Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Russian River Estuary Management Activities, 24471-24479 [2012-9863]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
Permit No. 17032 authorizes Mr.
Moore to film gray (Eschrichtius
robustus) and killer (Orcinus orca)
whales in the eastern Aleutian Islands,
primarily near Ikatan Bay and along the
Ikatan Peninsula on the south side of
Unimak Island, Alaska. The purpose of
the project is to document killer whales
hunting gray whales migrating through
False Pass and Unimak Pass and to
record the behavior of marine animals
in the presence of a gray whale carcass.
Filming will occur between April and
June of each year. A maximum of 35
killer whales and 10 gray whales could
be closely approached annually. Footage
will be obtained from vessel-mounted
cameras, a polecam that may be
submerged next to the boat, and, as the
opportunity arises, from a remotely
operated video camera in an underwater
housing placed on the sea floor near a
gray whale carcass. Footage will be used
for a television program about predators
and the challenges they face. The permit
will expire on April 15, 2017.
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), a final
determination has been made that the
activity proposed is categorically
excluded from the requirement to
prepare an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
Dated: April 18, 2012.
Tammy C. Adams,
Acting Chief, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–9857 Filed 4–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XB132
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Russian River
Estuary Management Activities
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an Incidental
Harassment Authorization (IHA) to the
Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA)
to incidentally harass, by Level B
harassment only, three species of
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
24471
Background
Authorization for incidental takings
shall be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s), will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses (where relevant), and if
the permissible methods of taking and
other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact (i.e.,
mitigation) and requirements pertaining
to monitoring and reporting of such
takings are set forth. 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
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the United States can
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by Level B harassment
as defined below. Section 101(a)(5)(D)
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 marine mammals. Within
45 days of the close of the comment
period, NMFS must either issue or deny
the authorization. If authorized, the IHA
would be effective for one year from
date of issuance.
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].’’
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is published in the
Federal Register to provide public
notice and initiate a 30-day comment
period.
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on
January 27, 2012, from SCWA for
issuance of an IHA for the taking, by
Level B harassment only, of marine
mammals incidental to ongoing
activities conducted in management of
the Russian River estuary in Sonoma
County, California. SCWA was first
issued an IHA, valid for a period of one
year, on April 1, 2010 (75 FR 17382),
and was subsequently issued a second
IHA for incidental take associated with
the same activities on April 21, 2011 (76
FR 23306). Management activities
include management of a naturally-
marine mammals during estuary
management activities conducted at the
mouth of the Russian River, Sonoma
County, California.
DATES: This authorization is effective for
the period of one year, from April 21,
2012, through April 20, 2013.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and
related documents are available by
writing to Tammy Adams, Acting Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910.
A copy of the application containing
a list of the references used in this
document may be obtained by writing to
the address specified above, telephoning
the contact listed below (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or
visiting the Internet at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. Supplemental
documents provided by SCWA may also
be found at the same address: Report of
Activities and Monitoring Results (July
2009 to December 2011); Russian River
Estuary Outlet Channel Adaptive
Management Plan; and Feasibility of
Alternatives to the Goat Rock State
Beach Jetty for Managing Lagoon Water
Surface Elevations—A Study Plan.
NMFS’ Environmental Assessment
(2010) and associated Finding of No
Significant Impact, prepared pursuant to
the National Environmental Policy Act,
are available at the same site.
Documents cited in this notice,
including NMFS’ Biological Opinion
(2008) on the effects of Russian River
management activities on salmonids,
may also be viewed, by appointment,
during regular business hours, at the
aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Laws, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
24472
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
formed barrier beach at the mouth of the
river in order to minimize potential for
flooding of properties adjacent to the
Russian River estuary and enhance
habitat for juvenile salmonids, and
biological and physical monitoring of
the estuary. Flood control-related
breaching of barrier beach at the mouth
of the river may include artificial
breaches, as well as construction and
maintenance of a lagoon outlet channel.
The latter activity, an alternative
management technique conducted to
mitigate impacts of flood control on
rearing habitat for salmonids listed as
threatened and endangered under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), occurs
only from May 15 through October 15
(hereafter, the ‘‘lagoon management
period’’). All estuary management
activities are conducted by SCWA in
accordance with a Reasonable and
Prudent Alternative (RPA) included in
NMFS’ Biological Opinion (BiOp) for
Water Supply, Flood Control
Operations, and Channel Maintenance
conducted in the Russian River
watershed (NMFS, 2008). Species
known from the haul-out at the mouth
of the Russian River include the harbor
seal (Phoca vitulina), California sea lion
(Zalophus californianus), and northern
elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris).
Description of the Specified Activity
Breaching of naturally-formed barrier
beach at the mouth of the Russian River
requires the use of heavy equipment
(e.g., bulldozer, excavator) and
increased human presence. As a result,
pinnipeds hauled out on the beach may
exhibit behavioral responses that
indicate incidental take by Level B
harassment under the MMPA. Numbers
of harbor seals, the species most
commonly encountered at the haul-out,
have been recorded extensively since
1972 at the haul-out near the mouth of
the Russian River.
The estuary is located about 97 km
(60 mi) northwest of San Francisco in
Sonoma County, near Jenner, California
(see Figure 1 of SCWA’s application).
The Russian River watershed
encompasses 3,847 km2 (1,485 mi2) in
Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake
Counties. The mouth of the Russian
River is located at Goat Rock State
Beach; the estuary extends from the
mouth upstream approximately 10 to 11
km (6–7 mi) between Austin Creek and
the community of Duncans Mills
(Heckel 1994). The proposed action
involves management of the estuary to
prevent flooding while avoiding adverse
modification to critical habitat for ESAlisted salmonids. During the lagoon
management period only, this involves
construction and maintenance of a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
lagoon outlet channel that would
facilitate formation of a perched lagoon,
which will reduce flooding while
maintaining appropriate conditions for
juvenile salmonids. Additional breaches
of barrier beach may be conducted for
the sole purpose of reducing flood risk.
There are three components to
SCWA’s ongoing estuary management
activities: (1) Lagoon outlet channel
management, during the lagoon
management period only, required to
accomplish the dual purposes of flood
risk abatement and maintenance of
juvenile salmonid habitat; (2) traditional
artificial breaching, with the sole
objective of flood risk abatement; and
(3) physical and biological monitoring
in and near the estuary, required under
the terms of the BiOp, to understand
response to water surface elevation
management in the estuary-lagoon
system. In addition to these ongoing
management activities, SCWA will
conduct new monitoring work at the
mouth of the Russian River during the
period of this IHA. This additional
activity comprises a plan to study the
effects of a historical, dilapidated jetty
on the formation and maintenance of
the Russian River estuary, as required
under RPA 2 of the 2008 BiOp. Through
several phases from 1929-1948, the jetty
and associated seawall, roadway, and
railroad were constructed, reinforced
and then abandoned by various entities.
The plan for study of the jetty is
described in greater detail in SCWA’s
‘Feasibility of Alternatives to the Goat
Rock State Beach Jetty for Managing
Lagoon Water Surface Elevations—A
Study Plan’ (ESA PWA, 2011a),
available online (see ADDRESSES).
SCWA’s estuary management
activities generally involve the use of
heavy equipment and increased human
presence on the beach, in order to
excavate and maintain an outlet channel
from the lagoon to the ocean or to
conduct artificial breaching. Pupping
season for harbor seals at the mouth of
the Russian River typically peaks during
May. However, pupping is known to
begin in March and may continue
through the end of June; pupping season
for harbor seals is conservatively
defined here as March 15 to June 30.
During pupping season, management
events may occur over a maximum of
two consecutive days per event and all
estuary management events on the
beach must be separated by a minimum
no-work period of one week. The use of
heavy equipment and increased human
presence has the potential to harass
hauled-out marine mammals by causing
movement or flushing into the water.
Mitigation and monitoring measures
described later in this document are
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
designed to minimize this harassment to
the lowest practicable level.
Equipment (e.g., bulldozer, excavator)
is off-loaded in the parking lot of Goat
Rock State Park and driven onto the
beach via an existing access point.
Personnel on the beach will include up
to two equipment operators, three safety
team members on the beach (one on
each side of the channel observing the
equipment operators, and one at the
barrier to warn beach visitors away from
the activities), and one safety team
member at the overlook on Highway 1
above the beach. Occasionally, there
will be two or more additional people
on the beach (SCWA staff or regulatory
agency staff) to observe the activities.
SCWA staff will be followed by the
equipment, which will then be followed
by an SCWA vehicle (typically a small
pickup truck, to be parked at the
previously posted signs and barriers on
the south side of the excavation
location).
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management
Active management of estuarine/
lagoon water levels commences
following the first closure of the barrier
beach during this period. When this
happens, SCWA monitors lagoon water
surface elevation and creates an outlet
channel when water levels in the
estuary are between 4.5 and 7.0 ft (1.4–
2.1 m) in elevation. Management
practices will be incrementally modified
over the course of the lagoon
management period in an effort to
improve performance in meeting the
goals of the BiOp while preventing
flooding.
Ideally, initial implementation of the
outlet channel would produce a stable
channel for the duration of the lagoon
management period. However, the sheer
number of variables and lack of past
site-specific experience likely preclude
this outcome, and succeeding
excavation attempts may be required.
The precise number of excavations
would depend on uncontrollable
variables such as seasonal ocean wave
conditions (e.g., wave heights and
lengths), river inflows, and the success
of previous excavations (e.g., the
success of selected channel widths and
meander patterns) in forming an outlet
channel that effectively maintains
lagoon water surface elevations. Based
on lagoon management operations
under similar conditions at Carmel
River, and expectations regarding how
wave action and sand deposition may
increase beach height or result in
closure, it is predicted that up to three
successive outlet channel excavation
events, at increasingly higher beach
elevations, may be necessary to produce
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
a successful outlet channel. In the event
that an outlet channel fails through
breaching (i.e., erodes the barrier beach
and forms a tidal inlet), SCWA would
resume adaptive management of the
outlet channel’s width, slope, and
alignment in consultation with NMFS
and the California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG), only after ocean
wave action naturally reforms a barrier
beach and closes the river’s mouth
during the lagoon management period.
Implementation and Maintenance—
Upon successful construction of an
outlet channel, adaptive management,
or maintenance, may be required for the
channel to continue achieving
performance criteria. In order to reduce
disturbance to seals and other wildlife,
as well as beach visitors, the amount
and frequency of mechanical
intervention will be minimized. As
technical staff and maintenance crews
gain more experience with
implementing the outlet channel and
observing its response, maintenance is
anticipated to be less frequent, with
events of lesser intensity. During
pupping season, machinery may only
operate on up to two consecutive
working days, including during initial
construction of the outlet channel. In
addition, SCWA must maintain a one
week no-work period between
management events during pupping
season, unless flooding is a threat, to
allow for adequate disturbance recovery
period. During the no-work period,
equipment must be removed from the
beach. SCWA seeks to avoid conducting
management activities on weekends
(Friday-Sunday) in order to reduce
disturbance of beach visitors. In
addition, activities are to be conducted
in such a manner as to effect the least
practicable adverse impacts to
pinnipeds and their habitat as described
later in this document (see
‘‘Mitigation’’).
Artificial Breaching
The estuary may close naturally
throughout the year as a result of barrier
beach formation at the mouth of the
Russian River. Although closures may
occur at any time of the year, the mouth
usually closes during the spring,
summer, and fall (Heckel 1994; Merritt
Smith Consulting 1997, 1998, 1999,
2000; SCWA and Merritt Smith
Consulting 2001). Closures result in
lagoon formation in the estuary and, as
water surface levels rise, flooding may
occur. For decades, artificial breaching
has been performed in the absence of
natural breaching, in order to alleviate
potential flooding of low-lying shoreline
properties near the town of Jenner.
Artificial breaching, as defined here, is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
conducted for the sole purpose of
reducing flood risk, and thus is a
different type of event, from an
engineering perspective, than are the
previously described lagoon
management events. Artificial breaching
activities occur in accordance with the
BiOp, and primarily occur outside the
lagoon management period (i.e.,
artificial breaching would primarily
occur from October 16 to May 14).
However, if conditions present
unacceptable risk of flooding during the
lagoon management period, SCWA may
artificially breach the sandbar a
maximum of two times during that
period. Implementation protocol would
follow that described previously for
lagoon outlet channel management
events, with the exception that only one
piece of heavy equipment is likely to be
required per event, rather than two.
Physical and Biological Monitoring
SCWA is required by the BiOp and
other state and federal permits to collect
biological and physical habitat data in
conjunction with estuary management.
Monitoring requires the use of boats and
nets in the estuary, among other
activities, and will require activities to
occur in the vicinity of beach and river
haul-outs (see Figure 4 of SCWA’s
application); these monitoring activities
have the potential to disturb pinnipeds.
The majority of monitoring is required
under the BiOp and occurs
approximately during the lagoon
management period (mid-May through
October or November), depending on
river dynamics. Beach topographic
surveys occur year-round.
Jetty Study
The jetty study will analyze the
effects of the jetty on beach permeability
and sand storage and transport. These
physical processes are affected by the
jetty, and, in turn, may affect seasonal
water surface elevations and flood risk.
Evaluating and quantifying these
linkages will inform the development
and evaluation of management
alternatives for the jetty. The study
involves delineation of two study
transects perpendicular to the beach
barrier (see Figure 5 of SCWA’s
application), with six water seepage
monitoring wells constructed (three per
transect). In addition, geophysical
surveys will be conducted in order to
better understand the characteristics of
the barrier beach substrate and the
location and composition of buried
portions of the jetty and associated
structures. Once the initial geophysical
surveys have been completed,
additional surface electromagnetic
profiles will be collected along the
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24473
barrier beach in order to explore how
the jetty impacts beach seepage relative
to the natural beach berm.
Comments and Responses
NMFS published a notice of receipt of
SCWA’s application and proposed IHA
in the Federal Register on March 16,
2012 (77 FR 15722). During the 30-day
comment period, NMFS received a letter
from the Marine Mammal Commission
(MMC). The MMC recommended that
NMFS issue the requested
authorization, subject to inclusion of the
proposed mitigation and monitoring
measures as described in NMFS’ notice
of proposed IHA and the application.
All measures proposed in the initial
Federal Register notice are included
within the authorization and NMFS has
determined that they will effect the least
practicable impact on the species or
stocks and their habitats.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
The marine mammal species that may
be harassed incidental to estuary
management activities are the harbor
seal, California sea lion, and the
northern elephant seal. None of these
species are listed as threatened or
endangered under the ESA, nor are they
categorized as depleted under the
MMPA. NMFS presented a more
detailed discussion of the status of these
stocks and their occurrence in the action
area in the notice of the proposed IHA
(77 FR 15722, March 16, 2012).
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals
NMFS provided a detailed discussion
of the potential effects of the specified
activity on marine mammals in the
notice of the proposed IHA (77 FR
15722, March 16, 2012). A summary of
anticipated effects is provided below.
A significant body of monitoring data
exists for pinnipeds at the mouth of the
Russian River. Pinnipeds have coexisted with regular estuary
management activity for decades, as
well as with regular human use activity
at the beach, and are likely habituated
to human presence and activity.
Nevertheless, SCWA’s estuary
management activities have the
potential to harass pinnipeds present on
the beach. During breaching operations,
past monitoring has revealed that some
or all of the seals present typically move
or flush from the beach in response to
the presence of crew and equipment,
though some may remain hauled-out.
No stampeding of seals—a potentially
dangerous occurrence in which large
numbers of animals succumb to mass
panic and rush away from a stimulus—
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
24474
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
has been documented since SCWA
developed protocols to prevent such
events in 1999. While it is likely
impossible to conduct required estuary
management activities without
provoking some response in hauled-out
animals, precautionary mitigation
measures, described later in this
document, ensure that animals are
gradually apprised of human approach.
Under these conditions, seals typically
exhibit a continuum of responses,
beginning with alert movements (e.g.,
raising the head), which may then
escalate to movement away from the
stimulus and possible flushing into the
water. Flushed seals typically re-occupy
the haul-out within minutes to hours of
the stimulus. In addition, eight other
haul-outs exist nearby that may
accommodate flushed seals. In the
absence of appropriate mitigation
measures, it is possible that pinnipeds
could be subject to injury, serious
injury, or mortality, likely through
stampeding or abandonment of pups.
California sea lions and northern
elephant seals, which have been noted
only infrequently in the action area,
have been observed as less sensitive to
stimulus than harbor seals during
monitoring at numerous other sites. For
example, monitoring of pinniped
disturbance as a result of abalone
research in the Channel Islands showed
that while harbor seals flushed at a rate
of 69 percent, California sea lions
flushed at a rate of only 21 percent. The
rate for elephant seals declined to 0.1
percent (VanBlaricom, 2011). In the
unlikely event that either of these
species is present during management
activities, they would be expected to
display a minimal reaction to
maintenance activities—less than that
expected of harbor seals.
Although the Jenner haul-out is not
known as a primary pupping beach,
harbor seal pups have been observed
during the pupping season; therefore,
NMFS has evaluated the potential for
injury, serious injury or mortality to
pups. There is a lack of published data
regarding pupping at the mouth of the
Russian River, but SCWA monitors have
observed pups on the beach. No births
were observed during monitoring in
2010–11, but were inferred based on
signs indicating pupping (e.g., blood
spots on the sand, birds consuming
possible placental remains). Pup injury
or mortality would be most likely to
occur in the event of extended
separation of a mother and pup, or
trampling in a stampede. As discussed
previously, no stampedes have been
recorded since development of
appropriate protocols in 1999. Any
California sea lions or northern elephant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
seals present would be independent
juveniles or adults; therefore, analysis of
impacts on pups is not relevant for
those species. Pups less than one week
old are characterized by being up to 15
kg, thin for their body length, or having
an umbilicus or natal pelage.
Similarly, the period of mother-pup
bonding, critical time needed to ensure
pup survival and maximize pup health,
is not expected to be impacted by
estuary management activities. Harbor
seal pups are extremely precocious,
swimming and diving immediately after
birth and throughout the lactation
period, unlike most other phocids
which normally enter the sea only after
weaning (Lawson and Renouf, 1985;
Cottrell et al., 2002; Burns et al., 2005).
Lawson and Renouf (1987) investigated
harbor seal mother-pup bonding in
response to natural and anthropogenic
disturbance. In summary, they found
that the most critical bonding time is
within minutes after birth. Although
pupping season is defined as March 15–
June 30, the peak of pupping season is
typically concluded by mid-May, when
the lagoon management period begins.
As such, it is expected that most
mother-pup bonding would likely be
concluded as well. The number of
management events during the months
of March and April has been relatively
low in the past, and the breaching
activities occur in a single day over
several hours. In addition, mitigation
measures described later in this
document further reduce the likelihood
of any impacts to pups, whether through
injury or mortality or interruption of
mother-pup bonding.
Therefore, based on a significant body
of site-specific monitoring data, harbor
seals are unlikely to sustain any
harassment that may be considered
biologically significant. Individual
animals would, at most, flush into the
water in response to maintenance
activities but may also simply become
alert or move across the beach away
from equipment and crews. NMFS has
determined that impacts to hauled-out
pinnipeds during estuary management
activities would be behavioral
harassment of limited duration (i.e., less
than one day) and limited intensity (i.e.,
temporary flushing at most).
Stampeding, and therefore injury or
mortality, is not expected—nor been
documented—in the years since
appropriate protocols were established
(see ‘‘Mitigation’’ for more details).
Further, the continued, and increasingly
heavy, use of the haul-out despite
decades of breaching events indicates
that abandonment of the haul-out is
unlikely.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
NMFS provided a detailed discussion
of the potential effects of this action on
marine mammal habitat in the notice of
the proposed IHA (77 FR 15722, March
16, 2012). SCWA’s estuary management
activities will result in temporary
physical alteration of the Jenner haulout. With barrier beach closure, seal
usage of the beach haul-out declines,
and the three nearby river haul-outs
may not be available for usage due to
rising water surface elevations.
Breaching of the barrier beach,
subsequent to the temporary habitat
disturbance, will likely increase
suitability and availability of habitat for
pinnipeds. Biological and water quality
monitoring will not physically alter
pinniped habitat. In summary, there
will be temporary physical alteration of
the beach. However, natural opening
and closure of the beach results in the
same impacts to habitat; therefore, seals
are likely adapted to this cycle. In
addition, the increase in rearing habitat
quality has the goal of increasing
salmon abundance, ultimately providing
more food for seals present within the
action area.
Summary of Previous Monitoring
SCWA complied with the mitigation
and monitoring required under the
previous authorization. In accordance
with the 2011 IHA, SCWA submitted a
Report of Activities and Monitoring
Results, covering the period of July 2009
through December 2011. Under the 2011
IHA, SCWA did not conduct any estuary
management events, but did conduct
associated biological and physical
monitoring. During the course of these
activities, SCWA did not exceed the
take levels authorized under the 2011
IHA. NMFS provided a detailed
description of previous monitoring
results in the notice of the proposed
IHA (77 FR 15722, March 16, 2012).
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA 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 on the availability of
such species or stock for taking for
certain subsistence uses.
SCWA will continue the following
mitigation measures, as implemented
during the previous IHA, designed to
minimize impact to affected species and
stocks:
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
• SCWA crews will cautiously
approach the haul-out ahead of heavy
equipment to minimize the potential for
sudden flushes, which may result in a
stampede—a particular concern during
pupping season.
• SCWA staff will avoid walking or
driving equipment through the seal
haul-out.
• Crews on foot will make an effort to
be seen by seals from a distance, if
possible, rather than appearing
suddenly at the top of the sandbar, again
preventing sudden flushes.
• During breaching events, all
monitoring will be conducted from the
overlook on the bluff along Highway 1
adjacent to the haul-out in order to
minimize potential for harassment.
• A water level management event
may not occur for more than two
consecutive days unless flooding threats
cannot be controlled.
In addition, SCWA will continue
mitigation measures specific to pupping
season (March 15–June 30), as
implemented in the previous IHA:
• SCWA will maintain a 1 week nowork period between water level
management events (unless flooding is
an immediate threat) to allow for an
adequate disturbance recovery period.
During the no-work period, equipment
must be removed from the beach.
• If a pup less than 1 week old is on
the beach where heavy machinery will
be used or on the path used to access
the work location, the management
action will be delayed until the pup has
left the site or the latest day possible to
prevent flooding while still maintaining
suitable fish rearing habitat. In the event
that a pup remains present on the beach
in the presence of flood risk, SCWA will
consult with NMFS and CDFG to
determine the appropriate course of
action. SCWA will coordinate with the
locally established seal monitoring
program (Stewards’ Seal Watch) to
determine if pups less than 1 week old
are on the beach prior to a breaching
event.
• Physical and biological monitoring
will not be conducted if a pup less than
1 week old is present at the monitoring
site or on a path to the site.
Equipment will be driven slowly on
the beach and care will be taken to
minimize the number of shutdowns and
start-ups when the equipment is on the
beach. All work will be completed as
efficiently as possible, with the smallest
amount of heavy equipment possible, to
minimize disturbance of seals at the
haul-out. Boats operating near river
haul-outs during monitoring will be
kept within posted speed limits and
driven as far from the haul-outs as safely
possible to minimize flushing seals.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
NMFS has carefully evaluated the
applicant’s mitigation measures as
proposed and considered their
effectiveness in past implementation, to
determine whether they are likely to
effect the least practicable adverse
impact on the affected marine mammal
species and stocks and their habitat. Our
evaluation of potential measures
includes consideration of the following
factors in relation to one another: (1)
The manner in which, and the degree to
which, the successful implementation of
the measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2)
the proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; (3) the
practicability of the measure for
applicant implementation, including
consideration of personnel safety, and
practicality of implementation.
Injury, serious injury, or mortality to
pinnipeds would likely result from
startling animals inhabiting the haul-out
into a stampede reaction, or from
extended mother-pup separation as a
result of such a stampede. Long-term
impacts to pinniped usage of the haulout could result from significantly
increased presence of humans and
equipment on the beach. To avoid these
possibilities, NMFS and SCWA have
developed the previously described
mitigation measures. These are designed
to reduce the possibility of startling
pinnipeds, by gradually apprising them
of the presence of humans and
equipment on the beach, and to reduce
the possibility of impacts to pups by
eliminating or altering management
activities on the beach when pups are
present and by setting limits on the
frequency and duration of events during
pupping season. During the past twelve
years of flood control management,
implementation of similar mitigation
measures has resulted in no known
stampede events and no known injury,
serious injury, or mortality. Over the
course of that time period, management
events have generally been infrequent
and of limited duration. Based upon the
SCWA’s record of management at the
mouth of the Russian River, as well as
information from monitoring SCWA’s
implementation of the improved
mitigation measures as prescribed under
the previous IHA, NMFS has
determined that the mitigation measures
included in the final IHA provide the
means of effecting the least practicable
adverse impacts on marine mammal
species or stocks and their habitat.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24475
‘‘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.
The applicant has developed a
Pinniped Monitoring Plan which
describes the proposed monitoring
efforts. The purpose of this monitoring
plan, which is carried out
collaboratively with the Stewards of the
Coasts and Redwoods (Stewards)
organization, is to detect the response of
pinnipeds to estuary management
activities at the Russian River estuary.
SCWA has designed the plan both to
satisfy the requirements of the IHA, and
to address the following questions of
interest:
1. Under what conditions do
pinnipeds haul out at the Russian River
estuary mouth at Jenner?
2. How do seals at the Jenner haul-out
respond to activities associated with the
construction and maintenance of the
lagoon outlet channel and artificial
breaching activities?
3. Does the number of seals at the
Jenner haul-out significantly differ from
historic averages with formation of a
summer (May 15 to October 15) lagoon
in the Russian River estuary?
4. Are seals at the Jenner haul-out
displaced to nearby river and coastal
haul-outs when the mouth remains
closed in the summer?
In summary, monitoring includes the
following:
Baseline Monitoring
Seals at the Jenner haul-out are
counted twice monthly for the term of
the IHA. This baseline information will
provide SCWA with details that may
help to plan estuary management
activities in the future to minimize
pinniped interaction. This census
begins at local dawn and continues for
8 hours. All seals hauled out on the
beach are counted every 30 minutes
from the overlook on the bluff along
Highway 1 adjacent to the haul-out
using high powered spotting scopes.
Monitoring may conclude for the day if
weather conditions affect visibility (e.g.,
heavy fog in the afternoon). Counts are
scheduled for 2 days out of each month,
with the intention of capturing a low
and high tide each in the morning and
afternoon. Depending on how the
sandbar is formed, seals may haul out in
multiple groups at the mouth. At each
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
24476
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
30-minute count, the observer indicates
where groups of seals are hauled out on
the sandbar and provides a total count
for each group. If possible, adults and
pups are counted separately.
In addition to the census data,
disturbances of the haul-out are
recorded. The method for recording
disturbances follows those in Mortenson
(1996). Disturbances will be recorded on
a three-point scale that represents an
increasing seal response to the
disturbance. The time, source, and
duration of the disturbance, as well as
an estimated distance between the
source and haul-out, are recorded. It
should be noted that only responses
falling into Mortenson’s Levels 2 and 3
(i.e., movement or flight) will be
considered as harassment under the
MMPA. Weather conditions are
recorded at the beginning of each
census. These include temperature,
percent cloud cover, and wind speed
(Beaufort scale). Tide levels and estuary
water surface elevations are correlated
to the monitoring start and end times.
In an effort towards understanding
possible relationships between use of
the Jenner haul-out and nearby coastal
and river haul-outs, several other haulouts on the coast and in the Russian
River estuary are monitored as well. The
peripheral haul-outs are visited for 10minute counts twice during each
baseline monitoring day. All pinnipeds
hauled out were counted from the same
vantage point(s) at each haul-out using
a high-powered spotting scope or
binoculars.
Estuary Management Event Monitoring
Activities associated with artificial
breaching or initial construction of the
outlet channel, as well as the
maintenance of the channel that may be
required, will be monitored for
disturbances to the seals at the Jenner
haul-out. A 1-day pre-event channel
survey will be made within 1–3 days
prior to constructing the outlet channel.
The haul-out will be monitored on the
day the outlet channel is constructed
and daily for up to the maximum 2 days
allowed for channel excavation
activities. Monitoring will also occur on
each day that the outlet channel is
maintained using heavy equipment for
the duration of the lagoon management
period. Monitoring will correspond with
that described under the ‘‘Baseline’’
section previously, with the exception
that management activity monitoring
duration is defined by event duration,
rather than being set at 8 hours. On the
day of the management event, pinniped
monitoring begins at least 1 hour prior
to the crew and equipment accessing the
beach work area and continues through
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
the duration of the event, until at least
1 hour after the crew and equipment
leave the beach.
In an attempt to understand whether
seals from the Jenner haul-out are
displaced to coastal and river haul-outs
nearby when management events occur,
other nearby haul-outs are monitored
concurrently with event monitoring.
This provides an opportunity to
qualitatively assess whether these haulouts are being used by seals displaced
from the Jenner haul-out. This
monitoring will not provide definitive
results regarding displacement to nearby
coastal and river haul-outs, as
individual seals are not marked, but is
useful in tracking general trends in
haul-out use during disturbance. As
volunteers are required to monitor these
peripheral haul-outs, haul-out locations
may need to be prioritized if there are
not enough volunteers available. In that
case, priority will be assigned to the
nearest haul-outs (North Jenner and
Odin Cove), followed by the Russian
River estuary haul-outs, and finally the
more distant coastal haul-outs.
For all counts, the following
information will be recorded in thirty
minute intervals: (1) Pinniped counts,
by species; (2) behavior; (3) time, source
and duration of any disturbance; (4)
estimated distances between source of
disturbance and pinnipeds; (5) weather
conditions (e.g., temperature, wind);
and (5) tide levels and estuary water
surface elevation.
Monitoring During Pupping Season—
As described previously, the pupping
season is defined as March 15 to June
30. Baseline, lagoon outlet channel, and
artificial breaching monitoring during
the pupping season will include records
of neonate (pups less than 1 week old)
observations. Characteristics of a
neonate pup include: body weight less
than 15 kg; thin for their body length;
an umbilicus or natal pelage present;
wrinkled skin; and awkward or jerky
movements on land. SCWA will
coordinate with the Seal Watch
monitoring program to determine if
pups less than 1 week old are on the
beach prior to a water level management
event.
If, during monitoring, observers sight
any pup that might be abandoned,
SCWA will contact the NMFS stranding
response network immediately and also
report the incident to NMFS’ Southwest
Regional Office and NMFS Office of
Protected Resources within 48 hours.
Observers will not approach or move
the pup. Potential indications that a pup
may be abandoned are no observed
contact with adult seals, no movement
of the pup, and the pup’s attempts to
nurse are rebuffed.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Reporting
SCWA is required to submit a report
on all activities and marine mammal
monitoring results to the Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
Southwest Regional Administrator,
NMFS, 90 days prior to the expiration
of the IHA if a renewal is sought, or
within 90 days of the expiration of the
permit otherwise. This annual report
will also be distributed to California
State Parks and Stewards, and would be
available to the public on SCWA’s Web
site. This report will contain the
following information:
• The number of seals taken, by
species and age class (if possible);
• Behavior prior to and during water
level management events;
• Start and end time of activity;
• Estimated distances between source
and seals when disturbance occurs;
• Weather conditions (e.g.,
temperature, wind, etc.);
• Haul-out reoccupation time of any
seals based on post activity monitoring;
• Tide levels and estuary water
surface elevation; and
• Seal census from bi-monthly and
nearby haul-out monitoring.
The annual report includes
descriptions of monitoring
methodology, tabulation of estuary
management events, summary of
monitoring results, and discussion of
problems noted and proposed remedial
measures. SCWA will report any injured
or dead marine mammals to NMFS’
Southwest Regional Office and NMFS
Office of Protected Resources.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
NMFS is authorizing SCWA to take
harbor seals, California sea lions, and
northern elephant seals, by Level B
harassment only, incidental to estuary
management activities. These activities,
involving increased human presence
and the use of heavy equipment and
support vehicles, are expected to harass
pinnipeds present at the haul-out
through behavioral disturbance only. In
addition, monitoring activities
prescribed in the BiOp may result in
harassment of additional individuals at
the Jenner haul-out and at the three
haul-outs located in the estuary.
Estimates of the number of harbor seals,
California sea lions, and northern
elephant seals that may be harassed by
the activities is based upon the number
of potential events associated with
Russian River estuary management
activities and the average number of
individuals of each species that are
present during conditions appropriate to
the activity. As described previously in
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
this document, monitoring effort at the
mouth of the Russian River has shown
that the number of seals utilizing the
haul-out declines during bar-closed
conditions. Tables 1 and 2 detail the
total number of authorized takes.
Methodology of take estimation was
discussed in detail in NMFS’ notice of
proposed IHA (77 FR 15722, March 16,
2012). Please note that the take
24477
estimates provided in NMFS’ notice of
proposed IHA (Tables 5–6 in that
document) contained several errors,
which are corrected here.
TABLE 1—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HARBOR SEAL TAKES RESULTING FROM RUSSIAN RIVER ESTUARY MANAGEMENT
ACTIVITIES
Number of animals expected to occur a
Potential total number of individual animals
that may be taken
Number of events b c
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)
Implementation: 105 d
Implementation: 3
Implementation: 315
Maintenance and Monitoring:
May: 103
June: 100
July: 105
Aug: 17
Sept: 19
Oct: 22
Maintenance:
May: 1
June–Sept: 4/month
Oct: 1
Monitoring:
June–Sept: 2/month
Oct: 1
Maintenance: 1,089
Monitoring: 504
Total: 1,908
Artificial Breaching
Oct: 22
Nov: 11
Dec: 45
Jan: 96
Feb: 89
Mar: 146
Apr: 173
May: 103
Oct: 2
Nov: 2
Dec: 2
Jan: 1
Feb: 1
Mar: 1
Apr: 1
May: 1
11 events maximum
Oct: 44
Nov: 22
Dec: 90
Jan: 96
Feb: 89
Mar: 146
Apr: 173
May: 103
Total: 763
Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys
Jan: 96
Feb: 89
Mar: 146
Apr: 131
May: 119
June: 134
July: 237
Aug: 108
Sept: 36
Oct: 36
Nov: 90
Dec: 45
1 topographic survey/month
2 geophysical surveys/month, Sep–Dec; 1/
month, July–Aug, Jan–Feb
Surveys considered to have potential for take
of 10 percent of animals present
Jan: 20
Feb: 18
Mar: 15
Apr: 13
May: 12
June: 13
July: 48
Aug: 22
Sept: 12
Oct: 12
Nov: 27
Dec: 15
Total: 227
Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary
1e
65
65
Total
2,963
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
a For
lagoon outlet channel management and artificial breaching events occurring from April through November, average daily number of animals is from observations at the mouth of the Russian River during breaching events (i.e., bar-closed conditions). For artificial breaching events
occurring from December through March, and for all topographic and geophysical beach surveys, average daily number of animals is from observations at Russian River mouth during bar-open conditions, 2009–11.
b For implementation of the lagoon outlet channel, an event is defined as a single, two-day episode. It is assumed that the same individual
seals would be hauled out during a single event. For the remaining activities, an event is defined as a single day on which an activity occurs.
Some events may include multiple activities.
c Number of events for artificial breaching derived from historical data. The average number of events for each month was rounded up to the
nearest whole number; estimated number of events for December was increased from one to two because multiple closures resulting from storm
events have occurred in recent years during that month. These numbers likely represent an overestimate, as the average annual number of
events is six.
d Although implementation could occur at any time during the lagoon management period, the highest daily average from any month during the
lagoon management period was used.
e Based on past experience, SCWA expects that no more than one seal may be present, and thus have the potential to be disturbed, at each
of the three river haul-outs.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:53 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
24478
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
TABLE 2—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF CALIFORNIA SEA LION AND ELEPHANT SEAL TAKES RESULTING FROM RUSSIAN RIVER
ESTUARY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Number of events
Potential total
number of individual animals that
may be taken
1
1
3
3
3
3
1
1
10
7
10
7
1
1
18
10
18
10
8
8
California sea lion ..........................................................................................................................................................................
37
Elephant seal .................................................................................................................................................................................
20
Number of animals expected to
occur
Species
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per event) ......................................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per event) ..............................
Artificial Breaching
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per event, Sept–Apr) .....................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per event, Dec–May) .............
Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per event, Sept–Apr) .....................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per event, Dec–May) .............
Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per month, Sept–Apr) ....................
1
Total
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analysis and Determination
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 determining
whether or not authorized incidental
take will have a negligible impact on
affected species stocks, NMFS considers
a number of criteria regarding the
impact of the proposed action,
including the number, nature, intensity,
and duration of Level B harassment take
that may occur. Although SCWA’s
estuary management activities may
harass pinnipeds hauled out at the
mouth of the Russian River, as well as
those hauled out at several locations in
the estuary during recurring monitoring
activities, impacts are occurring to a
small, localized group of animals. No
mortality or injury is anticipated, nor
will the action result in long-term
impacts such as permanent
abandonment of the haul-out. Seals will
likely become alert or, at most, flush
into the water in reaction to the
presence of crews and equipment on the
beach. However, breaching the sandbar
has been shown to increase seal
abundance on the beach, with seals
quickly re-inhabiting the haul-out
following cessation of activity. In
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
addition, the implementation of the
lagoon management plan may provide
increased availability of prey species
(salmonids). No impacts are expected at
the population or stock level.
No pinniped stocks known from the
action area are listed as threatened or
endangered under the ESA or
determined to be strategic or depleted
under the MMPA. Recent data suggests
that harbor seal populations have
reached carrying capacity; populations
of California sea lions and northern
elephant seals in California are also
considered healthy.
The number of animals authorized to
be taken for each species of pinnipeds
can be considered small relative to the
population size. There are an estimated
34,233 harbor seals in the California
stock, 238,000 California sea lions, and
124,000 northern elephant seals in the
California breeding population. Based
on extensive monitoring effort specific
to the affected haul-out and historical
data on the frequency of the specified
activity, NMFS is authorizing take, by
Level B harassment only, of 2,963
harbor seals, 37 California sea lions, and
20 northern elephant seals, representing
8.7, 0.02, and 0.02 percent of the
populations, respectively. However, this
represents an overestimate of the
number of individuals harassed over the
duration of the proposed IHA, because
the take estimates include multiple
instances of harassment to a given
individual.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
California sea lion and elephant seal
pups are not known to occur within the
action area and thus will not be affected
by the specified activity. The action is
not likely to cause injury or mortality to
any harbor seal pup, nor will it impact
mother-pup bonding. The peak of
harbor seal pupping season occurs
during May, when few management
activities are anticipated. However, the
pupping season has been conservatively
defined as March 15–June 30 for
mitigation purposes, and any
management activity that is required
during pupping season will be delayed
in the event that a pup less than one
week old is present on the beach. As
described previously in this document,
harbor seal pups are precocious, and
mother-pup bonding is likely to occur
within minutes. Delay of events will
further ensure that mother-pup bonding
is not likely to be interfered with.
Based on the foregoing analysis,
behavioral disturbance to pinnipeds at
the mouth of the Russian River will be
of low intensity and limited duration.
To ensure minimal disturbance, SCWA
will implement the mitigation measures
described previously, which NMFS has
determined will serve as the means for
effecting the least practicable adverse
effect on marine mammals stocks or
populations and their habitat. NMFS
finds that SCWA’s estuary management
activities will result in the incidental
take of small numbers of marine
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices
mammals, and that the authorized
number of takes will have no more than
a negligible impact on the affected
species and stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are no ESA-listed marine
mammals found in the action area;
therefore, no consultation under the
ESA is required. As described elsewhere
in this document, SCWA and the Corps
consulted with NMFS under section 7 of
the ESA regarding the potential effects
of their operations and maintenance
activities, including SCWA’s estuary
management program, on ESA-listed
salmonids. As a result of this
consultation, NMFS issued the Russian
River Biological Opinion (NMFS, 2008)
and RPA, which prescribes
modifications to SCWA’s estuary
management activities.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by
the regulations published by the
Council on Environmental Quality (40
CFR parts 1500–1508), and NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6, NMFS
prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA) to consider the direct, indirect and
cumulative effects to the human
environment resulting from issuance of
an IHA to SCWA. NMFS signed a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) on March 30, 2010. NMFS has
reviewed SCWA’s application and
determined that there are no substantial
changes to the proposed action and that
there are no new direct, indirect, or
cumulative effects to the human
environment resulting from renewal of
an IHA to SCWA. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that a new or supplemental
EA or Environmental Impact Statement
is unnecessary, and reaffirms the
existing FONSI for this action. The
existing EA and FONSI for this action
are available for review at https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm.
Determinations
NMFS has determined that the impact
of conducting the specific estuary
management activities described in this
notice and in the IHA request in the
specific geographic region in Sonoma
County, California may result, at worst,
in a temporary modification in behavior
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Apr 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
(Level B harassment) of small numbers
of marine mammals. Further, this
activity is expected to result in a
negligible impact on the affected species
or stocks of marine mammals. The
provision requiring that the activity not
have an unmitigable impact on the
availability of the affected species or
stock of marine mammals for
subsistence uses is not implicated for
this action.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
NMFS has issued an IHA to SCWA to
conduct estuary management activities
in the Russian River from the period of
April 21, 2012, through April 20, 2013,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: April 17, 2012.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–9863 Filed 4–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Information Collection; Submission for
OMB Review, Comment Request
Corporation for National and
Community Service.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Corporation for National
and Community Service (the
Corporation), has submitted a public
information collection request (ICR)
entitled AmeriCorps Member
Application Form for review and
approval in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter
35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable
supporting documentation, may be
obtained by calling the Corporation for
National and Community Service,
Thomas Howard, Jr., at (202) 606–6697
or email to toward@cns.gov. Individuals
who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TTY–TDD) may call 1–800–
833–3722 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted, identified by the title of the
information collection activity, to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB
Desk Officer for the Corporation for
National and Community Service, by
any of the following two methods
within 30 days from the date of
publication in the Federal Register:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
24479
(1) By fax to: (202) 395–6974,
Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk
Officer for the Corporation for National
and Community Service; and
(2) Electronically by email to:
smar@omb.eop.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB
is particularly interested in comments
which:
• Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Corporation, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
• Propose ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
• Propose ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submissions of responses.
Comments
A 60-day public comment Notice was
published in the Federal Register on
February 3, 2012. This comment
period ended April 3, 2012. No public
comments were received from this
Notice.
Description: The Corporation is
seeking approval of the AmeriCorps
Member Application Form which is
used by individuals to apply to serve in
an AmeriCorps program.
Type of Review: Renewal.
Agency: Corporation for National and
Community Service.
Title: AmeriCorps Member
Application Form.
OMB Number: 3045–0054.
Agency Number: None.
Affected Public: Applicants to serve
in AmeriCorps.
Total Respondents: 225,000.
Frequency: Ongoing.
Average Time per Response: 1.25
hours.
Estimated Total Burden Hours:
281,250.
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):
None.
Total Burden Cost (operating/
maintenance): None.
Dated: April 16, 2012.
Idara Nickelson,
Chief Program Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012–9807 Filed 4–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6050–$$–P
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24471-24479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9863]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XB132
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Russian River Estuary Management Activities
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to
the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) to incidentally harass, by Level
B harassment only, three species of marine mammals during estuary
management activities conducted at the mouth of the Russian River,
Sonoma County, California.
DATES: This authorization is effective for the period of one year, from
April 21, 2012, through April 20, 2013.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and related documents are available by
writing to Tammy Adams, Acting Chief, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.
A copy of the application containing a list of the references used
in this document may be obtained by writing to the address specified
above, telephoning the contact listed below (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT), or visiting the Internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Supplemental documents
provided by SCWA may also be found at the same address: Report of
Activities and Monitoring Results (July 2009 to December 2011); Russian
River Estuary Outlet Channel Adaptive Management Plan; and Feasibility
of Alternatives to the Goat Rock State Beach Jetty for Managing Lagoon
Water Surface Elevations--A Study Plan. NMFS' Environmental Assessment
(2010) and associated Finding of No Significant Impact, prepared
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, are available at the
same site. Documents cited in this notice, including NMFS' Biological
Opinion (2008) on the effects of Russian River management activities on
salmonids, may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business
hours, at the aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is
published in the Federal Register to provide public notice and initiate
a 30-day comment period.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse impact (i.e., mitigation) and
requirements pertaining to monitoring and reporting of such takings are
set forth. 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 established an expedited process
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by Level B
harassment as defined below. Section 101(a)(5)(D) 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 marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of
the comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny the authorization.
If authorized, the IHA would be effective for one year from date of
issuance.
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 an application on January 27, 2012, from SCWA for
issuance of an IHA for the taking, by Level B harassment only, of
marine mammals incidental to ongoing activities conducted in management
of the Russian River estuary in Sonoma County, California. SCWA was
first issued an IHA, valid for a period of one year, on April 1, 2010
(75 FR 17382), and was subsequently issued a second IHA for incidental
take associated with the same activities on April 21, 2011 (76 FR
23306). Management activities include management of a naturally-
[[Page 24472]]
formed barrier beach at the mouth of the river in order to minimize
potential for flooding of properties adjacent to the Russian River
estuary and enhance habitat for juvenile salmonids, and biological and
physical monitoring of the estuary. Flood control-related breaching of
barrier beach at the mouth of the river may include artificial
breaches, as well as construction and maintenance of a lagoon outlet
channel. The latter activity, an alternative management technique
conducted to mitigate impacts of flood control on rearing habitat for
salmonids listed as threatened and endangered under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), occurs only from May 15 through October 15
(hereafter, the ``lagoon management period''). All estuary management
activities are conducted by SCWA in accordance with a Reasonable and
Prudent Alternative (RPA) included in NMFS' Biological Opinion (BiOp)
for Water Supply, Flood Control Operations, and Channel Maintenance
conducted in the Russian River watershed (NMFS, 2008). Species known
from the haul-out at the mouth of the Russian River include the harbor
seal (Phoca vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus),
and northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris).
Description of the Specified Activity
Breaching of naturally-formed barrier beach at the mouth of the
Russian River requires the use of heavy equipment (e.g., bulldozer,
excavator) and increased human presence. As a result, pinnipeds hauled
out on the beach may exhibit behavioral responses that indicate
incidental take by Level B harassment under the MMPA. Numbers of harbor
seals, the species most commonly encountered at the haul-out, have been
recorded extensively since 1972 at the haul-out near the mouth of the
Russian River.
The estuary is located about 97 km (60 mi) northwest of San
Francisco in Sonoma County, near Jenner, California (see Figure 1 of
SCWA's application). The Russian River watershed encompasses 3,847
km\2\ (1,485 mi\2\) in Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake Counties. The mouth
of the Russian River is located at Goat Rock State Beach; the estuary
extends from the mouth upstream approximately 10 to 11 km (6-7 mi)
between Austin Creek and the community of Duncans Mills (Heckel 1994).
The proposed action involves management of the estuary to prevent
flooding while avoiding adverse modification to critical habitat for
ESA-listed salmonids. During the lagoon management period only, this
involves construction and maintenance of a lagoon outlet channel that
would facilitate formation of a perched lagoon, which will reduce
flooding while maintaining appropriate conditions for juvenile
salmonids. Additional breaches of barrier beach may be conducted for
the sole purpose of reducing flood risk.
There are three components to SCWA's ongoing estuary management
activities: (1) Lagoon outlet channel management, during the lagoon
management period only, required to accomplish the dual purposes of
flood risk abatement and maintenance of juvenile salmonid habitat; (2)
traditional artificial breaching, with the sole objective of flood risk
abatement; and (3) physical and biological monitoring in and near the
estuary, required under the terms of the BiOp, to understand response
to water surface elevation management in the estuary-lagoon system. In
addition to these ongoing management activities, SCWA will conduct new
monitoring work at the mouth of the Russian River during the period of
this IHA. This additional activity comprises a plan to study the
effects of a historical, dilapidated jetty on the formation and
maintenance of the Russian River estuary, as required under RPA 2 of
the 2008 BiOp. Through several phases from 1929[hyphen]1948, the jetty
and associated seawall, roadway, and railroad were constructed,
reinforced and then abandoned by various entities. The plan for study
of the jetty is described in greater detail in SCWA's `Feasibility of
Alternatives to the Goat Rock State Beach Jetty for Managing Lagoon
Water Surface Elevations--A Study Plan' (ESA PWA, 2011a), available
online (see ADDRESSES).
SCWA's estuary management activities generally involve the use of
heavy equipment and increased human presence on the beach, in order to
excavate and maintain an outlet channel from the lagoon to the ocean or
to conduct artificial breaching. Pupping season for harbor seals at the
mouth of the Russian River typically peaks during May. However, pupping
is known to begin in March and may continue through the end of June;
pupping season for harbor seals is conservatively defined here as March
15 to June 30. During pupping season, management events may occur over
a maximum of two consecutive days per event and all estuary management
events on the beach must be separated by a minimum no-work period of
one week. The use of heavy equipment and increased human presence has
the potential to harass hauled-out marine mammals by causing movement
or flushing into the water. Mitigation and monitoring measures
described later in this document are designed to minimize this
harassment to the lowest practicable level.
Equipment (e.g., bulldozer, excavator) is off-loaded in the parking
lot of Goat Rock State Park and driven onto the beach via an existing
access point. Personnel on the beach will include up to two equipment
operators, three safety team members on the beach (one on each side of
the channel observing the equipment operators, and one at the barrier
to warn beach visitors away from the activities), and one safety team
member at the overlook on Highway 1 above the beach. Occasionally,
there will be two or more additional people on the beach (SCWA staff or
regulatory agency staff) to observe the activities. SCWA staff will be
followed by the equipment, which will then be followed by an SCWA
vehicle (typically a small pickup truck, to be parked at the previously
posted signs and barriers on the south side of the excavation
location).
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management
Active management of estuarine/lagoon water levels commences
following the first closure of the barrier beach during this period.
When this happens, SCWA monitors lagoon water surface elevation and
creates an outlet channel when water levels in the estuary are between
4.5 and 7.0 ft (1.4-2.1 m) in elevation. Management practices will be
incrementally modified over the course of the lagoon management period
in an effort to improve performance in meeting the goals of the BiOp
while preventing flooding.
Ideally, initial implementation of the outlet channel would produce
a stable channel for the duration of the lagoon management period.
However, the sheer number of variables and lack of past site-specific
experience likely preclude this outcome, and succeeding excavation
attempts may be required. The precise number of excavations would
depend on uncontrollable variables such as seasonal ocean wave
conditions (e.g., wave heights and lengths), river inflows, and the
success of previous excavations (e.g., the success of selected channel
widths and meander patterns) in forming an outlet channel that
effectively maintains lagoon water surface elevations. Based on lagoon
management operations under similar conditions at Carmel River, and
expectations regarding how wave action and sand deposition may increase
beach height or result in closure, it is predicted that up to three
successive outlet channel excavation events, at increasingly higher
beach elevations, may be necessary to produce
[[Page 24473]]
a successful outlet channel. In the event that an outlet channel fails
through breaching (i.e., erodes the barrier beach and forms a tidal
inlet), SCWA would resume adaptive management of the outlet channel's
width, slope, and alignment in consultation with NMFS and the
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), only after ocean wave
action naturally reforms a barrier beach and closes the river's mouth
during the lagoon management period.
Implementation and Maintenance--Upon successful construction of an
outlet channel, adaptive management, or maintenance, may be required
for the channel to continue achieving performance criteria. In order to
reduce disturbance to seals and other wildlife, as well as beach
visitors, the amount and frequency of mechanical intervention will be
minimized. As technical staff and maintenance crews gain more
experience with implementing the outlet channel and observing its
response, maintenance is anticipated to be less frequent, with events
of lesser intensity. During pupping season, machinery may only operate
on up to two consecutive working days, including during initial
construction of the outlet channel. In addition, SCWA must maintain a
one week no-work period between management events during pupping
season, unless flooding is a threat, to allow for adequate disturbance
recovery period. During the no-work period, equipment must be removed
from the beach. SCWA seeks to avoid conducting management activities on
weekends (Friday-Sunday) in order to reduce disturbance of beach
visitors. In addition, activities are to be conducted in such a manner
as to effect the least practicable adverse impacts to pinnipeds and
their habitat as described later in this document (see ``Mitigation'').
Artificial Breaching
The estuary may close naturally throughout the year as a result of
barrier beach formation at the mouth of the Russian River. Although
closures may occur at any time of the year, the mouth usually closes
during the spring, summer, and fall (Heckel 1994; Merritt Smith
Consulting 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000; SCWA and Merritt Smith Consulting
2001). Closures result in lagoon formation in the estuary and, as water
surface levels rise, flooding may occur. For decades, artificial
breaching has been performed in the absence of natural breaching, in
order to alleviate potential flooding of low-lying shoreline properties
near the town of Jenner. Artificial breaching, as defined here, is
conducted for the sole purpose of reducing flood risk, and thus is a
different type of event, from an engineering perspective, than are the
previously described lagoon management events. Artificial breaching
activities occur in accordance with the BiOp, and primarily occur
outside the lagoon management period (i.e., artificial breaching would
primarily occur from October 16 to May 14). However, if conditions
present unacceptable risk of flooding during the lagoon management
period, SCWA may artificially breach the sandbar a maximum of two times
during that period. Implementation protocol would follow that described
previously for lagoon outlet channel management events, with the
exception that only one piece of heavy equipment is likely to be
required per event, rather than two.
Physical and Biological Monitoring
SCWA is required by the BiOp and other state and federal permits to
collect biological and physical habitat data in conjunction with
estuary management. Monitoring requires the use of boats and nets in
the estuary, among other activities, and will require activities to
occur in the vicinity of beach and river haul-outs (see Figure 4 of
SCWA's application); these monitoring activities have the potential to
disturb pinnipeds. The majority of monitoring is required under the
BiOp and occurs approximately during the lagoon management period (mid-
May through October or November), depending on river dynamics. Beach
topographic surveys occur year-round.
Jetty Study
The jetty study will analyze the effects of the jetty on beach
permeability and sand storage and transport. These physical processes
are affected by the jetty, and, in turn, may affect seasonal water
surface elevations and flood risk. Evaluating and quantifying these
linkages will inform the development and evaluation of management
alternatives for the jetty. The study involves delineation of two study
transects perpendicular to the beach barrier (see Figure 5 of SCWA's
application), with six water seepage monitoring wells constructed
(three per transect). In addition, geophysical surveys will be
conducted in order to better understand the characteristics of the
barrier beach substrate and the location and composition of buried
portions of the jetty and associated structures. Once the initial
geophysical surveys have been completed, additional surface
electromagnetic profiles will be collected along the barrier beach in
order to explore how the jetty impacts beach seepage relative to the
natural beach berm.
Comments and Responses
NMFS published a notice of receipt of SCWA's application and
proposed IHA in the Federal Register on March 16, 2012 (77 FR 15722).
During the 30-day comment period, NMFS received a letter from the
Marine Mammal Commission (MMC). The MMC recommended that NMFS issue the
requested authorization, subject to inclusion of the proposed
mitigation and monitoring measures as described in NMFS' notice of
proposed IHA and the application. All measures proposed in the initial
Federal Register notice are included within the authorization and NMFS
has determined that they will effect the least practicable impact on
the species or stocks and their habitats.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
The marine mammal species that may be harassed incidental to
estuary management activities are the harbor seal, California sea lion,
and the northern elephant seal. None of these species are listed as
threatened or endangered under the ESA, nor are they categorized as
depleted under the MMPA. NMFS presented a more detailed discussion of
the status of these stocks and their occurrence in the action area in
the notice of the proposed IHA (77 FR 15722, March 16, 2012).
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals
NMFS provided a detailed discussion of the potential effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals in the notice of the proposed IHA
(77 FR 15722, March 16, 2012). A summary of anticipated effects is
provided below.
A significant body of monitoring data exists for pinnipeds at the
mouth of the Russian River. Pinnipeds have co-existed with regular
estuary management activity for decades, as well as with regular human
use activity at the beach, and are likely habituated to human presence
and activity. Nevertheless, SCWA's estuary management activities have
the potential to harass pinnipeds present on the beach. During
breaching operations, past monitoring has revealed that some or all of
the seals present typically move or flush from the beach in response to
the presence of crew and equipment, though some may remain hauled-out.
No stampeding of seals--a potentially dangerous occurrence in which
large numbers of animals succumb to mass panic and rush away from a
stimulus--
[[Page 24474]]
has been documented since SCWA developed protocols to prevent such
events in 1999. While it is likely impossible to conduct required
estuary management activities without provoking some response in
hauled-out animals, precautionary mitigation measures, described later
in this document, ensure that animals are gradually apprised of human
approach. Under these conditions, seals typically exhibit a continuum
of responses, beginning with alert movements (e.g., raising the head),
which may then escalate to movement away from the stimulus and possible
flushing into the water. Flushed seals typically re-occupy the haul-out
within minutes to hours of the stimulus. In addition, eight other haul-
outs exist nearby that may accommodate flushed seals. In the absence of
appropriate mitigation measures, it is possible that pinnipeds could be
subject to injury, serious injury, or mortality, likely through
stampeding or abandonment of pups.
California sea lions and northern elephant seals, which have been
noted only infrequently in the action area, have been observed as less
sensitive to stimulus than harbor seals during monitoring at numerous
other sites. For example, monitoring of pinniped disturbance as a
result of abalone research in the Channel Islands showed that while
harbor seals flushed at a rate of 69 percent, California sea lions
flushed at a rate of only 21 percent. The rate for elephant seals
declined to 0.1 percent (VanBlaricom, 2011). In the unlikely event that
either of these species is present during management activities, they
would be expected to display a minimal reaction to maintenance
activities--less than that expected of harbor seals.
Although the Jenner haul-out is not known as a primary pupping
beach, harbor seal pups have been observed during the pupping season;
therefore, NMFS has evaluated the potential for injury, serious injury
or mortality to pups. There is a lack of published data regarding
pupping at the mouth of the Russian River, but SCWA monitors have
observed pups on the beach. No births were observed during monitoring
in 2010-11, but were inferred based on signs indicating pupping (e.g.,
blood spots on the sand, birds consuming possible placental remains).
Pup injury or mortality would be most likely to occur in the event of
extended separation of a mother and pup, or trampling in a stampede. As
discussed previously, no stampedes have been recorded since development
of appropriate protocols in 1999. Any California sea lions or northern
elephant seals present would be independent juveniles or adults;
therefore, analysis of impacts on pups is not relevant for those
species. Pups less than one week old are characterized by being up to
15 kg, thin for their body length, or having an umbilicus or natal
pelage.
Similarly, the period of mother-pup bonding, critical time needed
to ensure pup survival and maximize pup health, is not expected to be
impacted by estuary management activities. Harbor seal pups are
extremely precocious, swimming and diving immediately after birth and
throughout the lactation period, unlike most other phocids which
normally enter the sea only after weaning (Lawson and Renouf, 1985;
Cottrell et al., 2002; Burns et al., 2005). Lawson and Renouf (1987)
investigated harbor seal mother-pup bonding in response to natural and
anthropogenic disturbance. In summary, they found that the most
critical bonding time is within minutes after birth. Although pupping
season is defined as March 15-June 30, the peak of pupping season is
typically concluded by mid-May, when the lagoon management period
begins. As such, it is expected that most mother-pup bonding would
likely be concluded as well. The number of management events during the
months of March and April has been relatively low in the past, and the
breaching activities occur in a single day over several hours. In
addition, mitigation measures described later in this document further
reduce the likelihood of any impacts to pups, whether through injury or
mortality or interruption of mother-pup bonding.
Therefore, based on a significant body of site-specific monitoring
data, harbor seals are unlikely to sustain any harassment that may be
considered biologically significant. Individual animals would, at most,
flush into the water in response to maintenance activities but may also
simply become alert or move across the beach away from equipment and
crews. NMFS has determined that impacts to hauled-out pinnipeds during
estuary management activities would be behavioral harassment of limited
duration (i.e., less than one day) and limited intensity (i.e.,
temporary flushing at most). Stampeding, and therefore injury or
mortality, is not expected--nor been documented--in the years since
appropriate protocols were established (see ``Mitigation'' for more
details). Further, the continued, and increasingly heavy, use of the
haul-out despite decades of breaching events indicates that abandonment
of the haul-out is unlikely.
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
NMFS provided a detailed discussion of the potential effects of
this action on marine mammal habitat in the notice of the proposed IHA
(77 FR 15722, March 16, 2012). SCWA's estuary management activities
will result in temporary physical alteration of the Jenner haul-out.
With barrier beach closure, seal usage of the beach haul-out declines,
and the three nearby river haul-outs may not be available for usage due
to rising water surface elevations. Breaching of the barrier beach,
subsequent to the temporary habitat disturbance, will likely increase
suitability and availability of habitat for pinnipeds. Biological and
water quality monitoring will not physically alter pinniped habitat. In
summary, there will be temporary physical alteration of the beach.
However, natural opening and closure of the beach results in the same
impacts to habitat; therefore, seals are likely adapted to this cycle.
In addition, the increase in rearing habitat quality has the goal of
increasing salmon abundance, ultimately providing more food for seals
present within the action area.
Summary of Previous Monitoring
SCWA complied with the mitigation and monitoring required under the
previous authorization. In accordance with the 2011 IHA, SCWA submitted
a Report of Activities and Monitoring Results, covering the period of
July 2009 through December 2011. Under the 2011 IHA, SCWA did not
conduct any estuary management events, but did conduct associated
biological and physical monitoring. During the course of these
activities, SCWA did not exceed the take levels authorized under the
2011 IHA. NMFS provided a detailed description of previous monitoring
results in the notice of the proposed IHA (77 FR 15722, March 16,
2012).
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA 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 on the availability of such species or stock for
taking for certain subsistence uses.
SCWA will continue the following mitigation measures, as
implemented during the previous IHA, designed to minimize impact to
affected species and stocks:
[[Page 24475]]
SCWA crews will cautiously approach the haul-out ahead of
heavy equipment to minimize the potential for sudden flushes, which may
result in a stampede--a particular concern during pupping season.
SCWA staff will avoid walking or driving equipment through
the seal haul-out.
Crews on foot will make an effort to be seen by seals from
a distance, if possible, rather than appearing suddenly at the top of
the sandbar, again preventing sudden flushes.
During breaching events, all monitoring will be conducted
from the overlook on the bluff along Highway 1 adjacent to the haul-out
in order to minimize potential for harassment.
A water level management event may not occur for more than
two consecutive days unless flooding threats cannot be controlled.
In addition, SCWA will continue mitigation measures specific to
pupping season (March 15-June 30), as implemented in the previous IHA:
SCWA will maintain a 1 week no-work period between water
level management events (unless flooding is an immediate threat) to
allow for an adequate disturbance recovery period. During the no-work
period, equipment must be removed from the beach.
If a pup less than 1 week old is on the beach where heavy
machinery will be used or on the path used to access the work location,
the management action will be delayed until the pup has left the site
or the latest day possible to prevent flooding while still maintaining
suitable fish rearing habitat. In the event that a pup remains present
on the beach in the presence of flood risk, SCWA will consult with NMFS
and CDFG to determine the appropriate course of action. SCWA will
coordinate with the locally established seal monitoring program
(Stewards' Seal Watch) to determine if pups less than 1 week old are on
the beach prior to a breaching event.
Physical and biological monitoring will not be conducted
if a pup less than 1 week old is present at the monitoring site or on a
path to the site.
Equipment will be driven slowly on the beach and care will be taken
to minimize the number of shutdowns and start-ups when the equipment is
on the beach. All work will be completed as efficiently as possible,
with the smallest amount of heavy equipment possible, to minimize
disturbance of seals at the haul-out. Boats operating near river haul-
outs during monitoring will be kept within posted speed limits and
driven as far from the haul-outs as safely possible to minimize
flushing seals.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's mitigation measures as
proposed and considered their effectiveness in past implementation, to
determine whether they are likely to effect the least practicable
adverse impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures includes
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another: (1)
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals, (2) the proven or likely efficacy of the specific
measure to minimize adverse impacts as planned; (3) the practicability
of the measure for applicant implementation, including consideration of
personnel safety, and practicality of implementation.
Injury, serious injury, or mortality to pinnipeds would likely
result from startling animals inhabiting the haul-out into a stampede
reaction, or from extended mother-pup separation as a result of such a
stampede. Long-term impacts to pinniped usage of the haul-out could
result from significantly increased presence of humans and equipment on
the beach. To avoid these possibilities, NMFS and SCWA have developed
the previously described mitigation measures. These are designed to
reduce the possibility of startling pinnipeds, by gradually apprising
them of the presence of humans and equipment on the beach, and to
reduce the possibility of impacts to pups by eliminating or altering
management activities on the beach when pups are present and by setting
limits on the frequency and duration of events during pupping season.
During the past twelve years of flood control management,
implementation of similar mitigation measures has resulted in no known
stampede events and no known injury, serious injury, or mortality. Over
the course of that time period, management events have generally been
infrequent and of limited duration. Based upon the SCWA's record of
management at the mouth of the Russian River, as well as information
from monitoring SCWA's implementation of the improved mitigation
measures as prescribed under the previous IHA, NMFS has determined that
the mitigation measures included in the final IHA provide the means of
effecting the least practicable adverse impacts on marine mammal
species or stocks and their habitat.
Monitoring and Reporting
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.
The applicant has developed a Pinniped Monitoring Plan which
describes the proposed monitoring efforts. The purpose of this
monitoring plan, which is carried out collaboratively with the Stewards
of the Coasts and Redwoods (Stewards) organization, is to detect the
response of pinnipeds to estuary management activities at the Russian
River estuary. SCWA has designed the plan both to satisfy the
requirements of the IHA, and to address the following questions of
interest:
1. Under what conditions do pinnipeds haul out at the Russian River
estuary mouth at Jenner?
2. How do seals at the Jenner haul-out respond to activities
associated with the construction and maintenance of the lagoon outlet
channel and artificial breaching activities?
3. Does the number of seals at the Jenner haul-out significantly
differ from historic averages with formation of a summer (May 15 to
October 15) lagoon in the Russian River estuary?
4. Are seals at the Jenner haul-out displaced to nearby river and
coastal haul-outs when the mouth remains closed in the summer?
In summary, monitoring includes the following:
Baseline Monitoring
Seals at the Jenner haul-out are counted twice monthly for the term
of the IHA. This baseline information will provide SCWA with details
that may help to plan estuary management activities in the future to
minimize pinniped interaction. This census begins at local dawn and
continues for 8 hours. All seals hauled out on the beach are counted
every 30 minutes from the overlook on the bluff along Highway 1
adjacent to the haul-out using high powered spotting scopes. Monitoring
may conclude for the day if weather conditions affect visibility (e.g.,
heavy fog in the afternoon). Counts are scheduled for 2 days out of
each month, with the intention of capturing a low and high tide each in
the morning and afternoon. Depending on how the sandbar is formed,
seals may haul out in multiple groups at the mouth. At each
[[Page 24476]]
30-minute count, the observer indicates where groups of seals are
hauled out on the sandbar and provides a total count for each group. If
possible, adults and pups are counted separately.
In addition to the census data, disturbances of the haul-out are
recorded. The method for recording disturbances follows those in
Mortenson (1996). Disturbances will be recorded on a three-point scale
that represents an increasing seal response to the disturbance. The
time, source, and duration of the disturbance, as well as an estimated
distance between the source and haul-out, are recorded. It should be
noted that only responses falling into Mortenson's Levels 2 and 3
(i.e., movement or flight) will be considered as harassment under the
MMPA. Weather conditions are recorded at the beginning of each census.
These include temperature, percent cloud cover, and wind speed
(Beaufort scale). Tide levels and estuary water surface elevations are
correlated to the monitoring start and end times.
In an effort towards understanding possible relationships between
use of the Jenner haul-out and nearby coastal and river haul-outs,
several other haul-outs on the coast and in the Russian River estuary
are monitored as well. The peripheral haul-outs are visited for 10-
minute counts twice during each baseline monitoring day. All pinnipeds
hauled out were counted from the same vantage point(s) at each haul-out
using a high-powered spotting scope or binoculars.
Estuary Management Event Monitoring
Activities associated with artificial breaching or initial
construction of the outlet channel, as well as the maintenance of the
channel that may be required, will be monitored for disturbances to the
seals at the Jenner haul-out. A 1-day pre-event channel survey will be
made within 1-3 days prior to constructing the outlet channel. The
haul-out will be monitored on the day the outlet channel is constructed
and daily for up to the maximum 2 days allowed for channel excavation
activities. Monitoring will also occur on each day that the outlet
channel is maintained using heavy equipment for the duration of the
lagoon management period. Monitoring will correspond with that
described under the ``Baseline'' section previously, with the exception
that management activity monitoring duration is defined by event
duration, rather than being set at 8 hours. On the day of the
management event, pinniped monitoring begins at least 1 hour prior to
the crew and equipment accessing the beach work area and continues
through the duration of the event, until at least 1 hour after the crew
and equipment leave the beach.
In an attempt to understand whether seals from the Jenner haul-out
are displaced to coastal and river haul-outs nearby when management
events occur, other nearby haul-outs are monitored concurrently with
event monitoring. This provides an opportunity to qualitatively assess
whether these haul-outs are being used by seals displaced from the
Jenner haul-out. This monitoring will not provide definitive results
regarding displacement to nearby coastal and river haul-outs, as
individual seals are not marked, but is useful in tracking general
trends in haul-out use during disturbance. As volunteers are required
to monitor these peripheral haul-outs, haul-out locations may need to
be prioritized if there are not enough volunteers available. In that
case, priority will be assigned to the nearest haul-outs (North Jenner
and Odin Cove), followed by the Russian River estuary haul-outs, and
finally the more distant coastal haul-outs.
For all counts, the following information will be recorded in
thirty minute intervals: (1) Pinniped counts, by species; (2) behavior;
(3) time, source and duration of any disturbance; (4) estimated
distances between source of disturbance and pinnipeds; (5) weather
conditions (e.g., temperature, wind); and (5) tide levels and estuary
water surface elevation.
Monitoring During Pupping Season--As described previously, the
pupping season is defined as March 15 to June 30. Baseline, lagoon
outlet channel, and artificial breaching monitoring during the pupping
season will include records of neonate (pups less than 1 week old)
observations. Characteristics of a neonate pup include: body weight
less than 15 kg; thin for their body length; an umbilicus or natal
pelage present; wrinkled skin; and awkward or jerky movements on land.
SCWA will coordinate with the Seal Watch monitoring program to
determine if pups less than 1 week old are on the beach prior to a
water level management event.
If, during monitoring, observers sight any pup that might be
abandoned, SCWA will contact the NMFS stranding response network
immediately and also report the incident to NMFS' Southwest Regional
Office and NMFS Office of Protected Resources within 48 hours.
Observers will not approach or move the pup. Potential indications that
a pup may be abandoned are no observed contact with adult seals, no
movement of the pup, and the pup's attempts to nurse are rebuffed.
Reporting
SCWA is required to submit a report on all activities and marine
mammal monitoring results to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the Southwest Regional Administrator, NMFS, 90 days prior to the
expiration of the IHA if a renewal is sought, or within 90 days of the
expiration of the permit otherwise. This annual report will also be
distributed to California State Parks and Stewards, and would be
available to the public on SCWA's Web site. This report will contain
the following information:
The number of seals taken, by species and age class (if
possible);
Behavior prior to and during water level management
events;
Start and end time of activity;
Estimated distances between source and seals when
disturbance occurs;
Weather conditions (e.g., temperature, wind, etc.);
Haul-out reoccupation time of any seals based on post
activity monitoring;
Tide levels and estuary water surface elevation; and
Seal census from bi-monthly and nearby haul-out
monitoring.
The annual report includes descriptions of monitoring methodology,
tabulation of estuary management events, summary of monitoring results,
and discussion of problems noted and proposed remedial measures. SCWA
will report any injured or dead marine mammals to NMFS' Southwest
Regional Office and NMFS Office of Protected Resources.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
NMFS is authorizing SCWA to take harbor seals, California sea
lions, and northern elephant seals, by Level B harassment only,
incidental to estuary management activities. These activities,
involving increased human presence and the use of heavy equipment and
support vehicles, are expected to harass pinnipeds present at the haul-
out through behavioral disturbance only. In addition, monitoring
activities prescribed in the BiOp may result in harassment of
additional individuals at the Jenner haul-out and at the three haul-
outs located in the estuary. Estimates of the number of harbor seals,
California sea lions, and northern elephant seals that may be harassed
by the activities is based upon the number of potential events
associated with Russian River estuary management activities and the
average number of individuals of each species that are present during
conditions appropriate to the activity. As described previously in
[[Page 24477]]
this document, monitoring effort at the mouth of the Russian River has
shown that the number of seals utilizing the haul-out declines during
bar-closed conditions. Tables 1 and 2 detail the total number of
authorized takes. Methodology of take estimation was discussed in
detail in NMFS' notice of proposed IHA (77 FR 15722, March 16, 2012).
Please note that the take estimates provided in NMFS' notice of
proposed IHA (Tables 5-6 in that document) contained several errors,
which are corrected here.
Table 1--Estimated Number of Harbor Seal Takes Resulting From Russian River Estuary Management Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of animals expected to occur Potential total number of individual
\a\ Number of events b c animals that may be taken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation: 105 \d\ Implementation: 3 Implementation: 315
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance and Monitoring: Maintenance: Maintenance: 1,089
May: 103 May: 1 ....................................
June: 100 June-Sept: 4/month ....................................
July: 105 Oct: 1 ....................................
Aug: 17 Monitoring: Monitoring: 504
Sept: 19 June-Sept: 2/month ....................................
Oct: 22 Oct: 1 Total: 1,908
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Artificial Breaching
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oct: 22 Oct: 2 Oct: 44
Nov: 11 Nov: 2 Nov: 22
Dec: 45 Dec: 2 Dec: 90
Jan: 96 Jan: 1 Jan: 96
Feb: 89 Feb: 1 Feb: 89
Mar: 146 Mar: 1 Mar: 146
Apr: 173 Apr: 1 Apr: 173
May: 103 May: 1 May: 103
11 events maximum Total: 763
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan: 96 1 topographic survey/month Jan: 20
Feb: 89 .................................... Feb: 18
Mar: 146 2 geophysical surveys/month, Sep- Mar: 15
Apr: 131 Dec; 1/month, July-Aug, Jan-Feb Apr: 13
May: 119 .................................... May: 12
June: 134 Surveys considered to have potential June: 13
July: 237 for take of 10 percent of animals July: 48
Aug: 108 present Aug: 22
Sept: 36 Sept: 12
Oct: 36 Oct: 12
Nov: 90 Nov: 27
Dec: 45 Dec: 15
Total: 227
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 \e\ 65 65
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total .................................... 2,963
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ For lagoon outlet channel management and artificial breaching events occurring from April through November,
average daily number of animals is from observations at the mouth of the Russian River during breaching events
(i.e., bar-closed conditions). For artificial breaching events occurring from December through March, and for
all topographic and geophysical beach surveys, average daily number of animals is from observations at Russian
River mouth during bar-open conditions, 2009-11.
\b\ For implementation of the lagoon outlet channel, an event is defined as a single, two-day episode. It is
assumed that the same individual seals would be hauled out during a single event. For the remaining
activities, an event is defined as a single day on which an activity occurs. Some events may include multiple
activities.
\c\ Number of events for artificial breaching derived from historical data. The average number of events for
each month was rounded up to the nearest whole number; estimated number of events for December was increased
from one to two because multiple closures resulting from storm events have occurred in recent years during
that month. These numbers likely represent an overestimate, as the average annual number of events is six.
\d\ Although implementation could occur at any time during the lagoon management period, the highest daily
average from any month during the lagoon management period was used.
\e\ Based on past experience, SCWA expects that no more than one seal may be present, and thus have the
potential to be disturbed, at each of the three river haul-outs.
[[Page 24478]]
Table 2--Estimated Number of California Sea Lion and Elephant Seal Takes Resulting From Russian River Estuary
Management Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potential total
number of
Species Number of animals Number of events individual
expected to occur animals that may
be taken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per 1 3 3
event)................................................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per 1 3 3
event)................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Artificial Breaching
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per 1 10 10
event, Sept-Apr)......................................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per 1 7 7
event, Dec-May).......................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per 1 18 18
event, Sept-Apr)......................................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per 1 10 10
event, Dec-May).......................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per 1 8 8
month, Sept-Apr)......................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion.......................................................................... 37
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elephant seal................................................................................ 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analysis and Determination
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 determining whether or not authorized
incidental take will have a negligible impact on affected species
stocks, NMFS considers a number of criteria regarding the impact of the
proposed action, including the number, nature, intensity, and duration
of Level B harassment take that may occur. Although SCWA's estuary
management activities may harass pinnipeds hauled out at the mouth of
the Russian River, as well as those hauled out at several locations in
the estuary during recurring monitoring activities, impacts are
occurring to a small, localized group of animals. No mortality or
injury is anticipated, nor will the action result in long-term impacts
such as permanent abandonment of the haul-out. Seals will likely become
alert or, at most, flush into the water in reaction to the presence of
crews and equipment on the beach. However, breaching the sandbar has
been shown to increase seal abundance on the beach, with seals quickly
re-inhabiting the haul-out following cessation of activity. In
addition, the implementation of the lagoon management plan may provide
increased availability of prey species (salmonids). No impacts are
expected at the population or stock level.
No pinniped stocks known from the action area are listed as
threatened or endangered under the ESA or determined to be strategic or
depleted under the MMPA. Recent data suggests that harbor seal
populations have reached carrying capacity; populations of California
sea lions and northern elephant seals in California are also considered
healthy.
The number of animals authorized to be taken for each species of
pinnipeds can be considered small relative to the population size.
There are an estimated 34,233 harbor seals in the California stock,
238,000 California sea lions, and 124,000 northern elephant seals in
the California breeding population. Based on extensive monitoring
effort specific to the affected haul-out and historical data on the
frequency of the specified activity, NMFS is authorizing take, by Level
B harassment only, of 2,963 harbor seals, 37 California sea lions, and
20 northern elephant seals, representing 8.7, 0.02, and 0.02 percent of
the populations, respectively. However, this represents an overestimate
of the number of individuals harassed over the duration of the proposed
IHA, because the take estimates include multiple instances of
harassment to a given individual.
California sea lion and elephant seal pups are not known to occur
within the action area and thus will not be affected by the specified
activity. The action is not likely to cause injury or mortality to any
harbor seal pup, nor will it impact mother-pup bonding. The peak of
harbor seal pupping season occurs during May, when few management
activities are anticipated. However, the pupping season has been
conservatively defined as March 15-June 30 for mitigation purposes, and
any management activity that is required during pupping season will be
delayed in the event that a pup less than one week old is present on
the beach. As described previously in this document, harbor seal pups
are precocious, and mother-pup bonding is likely to occur within
minutes. Delay of events will further ensure that mother-pup bonding is
not likely to be interfered with.
Based on the foregoing analysis, behavioral disturbance to
pinnipeds at the mouth of the Russian River will be of low intensity
and limited duration. To ensure minimal disturbance, SCWA will
implement the mitigation measures described previously, which NMFS has
determined will serve as the means for effecting the least practicable
adverse effect on marine mammals stocks or populations and their
habitat. NMFS finds that SCWA's estuary management activities will
result in the incidental take of small numbers of marine
[[Page 24479]]
mammals, and that the authorized number of takes will have no more than
a negligible impact on the affected species and stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are no ESA-listed marine mammals found in the action area;
therefore, no consultation under the ESA is required. As described
elsewhere in this document, SCWA and the Corps consulted with NMFS
under section 7 of the ESA regarding the potential effects of their
operations and maintenance activities, including SCWA's estuary
management program, on ESA-listed salmonids. As a result of this
consultation, NMFS issued the Russian River Biological Opinion (NMFS,
2008) and RPA, which prescribes modifications to SCWA's estuary
management activities.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published
by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6, NMFS prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) to consider the direct, indirect and cumulative effects
to the human environment resulting from issuance of an IHA to SCWA.
NMFS signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on March 30,
2010. NMFS has reviewed SCWA's application and determined that there
are no substantial changes to the proposed action and that there are no
new direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to the human environment
resulting from renewal of an IHA to SCWA. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that a new or supplemental EA or Environmental Impact
Statement is unnecessary, and reaffirms the existing FONSI for this
action. The existing EA and FONSI for this action are available for
review at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Determinations
NMFS has determined that the impact of conducting the specific
estuary management activities described in this notice and in the IHA
request in the specific geographic region in Sonoma County, California
may result, at worst, in a temporary modification in behavior (Level B
harassment) of small numbers of marine mammals. Further, this activity
is expected to result in a negligible impact on the affected species or
stocks of marine mammals. The provision requiring that the activity not
have an unmitigable impact on the availability of the affected species
or stock of marine mammals for subsistence uses is not implicated for
this action.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to SCWA
to conduct estuary management activities in the Russian River from the
period of April 21, 2012, through April 20, 2013, provided the
previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements
are incorporated.
Dated: April 17, 2012.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-9863 Filed 4-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P