beamwidth is 3[deg]. The pointing angle for each beam is 30[deg]
off from vertical with one each to port, starboard, forward, and aft.
The four beams do not overlap. The 150 kHz ADCPTM's maximum
depth range is 300 m.
The Ocean Surveyor 75 is an ADCPTM operating at a
frequency of 75 kHz, producing a ping every 1.4 s. The system is a
four-beam phased array with a beam angle of 30[deg]. Each beam has a
width of 4[deg], and there is no overlap. Maximum output power is 1 kW
with a maximum depth range of 700 m (2,297 ft).
Plan of Cooperation
The UTIG will consult with representatives of the communities along
the Chukchi Sea coast to identify any areas or issues of potential
conflict. These communities are Point Hope, Point Lay, Wainwright, and
Barrow. A Plan of Cooperation (POC) for the 2006 seismic survey in the
Chukchi Sea will be developed if identified as warranted during these
consultations and determined to be necessary by the Service. The POC
would cover the phases of UTIG's seismic surveys planned in the Chukchi
Sea when appropriate for the 2006 project. The purpose of the POC will
be to identify measures that will be taken to minimize any adverse
effects on the availability of marine mammals for subsistence uses, and
to ensure good communication between the project scientists and the
native communities along the coast.
Subsequent meetings with community representatives and any other
parties to the POC will be held as necessary to negotiate the terms of
the plan and to coordinate the planned seismic survey operation with
subsistence hunting. The POC may address: Operational agreement and
communications procedures; where and when the agreement becomes
effective; the general communications scheme; onboard observers;
conflict avoidance; seasonally sensitive areas; vessel navigation; air
navigation; marine mammal monitoring activities; measures to avoid
impacts to marine mammals; measures to avoid conflicts in areas of
active hunting; emergency assistance; and the dispute resolution
process.
In addition, one (or more) Alaska Native knowledgeable about the
mammals and fish of the area is expected to be included as a member of
the observer team aboard the Healy. Although the primary
responsibilities encompass implementing the monitoring and mitigation
requirements, duties will also include acting as a liaison with hunters
and fishers if they are encountered at sea. In the unlikely event
subsistence hunting or fishing is occurring within 5 km (3 mi) of the
Healy's trackline, the airgun operations will be suspended until the
Healy is approximately 5 km (3 mi) away.
Description of Habitat and Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity
A detailed description of the Chukchi Sea ecosystem and the
associated marine mammals can be found in several documents (Corps of
Engineers 1999; NMFS 1999; Minerals Management Service (MMS) 2006,
1996, and 1992). MMS' Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA)-
Arctic Ocean Outer Continental Shelf Seismic Surveys 2006--may be
viewed at: https://www.mms.gov/alaska.
The marine mammals that occur in the proposed survey area belong to
three taxonomic groups: odontocetes (toothed cetaceans, such as beluga
whale and narwhal whale), mysticetes (baleen whales), and carnivora
(pinnipeds and polar bears). Cetaceans and pinnipeds, with the
exception of walrus, are managed by the NMFS and are being addressed by
that agency (71 FR 27997; May 15, 2006). Pacific walrus and polar bear,
which are managed by the Service, are the subject of this proposed IHA.
Pacific Walrus
Concentrations of walrus might be encountered in certain areas,
depending on the location of the edge of the pack ice relative to their
favored shallow-water foraging habitat. There are two recognized
subspecies of walrus: the Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens)
and Atlantic walrus (O. r. rosmarus). Only the Pacific subspecies is
potentially within the planned seismic survey study area.
The Pacific walrus is represented by a single stock of animals that
inhabits the shallow continental shelf waters of the Bering and Chukchi
Seas, occasionally moving into the East Siberian and Beaufort Seas. The
population ranges across the international boundaries of the United
States and Russia, and both nations share common interests with respect
to the conservation and management of this species.
Walrus are migratory, moving south with the advancing ice in autumn
and north as the ice recedes in spring (Fay 1981). In the summer, most
of the population of Pacific walrus moves to the Chukchi Sea, but
several thousands aggregate in the Gulf of Anadyr and in Bristol Bay
(Angliss and Lodge 2004). Limited numbers of walrus inhabit the
Beaufort Sea during the open water season, and they are considered
extralimital east of Point Barrow (Sease and Chapman 1988).
The northeast Chukchi Sea west of Barrow is the northeastern extent
of the main summer range of the walrus, and only a few are seen farther
east in the Beaufort Sea (e.g., Harwood et al. 2005). Walrus observed
in the Beaufort Sea have typically been lone individuals. The reported
subsistence harvest of walrus by Barrow hunters for the 5-year period
of 1994-1998 was 99 walrus (USDI 2000a). Most of these were harvested
west of Point Barrow. In addition, between 1988 and 1998, Kaktovik
hunters harvested one walrus (USDI 2000b).
Walrus are most commonly found near the southern margins of the
pack ice as opposed to deep in the pack where few open leads (polynyas)
exist to afford access to the sea for foraging (Estes and Gilbert 1978;
Gilbert 1989; Fay 1982). Walrus are not typically found in areas of
greater than 80 percent ice cover (Fay 1982). Ice serves as an
important mobile platform, floating the walrus on to new foraging
habitat and providing a place to rest and nurse their young.
This close relationship to the ice largely determines walrus
distribution and the timing of their migrations. As the pack ice breaks
up in the Bering Sea and recedes northward in May and June, a majority
of subadults, females, and calves migrate with it, either by
[[Page 35933]]
swimming or resting on drifting ice sheets. Many males will choose to
stay in the Bering Sea for the entire year, with concentrations near
Saint Lawrence Island and further south in Bristol Bay. Two northward
migration pathways are apparent, either toward the eastern Chukchi Sea
near Barrow or northwestward toward Wrangel Island. By late June to
early July, concentrations of walrus migrating northeastward spread
along the Alaska coast congregating within 200 km of the shore from
Saint Lawrence Island to southwest of Barrow. In August, largely
dependent on the retreat of the pack ice, walrus are found further
offshore with principal concentrations to the northwest of Barrow. By
October, a reverse migration occurs out of the Chukchi Sea, with
animals swimming ahead of the developing pack ice, as it is too weak to
support them (Fay 1982).
Estimates of the pre-exploitation population of the Pacific walrus
range from 200,000 to 400,000 animals (USFWS 2000a). Over the past 150
years, the population has been depleted by overharvesting and then
periodically allowed to recover (Fay et al. 1989). An aerial survey
flown in 1990 produced a population estimate of 201,039 animals;
however, large confidence intervals associated with that estimate
precluded any conclusions concerning population trend (Gilbert et al.
1992). The most current minimum population estimate is 188,316 walrus
(USFWS 2000a). This estimate is conservative, because a portion of the
Chukchi Sea was not surveyed due to lack of ice. The Service and U.S.
Geological Survey, in partnership with Russian scientists, will conduct
a rangewide survey to estimate population size. The results of these
survey efforts should be available in 2007 (USFWS 2006).
Pacific walrus feed primarily on benthic invertebrates,
occasionally fish and cephalopods, and more rarely, some adult males
may prey on other pinnipeds (reviewed in Riedman 1990). Walrus
typically feed in depths of 10 to 50 m (Vibe 1950; Fay 1982). Though
the deepest dive recorded for a walrus was 133 m, they are more likely
to be found in depths of 80 m or less in coastal or continental shelf
habitats, where the clams and other mollusks that walrus prefer are
found (Fay 1982; Fay and Burns 1988; Reeves et al. 2002). In a recent
study in Bristol Bay, 98 percent of satellite locations of tagged
walrus were foraging in water depths of 60 m or less (Chadwick and
Hills 2005).
Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) are known to prey on walrus calves,
and killer whales (Orcinus orca) have been known to take all age
classes of animals. Predation levels are thought to be highest near
terrestrial haulout sites where large aggregations of walrus can be
found; however, few observations exist for off-shore environs.
Pacific walrus have been hunted by coastal Natives in Alaska and
Chukotka for thousands of years. Exploitation of walrus by Europeans
has also occurred in varying degrees since first contact. Presently,
walrus hunting in Alaska and Chukotka is restricted to meet the
subsistence needs of aboriginal peoples. The Service, in partnership
with the Eskimo Walrus Commission (EWC) and the Association of
Traditional Marine Mammal Hunters of Chukotka, administers subsistence
harvest monitoring programs in Alaska and Chukotka.
Intraspecific trauma is also a known source of walrus injury and
mortality. Disturbance events can cause walrus to stampede into the
water and have been known to result in injuries and mortalities. The
risk of stampede-related injuries increases with the number of animals
hauled out. Calves and young animals at the perimeter of these herds
are particularly vulnerable to trampling injuries.
Most (64 percent or 303 km) of the proposed Chukchi Sea seismic
work will take place in water less than 100 m deep. Of those 303 km,
220 km will be surveyed in water greater then 60 m, where walrus prefer
to forage (Chadwick and Hills 2005). During a survey through open water
in the northern Chukchi Sea in early August of 2005, only three walrus
were sighted south of 72.8[deg] N in water 47 to 69 m deep (Haley and
Ireland 2006).
The probability of encountering Pacific walrus along the proposed
survey line in the Chukchi Sea will depend on the location of the
southern margin of the pack ice and the timing of spring break-up. If
the Healy crosses the margin when the ice margin is close to depths
where walrus prefer to feed, it is likely that walrus will be
encountered.
Polar Bear
Polar bears have a circumpolar distribution throughout the northern
hemisphere (Amstrup et al. 1986) and occur in relatively low densities
throughout most ice-covered areas (DeMaster and Stirling 1981). Polar
bears are divided into six major populations and many sub-populations
based on mark-and-recapture studies (Lentfer 1983), radio telemetry
studies (Amstrup and Gardner 1994), and morpho-metrics (Manning 1971;
Wilson 1976). Polar bears are common in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas
north of Alaska throughout the year, including the late summer period
(Harwood et al. 2005). They also occur throughout the East Siberian,
Laptev, and Kara Seas of Russia and the Barent's Sea of northern
Europe. They are found in the northern part of the Greenland Sea, and
are common in Baffin Bay, which separates Canada and Greenland, as well
as through most of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago.
In Alaska, they have been observed as far south in the eastern
Bering Sea as St. Matthew Island and the Pribilof Islands, but they are
most commonly found within 180 miles of the Alaskan coast of the
Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, from the Bering Strait to the Canadian
border. Two stocks occur in Alaska: (1) The Chukchi/Bering Seas stock;
and (2) the Southern Beaufort Sea stock. The Chukchi/Bering Seas stock
is defined as polar bears inhabiting the area as far west as the
eastern portion of the Eastern Siberian Sea, as far east as Point
Barrow, and extending into the Bering Sea, with its southern boundary
determined by the extent of annual ice.
The world population estimate of polar bears ranges from 20,000-
25,000 individuals (ICUN, in prep). Amstrup (1995) estimated the
minimum population of polar bears for the Beaufort Sea to be
approximately 1,500 to 1,800 individuals, with an average density of
about one bear per 38.6 to 77.2 square miles (100 to 200 km\2\).
Previous population estimates have put the Chukchi/Bering Seas
population at 2,000 to 5,000; however, there are no reliable data on
the population status of polar bears in the Bering/Chukchi Seas. An
estimate was derived by subtracting the total estimated Alaska polar
bear population from the Beaufort Sea population, thus yielding an
estimate of 1,200-3,200 animals (Amstrup 1995).
The Alaskan polar bear population is considered to be stable or
increasing slightly (USFWS 2000b, c). Polar bear populations located in
the Southern Beaufort Sea have been estimated to have an annual growth
rate of 2.2 to 2.4 percent with an annual harvest of only 1.9 percent
(Amstrup 1995). The Southern Beaufort Sea population ranges from the
Baillie Islands, Canada, in the east to Point Hope, Alaska, in the
west. The Chukchi/Bering Seas population ranges from Point Barrow,
Alaska, in the east to the Eastern Siberian Sea in the west. These two
populations overlap between Point Hope and Point Barrow, Alaska,
centered near Point Lay (Amstrup 1995). Both of these populations have
been extensively studied by tracking the movement of tagged females
(Garner et al. 1990). Radio-tracking studies indicate significant
movement within
[[Page 35934]]
populations and occasional movement between populations (Garner et al.
1990; Amstrup 1995).
Although insufficient data exist to accurately quantify polar bear
denning along the Alaskan Chukchi Sea coast, dens in the area are less
concentrated than for other areas in the Arctic. The majority of
denning of Chukchi Sea polar bears occurs on Wrangel Island, Herald
Island, and certain locations on the northern Chukotka coast. Females
without dependent cubs breed in the spring, and pregnant females enter
maternity dens by late November; the young are usually born in late
December or early January. Female bears can be quite sensitive to
disturbances during this denning period.
Greater than 90 percent of a polar bear's diet is ringed (Phoca
hispida) and bearded (Erignathus barbatus) seals; walrus calves are
hunted occasionally. Polar bears hunt in areas where there are high
concentrations of ringed and bearded seals (Larsen 1985; Stirling and
McEwan 1975). This includes areas of land-fast ice, as well as moving
pack ice. They hunt along leads and other areas of open water, or by
waiting at a breathing hole, or by breaking through the roof of a
seal's lair. Lairs are excavated in snow drifts on top of the ice.
Bears also stalk seals in the spring when they haul out on the ice in
warm weather. The relationship between ice type and bear distribution
is as yet unknown, but it is suspected to be related to seal
availability. Polar bears are opportunistic feeders and feed on a
variety of foods and carcasses, including other marine mammals,
reindeer, arctic cod, and geese and their eggs (Smith 1985; Jefferson
et al. 1993; Smith and Hill 1996; Derocher et al. 2000). Polar bears
are also known to eat nonfood items including styrofoam, plastic,
antifreeze, and hydraulic and lubricating fluids.
The most significant source of mortality is man. Before the MMPA
was passed, polar bears were taken by sport hunters and residents.
Between 1925 and 1972, the mean reported kill was 186 bears per year.
Since 1972, only Alaska Natives have been allowed to hunt polar bears
for their subsistence uses or for handicraft and clothing items for
sale. From 1980 to 2005, the total annual harvest for Alaska averaged
101 bears: 64 percent from the Chukchi Sea and 36 percent from the
Beaufort Sea.
MMS bowhead whale aerial surveys since 1979 have documented an
increase, starting in 1992, in the proportion of polar bears associated
with land vs. sea-ice in the fall season (Monnett et al. 2005). In
2004, a large number of bears were observed swimming more than 2 km
offshore, and a number of polar bear carcasses were subsequently
observed offshore. Monnett et al. (2005) suggest that, as the pack ice
edge moves northward, drowning deaths of polar bears may increase. The
number of polar bears encountered in open water may, therefore, be
slightly higher than previously reported.
Polar bears typically range as far north as 88[deg] N (Ray 1971;
Durner and Amstrup 1995); at about 88[deg] N their population thins
dramatically. However, polar bears have been observed across the
Arctic, including close to the North Pole (van Meurs and Splettstoesser
2003). Stirling (1990) reported that, of 181 sightings of bears, only 3
were above 82[deg] N. Three polar bears were observed from the Healy in
the northern Chukchi Sea during a survey through this area in August of
2005 (Haley and Ireland 2006). These three sightings occurred along
2,401 km of observed trackline over 14 days between 70[deg] N and
81[deg] N.
Historically, polar bears have preferred the pack ice over coastal
areas during the summer (Stirling 1988; Amstrup 1995). However, since
the late 1980s, polar bears have been observed in greater numbers near
coastal areas during late summer and fall in the central Beaufort Sea
(Schliebe et al. 2004). This recent observation of bear behavior may be
related to the 30-year moratorium on polar bear hunting and the recent
success of subsistence whale harvests, the scraps of which appear to
have become a reliable, annual food source for polar bears (Schliebe et
al. 2004). The Healy is likely to encounter polar bears when it enters
the pack ice, and small numbers of bears could be encountered anywhere
along the entire trackline, as well as in the course of coring
activities.
Potential Impacts of Activities on Pacific Walrus and Polar Bear
Potential Effects of Airguns
The effects of sounds from airguns might include one or more of the
following: noise, behavioral disturbance, and, at least in theory,
temporary or permanent hearing impairment, or non-auditory physical
effects (Richardson et al. 1995). Because the airgun sources planned
for use during the present project involve only 4 or 8 airguns, the
effects are anticipated to be less than would be the case with a large
array of airguns. It is very unlikely that there would be any cases of
temporary or especially permanent hearing impairment, or non-auditory
physical effects. Also, behavioral disturbance is expected to be
limited to relatively short distances.
Species Perception of Sound and Masking Effects
The underwater hearing of a walrus has been measured at frequencies
from 13 Hz to 1,200 Hz. The range of best hearing was from 1 to 12 kHz,
with maximum sensitivity (67 dB re 1 [mu]Pa) occurring at 12 kHz
(Kastelein et al. 2002). Most of the energy in the sound pulses emitted
by airgun arrays is at low frequencies, with the strongest spectrum
levels below 200 Hz and considerably lower spectrum levels above 1,000
Hz. These low frequencies are not generally used by Pacific walrus.
Masking effects of pulsed sound (even from large arrays of airguns) on
Pacific walrus calls and other natural sounds are expected to be
limited, and given the intermittent nature of these seismic pulses,
masking effects are expected to be negligible. Any sound levels
received by polar bears in the water would be attenuated because polar
bears generally swim with their heads out of the water or at the
surface and polar bears do not dive much below 4.5 m. Received levels
of airgun sounds are reduced near the surface because of the pressure
release effect at the water's surface (Greene and Richardson 1988;
Richardson et al. 1995). Walrus and polar bears on the ice would be
unaffected by underwater sound.
Disturbance Reactions
Disturbance includes a variety of effects, including subtle changes
in behavior, more conspicuous changes in activities, and displacement.
Reactions to sound depend on species, state of maturity, experience,
current activity, reproductive state, time of day, and many other
factors. If a marine mammal does react briefly to a disturbance by
changing its behavior or moving a small distance, the impacts of the
change are unlikely to be significant to the individual, let alone the
stock or the species as a whole. Alternatively, if a sound source
displaces marine mammals from an important area for a prolonged period,
impacts on the animals are most likely significant.
Numerous studies have shown that pulsed sounds from airguns are
often readily detectable in the water at distances of many kilometers;
however, numerous studies have shown that marine mammals at distances
more than a few kilometers from operating seismic vessels often show no
apparent response. That is often true even in cases when the pulsed
sounds must be readily audible to the animals based on measured
received levels and the
[[Page 35935]]
hearing sensitivity of that mammal group.
Seismic operations are expected to create significantly more noise
than general vessel and icebreaker traffic; however, data specific to
the potential response of walrus to seismic operations is limited.
Therefore, we rely on observations of walrus and other pinniped
reactions to similar activities and apply these conservatively to
determine expected reactions. Potential effects of prolonged or
repeated disturbances to Pacific walrus include displacement from
preferred feeding areas, increased stress levels, increased energy
expenditure, masking of communication, and impairment of
thermoregulation of neonates that spend too much time in the water.
There are some uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types of
impacts of noise on marine mammals; however, appropriate mitigation
measures minimize the potential for displacement.
The response of walrus to sound sources may be either avoidance or
tolerance. It is possible that noises produced by the icebreaking or
seismic activities may cause avoidance behavior in walrus. Walrus on
ice have been observed to become alert and dive into the water when
icebreakers passed over 2 km (1.2 mi) away (Fay et al. 1984; Brueggeman
et al. 1990, 1991, 1992). In addition, Brueggeman et al. (1990) suggest
that walrus on ice floes may avoid icebreakers by 10 to 15 km (6.2 to
9.3 mi). Anecdotal observations by walrus hunters and researchers
suggest that males tend to be more tolerant of disturbances than
females and individuals tend to be more tolerant than groups. Females
with dependent calves are considered least tolerant of disturbances.
Pacific walrus are not likely to show a strong avoidance reaction
to the medium-sized airgun sources that will be used. Studies in the
Beaufort Sea based on visual monitoring from seismic vessels has shown
only slight (if any) avoidance of airguns by pinnipeds in general, and
only slight (if any) changes in behavior. These studies have shown that
pinnipeds frequently do not avoid the area within a few hundred meters
of operating airgun arrays (e.g., Miller et al. 2005, Harris et al.
2001). However, visual studies have their limitations, and initial
telemetry work suggests that avoidance and other behavioral reactions
to small airgun sources may at times be stronger than evident to date
from visual studies of pinniped reactions to airguns (Thompson et al.
1998). Even if reactions of the species occurring in the present study
area are as strong as those evident in the telemetry study, reactions
are expected to be confined to relatively small distances and
durations, with no long-term effects on pinniped individuals or
populations.
Quantitative research on the sensitivity of walrus to noise has
been limited because no audiograms (a test to determine the range of
frequencies and minimum hearing threshold) have been done on walrus.
Hearing range is assumed to be within the 13 Hz and 1,200 Hz range of
their own vocalizations, with maximum hearing sensitivity in the 1 to
12 kHz range (Kastelein et al. 2002). Walrus hunters and researchers
have also noted that walrus tend to react to the presence of humans and
machines at greater distances from upwind approaches than from downwind
approaches, suggesting that odor may also be a stimulus for a flight
response. The visual acuity of walrus is thought to be less than for
other species of pinnipeds. The reaction of walrus to vessels is highly
dependent on distance, vessel speed, and possibly vessel smell
(Richardson et al. 1995; Fay et al. 1984), as well as previous exposure
to hunting (D.G. Roseneau In Malme et al. 1989). Walrus in the water
appear to be less readily disturbed by vessels than walrus hauled out
on land or ice (Fay et al. 1984).
Seismic activities may affect polar bears in a number of ways.
Seismic ships and icebreakers may be physical obstructions to polar
bear movements, although these impacts are of short-term and localized
effect. Noise, sights, and smells produced by exploration activities
may repel or attract bears, either disrupting their natural behavior or
endangering them by threatening the safety of seismic personnel.
In the Chukchi Sea, during the open-water season, polar bears spend
the majority of their time on pack ice, which limits the chance of
impacts from seismic activities. Occasionally, polar bears can be found
in open water, miles from the ice edge or ice floes.
Vessel traffic could result in short-term behavioral disturbance to
polar bears. During the open-water season, most polar bears remain
offshore in the pack ice and are not typically present in the area of
vessel traffic. If a ship is surrounded by ice, it is more likely that
curious bears will approach. Any on-ice activities create the
opportunity for bear-human interactions. In relatively ice-free waters,
polar bears are less likely to approach ships, although bears may be
encountered on ice floes.
Ships and icebreakers may act as physical obstructions in the
spring if they transit through a restricted lead system, such as the
Chukchi Polynya. Polynyas are important habitat for marine mammals,
which makes them important hunting areas for polar bears. Ship traffic
in these ice conditions may intercept or alter movements of bears. A
similar situation could occur in the fall when the pack ice begins to
expand.
Little research has been conducted on the effects of noise on polar
bears. Polar bears are curious and tend to investigate novel sights,
smells, and possibly noises. Noise produced by seismic activities could
elicit several different responses in polar bears. It may act as a
deterrent to bears entering an area of operation, or potentially
attract curious bears. Underwater noises are probably not a relevant
form of disturbance because bears spend most of their time on the ice
or at the surface of the water.
Hearing Impairment and Other Physical Effects
Temporary or permanent hearing impairment is a possibility when
marine mammals are exposed to very strong sounds, but there has been no
specific documentation of this for marine mammals exposed to sequences
of airgun pulses. Currently, the Service does not have specific
guidelines regarding ``allowable'' received sound levels for either
walrus or polar bears; however, we have adopted the NMFS criterion for
Pacific walrus that pinnipeds should not be exposed to impulsive sounds
greater or equal to 190 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) (NMFS 2000). As a
conservative measure, this criterion is also applied to polar bear.
This criterion defines the safety (shut-down) radii planned for the
proposed seismic survey.
Several aspects of the planned monitoring and mitigation measures
for this project are designed to detect animals occurring near the
airguns (and multi-beam bathymetric sonar), and to avoid exposing them
to sound pulses that might cause hearing impairment. Marine mammal
observers will be on watch during seismic operations. In addition,
walrus and polar bears are likely to show some avoidance of the area
with high received levels of airgun sound. In those cases, the
avoidance responses of the animals themselves will reduce or (most
likely) avoid any possibility of hearing impairment.
Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS): TTS is the mildest form of hearing
impairment that can occur during exposure to a strong sound (Kryter
1985). While experiencing TTS, the hearing threshold rises and a sound
must be stronger in order to be heard. TTS can last from minutes or
hours to (in cases of strong TTS) days. For sound
[[Page 35936]]
exposures at or somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity
recovers rapidly after exposure to the noise ends. Few data on sound
levels and durations necessary to elicit mild TTS have been obtained
for marine mammals, and none of the published data concern TTS elicited
by exposure to multiple pulses of sound. In Pacific walrus, TTS
thresholds associated with exposure to brief pulses (single or
multiple) of underwater sound have not been measured.
A marine mammal within a radius of 100 m around a typical large
array of operating airguns might be exposed to a few seismic pulses
with levels of 205 dB, and possibly more pulses if the mammal moved
with the seismic vessel. However, based on the implementation of the
mitigation measures required by this proposed authorization, several of
the considerations that are relevant in assessing the impact of typical
seismic surveys with arrays of airguns are not directly applicable
here. These considerations include the effects on polar bear and walrus
of:
Ramping up (soft start), which is standard operational protocol
during startup of large airgun arrays in many jurisdictions. Ramping up
involves starting the airguns in sequence, usually commencing with a
single airgun and gradually adding additional airguns. This practice,
which will be employed when the airgun array is operated, requires that
the safety radius be visible for 30 minutes prior to the start of
operations and that no walrus or polar bear has been sighted within or
near the safety radius during the final 15 minutes, thereby avoiding
exposure of walrus and polar bears to potential effects of ramping up.
Longer term exposure to airgun pulses at a sufficiently high level
for a sufficiently long period to cause more than mild TTS. Because the
mitigation measures require that the operation of airguns either shut-
down or power-down (which procedure is followed depends on the
circumstances as described in the section on Mitigation) if a walrus or
polar bear approaches or nears the safety radius, long term exposure to
airgun pulses at high levels will be avoided.
The predicted 190 dB distances for the airguns operated by UTIG
vary with water depth. They are estimated to be 230 m in deep water for
the 8-airgun system, and 75 m in deep water for the 4-GI gun system. In
intermediate depths, this distance is predicted to increase to 113 m
for the 4-GI gun system. The 8-airgun array will only be used in deep
water (greater than 1,000 m). The predicted 190 dB distance for the 4-
GI gun system in shallow water is 938 m (Table 1). Shallow water (less
than 100 m) will occur along 303 km (64 percent) of the planned
trackline in the Chukchi Sea. Those sound levels are not considered to
be the levels above which TTS might occur.
Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS): When PTS occurs, there is physical
damage to the sound receptors in the ear. In some cases, there can be
total or partial deafness; in other cases, the animal has an impaired
ability to hear sounds in specific frequency ranges.
There is no specific evidence that exposure to pulses of airgun
sound can cause PTS in any marine mammal, even with large arrays of
airguns. However, given the possibility that mammals close to an airgun
array might incur TTS, there has been further speculation about the
possibility that some individuals occurring very close to airguns might
incur PTS. Single or occasional occurrences of mild TTS are not
indicative of permanent auditory damage in terrestrial mammals.
Relationships between TTS and PTS thresholds have not been studied in
marine mammals, but are assumed to be similar to those in humans and
other terrestrial mammals. PTS might occur at a received sound level at
least several decibels above that inducing mild TTS if the animal were
exposed to the strong sound pulses with very rapid rise time.
It is unlikely that walrus or polar bears could receive sounds
strong enough (and over a sufficient duration) to cause permanent
hearing impairment during a project employing the medium-sized airgun
sources planned here. In the proposed project, walrus or bears are
unlikely to be exposed to received levels of seismic pulses strong
enough to cause TTS, as they would probably need to be within 100 to
200 m of the airguns for that to occur. Given the higher level of sound
necessary to cause PTS, it is even less likely that PTS could occur. In
fact, even the levels immediately adjacent to the airgun may not be
sufficient to induce PTS, especially because an animal would not be
exposed to more than one strong pulse unless it swam immediately
alongside the airgun for a period longer than the inter-pulse interval.
The planned monitoring and mitigation measures, including visual
monitoring, power-downs, and shut-downs of the airguns when walrus and
bears are seen within the safety radii, will minimize the already
minimal probability of exposure of animals to sounds strong enough to
induce PTS.
Non-auditory Physiological Effects: Non-auditory physiological
effects or injuries that theoretically might occur in Pacific walrus or
polar bears exposed to strong underwater sound include stress,
neurological effects, and other types of organ or tissue damage.
However, studies examining such effects are very limited. If any such
effects do occur, they probably would be limited to unusual situations
when animals might be exposed at close range for unusually long
periods. It is doubtful that any single walrus or bear would be exposed
to strong seismic sounds long enough for significant physiological
stress to develop. That is especially so in the case of the proposed
project where the airgun configuration is moderately sized, the ship is
moving at 3 to 4 knots (5.5 to 7.4 km/hr), and for the most part, the
tracklines will not double back through the same area.
In general, little is known about the potential for seismic survey
sounds to cause auditory impairment or other physical effects in
Pacific walrus or polar bears. Available data suggest that such
effects, if they occur at all, would b