Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; St. George Reef Light Station Restoration and Maintenance at Northwest Seal Rock, Del Norte County, CA, 80471-80480 [2010-32164]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
studies animals that fail to feed within
10 days of capture.
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial
determination has been made that the
activities proposed are consistent with
the Preferred Alternative in the Final
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement for Steller Sea Lion and
Northern Fur Seal Research (NMFS
2007), and that issuance of the permit
would not have a significant adverse
impact on the human environment.
Concurrent with the publication of
this notice in the Federal Register,
NMFS is forwarding copies of this
application to the Marine Mammal
Commission and its Committee of
Scientific Advisors.
Dated: December 15, 2010.
Tammy C. Adams,
Acting Chief, Permits, Conservation and
Education Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–32162 Filed 12–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XZ87
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; St. George Reef
Light Station Restoration and
Maintenance at Northwest Seal Rock,
Del Norte County, CA
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental take
authorization; request for comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received an
application from the St. George Reef
Lighthouse Preservation Society
(SGRLPS), for an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take marine
mammals, by harassment incidental to
conducting aircraft operations, and
lighthouse renovation and light
maintenance activities on the St. George
Reef Light Station on Northwest Seal
Rock (NWSR) in the northeast Pacific
Ocean. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is
requesting comments on its proposal to
issue an IHA to SGRLPS to incidentally
harass, by Level B harassment only, four
species of marine mammals during the
specified activity.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than January 21,
2011.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
Comments on the
application should be addressed to P.
Michael Payne, Chief, Permits,
Conservation and Education Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910. The mailbox address for
providing e-mail comments is
ITP.Cody@noaa.gov. NMFS is not
responsible for e-mail comments sent to
addresses other than the one provided
here. Comments sent via e-mail,
including all attachments, must not
exceed a 10-megabyte file size.
Instructions: All comments received
are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm#applications without
change. All Personal Identifying
Information (for example, name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly
accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise
sensitive or protected information.
A copy of the application containing
a list of the references used in this
document may be obtained by writing to
the above address, telephoning the
contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT) or visiting the
internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
The following associated documents are
also available at the same internet
address: Environmental Assessment
(EA) prepared by NMFS; and the finding
of no significant impact (FONSI).
Documents cited in this notice may be
viewed, by appointment, during regular
business hours, at the aforementioned
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeannine Cody, NMFS, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–
2289 or Monica DeAngelis, NMFS
Southwest Regional Office, (562) 980–
3232.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) directs the
Secretary of Commerce to authorize,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking by harassment of
small numbers of marine mammals of a
species or population stock, by United
States citizens who engage in a specified
activity (other than commercial fishing)
within a specified geographical region if
certain findings are made and, a notice
of a proposed authorization is provided
to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental taking of
small numbers of marine mammals shall
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
80471
be granted if NMFS 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 (where relevant). The
authorization must set forth the
permissible methods of taking, other
means of effecting the least practicable
adverse impact on the species or stock
and its habitat, and monitoring and
reporting of such takings. NMFS has
defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 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.’’
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
establishes a 45-day time limit for
NMFS’ review of an application
followed by a 30-day public notice and
comment period on any proposed
authorizations for the incidental
harassment of small numbers of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close
of the public comment period, NMFS
must either issue or deny the
authorization.
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as:
Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance
which (i) has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
[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
[Level B harassment].
Summary of Request
NMFS received a letter on October 13,
2010, from the SGRLPS requesting the
taking by harassment, of small numbers
of marine mammals, incidental to
aircraft operations and restoration and
maintenance activities on the St. George
Reef Light Station (Station). At NMFS’
request, the SGRLPS submitted a
complete and adequate application on
November 3, 2010. The SGRLPS aims to:
(1) Restore and preserve the Station on
a monthly basis (November 1–April 30,
annually); and (2) perform periodic,
annual maintenance on the Station’s
optical light system.
The Station, which is listed in the
National Park Service’s National
Register of Historic Places, is located on
Northwest Seal Rock (NWSR) offshore
of Crescent City, California in the
northeast Pacific Ocean.
The proposed activities would occur
in the vicinity of a possible pinniped
haul out site located on NWSR.
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
80472
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
Acoustic and visual stimuli generated
by: (1) Helicopter landings/takeoffs; (2)
noise generated during restoration
activities (e.g., painting, plastering,
welding, and glazing); (3) maintenance
activities (e.g., bulb replacement and
automation of the light system); and (4)
human presence, may have the potential
to cause any pinnipeds hauled out on
NWSR to flush into the surrounding
water or to cause a short-term
behavioral disturbance. These types of
disturbances are the principal means of
marine mammal taking associated with
these activities and the SGRLPS has
requested an authorization to take 204
California sea lions (Zalophus
californianus); 36 Pacific Harbor seals
(Phoca vitulina); 172 Steller sea lions
(Eumetopias jubatus); and six northern
fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) by Level
B harassment.
This is SGRLPS’ second request for an
IHA and the monitoring results from the
first IHA appear in the Proposed
Monitoring section of this notice.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Description of the Specified Activity
SGRLPS proposes to conduct the
proposed activities (aircraft operations,
lighthouse restoration, and light
maintenance activities) between
November 1 through April 30, annually,
at a maximum frequency of one session
per month. The proposed duration for
each session would last no more than
three days (e.g., Friday, Saturday, and
Sunday).
Aircraft Operations
Because NWSR has no safe landing
area for boats, the proposed restoration
activities would require the SGRLPS to
transport personnel and equipment from
the California mainland to NWSR by a
small helicopter. Helicopter landings
take place on top of the engine room
(caisson) which is approximately 15 m
(48 ft) above the surface of the rocks on
NWSR.
SGRLPS proposes to transport no
more than 15 work crew members and
equipment to NWSR for each session
and estimates that each session would
require no more than 36 helicopter
landings/takeoffs per month. During
landing, the helicopter would land on
the caisson to allow the work crew
members to disembark and retrieve their
equipment located in a basket attached
to the underside of the helicopter. The
helicopter would then return to the
mainland to pick up additional
personnel and equipment. Even though
SGRLPS would use the helicopter to
transport work crew members and
materials on the first and last days of the
three-day activity, the helicopter would
likely fly to and from the Station on all
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
three days of the restoration and
maintenance activities.
Proposed schedule: SGRLPS would
conduct a maximum of 16 flights (eight
arrivals and eight departures) for the
first day. The first flight would depart
from Crescent City Airport at
approximately 9 a.m. for a six-minute
flight to NWSR. The helicopter would
land and takeoff immediately after
offloading personnel and equipment
every 20 minutes (min). The total
duration of the first day’s aerial
operations would last for approximately
three hours (hrs) and 34 min and would
end at approximately 12:34 p.m. Crew
members would remain overnight at the
Station and would not return to the
mainland on the first day.
For the second day, the SGRLPS
would conduct a maximum of 10 flights
(five arrivals and five departures) to
transport additional materials on and off
the islet. The first flight would depart
from Crescent City Airport at 9 a.m. for
a six-minute flight to NWSR. The total
duration of the second day’s aerial
operations would last up to three hours.
For the final day of operations,
SGRLPS would conduct a maximum of
ten helicopter flights (five arrivals and
five departures) to transport the
remaining crew members and
equipment/material back to the Crescent
City Airport. The total duration of the
third day’s helicopter operations in
support of restoration would last up to
two hrs.
As a mean of funding support for the
restoration activities, the SGRLPS will
conduct public tours of the Station
during the last day of the proposed
restoration and maintenance activities.
SGRLPS proposes to transport visitors to
the Station during the Sunday work
window period. Although some of these
flights would be conducted solely for
the transportation of tourists, those
flights would be conducted at a later
stage when no pinnipeds are expected
to be at the Station. The proposed IHA
does not include additional allowance
for animals that might be affected by
additional flights for the transportation
of tourists.
Lighthouse Restoration Activities
Restoration activities would include
the removal of peeling paint and plaster,
restoration of interior plaster and paint,
refurbishing structural and decorative
metal, reworking original metal support
beams throughout the lantern room and
elsewhere, replacing glass as necessary,
and upgrading the present electrical
system. The SGRLPS expects to
complete most of the major restoration
work within three years.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Light Maintenance Activities
The SGRLPS will need to conduct
maintenance on the Station’s beacon
light at least once or up to two times per
year within the proposed work window.
Scheduled light maintenance activities
would coincide with lighthouse
restoration activities conducted monthly
during the period of November 1,
through April 30, annually. The
SGRLPS expects that maintenance
activities would not exceed three hrs
per each monthly session.
Emergency Light Maintenance
If the beacon light fails during the
period from February 15, 2011, through
April 30, 2011, or during the period of
November 1, 2011, through December
31, 2011, the SGRLPS proposes to send
a crew of two to three people to the
Station by helicopter to repair the
beacon light. For each emergency repair
event, the SGRLPS proposes to conduct
a maximum of four flights (two arrivals
and two departures) to transport
equipment and supplies. The helicopter
may remain on site or transit back to
shore and make a second landing to
pick up the repair personnel.
In the case of an emergency repair
between May 1, 2011, and October 31,
2011, the SGRLPS would consult with
the NMFS Southwest Regional Office
(SWRO) to best determine the timing of
the trips to the lighthouse, on a case-bycase basis, based upon the existing
environmental conditions and the
abundance and distribution of any
marine mammals present on NWSR.
The SWRO biologists would have realtime knowledge regarding the animal
use and abundance of the NWSR at the
time of the repair request and would
make a decision regarding when the
trips to the lighthouse can be made
during the emergency repair time
window that would have the least
practicable adverse impact to marine
mammals. The SWRO would also
ensure that the SGRLPS’ request for
incidental take during emergency
repairs would not exceed the number of
incidental take authorized in the
proposed IHA.
Complete automation of the light
generating system and automatic backup
system will minimize maintenance and
emergency repair visits to the island.
The light is solar powered using one
solar panel; an installed second panel
serves as a backup which is
automatically activated if needed. A
second smaller bulb in the lantern is
activated if the primary bulb fails. Use
of high quality, durable materials and
thorough weatherproofing is planned to
minimize trips for maintenance and
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
repair in the future. All tools and
supplies are stored on the island so that
a minimal number of transport trips for
emergency maintenance will be
necessary.
The helicopter would land on the
Station’s caisson and presumably, the
received sound levels would increase
above 81–81.9 dB re: 20 μPa (Aweighted) at the landing area.
Acoustic Source Specifications
Characteristics of Restoration and
Maintenance Noise
Restoration and maintenance
activities would involve the removal of
peeling paint and plaster, restoration of
interior plaster and paint, refurbishing
structural and decorative metal,
reworking original metal support beams
throughout the lantern room and
elsewhere, replacing glass as necessary,
upgrading the present electrical system;
and annual light beacon maintenance.
Any noise associated with these
activities is likely to be from light
construction (e.g., sanding, hammering,
or use of hand drills). The SGRLPS
proposes to confine all restoration
activities to the existing structure which
would occur on the upper levels of the
Station. The pinnipeds of NWSR do not
have access to this area.
NMFS expects that acoustic stimuli
resulting from the proposed helicopter
operations; noise from maintenance and
restoration activities; and human
presence has the potential to harass
marine mammals, incidental to the
conduct of the proposed activities.
NMFS expects these disturbances to be
temporary and result, at worst, in a
temporary modification in behavior
and/or low-level physiological effects
(Level B Harassment) of small numbers
of certain species of marine mammals.
R44 Raven Helicopter
The SGRLPS plans to charter a Raven
R44 helicopter, owned and operated by
Air Shasta Rotor and Wing, LLC. The
Raven R44, which seats three passengers
and one pilot, is a compact-sized (1134
kilograms (kg), 2500 pounds (lbs))
helicopter with two-bladed main and
tail rotors. Both sets of rotors are fitted
with noise-attenuating blade tip caps
that would decrease flyover noise.
Metrics Used in This Document
This section includes a brief
explanation of the sound measurements
frequently used in the discussions of
acoustic effects in this document. Sound
pressure is the sound force per unit
area, and is usually measured in
micropascals (μPa), where 1 pascal (Pa)
is the pressure resulting from a force of
one newton exerted over an area of one
square meter. Sound pressure level
(SPL) is expressed as the ratio of a
measured sound pressure and a
reference level. The commonly used
reference pressure is 1 μPa for under
water, and the units for SPLs are dB re:
1 μPa. The commonly used reference
pressure is 20 μPa for in air, and the
units for SPLs are dB re: 20 μPa.
SPL (in decibels (dB)) = 20 log
(pressure/reference pressure).
SPL is an instantaneous measurement
and can be expressed as the peak, the
peak-peak (p-p), or the root mean square
(rms). Root mean square, which is the
square root of the arithmetic average of
the squared instantaneous pressure
values, is typically used in discussions
of the effects of sounds on vertebrates
and all references to SPL in this
document refer to the root mean square
unless otherwise noted. SPL does not
take the duration of a sound into
account.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Characteristics of the Aircraft Noise
Noise testing performed on the R44
Raven Helicopter, as required for
Federal Aviation Administration
approval, required an overflight at 150
m (492 ft) above ground level, 109 knots
and a maximum gross weight of 1,134
kg (2,500 lbs). The noise levels
measured on the ground at this distance
and speed were 81.9 decibels (dB) re: 20
μPa (A-weighted) for the model R44
Raven I, or 81.0 dB re: 20 μPa (Aweighted) for the model R44 Raven II
(NMFS, 2007).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
Description of the Specified Geographic
Region
The Station is located on a small,
rocky islet (41°50′24″ N, 124°22′06″ W)
approximately nine kilometers (km) (6.0
miles (mi)) in the northeast Pacific
Ocean, offshore of Crescent City,
California (Latitude: 41°46′48″ N;
Longitude: 124°14′11″ W). NWSR is
approximately 91.4 m (300 ft) in
diameter that peaks at 5.18 m (17 ft)
above mean sea level. The Station, built
in 1892, rises 45.7 m (150 ft) above the
sea, consists of hundreds of granite
blocks, is topped with a cast iron
lantern room, and covers much of the
surface of the islet.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Proposed Specified Activity
The marine mammal species likely to
be harassed incidental to helicopter
operations, lighthouse restoration, and
lighthouse maintenance on NWSR are
the California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus), the Pacific Harbor seal
(Phoca vitulina), the eastern (Distinct
Population Segment) U.S. stock of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
80473
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus),
and the eastern Pacific stock of northern
fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus). General
information of these species can be
found in Caretta et al., (2009) and Allen
and Angliss (2010) and is available at
the following URLs: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/
po2009.pdf and https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/
ak2009.pdf respectively. Refer to these
documents for information on these
species. Additional information on
these species is presented below this
section.
California Sea Lion
California sea lions are not listed as
threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.), nor are they categorized as
depleted under the MMPA. The
California sea lion includes three
subspecies: Z. c. wollebaeki (on the
Galapagos Islands), Z. c. japonicus (in
Japan, but now thought to be extinct),
and Z. c. californianus (found from
southern Mexico to southwestern
Canada; herein referred to as the
California sea lion). The subspecies is
comprised of three stocks: (1) The U.S.
stock, beginning at the U.S./Mexico
border extending northward into
Canada; (2) the western Baja California
stock, extending from the U.S./Mexico
border to the southern tip of the Baja
California peninsula; and (3) the Gulf of
California stock, which includes the
Gulf of California from the southern tip
of the Baja California peninsula and
across to the mainland and extends to
southern Mexico (Lowry et al., 1992).
In 2009, the estimated population of
the U.S. stock of California sea lion
ranged from 141,842 to 238,000 animals
and the maximum population growth
rate was 6.52 percent when pup counts
˜
from El Nino years (1983, 1984, 1992,
1993, 1998, and 2003) were removed
(Carretta et al., 2009).
Major rookeries for the California sea
lion exist on the Channel Islands off
southern California and on the islands
situated along the east and west coasts
of Baja California. Males are
polygamous, establishing breeding
territories that may include up to
fourteen females. They defend their
territories with aggressive physical
displays and vocalization. Sea lions
reach sexual maturity at four to five
years old and the breeding season lasts
from May to August. Most pups are born
from May through July and weaned at
10 months old.
Crescent Coastal Research (CCR)
conducted a three-year (1998–2000)
survey of the wildlife species on NWSR
for the SGRLPS. They reported that
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
80474
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
counts of California sea lions on NWSR
varied greatly (from six to 541) during
the observation period from April 1997
through July 2000. CCR reported that
counts for California sea lions during
the spring (April–May), summer (June–
August), and fall (September–October),
averaged 60, 154, and 235, respectively
(CCR, 2001).
Pacific Harbor Seal
Pacific harbor seals are not listed as
threatened or endangered under the
ESA, nor are they categorized as
depleted under the MMPA. The animals
inhabit near-shore coastal and estuarine
areas from Baja California, Mexico, to
the Pribilof Islands in Alaska. Pacific
harbor seals are divided into two
subspecies: P. v. stejnegeri in the
western North Pacific, near Japan, and
P. v. richardsi in the northeast Pacific
Ocean. The latter subspecies, recognized
as three separate stocks, inhabits the
west coast of the continental United
States, including: The outer coastal
waters of Oregon and Washington states;
Washington state inland waters; and
Alaska coastal and inland waters. Two
of these stocks, the California stock and
Oregon/Washington coast stock, of
Pacific harbor seals are identified off the
coast of Oregon and California for
management purposes under the
MMPA. However, the stock boundary is
difficult to distinguish because of the
continuous distribution of harbor seals
along the west coast and any rigid
boundary line is (to a greater or lesser
extent) arbitrary, from a biological
perspective (Carretta et al., 2009). Due
to the location of the proposed project
which is situated near the border of
Oregon and California, both stocks
could be present within the proposed
project area.
In 2009, the estimated population of
the California of Pacific harbor seals
ranged from 31,600 to 34,233 animals
and the maximum population growth
rate was 3.5 percent. The estimated
population of the Oregon/Washington
coast stocks was 24,732 animals
(Carretta et al., 2009).
In California, over 500 harbor seal
haulout sites are widely distributed
along the mainland and offshore
islands, and include rocky shores,
beaches and intertidal sandbars (Lowry
et al., 2005). Harbor seals mate at sea
and females give birth during the spring
and summer, although the pupping
season varies with latitude. Pups are
nursed for an average of 24 days and are
ready to swim minutes after being born.
Harbor seal pupping takes place at many
locations and rookery size varies from a
few pups to many hundreds of pups.
The nearest harbor seal rookery relative
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
to the proposed project site is at Castle
Rock National Wildlife Refuge, located
approximately 965 m (0.6 mi) south of
Point St. George, and 2.4 km (1.5 mi)
north of the Crescent City Harbor in Del
Norte County, California (USFWS,
2007).
CCR noted that harbor seal use of
NWSR was minimal, with only one
sighting of a group of six animals,
during 20 observation surveys. They
hypothesized that harbor seals may
avoid the islet because of its distance
from shore, relatively steep topography,
and full exposure to rough and
frequently turbulent sea swells.
Northern Fur Seal
Northern fur seals are not listed as
threatened or endangered under the
ESA. However, they are categorized as
depleted under the MMPA. Northern fur
seals occur from southern California
north to the Bering Sea and west to the
Sea of Okhotsk and Honshu Island of
Japan. Two separate stocks of northern
fur seals are recognized within U.S.
waters: An Eastern Pacific stock
distributed among sites in Alaska,
British Columbia; and a San Miguel
Island stock distributed along the west
coast of the continental U.S.
Northern fur seals may temporarily
haul out on land at other sites in Alaska,
British Columbia, and on islets along
the west coast of the continental United
States, but generally this occurs outside
of the breeding season (Fiscus, 1983).
In 2009, the estimated population of
the San Miguel Island stock ranged from
5,096 to 9,424 animals and the
maximum population growth rate was
8.6 percent (Carretta et al., 2009).
Northern fur seals breed in Alaska
and migrate along the west coast during
fall and winter. Due to their pelagic
habitat, they are rarely seen from shore
in the continental U.S., but individuals
occasionally come ashore on islands
well offshore (i.e., Farallon Islands and
Channel Islands in California). During
the breeding season, approximately 74
percent of the worldwide population is
found on the Pribilof Islands in Alaska,
with the remaining animals spread
throughout the North Pacific Ocean
(Lander and Kajimura, 1982).
CCR observed one male northern fur
seal on NWSR in October, 1998 (CCR,
2001). It is possible that a few animals
may use the island more often that
indicated by the CCR surveys, if they
were mistaken for other otariid species
(M. DeAngelis, NMFS, pers. comm.).
Steller Sea Lion
The Steller sea lion eastern stock is
listed as threatened under the ESA and
is categorized as depleted under the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
MMPA. Steller sea lions range along the
North Pacific Rim from northern Japan
to California (Loughlin et al., 1984),
with centers of abundance and
distribution in the Gulf of Alaska and
Aleutian Islands, respectively. Two
separate stocks of Steller sea lions were
recognized within U.S. waters: an
eastern U.S. stock, which includes
animals east of Cape Suckling, Alaska
(144° W), and a western U.S. stock,
which includes animals at and west of
Cape Suckling (Loughlin, 1997). The
species is not known to migrate, but
individuals disperse widely outside of
the breeding season (late May through
early July), thus potentially intermixing
with animals from other areas.
In 2009, the estimated population of
the eastern U.S. stock ranged from
45,095 to 55,832 animals and the
maximum population growth rate was
3.1 percent (Allen and Angliss, 2009).
The eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea
lions breeds on rookeries located in
southeast Alaska, British Columbia,
Oregon, and California; there are no
rookeries located in Washington state.
Counts of pups on rookeries conducted
near the end of the birthing season are
nearly complete counts of pup
production.
Despite the wide-ranging movements
of juveniles and adult males in
particular, exchange between rookeries
by breeding adult females and males
(other than between adjoining rookeries)
appears low, although males have a
higher tendency to disperse than
females (NMFS 1995, Trujillo et al.,
2004, Hoffman et al., 2006). A
northward shift in the overall breeding
distribution has occurred, with a
contraction of the range in southern
California and new rookeries
established in southeastern Alaska
(Pitcher et al., 2007).
CCR reported that Steller sea lion
numbers at NWSR ranged from 20 to
355 animals. Counts of Steller sea lions
during the spring (April–May), summer
(June–August), and fall (September–
October), averaged 68, 110, and 56,
respectively (CCR, 2001). A more recent
survey at NWSR between 2000 and 2004
showed Steller sea lion numbers ranged
from 175 to 354 in July (M. Lowry,
NMFS/SWFSC, unpubl. data). Winter
use of NWSR by Steller sea lion is
presumed to be minimal, due to
inundation of the natural portion of the
island by large swells.
Other Marine Mammals in the Proposed
Action Area
There are several endangered
cetaceans that have the potential to
transit in the vicinity of NWSR
including the blue (Balaenoptera
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
musculus), fin (Balaenoptera physalus),
humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae),
sei (Balaenoptera borealis), north
Pacific right (Eubalena japonica), sperm
(Physeter macrocephalus), and southern
resident killer (Orcinus orca) whales.
California (southern) sea otters
(Enhydra lutris nereis), listed as
threatened under the ESA and
categorized as depleted under the
MMPA, usually range in coastal waters
within two km of shore. Neither CCR
nor the SGRLPS has encountered
California sea otters on NWSR during
the course of the four-year wildlife
study (CCR, 2001). The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) manages the
sea otter and NMFS will not consider
this species further in this proposed
IHA notice.
All of the aforementioned species are
found farther offshore than the proposed
action area and are not likely to be
affected by the restoration and
maintenance activities. Accordingly,
NMFS will not consider these species in
greater detail and the proposed IHA will
only address requested take
authorizations for pinnipeds.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
Acoustic and visual stimuli generated
by: (1) Helicopter landings/takeoffs; (2)
noise generated during restoration
activities (e.g., painting, plastering,
welding, and glazing); and (3)
maintenance activities (e.g., bulb
replacement and automation of the light
system) may have the potential to cause
Level B harassment of any pinnipeds
hauled out on NWSR. The effects of
sounds from helicopter operations and/
or restoration and maintenance
activities might include one of the
following: temporary or permanent
hearing impairment or behavioral
disturbance (Southall, et al., 2007).
Hearing Impairment
Marine mammals produce sounds in
various important contexts—social
interactions, foraging, navigating, and to
responding to predators. The best
available science suggests that
pinnipeds have a functional aerial
hearing sensitivity between 75 hertz
(Hz) and 75 kilohertz (kHz) and can
produce a diversity of sounds, though
generally from 100 Hz to several tens of
kHz (Southall, et al., 2007).
Exposure to high intensity sound for
a sufficient duration may result in
auditory effects such as a noise-induced
threshold shift—an increase in the
auditory threshold after exposure to
noise (Finneran, Carder, Schlundt, and
Ridgway, 2005). Factors that influence
the amount of threshold shift include
the amplitude, duration, frequency
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
content, temporal pattern, and energy
distribution of noise exposure. The
magnitude of hearing threshold shift
normally decreases over time following
cessation of the noise exposure. The
amount of threshold shift just after
exposure is called the initial threshold
shift. If the threshold shift eventually
returns to zero (i.e., the threshold
returns to the pre-exposure value), it is
called temporary threshold shift (TTS)
(Southall et al., 2007).
Pinnipeds have the potential to be
disturbed by airborne and underwater
noise generated by the engine of the
aircraft (Born, Riget, Dietz, and
Andriashek, 1999; Richardson, Greene,
Malme, and Thomson, 1995). Data on
underwater TTS-onset in pinnipeds
exposed to pulses are limited to a single
study which exposed two California sea
lions to single underwater pulses from
an arc-gap transducer and found no
measurable TTS following exposures up
to 183 dB re: 1 μPa (peak-to-peak)
(Finneran, Dear, Carder, and Ridgway,
2003).
TTS has been demonstrated and
studied in certain captive odontocetes
and pinnipeds exposed to strong sounds
(reviewed in Southall et al., 2007). In
2004, researchers measured auditory
fatigue to airborne sound in harbor
seals, California sea lions, and northern
elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris)
after exposure to nonpulse noise for 25
minutes (Kastak, Southall, Holt, Kastak,
and Schusterman, 2004). In the study,
the harbor seal experienced
approximately 6 dB of TTS at 99 dB re:
20 μPa. Onset of TTS was identified in
the California sea lion at 122 dB re: 20
μPa. The northern elephant seal
experienced TTS-onset at 121 dB re: 20
μPa (Kastak et al., 2004).
There is a dearth of information on
acoustic effects of helicopter overflights
on pinniped hearing and
communication (Richardson et al.,
1995) and to NMFS’ knowledge, there
has been no specific documentation of
TTS, let alone permanent threshold shift
(PTS), in free-ranging pinnipeds
exposed to helicopter operations during
realistic field conditions.
In 2008, NMFS issued an IHA to the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
for the take of small numbers of Steller
sea lions and Pacific harbor seals,
incidental to rodent eradication
activities on an islet offshore of Rat
Island, AK conducted by helicopter. The
15-minute aerial treatment consisted of
the helicopter slowly approaching the
islet at an elevation of over 1,000 feet
(304.8 m); gradually decreasing altitude
in slow circles; and applying the
rodenticide in a single pass and
returning to Rat Island. The gradual and
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
80475
deliberate approach to the islet resulted
in the sea lions present initially
becoming aware of the helicopter and
calmly moving into the water. Further,
the USFWS reported that all responses
fell well within the range of Level B
harassment (i.e., alert head raises
without moving or limited, short-term
displacement resulting from aircraft
noise due to helicopter overflights).
As a general statement from the
available information, pinnipeds
exposed to intense (approximately 110
to 120 dB re: 20 μPa) nonpulse sounds
often leave haulout areas and seek
refuge temporarily (minutes to a few
hours) in the water (Southall et al.,
2007). Any noise attributed to the
SGRLPS’ proposed helicopter
operations on NWSR would be shortterm (approximately 5 min per trip).
NMFS would expect the ambient noise
levels to return to a baseline state when
helicopter operations have ceased for
the day. Per Richardson et al. (1995),
approaching aircraft generally flush
animals into the water and noise from
a helicopter is typically directed down
in a ‘‘cone’’ underneath the aircraft. As
the helicopter landings take place 15 m
(48 ft) above the surface of the rocks on
NWSR, NMFS presumes that the
received sound levels would increase
above 81–81.9 dB re: 20 μPa (Aweighted) at the landing pad. However,
NMFS does not expect that the
increased received levels of sound from
the helicopter would cause TTS or PTS
because the pinnipeds would flush
before the helicopter approached
NWSR; thus increasing the distance
between the pinnipeds and the received
sound levels on NWSR during the
proposed action.
Behavioral Disturbance
There is increasing recognition that
the effect of human disturbance on
wildlife is highly dependent on the
nature of the disturbance (Burger et al.,
1995; Klein et al., 1995; and Kucey,
2005). Disturbances resulting from
human activity can impact short- and
long-term pinniped haul out behavior
(Renouf et al., 1981; Schneider and
Payne, 1983; Terhune and Almon, 1983;
Allen et al., 1984; Stewart, 1984; Suryan
and Harvey, 1999; Mortenson et al.,
2000; and Kucey and Trites, 2006). The
apparent skittishness of both harbor
seals and Steller sea lions raises
concerns regarding behavioral and
physiological impacts to individuals
and populations experiencing high
levels of human disturbance. It is well
known that human activity can flush
harbor seals off haul out sites (Allen et
al., 1984; Calambokidis et al., 1991;
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
80476
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
Suryan and Harvey, 1999; Mortenson et
al., 2000).
The Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus
schauinslandi) has been shown to avoid
beaches that have been disturbed often
by humans (Kenyon, 1972). Stevens and
Boness (2003) concluded that after the
˜
1997–98 El Nino, when populations of
the South American fur seal,
Arctocephalus australis, in Peru
declined dramatically, seals abandoned
some of their former primary breeding
sites, but continued to breed at adjacent
beaches that were more rugged (i.e., less
likely to be used by humans).
Abandoned and unused sites were more
likely to have human disturbance than
currently used sites. In one case, human
disturbance appeared to cause Steller
sea lions to desert a breeding area at
Northeast Point on St. Paul Island,
Alaska (Kenyon, 1962).
It is likely that the initial helicopter
approach to the Station would cause a
subset, or all of the marine mammals
hauled out on NWSR to depart the rock
and flush into the water. The physical
presence of aircraft could also lead to
non-auditory effects on marine
mammals involving visual or other cues.
Airborne sound from a low-flying
helicopter or airplane may be heard by
marine mammals while at the surface or
underwater. In general, helicopters tend
to be noisier than fixed wing aircraft of
similar size and underwater sounds
from aircraft are strongest just below the
surface and directly under the aircraft.
Noise from aircraft would not be
expected to cause direct physical effects
but have the potential to affect behavior.
The primary factor that may influence
abrupt movements of animals is engine
noise, specifically changes in engine
noise. Responses by mammals could
include hasty dives or turns, change in
course, or flushing and stampeding from
a haul out site. There are few well
documented studies of the impacts of
aircraft overflight over pinniped haul
out sites or rookeries, and many of those
that exist, are specific to military
activities (Efroymson et al., 2001).
Several factors complicate the
analysis of long- and short-term effects
for aircraft overflights. Information on
behavioral effects of overflights by
military aircraft (or component
stressors) on most wildlife species is
sparse. Moreover, models that relate
behavioral changes to abundance or
reproduction, and those that relate
behavioral or hearing effects thresholds
from one population to another are
generally not available. In addition, the
aggregation of sound frequencies,
durations, and the view of the aircraft
into a single exposure metric is not
always the best predictor of effects and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
it may also be difficult to calculate.
Overall, there has been no indication
that single or occasional aircraft flying
above pinnipeds in water cause long
term displacement of these animals
(Richardson et al., 1995). The Lowest
Observed Adverse Effects Levels
(LOAELs) are rather variable for
pinnipeds on land, ranging from just
over 150 m (492 ft) to about 2,000 m
(6,562 ft) (Efroymson et al., 2001). A
conservative (90th percentile) distance
effects level is 1,150 m (3,773 ft). Most
thresholds represent movement away
from the overflight. Bowles and Stewart
(1980) estimated an LOAEL of 305 m
(1,000 ft) for helicopters (low and
landing) in California sea lions and
harbor seals observed on San Miguel
Island, CA; animals responded to some
degree by moving within the haul out
and entering into the water, stampeding
into the water, or clearing the haul out
completely. Both species always
responded with the raising of their
heads. California sea lions appeared to
react more to the visual cue of the
helicopter than the noise.
If pinnipeds are present on NWSR, it
is likely that a helicopter landing at the
Station would cause 100 percent of the
pinnipeds on NWSR to flush; however,
when present, they appear to show
rapid habituation to helicopter landing
and departure (Crescent Coastal
Research, 2001; Guy Towers, SGRLPS,
pers. com.). According to the CCR
Report (2001), while up to 40 percent of
the California and Steller sea lions
present on the rock have been observed
to enter the water on the first of a series
of helicopter landings, as few as zero
percent have flushed on subsequent
landings on the same date.
If pinnipeds are present on NWSR,
Level B behavioral harassment of
pinnipeds may occur during helicopter
landing and takeoff from NWSR due to
the pinnipeds temporarily moving from
the rocks and lower structure of the
Station into the sea due to the noise and
appearance of helicopter during
approaches and departures. It is
expected that all or a portion of the
marine mammals hauled out on the
island will depart the rock and move
into the water upon initial helicopter
approaches. The movement to the water
is expected to be gradual due to the
required controlled helicopter
approaches (see Proposed Mitigation
section), the small size of the aircraft,
the use of noise-attenuating blade tip
caps on the rotors, and behavioral
habituation on the part of the animals as
helicopter trips continue throughout the
day. During the sessions of helicopter
activity, if present on NWSR, some
animals may be temporarily displaced
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
from the island and either raft in the
water or relocate to other haul-outs.
Sea lions have shown habituation to
helicopter flights within a day at the
project site and most animals are
expected to return soon after helicopter
activities cease for that day. By
clustering helicopter arrival/departures
within a short time period, animals are
expected to show less response to
subsequent landings. No impact on the
population size or breeding stock of
Steller sea lions, California sea lions,
Pacific harbor seals, or northern fur
seals is expected to occur.
Restoration and maintenance
activities would involve the removal of
peeling paint and plaster, restoration of
interior plaster and paint, refurbishing
structural and decorative metal,
reworking original metal support beams
throughout the lantern room and
elsewhere, replacing glass as necessary,
upgrading the present electrical system;
and annual light beacon maintenance.
Any noise associated with these
activities is likely to be from light
construction (e.g., sanding, hammering,
or use of hand drills) and the pinnipeds
may be disturbed by human presence.
Animals respond to disturbance from
humans in the same way as they
respond to the risk of predation, by
avoiding areas of high risk, either
completely or by using them for limited
periods (Gill et al., 1996).
Mortality
Sudden movement of large numbers
of animals may cause a stampede. In
order to prevent such stampedes from
occurring within the sea lion colony,
certain mitigation requirements and
restrictions, such as controlled
helicopter approaches and limited
access period during the pupping
season, will be imposed should an IHA
be issued. As such, and because any
pinnipeds nearby likely would avoid
the approaching helicopter, the SGRLPS
anticipates that there will be no
instances of injury or mortality during
the proposed project.
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The NMFS expects that there will be
no long- or short-term physical impacts
to pinniped habitat on NWSR. The
SGRLPS proposes to confine all
restoration activities to the existing
structure which would occur on the
upper levels of the Station which are
not used by marine mammals. The
SGRLPS would remove all waste,
discarded materials and equipment from
the island after each visit. The proposed
activities will not result in any
permanent impact on habitats used by
marine mammals, including the food
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
sources they use. The main impact
associated with the proposed activity
will be temporarily elevated noise levels
and the associated direct effects on
marine mammals, previously discussed
in this notice.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization (ITA) under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must
set forth the permissible methods of
taking pursuant to such activity, and
other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact on such
species or stock and its habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and the availability of such
species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses.
As a way to reduce potential Level B
behavioral harassment to marine
mammals that would result from the
proposed project, NMFS proposes that
the following mitigation measures
would be required.
Time and Frequency: Lighthouse
restoration activities are to be conducted
at maximum of once per month between
February 15, 2011, through April 30,
2011, or between November 1, 2011,
through December 31, 2011. Each
restoration session will last no more
than three days. Maintenance of the
light beacon will occur only in
conjunction with restoration activities.
Helicopter Approach and Timing
Techniques: The SGRLPS shall ensure
that helicopter approach patterns to the
lighthouse will be such that the timing
techniques are least disturbing to
marine mammals. To the extent
possible, the helicopter should
approach NWSR when the tide is too
high for the marine mammals to haulout on NWSR.
Since the most severe impacts
(stampede) are precipitated by rapid and
direct helicopter approaches, initial
approach to the Station must be offshore
from the island at a relatively high
altitude (e.g., 800–1,000 ft, or 244–305
m). Before the final approach, the
helicopter shall circle lower, and
approach from area where the density of
pinnipeds is the lowest. If for any safety
reasons (e.g., wind condition) such
helicopter approach and timing
techniques cannot be achieved, the
SGRLPS must abort the restoration and
maintenance activities for that day.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
Avoidance of Visual and Acoustic
Contact with People on Island: The
SGRLPS members and restoration crews
shall be instructed to avoid making
unnecessary noise and not expose
themselves visually to pinnipeds
around the base of the lighthouse.
Although no impacts from these
activities were seen during the 2001
CCR study, it is relatively simple to
avoid this potential impact. The door to
the lower platform (which is used at
times by pinnipeds) shall remain closed
and barricaded to all tourists and other
personnel.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the
applicant’s proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of
other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the
means of effecting the least practicable
adverse impact on the affected marine
mammal species and stocks and their
habitat. Our evaluation of potential
measures included consideration of the
following factors in relation to one
another:
• The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is
expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals;
• The proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and
• The practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation, including
safety and practicality of
implementation.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS
or recommended by the public, NMFS
has preliminarily determined that the
proposed mitigation measures provide
the means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impacts on marine
mammals species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance.
Proposed Monitoring
Summary of Previous Monitoring
The SGRLPS complied with the
mitigation and monitoring required
under the previous authorization for the
2010 season. In compliance with the
2010 IHA, the SGRLPS submitted a final
report on the activities at Station,
covering the period of January 27, 2010
through April 30, 2010. During the
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
80477
effective dates of the 2010 IHA, the
SGRLPS conducted two sessions of
aircraft operations and restoration
activities on NWSR which did not
exceed the activity levels analyzed
under the 2010 authorization.
The 2010 IHA required that the
SGRLPS conduct a pre-restoration and
post-restoration aerial survey of all
marine mammals hauled-out on NWSR
for each session. NMFS restricted the
SGRLPS’ taking of aerial photographs to
an altitude greater than 300 m (984 feet
ft) during the first arrival flight and the
last departure flight. This is the
minimum altitude set within the 2010
Biological Opinion (BiOp) Incidental
Take Statement (ITS) which follows the
reference distance of 300 m (984 feet ft)
for in-air measurements and predictions
established by Richardson et al. (1995).
On February 26, 2010, the SGRLPS’
photographed the haulout areas on the
initial approach to NWSR at an altitude
of 900 m (2,953 ft). During the approach,
the photographer observed no animals
hauled out on NWSR. The SGRLPS
observed no animals hauled on NWSR
during the two-day restoration session
and no pinnipeds were present during
the helicopter’s February 28th departure
flight to the mainland.
On April 9, 2010, the SGRLPS’
photographed the haulout areas on the
initial approach to NWSR at an altitude
of 900 m (2,953 ft). Similar to the
February session, the photographer
observed no animals hauled out on
NWSR during approach. The SGRLPS
observed no animals hauled on NWSR
during the three-day restoration session
and no pinnipeds were present during
the helicopter’s April 11th departure
flight to the mainland.
The SGRLPS observed no animals
hauled on NWSR during the entirety of
each session. As there were no observed
impacts to pinnipeds from these
activities, NMFS was unable to assess
the effectiveness of mitigation measures
for helicopter approaches set forth in
the 2010 IHA. However, the 2010 IHA
restricted SGRLP’s access to NWSR
during the pupping season, thus
effecting the least practical adverse
impact on the species or stock. These
results did not refute NMFS’ original
findings.
The dates, times, activities, absence/
presence information, and required
monitoring are summarized in Tables 1
and 2.
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
80478
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS CONDUCTED IN FEBRUARY 2010
Date
26–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
27–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
28–Feb
Time
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
Monitoring
conducted
Activity
8:30 PST ..........
8:30 PST ..........
8:31 PST ..........
8:46 PST ..........
8:47 PST ..........
9:05 PST ..........
9:06 PST ..........
9:36 PST ..........
9:37 PST ..........
10:00 PST ........
10:01 PST ........
10:20 PST ........
10:21 PST ........
10:40 PST ........
10:41 PST ........
9:00 PST ..........
9:07 PST ..........
9:30 PST ..........
9:32 PST ..........
9:50 PST ..........
9:53 PST ..........
10:15 PST ........
10:17 PST ........
10:45 PST ........
10:47 PST ........
11:15 PST ........
11:17 PST ........
11:45 PST ........
11:47 PST ........
12:30 PST ........
12:35 PST ........
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
flight—survey NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrived NWSR (sling load operations) ....................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR (sling load operations) ....................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR (sling load operations) ....................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Animals
present
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS CONDUCTED IN APRIL 2010
Time
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
9–Apr ................
11–Apr ..............
11–Apr ..............
11–Apr ..............
11–Apr ..............
11–Apr ..............
11–Apr ..............
11–Apr ..............
11–Apr ..............
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Date
8:00 PST ..........
8:01 PST ..........
8:21 PST ..........
8:22 PST ..........
8:42 PST ..........
8:43 PST ..........
9:15 PST ..........
9:16 PST ..........
9:35 PST ..........
9:36 PST ..........
10:00 PST ........
10:01 PST ........
10:20 PST ........
10:21 PST ........
10:40 PST ........
10:41 PST ........
9:05 PST ..........
9:10 PST ..........
9:31 PST ..........
9:36 PST ..........
9:57 PST ..........
10:02 PST ........
10:23 PST ........
10:28 PST ........
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
Helicopter
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Monitoring
conducted
Activity
Jkt 223001
flight—arrived NWSR .........................................................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR .........................................................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR .........................................................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR .........................................................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR .........................................................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR (sling load operations) ....................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR (sling load operations) ....................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrived NWSR (sling load operations) ....................
flight—departed NWSR ......................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
flight—arrive NWSR ...........................................................
flight—depart NWSR ..........................................................
taking’’. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13)
indicate that requests for IHAs must
include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Animals
present
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
and reporting that will result in
increased knowledge of the species and
of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are
expected to be present.
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
At least once during the period
between February 15, 2011, through
April 30, 2011, or during the period of
November 1, 2011, through December
31, 2011 a qualified biologist shall be
present during all three workdays at the
Station. The biologist hired will be
subject to approval of NMFS and this
requirement may be modified
depending on the results of the second
year of monitoring.
The qualified biologist shall
document use of the island by the
pinnipeds, frequency, (i.e., dates, time,
tidal height, species, numbers present,
and any disturbances), and note any
responses to potential disturbances. In
the event of any observed Steller sea
lion injury, mortality, or the presence of
newborn pup, the SGRLPS will notify
the NMFS SWRO Administrator and the
NMFS Director of Office of Protected
Resources immediately.
Aerial photographic surveys may
provide the most accurate means of
documenting species composition, age
and sex class of pinnipeds using the
project site during human activity
periods. Aerial photo coverage of the
island shall be completed from the same
helicopter used to transport the SGRLPS
personnel to the island during
restoration trips. Photographs of all
marine mammals hauled out on the
island shall be taken at an altitude
greater than 300 m (984 ft) by a skilled
photographer, prior to the first landing
on each visit included in the monitoring
program. Photographic documentation
of marine mammals present at the end
of each three-day work session shall
also be made for a before and after
comparison. These photographs will be
forwarded to a biologist capable of
discerning marine mammal species.
Data shall be provided to NMFS in the
form of a report with a data table, any
other significant observations related to
marine mammals, and a report of
restoration activities (see Reporting).
The original photographs can be made
available to NMFS or other marine
mammal experts for inspection and
further analysis.
Proposed Reporting
The SGRLPS personnel will record
data to document the number of marine
mammals exposed to helicopter noise
and to document apparent disturbance
reactions or lack thereof. SGRLPS and
NMFS will use the data to estimate
numbers of animals potentially taken by
Level B harassment.
Interim Monitoring Report
The SGRLPS will submit interim
monitoring reports to the NMFS SWRO
Administrator and the NMFS Director of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
Office of Protected Resources no later
than 30 days after the conclusion of
each monthly session. The interim
report will describe the operations that
were conducted and sightings of marine
mammals near the proposed project.
The report will provide full
documentation of methods, results, and
interpretation pertaining to all
monitoring.
Each interim report will provide:
(i) A summary and table of the dates,
times, and weather during all helicopter
operations, and restoration and
maintenance activities.
(ii) Species, number, location, and
behavior of any marine mammals,
observed throughout all monitoring
activities.
(iii) An estimate of the number (by
species) of marine mammals that are
known to have been exposed to acoustic
stimuli associated with the helicopter
operations, restoration and maintenance
activities.
(iv) A description of the
implementation and effectiveness of the
monitoring and mitigation measures of
the IHA and full documentation of
methods, results, and interpretation
pertaining to all monitoring.
Final Monitoring Report
In addition to the interim reports, the
SGRLPS will submit a draft Final
Monitoring Report to NMFS no later
than 90 days after the project is
completed to the Regional
Administrator and the Director of Office
of Protected Resources at NMFS
Headquarters. Within 30 days after
receiving comments from NMFS on the
draft Final Monitoring Report, the
SGRLPS must submit a Final
Monitoring Report to the Regional
Administrator and the NMFS Director of
Office of Protected Resources. If the
SGRLPS receives no comments from
NMFS on the draft Final Monitoring
Report, the draft Final Monitoring
Report will be considered to be the
Final Monitoring Report.
The final report will provide:
(i) A summary and table of the dates,
times, and weather during all helicopter
operations, and restoration and
maintenance activities.
(ii) Species, number, location, and
behavior of any marine mammals,
observed throughout all monitoring
activities.
(iii) An estimate of the number (by
species) of marine mammals that are
known to have been exposed to acoustic
stimuli associated with the helicopter
operations, restoration and maintenance
activities.
(iv) A description of the
implementation and effectiveness of the
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
80479
monitoring and mitigation measures of
the IHA and full documentation of
methods, results, and interpretation
pertaining to all monitoring.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as:
any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance
which (i) has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
[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
[Level B harassment].
Only take by Level B harassment is
anticipated and authorized as a result of
the helicopter operations and
restoration and maintenance activities
on NWSR.
Based on pinniped survey counts
conducted by CCR on NWSR in the
spring of 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000
(CCR, 2001), NMFS estimates that
approximately 204 California sea lions
(calculated by multiplying the average
monthly abundance of California sea
lions (zero in April, 1997 and 34 in
April,1998) present on NWSR by six
months of the proposed restoration and
maintenance activities), 172 Steller sea
lions (NMFS’ estimate of the maximum
number of Steller sea lions that could be
present on NWSR with a 95-percent
confidence interval), 36 Pacific harbor
seals (calculated by multiplying the
maximum number of harbor seals
present on NWSR (6) by six months),
and 6 northern fur seals (calculated by
multiplying the maximum number of
northern fur seals present on NWSR (1)
by six months) could be potentially
affected by Level B behavioral
harassment over the course of the
proposed IHA. Estimates of the numbers
of marine mammals that might be
affected are based on consideration of
the number of marine mammals that
could be disturbed appreciably by
approximately 51 hrs of aircraft
operations during the course of the
proposed activity. These incidental
harassment take numbers represent
approximately 0.14 percent of the U.S.
stock of California sea lion, 0.42 percent
of the eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea
lion, 0.11 percent of the California stock
of Pacific harbor seals, and 0.06 percent
of the San Miguel Island stock of
northern fur seal.
All of the potential takes are expected
to be Level B behavioral harassment
only. Because of the mitigation
measures that will be required and the
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
80480
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analysis and Determination
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
likelihood that some pinnipeds will
avoid the area, no injury or mortality to
pinnipeds is expected or requested.
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action.
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible impact’’
in 50 CFR 216.103 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.’’
In making a negligible impact
determination, NMFS considers:
(1) The number of anticipated
mortalities;
(2) The number and nature of
anticipated injuries;
(3) The number, nature, and intensity,
and duration of Level B harassment; and
(4) The context in which the takes
occur.
As mentioned previously, NMFS
estimates that four species of marine
mammals could be potentially affected
by Level B harassment over the course
of the IHA. For each species, these
numbers are small (each, less than one
percent) relative to the population size.
No takes by Level A harassment,
serious injury, or mortality are
anticipated to occur as a result of the
SGRLPS’ proposed activities, and none
are authorized. Only short-term
behavioral disturbance is anticipated to
occur due to the brief and sporadic
duration of the proposed activities; the
availability of alternate areas near
NWSR for marine mammals to avoid the
resultant acoustic disturbance; and
limited access to NWSR during the
pupping season. Due to the nature,
degree, and context of the behavioral
harassment anticipated, the activities
are not expected to impact rates of
recruitment or survival.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
mitigation and monitoring measures,
NMFS preliminarily finds that the
SGRLPS’ planned helicopter operations
and restoration/maintenance activities,
will result in the incidental take of
small numbers of marine mammals, by
Level B harassment only, and that the
total taking from the helicopter
operations and restoration/maintenance
activities will have a negligible impact
on the affected species or stocks.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:24 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
The Steller sea lion, eastern Distinct
Population Segment (DPS) is listed as
threatened under the ESA and occurs in
the planned action area. NMFS
Headquarters’ Office of Protected
Resources, Permits, Conservation, and
Education Division conducted a formal
section 7 consultation under the ESA
with the Southwest Region, NMFS. On
January 27, 2010, the Southwest Region
issued a BiOp and concluded that the
issuance of IHAs are likely to adversely
affect, but not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of Steller sea lions.
NMFS has designated critical habitat for
the eastern Distinct Population Segment
˜
of Steller sea lions in California at Ano
Nuevo Island, Southeast Farallon Island,
Sugarloaf Island and Cape Mendocino,
California pursuant to section 4 of the
ESA (see 50 CFR 226.202(b)). Northwest
Seal Rock is neither within nor nearby
these designated areas. Finally, the
BiOp included an ITS for Steller sea
lions. The ITS contains reasonable and
prudent measures implemented by
terms and conditions to minimize the
effects of this take.
NMFS has reviewed the 2010 BiOp
and determined that there is no new
information regarding effects to Stellar
sea lions; the action has not been
modified in a manner which would
cause adverse effects not previously
evaluated; there has been no new listing
of species or designation of critical
habitat that could be affected by the
action; and, the action will not exceed
the extent or amount of incidental take
authorized in the 2010–2012 ITS.
Therefore, the proposed IHA does not
require the reinitiation of Section 7
consultation under the ESA.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
To meet NMFS’ NEPA requirements
for the issuance of an IHA to the
SGRLPS, NMFS prepared an
Environmental Assessment (EA) in 2010
that was specific to conducting aircraft
operations and restoration and
maintenance work on the St. George
Reef Light Station. The EA, titled
‘‘Issuance of an Incidental Harassment
Authorization to Take Marine Mammals
by Harassment Incidental to Conducting
Aircraft Operations, Lighthouse
Restoration and Maintenance Activities
on St. George Reef Lighthouse Station in
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Del Norte County, California,’’ evaluated
the impacts on the human environment
of NMFS’ authorization of incidental
Level B harassment resulting from the
specified activity in the specified
geographic region. At that time, NMFS
concluded that issuance of an IHA
November 1 through April 30, annually
would not significantly affect the
quality of the human environment and
issued a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for the 2010 EA
regarding the SGRLPS’ activities. In
conjunction with the SGRLPS’ 2011
application, NMFS has again reviewed
the 2010 EA and determined that there
are no new direct, indirect or
cumulative impacts to the human and
natural environment associated with the
IHA requiring evaluation in a
supplemental EA and NMFS, therefore,
intends to reaffirm the 2010 FONSI. A
copy of the EA and the FONSI for this
activity is available upon request (see
ADDRESSES).
Dated: December 16, 2010.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–32164 Filed 12–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
Notice of Availability of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS) for Disposal and Reuse of Fort
McPherson, GA
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice of Availability (NOA).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of the Army
announces the availability of the FEIS,
which evaluates the potential
environmental impacts associated with
the disposal and reuse of Fort
McPherson, Georgia.
DATES: The waiting period for the FEIS
will end 30 days after publication of an
NOA in the Federal Register by the U.
S. Environmental Protection Agency.
ADDRESSES: To obtain a copy of the FEIS
contact Mr. Larry Gissentanna,
McPherson BRAC Environmental
Coordinator, 1508 Hood Ave., Building
714, Fort Gillem, GA 30297 or
larry.gissentanna@us.army.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Larry Gissentanna at (404) 469–3559.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FEIS
covers activities associated with the
disposal and reuse of Fort McPherson,
Georgia. In accordance with the 2005
Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC)
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80471-80480]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32164]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XZ87
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; St.
George Reef Light Station Restoration and Maintenance at Northwest Seal
Rock, Del Norte County, CA
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental take authorization; request for
comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from the St. George Reef
Lighthouse Preservation Society (SGRLPS), for an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals, by harassment incidental to
conducting aircraft operations, and lighthouse renovation and light
maintenance activities on the St. George Reef Light Station on
Northwest Seal Rock (NWSR) in the northeast Pacific Ocean. Pursuant to
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on
its proposal to issue an IHA to SGRLPS to incidentally harass, by Level
B harassment only, four species of marine mammals during the specified
activity.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than January
21, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to P.
Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315
East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox address for
providing e-mail comments is ITP.Cody@noaa.gov. NMFS is not responsible
for e-mail comments sent to addresses other than the one provided here.
Comments sent via e-mail, including all attachments, must not exceed a
10-megabyte file size.
Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications without change. All Personal Identifying
Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
A copy of the application containing a list of the references used
in this document may be obtained by writing to the above address,
telephoning the contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT) or visiting the internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications. The following associated documents
are also available at the same internet address: Environmental
Assessment (EA) prepared by NMFS; and the finding of no significant
impact (FONSI). Documents cited in this notice may be viewed, by
appointment, during regular business hours, at the aforementioned
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeannine Cody, NMFS, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-2289 or Monica DeAngelis, NMFS
Southwest Regional Office, (562) 980-3232.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) directs
the Secretary of Commerce to authorize, upon request, the incidental,
but not intentional, taking by harassment of small numbers of marine
mammals of a species or population stock, by United States citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a
specified geographical region if certain findings are made and, a
notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for
review.
Authorization for incidental taking of small numbers of marine
mammals shall be granted if NMFS 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 (where relevant). The authorization must
set forth the permissible methods of taking, other means of effecting
the least practicable adverse impact on the species or stock and its
habitat, and monitoring and reporting of such takings. NMFS has defined
``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 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.''
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA establishes a 45-day time limit
for NMFS' review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice
and comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental
harassment of small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the
close of the public comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny the
authorization.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as:
Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild [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
[Level B harassment].
Summary of Request
NMFS received a letter on October 13, 2010, from the SGRLPS
requesting the taking by harassment, of small numbers of marine
mammals, incidental to aircraft operations and restoration and
maintenance activities on the St. George Reef Light Station (Station).
At NMFS' request, the SGRLPS submitted a complete and adequate
application on November 3, 2010. The SGRLPS aims to: (1) Restore and
preserve the Station on a monthly basis (November 1-April 30,
annually); and (2) perform periodic, annual maintenance on the
Station's optical light system.
The Station, which is listed in the National Park Service's
National Register of Historic Places, is located on Northwest Seal Rock
(NWSR) offshore of Crescent City, California in the northeast Pacific
Ocean.
The proposed activities would occur in the vicinity of a possible
pinniped haul out site located on NWSR.
[[Page 80472]]
Acoustic and visual stimuli generated by: (1) Helicopter landings/
takeoffs; (2) noise generated during restoration activities (e.g.,
painting, plastering, welding, and glazing); (3) maintenance activities
(e.g., bulb replacement and automation of the light system); and (4)
human presence, may have the potential to cause any pinnipeds hauled
out on NWSR to flush into the surrounding water or to cause a short-
term behavioral disturbance. These types of disturbances are the
principal means of marine mammal taking associated with these
activities and the SGRLPS has requested an authorization to take 204
California sea lions (Zalophus californianus); 36 Pacific Harbor seals
(Phoca vitulina); 172 Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus); and six
northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) by Level B harassment.
This is SGRLPS' second request for an IHA and the monitoring
results from the first IHA appear in the Proposed Monitoring section of
this notice.
Description of the Specified Activity
SGRLPS proposes to conduct the proposed activities (aircraft
operations, lighthouse restoration, and light maintenance activities)
between November 1 through April 30, annually, at a maximum frequency
of one session per month. The proposed duration for each session would
last no more than three days (e.g., Friday, Saturday, and Sunday).
Aircraft Operations
Because NWSR has no safe landing area for boats, the proposed
restoration activities would require the SGRLPS to transport personnel
and equipment from the California mainland to NWSR by a small
helicopter. Helicopter landings take place on top of the engine room
(caisson) which is approximately 15 m (48 ft) above the surface of the
rocks on NWSR.
SGRLPS proposes to transport no more than 15 work crew members and
equipment to NWSR for each session and estimates that each session
would require no more than 36 helicopter landings/takeoffs per month.
During landing, the helicopter would land on the caisson to allow the
work crew members to disembark and retrieve their equipment located in
a basket attached to the underside of the helicopter. The helicopter
would then return to the mainland to pick up additional personnel and
equipment. Even though SGRLPS would use the helicopter to transport
work crew members and materials on the first and last days of the
three-day activity, the helicopter would likely fly to and from the
Station on all three days of the restoration and maintenance
activities.
Proposed schedule: SGRLPS would conduct a maximum of 16 flights
(eight arrivals and eight departures) for the first day. The first
flight would depart from Crescent City Airport at approximately 9 a.m.
for a six-minute flight to NWSR. The helicopter would land and takeoff
immediately after offloading personnel and equipment every 20 minutes
(min). The total duration of the first day's aerial operations would
last for approximately three hours (hrs) and 34 min and would end at
approximately 12:34 p.m. Crew members would remain overnight at the
Station and would not return to the mainland on the first day.
For the second day, the SGRLPS would conduct a maximum of 10
flights (five arrivals and five departures) to transport additional
materials on and off the islet. The first flight would depart from
Crescent City Airport at 9 a.m. for a six-minute flight to NWSR. The
total duration of the second day's aerial operations would last up to
three hours.
For the final day of operations, SGRLPS would conduct a maximum of
ten helicopter flights (five arrivals and five departures) to transport
the remaining crew members and equipment/material back to the Crescent
City Airport. The total duration of the third day's helicopter
operations in support of restoration would last up to two hrs.
As a mean of funding support for the restoration activities, the
SGRLPS will conduct public tours of the Station during the last day of
the proposed restoration and maintenance activities. SGRLPS proposes to
transport visitors to the Station during the Sunday work window period.
Although some of these flights would be conducted solely for the
transportation of tourists, those flights would be conducted at a later
stage when no pinnipeds are expected to be at the Station. The proposed
IHA does not include additional allowance for animals that might be
affected by additional flights for the transportation of tourists.
Lighthouse Restoration Activities
Restoration activities would include the removal of peeling paint
and plaster, restoration of interior plaster and paint, refurbishing
structural and decorative metal, reworking original metal support beams
throughout the lantern room and elsewhere, replacing glass as
necessary, and upgrading the present electrical system. The SGRLPS
expects to complete most of the major restoration work within three
years.
Light Maintenance Activities
The SGRLPS will need to conduct maintenance on the Station's beacon
light at least once or up to two times per year within the proposed
work window. Scheduled light maintenance activities would coincide with
lighthouse restoration activities conducted monthly during the period
of November 1, through April 30, annually. The SGRLPS expects that
maintenance activities would not exceed three hrs per each monthly
session.
Emergency Light Maintenance
If the beacon light fails during the period from February 15, 2011,
through April 30, 2011, or during the period of November 1, 2011,
through December 31, 2011, the SGRLPS proposes to send a crew of two to
three people to the Station by helicopter to repair the beacon light.
For each emergency repair event, the SGRLPS proposes to conduct a
maximum of four flights (two arrivals and two departures) to transport
equipment and supplies. The helicopter may remain on site or transit
back to shore and make a second landing to pick up the repair
personnel.
In the case of an emergency repair between May 1, 2011, and October
31, 2011, the SGRLPS would consult with the NMFS Southwest Regional
Office (SWRO) to best determine the timing of the trips to the
lighthouse, on a case-by-case basis, based upon the existing
environmental conditions and the abundance and distribution of any
marine mammals present on NWSR. The SWRO biologists would have real-
time knowledge regarding the animal use and abundance of the NWSR at
the time of the repair request and would make a decision regarding when
the trips to the lighthouse can be made during the emergency repair
time window that would have the least practicable adverse impact to
marine mammals. The SWRO would also ensure that the SGRLPS' request for
incidental take during emergency repairs would not exceed the number of
incidental take authorized in the proposed IHA.
Complete automation of the light generating system and automatic
backup system will minimize maintenance and emergency repair visits to
the island. The light is solar powered using one solar panel; an
installed second panel serves as a backup which is automatically
activated if needed. A second smaller bulb in the lantern is activated
if the primary bulb fails. Use of high quality, durable materials and
thorough weatherproofing is planned to minimize trips for maintenance
and
[[Page 80473]]
repair in the future. All tools and supplies are stored on the island
so that a minimal number of transport trips for emergency maintenance
will be necessary.
Acoustic Source Specifications
R44 Raven Helicopter
The SGRLPS plans to charter a Raven R44 helicopter, owned and
operated by Air Shasta Rotor and Wing, LLC. The Raven R44, which seats
three passengers and one pilot, is a compact-sized (1134 kilograms
(kg), 2500 pounds (lbs)) helicopter with two-bladed main and tail
rotors. Both sets of rotors are fitted with noise-attenuating blade tip
caps that would decrease flyover noise.
Metrics Used in This Document
This section includes a brief explanation of the sound measurements
frequently used in the discussions of acoustic effects in this
document. Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, and is
usually measured in micropascals ([mu]Pa), where 1 pascal (Pa) is the
pressure resulting from a force of one newton exerted over an area of
one square meter. Sound pressure level (SPL) is expressed as the ratio
of a measured sound pressure and a reference level. The commonly used
reference pressure is 1 [mu]Pa for under water, and the units for SPLs
are dB re: 1 [mu]Pa. The commonly used reference pressure is 20 [mu]Pa
for in air, and the units for SPLs are dB re: 20 [mu]Pa.
SPL (in decibels (dB)) = 20 log (pressure/reference pressure).
SPL is an instantaneous measurement and can be expressed as the
peak, the peak-peak (p-p), or the root mean square (rms). Root mean
square, which is the square root of the arithmetic average of the
squared instantaneous pressure values, is typically used in discussions
of the effects of sounds on vertebrates and all references to SPL in
this document refer to the root mean square unless otherwise noted. SPL
does not take the duration of a sound into account.
Characteristics of the Aircraft Noise
Noise testing performed on the R44 Raven Helicopter, as required
for Federal Aviation Administration approval, required an overflight at
150 m (492 ft) above ground level, 109 knots and a maximum gross weight
of 1,134 kg (2,500 lbs). The noise levels measured on the ground at
this distance and speed were 81.9 decibels (dB) re: 20 [mu]Pa (A-
weighted) for the model R44 Raven I, or 81.0 dB re: 20 [mu]Pa (A-
weighted) for the model R44 Raven II (NMFS, 2007).
The helicopter would land on the Station's caisson and presumably,
the received sound levels would increase above 81-81.9 dB re: 20 [mu]Pa
(A-weighted) at the landing area.
Characteristics of Restoration and Maintenance Noise
Restoration and maintenance activities would involve the removal of
peeling paint and plaster, restoration of interior plaster and paint,
refurbishing structural and decorative metal, reworking original metal
support beams throughout the lantern room and elsewhere, replacing
glass as necessary, upgrading the present electrical system; and annual
light beacon maintenance. Any noise associated with these activities is
likely to be from light construction (e.g., sanding, hammering, or use
of hand drills). The SGRLPS proposes to confine all restoration
activities to the existing structure which would occur on the upper
levels of the Station. The pinnipeds of NWSR do not have access to this
area.
NMFS expects that acoustic stimuli resulting from the proposed
helicopter operations; noise from maintenance and restoration
activities; and human presence has the potential to harass marine
mammals, incidental to the conduct of the proposed activities. NMFS
expects these disturbances to be temporary and result, at worst, in a
temporary modification in behavior and/or low-level physiological
effects (Level B Harassment) of small numbers of certain species of
marine mammals.
Description of the Specified Geographic Region
The Station is located on a small, rocky islet (41[deg]50'24'' N,
124[deg]22'06'' W) approximately nine kilometers (km) (6.0 miles (mi))
in the northeast Pacific Ocean, offshore of Crescent City, California
(Latitude: 41[deg]46'48'' N; Longitude: 124[deg]14'11'' W). NWSR is
approximately 91.4 m (300 ft) in diameter that peaks at 5.18 m (17 ft)
above mean sea level. The Station, built in 1892, rises 45.7 m (150 ft)
above the sea, consists of hundreds of granite blocks, is topped with a
cast iron lantern room, and covers much of the surface of the islet.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Proposed Specified
Activity
The marine mammal species likely to be harassed incidental to
helicopter operations, lighthouse restoration, and lighthouse
maintenance on NWSR are the California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus), the Pacific Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), the eastern
(Distinct Population Segment) U.S. stock of Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias jubatus), and the eastern Pacific stock of northern fur
seal (Callorhinus ursinus). General information of these species can be
found in Caretta et al., (2009) and Allen and Angliss (2010) and is
available at the following URLs: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/po2009.pdf and https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/ak2009.pdf
respectively. Refer to these documents for information on these
species. Additional information on these species is presented below
this section.
California Sea Lion
California sea lions are not listed as threatened or endangered
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), nor are
they categorized as depleted under the MMPA. The California sea lion
includes three subspecies: Z. c. wollebaeki (on the Galapagos Islands),
Z. c. japonicus (in Japan, but now thought to be extinct), and Z. c.
californianus (found from southern Mexico to southwestern Canada;
herein referred to as the California sea lion). The subspecies is
comprised of three stocks: (1) The U.S. stock, beginning at the U.S./
Mexico border extending northward into Canada; (2) the western Baja
California stock, extending from the U.S./Mexico border to the southern
tip of the Baja California peninsula; and (3) the Gulf of California
stock, which includes the Gulf of California from the southern tip of
the Baja California peninsula and across to the mainland and extends to
southern Mexico (Lowry et al., 1992).
In 2009, the estimated population of the U.S. stock of California
sea lion ranged from 141,842 to 238,000 animals and the maximum
population growth rate was 6.52 percent when pup counts from El
Ni[ntilde]o years (1983, 1984, 1992, 1993, 1998, and 2003) were removed
(Carretta et al., 2009).
Major rookeries for the California sea lion exist on the Channel
Islands off southern California and on the islands situated along the
east and west coasts of Baja California. Males are polygamous,
establishing breeding territories that may include up to fourteen
females. They defend their territories with aggressive physical
displays and vocalization. Sea lions reach sexual maturity at four to
five years old and the breeding season lasts from May to August. Most
pups are born from May through July and weaned at 10 months old.
Crescent Coastal Research (CCR) conducted a three-year (1998-2000)
survey of the wildlife species on NWSR for the SGRLPS. They reported
that
[[Page 80474]]
counts of California sea lions on NWSR varied greatly (from six to 541)
during the observation period from April 1997 through July 2000. CCR
reported that counts for California sea lions during the spring (April-
May), summer (June-August), and fall (September-October), averaged 60,
154, and 235, respectively (CCR, 2001).
Pacific Harbor Seal
Pacific harbor seals are not listed as threatened or endangered
under the ESA, nor are they categorized as depleted under the MMPA. The
animals inhabit near-shore coastal and estuarine areas from Baja
California, Mexico, to the Pribilof Islands in Alaska. Pacific harbor
seals are divided into two subspecies: P. v. stejnegeri in the western
North Pacific, near Japan, and P. v. richardsi in the northeast Pacific
Ocean. The latter subspecies, recognized as three separate stocks,
inhabits the west coast of the continental United States, including:
The outer coastal waters of Oregon and Washington states; Washington
state inland waters; and Alaska coastal and inland waters. Two of these
stocks, the California stock and Oregon/Washington coast stock, of
Pacific harbor seals are identified off the coast of Oregon and
California for management purposes under the MMPA. However, the stock
boundary is difficult to distinguish because of the continuous
distribution of harbor seals along the west coast and any rigid
boundary line is (to a greater or lesser extent) arbitrary, from a
biological perspective (Carretta et al., 2009). Due to the location of
the proposed project which is situated near the border of Oregon and
California, both stocks could be present within the proposed project
area.
In 2009, the estimated population of the California of Pacific
harbor seals ranged from 31,600 to 34,233 animals and the maximum
population growth rate was 3.5 percent. The estimated population of the
Oregon/Washington coast stocks was 24,732 animals (Carretta et al.,
2009).
In California, over 500 harbor seal haulout sites are widely
distributed along the mainland and offshore islands, and include rocky
shores, beaches and intertidal sandbars (Lowry et al., 2005). Harbor
seals mate at sea and females give birth during the spring and summer,
although the pupping season varies with latitude. Pups are nursed for
an average of 24 days and are ready to swim minutes after being born.
Harbor seal pupping takes place at many locations and rookery size
varies from a few pups to many hundreds of pups. The nearest harbor
seal rookery relative to the proposed project site is at Castle Rock
National Wildlife Refuge, located approximately 965 m (0.6 mi) south of
Point St. George, and 2.4 km (1.5 mi) north of the Crescent City Harbor
in Del Norte County, California (USFWS, 2007).
CCR noted that harbor seal use of NWSR was minimal, with only one
sighting of a group of six animals, during 20 observation surveys. They
hypothesized that harbor seals may avoid the islet because of its
distance from shore, relatively steep topography, and full exposure to
rough and frequently turbulent sea swells.
Northern Fur Seal
Northern fur seals are not listed as threatened or endangered under
the ESA. However, they are categorized as depleted under the MMPA.
Northern fur seals occur from southern California north to the Bering
Sea and west to the Sea of Okhotsk and Honshu Island of Japan. Two
separate stocks of northern fur seals are recognized within U.S.
waters: An Eastern Pacific stock distributed among sites in Alaska,
British Columbia; and a San Miguel Island stock distributed along the
west coast of the continental U.S.
Northern fur seals may temporarily haul out on land at other sites
in Alaska, British Columbia, and on islets along the west coast of the
continental United States, but generally this occurs outside of the
breeding season (Fiscus, 1983).
In 2009, the estimated population of the San Miguel Island stock
ranged from 5,096 to 9,424 animals and the maximum population growth
rate was 8.6 percent (Carretta et al., 2009).
Northern fur seals breed in Alaska and migrate along the west coast
during fall and winter. Due to their pelagic habitat, they are rarely
seen from shore in the continental U.S., but individuals occasionally
come ashore on islands well offshore (i.e., Farallon Islands and
Channel Islands in California). During the breeding season,
approximately 74 percent of the worldwide population is found on the
Pribilof Islands in Alaska, with the remaining animals spread
throughout the North Pacific Ocean (Lander and Kajimura, 1982).
CCR observed one male northern fur seal on NWSR in October, 1998
(CCR, 2001). It is possible that a few animals may use the island more
often that indicated by the CCR surveys, if they were mistaken for
other otariid species (M. DeAngelis, NMFS, pers. comm.).
Steller Sea Lion
The Steller sea lion eastern stock is listed as threatened under
the ESA and is categorized as depleted under the MMPA. Steller sea
lions range along the North Pacific Rim from northern Japan to
California (Loughlin et al., 1984), with centers of abundance and
distribution in the Gulf of Alaska and Aleutian Islands, respectively.
Two separate stocks of Steller sea lions were recognized within U.S.
waters: an eastern U.S. stock, which includes animals east of Cape
Suckling, Alaska (144[deg] W), and a western U.S. stock, which includes
animals at and west of Cape Suckling (Loughlin, 1997). The species is
not known to migrate, but individuals disperse widely outside of the
breeding season (late May through early July), thus potentially
intermixing with animals from other areas.
In 2009, the estimated population of the eastern U.S. stock ranged
from 45,095 to 55,832 animals and the maximum population growth rate
was 3.1 percent (Allen and Angliss, 2009).
The eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea lions breeds on rookeries
located in southeast Alaska, British Columbia, Oregon, and California;
there are no rookeries located in Washington state. Counts of pups on
rookeries conducted near the end of the birthing season are nearly
complete counts of pup production.
Despite the wide-ranging movements of juveniles and adult males in
particular, exchange between rookeries by breeding adult females and
males (other than between adjoining rookeries) appears low, although
males have a higher tendency to disperse than females (NMFS 1995,
Trujillo et al., 2004, Hoffman et al., 2006). A northward shift in the
overall breeding distribution has occurred, with a contraction of the
range in southern California and new rookeries established in
southeastern Alaska (Pitcher et al., 2007).
CCR reported that Steller sea lion numbers at NWSR ranged from 20
to 355 animals. Counts of Steller sea lions during the spring (April-
May), summer (June-August), and fall (September-October), averaged 68,
110, and 56, respectively (CCR, 2001). A more recent survey at NWSR
between 2000 and 2004 showed Steller sea lion numbers ranged from 175
to 354 in July (M. Lowry, NMFS/SWFSC, unpubl. data). Winter use of NWSR
by Steller sea lion is presumed to be minimal, due to inundation of the
natural portion of the island by large swells.
Other Marine Mammals in the Proposed Action Area
There are several endangered cetaceans that have the potential to
transit in the vicinity of NWSR including the blue (Balaenoptera
[[Page 80475]]
musculus), fin (Balaenoptera physalus), humpback (Megaptera
novaeangliae), sei (Balaenoptera borealis), north Pacific right
(Eubalena japonica), sperm (Physeter macrocephalus), and southern
resident killer (Orcinus orca) whales.
California (southern) sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis), listed as
threatened under the ESA and categorized as depleted under the MMPA,
usually range in coastal waters within two km of shore. Neither CCR nor
the SGRLPS has encountered California sea otters on NWSR during the
course of the four-year wildlife study (CCR, 2001). The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) manages the sea otter and NMFS will not
consider this species further in this proposed IHA notice.
All of the aforementioned species are found farther offshore than
the proposed action area and are not likely to be affected by the
restoration and maintenance activities. Accordingly, NMFS will not
consider these species in greater detail and the proposed IHA will only
address requested take authorizations for pinnipeds.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
Acoustic and visual stimuli generated by: (1) Helicopter landings/
takeoffs; (2) noise generated during restoration activities (e.g.,
painting, plastering, welding, and glazing); and (3) maintenance
activities (e.g., bulb replacement and automation of the light system)
may have the potential to cause Level B harassment of any pinnipeds
hauled out on NWSR. The effects of sounds from helicopter operations
and/or restoration and maintenance activities might include one of the
following: temporary or permanent hearing impairment or behavioral
disturbance (Southall, et al., 2007).
Hearing Impairment
Marine mammals produce sounds in various important contexts--social
interactions, foraging, navigating, and to responding to predators. The
best available science suggests that pinnipeds have a functional aerial
hearing sensitivity between 75 hertz (Hz) and 75 kilohertz (kHz) and
can produce a diversity of sounds, though generally from 100 Hz to
several tens of kHz (Southall, et al., 2007).
Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may
result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift--an
increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise (Finneran,
Carder, Schlundt, and Ridgway, 2005). Factors that influence the amount
of threshold shift include the amplitude, duration, frequency content,
temporal pattern, and energy distribution of noise exposure. The
magnitude of hearing threshold shift normally decreases over time
following cessation of the noise exposure. The amount of threshold
shift just after exposure is called the initial threshold shift. If the
threshold shift eventually returns to zero (i.e., the threshold returns
to the pre-exposure value), it is called temporary threshold shift
(TTS) (Southall et al., 2007).
Pinnipeds have the potential to be disturbed by airborne and
underwater noise generated by the engine of the aircraft (Born, Riget,
Dietz, and Andriashek, 1999; Richardson, Greene, Malme, and Thomson,
1995). Data on underwater TTS-onset in pinnipeds exposed to pulses are
limited to a single study which exposed two California sea lions to
single underwater pulses from an arc-gap transducer and found no
measurable TTS following exposures up to 183 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa (peak-to-
peak) (Finneran, Dear, Carder, and Ridgway, 2003).
TTS has been demonstrated and studied in certain captive
odontocetes and pinnipeds exposed to strong sounds (reviewed in
Southall et al., 2007). In 2004, researchers measured auditory fatigue
to airborne sound in harbor seals, California sea lions, and northern
elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) after exposure to nonpulse
noise for 25 minutes (Kastak, Southall, Holt, Kastak, and Schusterman,
2004). In the study, the harbor seal experienced approximately 6 dB of
TTS at 99 dB re: 20 [mu]Pa. Onset of TTS was identified in the
California sea lion at 122 dB re: 20 [mu]Pa. The northern elephant seal
experienced TTS-onset at 121 dB re: 20 [mu]Pa (Kastak et al., 2004).
There is a dearth of information on acoustic effects of helicopter
overflights on pinniped hearing and communication (Richardson et al.,
1995) and to NMFS' knowledge, there has been no specific documentation
of TTS, let alone permanent threshold shift (PTS), in free-ranging
pinnipeds exposed to helicopter operations during realistic field
conditions.
In 2008, NMFS issued an IHA to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for the take of small numbers of Steller sea lions and Pacific
harbor seals, incidental to rodent eradication activities on an islet
offshore of Rat Island, AK conducted by helicopter. The 15-minute
aerial treatment consisted of the helicopter slowly approaching the
islet at an elevation of over 1,000 feet (304.8 m); gradually
decreasing altitude in slow circles; and applying the rodenticide in a
single pass and returning to Rat Island. The gradual and deliberate
approach to the islet resulted in the sea lions present initially
becoming aware of the helicopter and calmly moving into the water.
Further, the USFWS reported that all responses fell well within the
range of Level B harassment (i.e., alert head raises without moving or
limited, short-term displacement resulting from aircraft noise due to
helicopter overflights).
As a general statement from the available information, pinnipeds
exposed to intense (approximately 110 to 120 dB re: 20 [mu]Pa) nonpulse
sounds often leave haulout areas and seek refuge temporarily (minutes
to a few hours) in the water (Southall et al., 2007). Any noise
attributed to the SGRLPS' proposed helicopter operations on NWSR would
be short-term (approximately 5 min per trip). NMFS would expect the
ambient noise levels to return to a baseline state when helicopter
operations have ceased for the day. Per Richardson et al. (1995),
approaching aircraft generally flush animals into the water and noise
from a helicopter is typically directed down in a ``cone'' underneath
the aircraft. As the helicopter landings take place 15 m (48 ft) above
the surface of the rocks on NWSR, NMFS presumes that the received sound
levels would increase above 81-81.9 dB re: 20 [mu]Pa (A-weighted) at
the landing pad. However, NMFS does not expect that the increased
received levels of sound from the helicopter would cause TTS or PTS
because the pinnipeds would flush before the helicopter approached
NWSR; thus increasing the distance between the pinnipeds and the
received sound levels on NWSR during the proposed action.
Behavioral Disturbance
There is increasing recognition that the effect of human
disturbance on wildlife is highly dependent on the nature of the
disturbance (Burger et al., 1995; Klein et al., 1995; and Kucey, 2005).
Disturbances resulting from human activity can impact short- and long-
term pinniped haul out behavior (Renouf et al., 1981; Schneider and
Payne, 1983; Terhune and Almon, 1983; Allen et al., 1984; Stewart,
1984; Suryan and Harvey, 1999; Mortenson et al., 2000; and Kucey and
Trites, 2006). The apparent skittishness of both harbor seals and
Steller sea lions raises concerns regarding behavioral and
physiological impacts to individuals and populations experiencing high
levels of human disturbance. It is well known that human activity can
flush harbor seals off haul out sites (Allen et al., 1984; Calambokidis
et al., 1991;
[[Page 80476]]
Suryan and Harvey, 1999; Mortenson et al., 2000).
The Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi) has been shown to
avoid beaches that have been disturbed often by humans (Kenyon, 1972).
Stevens and Boness (2003) concluded that after the 1997-98 El
Ni[ntilde]o, when populations of the South American fur seal,
Arctocephalus australis, in Peru declined dramatically, seals abandoned
some of their former primary breeding sites, but continued to breed at
adjacent beaches that were more rugged (i.e., less likely to be used by
humans). Abandoned and unused sites were more likely to have human
disturbance than currently used sites. In one case, human disturbance
appeared to cause Steller sea lions to desert a breeding area at
Northeast Point on St. Paul Island, Alaska (Kenyon, 1962).
It is likely that the initial helicopter approach to the Station
would cause a subset, or all of the marine mammals hauled out on NWSR
to depart the rock and flush into the water. The physical presence of
aircraft could also lead to non-auditory effects on marine mammals
involving visual or other cues. Airborne sound from a low-flying
helicopter or airplane may be heard by marine mammals while at the
surface or underwater. In general, helicopters tend to be noisier than
fixed wing aircraft of similar size and underwater sounds from aircraft
are strongest just below the surface and directly under the aircraft.
Noise from aircraft would not be expected to cause direct physical
effects but have the potential to affect behavior. The primary factor
that may influence abrupt movements of animals is engine noise,
specifically changes in engine noise. Responses by mammals could
include hasty dives or turns, change in course, or flushing and
stampeding from a haul out site. There are few well documented studies
of the impacts of aircraft overflight over pinniped haul out sites or
rookeries, and many of those that exist, are specific to military
activities (Efroymson et al., 2001).
Several factors complicate the analysis of long- and short-term
effects for aircraft overflights. Information on behavioral effects of
overflights by military aircraft (or component stressors) on most
wildlife species is sparse. Moreover, models that relate behavioral
changes to abundance or reproduction, and those that relate behavioral
or hearing effects thresholds from one population to another are
generally not available. In addition, the aggregation of sound
frequencies, durations, and the view of the aircraft into a single
exposure metric is not always the best predictor of effects and it may
also be difficult to calculate. Overall, there has been no indication
that single or occasional aircraft flying above pinnipeds in water
cause long term displacement of these animals (Richardson et al.,
1995). The Lowest Observed Adverse Effects Levels (LOAELs) are rather
variable for pinnipeds on land, ranging from just over 150 m (492 ft)
to about 2,000 m (6,562 ft) (Efroymson et al., 2001). A conservative
(90th percentile) distance effects level is 1,150 m (3,773 ft). Most
thresholds represent movement away from the overflight. Bowles and
Stewart (1980) estimated an LOAEL of 305 m (1,000 ft) for helicopters
(low and landing) in California sea lions and harbor seals observed on
San Miguel Island, CA; animals responded to some degree by moving
within the haul out and entering into the water, stampeding into the
water, or clearing the haul out completely. Both species always
responded with the raising of their heads. California sea lions
appeared to react more to the visual cue of the helicopter than the
noise.
If pinnipeds are present on NWSR, it is likely that a helicopter
landing at the Station would cause 100 percent of the pinnipeds on NWSR
to flush; however, when present, they appear to show rapid habituation
to helicopter landing and departure (Crescent Coastal Research, 2001;
Guy Towers, SGRLPS, pers. com.). According to the CCR Report (2001),
while up to 40 percent of the California and Steller sea lions present
on the rock have been observed to enter the water on the first of a
series of helicopter landings, as few as zero percent have flushed on
subsequent landings on the same date.
If pinnipeds are present on NWSR, Level B behavioral harassment of
pinnipeds may occur during helicopter landing and takeoff from NWSR due
to the pinnipeds temporarily moving from the rocks and lower structure
of the Station into the sea due to the noise and appearance of
helicopter during approaches and departures. It is expected that all or
a portion of the marine mammals hauled out on the island will depart
the rock and move into the water upon initial helicopter approaches.
The movement to the water is expected to be gradual due to the required
controlled helicopter approaches (see Proposed Mitigation section), the
small size of the aircraft, the use of noise-attenuating blade tip caps
on the rotors, and behavioral habituation on the part of the animals as
helicopter trips continue throughout the day. During the sessions of
helicopter activity, if present on NWSR, some animals may be
temporarily displaced from the island and either raft in the water or
relocate to other haul-outs.
Sea lions have shown habituation to helicopter flights within a day
at the project site and most animals are expected to return soon after
helicopter activities cease for that day. By clustering helicopter
arrival/departures within a short time period, animals are expected to
show less response to subsequent landings. No impact on the population
size or breeding stock of Steller sea lions, California sea lions,
Pacific harbor seals, or northern fur seals is expected to occur.
Restoration and maintenance activities would involve the removal of
peeling paint and plaster, restoration of interior plaster and paint,
refurbishing structural and decorative metal, reworking original metal
support beams throughout the lantern room and elsewhere, replacing
glass as necessary, upgrading the present electrical system; and annual
light beacon maintenance. Any noise associated with these activities is
likely to be from light construction (e.g., sanding, hammering, or use
of hand drills) and the pinnipeds may be disturbed by human presence.
Animals respond to disturbance from humans in the same way as they
respond to the risk of predation, by avoiding areas of high risk,
either completely or by using them for limited periods (Gill et al.,
1996).
Mortality
Sudden movement of large numbers of animals may cause a stampede.
In order to prevent such stampedes from occurring within the sea lion
colony, certain mitigation requirements and restrictions, such as
controlled helicopter approaches and limited access period during the
pupping season, will be imposed should an IHA be issued. As such, and
because any pinnipeds nearby likely would avoid the approaching
helicopter, the SGRLPS anticipates that there will be no instances of
injury or mortality during the proposed project.
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The NMFS expects that there will be no long- or short-term physical
impacts to pinniped habitat on NWSR. The SGRLPS proposes to confine all
restoration activities to the existing structure which would occur on
the upper levels of the Station which are not used by marine mammals.
The SGRLPS would remove all waste, discarded materials and equipment
from the island after each visit. The proposed activities will not
result in any permanent impact on habitats used by marine mammals,
including the food
[[Page 80477]]
sources they use. The main impact associated with the proposed activity
will be temporarily elevated noise levels and the associated direct
effects on marine mammals, previously discussed in this notice.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible
methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock
and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar significance, and the availability of
such species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses.
As a way to reduce potential Level B behavioral harassment to
marine mammals that would result from the proposed project, NMFS
proposes that the following mitigation measures would be required.
Time and Frequency: Lighthouse restoration activities are to be
conducted at maximum of once per month between February 15, 2011,
through April 30, 2011, or between November 1, 2011, through December
31, 2011. Each restoration session will last no more than three days.
Maintenance of the light beacon will occur only in conjunction with
restoration activities.
Helicopter Approach and Timing Techniques: The SGRLPS shall ensure
that helicopter approach patterns to the lighthouse will be such that
the timing techniques are least disturbing to marine mammals. To the
extent possible, the helicopter should approach NWSR when the tide is
too high for the marine mammals to haul-out on NWSR.
Since the most severe impacts (stampede) are precipitated by rapid
and direct helicopter approaches, initial approach to the Station must
be offshore from the island at a relatively high altitude (e.g., 800-
1,000 ft, or 244-305 m). Before the final approach, the helicopter
shall circle lower, and approach from area where the density of
pinnipeds is the lowest. If for any safety reasons (e.g., wind
condition) such helicopter approach and timing techniques cannot be
achieved, the SGRLPS must abort the restoration and maintenance
activities for that day.
Avoidance of Visual and Acoustic Contact with People on Island: The
SGRLPS members and restoration crews shall be instructed to avoid
making unnecessary noise and not expose themselves visually to
pinnipeds around the base of the lighthouse. Although no impacts from
these activities were seen during the 2001 CCR study, it is relatively
simple to avoid this potential impact. The door to the lower platform
(which is used at times by pinnipeds) shall remain closed and
barricaded to all tourists and other personnel.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact on the affected marine mammal species and
stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals;
The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
The practicability of the measure for applicant
implementation, including safety and practicality of implementation.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS or recommended by the public,
NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least practicable adverse impacts on
marine mammals species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Proposed Monitoring
Summary of Previous Monitoring
The SGRLPS complied with the mitigation and monitoring required
under the previous authorization for the 2010 season. In compliance
with the 2010 IHA, the SGRLPS submitted a final report on the
activities at Station, covering the period of January 27, 2010 through
April 30, 2010. During the effective dates of the 2010 IHA, the SGRLPS
conducted two sessions of aircraft operations and restoration
activities on NWSR which did not exceed the activity levels analyzed
under the 2010 authorization.
The 2010 IHA required that the SGRLPS conduct a pre-restoration and
post-restoration aerial survey of all marine mammals hauled-out on NWSR
for each session. NMFS restricted the SGRLPS' taking of aerial
photographs to an altitude greater than 300 m (984 feet ft) during the
first arrival flight and the last departure flight. This is the minimum
altitude set within the 2010 Biological Opinion (BiOp) Incidental Take
Statement (ITS) which follows the reference distance of 300 m (984 feet
ft) for in-air measurements and predictions established by Richardson
et al. (1995).
On February 26, 2010, the SGRLPS' photographed the haulout areas on
the initial approach to NWSR at an altitude of 900 m (2,953 ft). During
the approach, the photographer observed no animals hauled out on NWSR.
The SGRLPS observed no animals hauled on NWSR during the two-day
restoration session and no pinnipeds were present during the
helicopter's February 28th departure flight to the mainland.
On April 9, 2010, the SGRLPS' photographed the haulout areas on the
initial approach to NWSR at an altitude of 900 m (2,953 ft). Similar to
the February session, the photographer observed no animals hauled out
on NWSR during approach. The SGRLPS observed no animals hauled on NWSR
during the three-day restoration session and no pinnipeds were present
during the helicopter's April 11th departure flight to the mainland.
The SGRLPS observed no animals hauled on NWSR during the entirety
of each session. As there were no observed impacts to pinnipeds from
these activities, NMFS was unable to assess the effectiveness of
mitigation measures for helicopter approaches set forth in the 2010
IHA. However, the 2010 IHA restricted SGRLP's access to NWSR during the
pupping season, thus effecting the least practical adverse impact on
the species or stock. These results did not refute NMFS' original
findings.
The dates, times, activities, absence/presence information, and
required monitoring are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.
[[Page 80478]]
TABLE 1--Summary of Aircraft Operations Conducted in February 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Time Activity Monitoring conducted Animals present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26-Feb................ 8:30 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--survey
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 8:30 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 8:31 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 8:46 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 8:47 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 9:05 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 9:06 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 9:36 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 9:37 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 10:00 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR (sling load
operations).
27-Feb................ 10:01 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 10:20 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR (sling load
operations).
27-Feb................ 10:21 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
27-Feb................ 10:40 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR (sling load
operations).
27-Feb................ 10:41 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 9:00 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 9:07 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 9:30 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 9:32 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 9:50 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 9:53 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 10:15 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 10:17 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 10:45 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 10:47 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 11:15 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 11:17 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 11:45 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 11:47 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 12:30 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
28-Feb................ 12:35 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE 2--Summary of Aircraft Operations Conducted in April 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Time Activity Monitoring conducted Animals present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9-Apr................. 8:00 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 8:01 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 8:21 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 8:22 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 8:42 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 8:43 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 9:15 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 9:16 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 9:35 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 9:36 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 10:00 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR (sling load
operations).
9-Apr................. 10:01 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 10:20 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR (sling load
operations).
9-Apr................. 10:21 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
9-Apr................. 10:40 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrived
NWSR (sling load
operations).
9-Apr................. 10:41 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--departed
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 9:05 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 9:10 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 9:31 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 9:36 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 9:57 PST.............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 10:02 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 10:23 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--arrive
NWSR.
11-Apr................ 10:28 PST............. Helicopter Yes................... Absent
flight--depart
NWSR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking''. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for IHAs
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be present.
[[Page 80479]]
At least once during the period between February 15, 2011, through
April 30, 2011, or during the period of November 1, 2011, through
December 31, 2011 a qualified biologist shall be present during all
three workdays at the Station. The biologist hired will be subject to
approval of NMFS and this requirement may be modified depending on the
results of the second year of monitoring.
The qualified biologist shall document use of the island by the
pinnipeds, frequency, (i.e., dates, time, tidal height, species,
numbers present, and any disturbances), and note any respo