Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Rocky Intertidal Monitoring Surveys Along the Oregon and California Coasts, 7319-7324 [2016-02802]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 28 (Thursday, February 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7319-7324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02802]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XE282


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Rocky Intertidal Monitoring Surveys 
Along the Oregon and California Coasts

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 we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the 
Partnership for Interdisciplinary Study of Coastal Oceans (PISCO) at 
the University of California (UC) Santa Cruz for an Incidental 
Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take three species of marine mammals, 
by harassment, incidental to rocky intertidal monitoring surveys.

DATES: This authorization is effective from February 3, 2016, through 
February 2, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pauline, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability

    An electronic copy of PISCO's application and supporting documents, 
as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be 
obtained by visiting the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, 
please call the contact listed above (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).

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 
provided to the public for review.
    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 requirements 
pertaining to the mitigation, 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 U.S. can apply for an authorization to 
incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment. 
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. 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

    On August 10, 2015 NMFS received an application from PISCO for the 
taking of marine mammals incidental to rocky intertidal monitoring 
surveys along the Oregon and California coasts. NMFS determined that 
the application was adequate and complete on October 9, 2015. In 
December 2012, NMFS issued a 1-year IHA to PISCO to take marine mammals 
incidental to these same proposed activities (77 FR 72327, December 5, 
2012). In December 2013, NMFS issued a second 1-year IHA to PISCO to 
take marine mammals incidental to these same proposed activities (78 FR 
79403, December 30, 2013). The 2013 IHA expired on December 16, 2014. A 
third IHA was issued to PISCO with an effective date of December 17, 
2014 (79 FR 73048, December 9, 2014) to take animals for these 
identical activities and expires on December 16, 2015. The IHA 
announced in this notice is valid from February 3, 2016 through 
February 2, 2017.
    The research group at UC Santa Cruz operates in collaboration with 
two large-scale marine research programs: PISCO and the Multi-agency 
Rocky Intertidal Network (MARINe). The research group at UC Santa Cruz 
(PISCO) is responsible for many of the ongoing rocky intertidal 
monitoring programs along the Pacific coast. Monitoring occurs at rocky 
intertidal sites, often large bedrock benches, from the high intertidal 
to the water's edge. Long-term monitoring

[[Page 7320]]

projects include Community Structure Monitoring, Intertidal 
Biodiversity Surveys, Marine Protected Area Baseline Monitoring, 
Intertidal Recruitment Monitoring, and Ocean Acidification. Research is 
conducted throughout the year along the California and Oregon coasts 
and will continue indefinitely. Most sites are sampled one to two times 
per year over a 4-6 hour period during a negative low tide series. The 
following specific aspects of the proposed activities are likely to 
result in the take of marine mammals: Presence of survey personnel near 
pinniped haulout sites and unintentional approach of survey personnel 
towards hauled out pinnipeds. Take, by Level B harassment only, of 
individuals of California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), harbor 
seals (Phoca vitulina richardii) and northern elephant seals (Mirounga 
angustirostris) is anticipated to result from the specified activity.

Description of the Specified Activity

Overview

    PISCO requested an IHA for work to continue a rocky intertidal 
monitoring project that has been ongoing for 20 years. Research 
activities would include the presence of survey personnel near pinniped 
haulout sites as well as the unintentional approach of survey personnel 
towards hauled out pinnipeds. PISCO focuses on understanding the 
nearshore ecosystems of the U.S. west coast through a number of 
interdisciplinary collaborations. The program integrates long-term 
monitoring of ecological and oceanographic processes at dozens of sites 
with experimental work in the lab and field.

Dates and Duration

    PISCO's research is conducted throughout the year but will begin no 
sooner than February 3, 2016 and end on February 2, 2017. Most sites 
are sampled one to two times per year over a 1-day period (4-6 hours 
per site) during a negative low tide series. Due to the large number of 
research sites, scheduling constraints, and the necessity for negative 
low tides and favorable weather/ocean conditions, exact survey dates 
are variable and difficult to predict. Some sampling is anticipated to 
occur in all months.

Specific Geographic Region

    Sampling sites occur along the California and Oregon coasts. 
Community Structure Monitoring sites range from Ecola State Park near 
Cannon Beach, Oregon to Government Point located northwest of Santa 
Barbara, California. Biodiversity Survey sites extend from Ecola State 
Park south to Cabrillo National Monument in San Diego County, 
California. Exact locations of sampling sites can be found in Tables 1 
and 2 of PISCO's application (see ADDRESSES).

Detailed Description of Activities

    We provided a description of the proposed action in our Federal 
Register notice announcing the proposed authorization (80 FR 76448; 
December 9, 2015). Please refer to that document; we provide only 
summary information here.
    Researchers will utilize a Community Structure Monitoring approach 
which is based largely on surveys that quantify the percent cover and 
distribution of algae and invertebrates that constitute these 
communities. This approach allows researchers to quantify both the 
patterns of abundance of targeted species, as well as characterize 
changes in the communities in which they reside. Such information 
provides managers with insight into the causes and consequences of 
changes in species abundance. There are 47 Community Structure sites, 
each of which is surveyed over a 1-day period during a low tide series 
one to two times per year.
    Biodiversity surveys are also part of a long-term monitoring 
project and are conducted every 3-5 years across 140 established sites. 
These surveys involve point contact identification along permanent 
transects, mobile invertebrate quadrat counts, sea star band counts, 
and tidal height topographic measurements. Additionally, California has 
established a network of Marine Protected Areas along the California 
coast which will require sampling at both new and established sites 
within and outside of marine protected areas. These sites were sampled 
using existing Community Structure and Biodiversity protocols for 
consistency. Resampling of these sites may take place as part of future 
marine protected area evaluation.
    The intertidal zones where PISCO conducts intertidal monitoring are 
also areas where pinnipeds can be found hauled out on the shore at or 
adjacent to some research sites. Accessing portions of the intertidal 
habitat may cause incidental Level B (behavioral) harassment of 
pinnipeds through some unavoidable approaches if pinnipeds are hauled 
out directly in the study plots or while biologists walk from one 
location to another. No motorized equipment is involved in conducting 
these surveys.

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the 
Federal Register on December 9, 2015 (80 FR 76448). During the 30-day 
public comment period, the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) 
submitted a letter on December 15, 2015. The letter is available on the 
Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm. The 
Commission had no formal comments and concurred with NMFS's preliminary 
finding that recommended that NMFS issue an IHA to PISCO, subject to 
the inclusion of the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    There are three marine mammal species known to occur in the 
vicinity of the project areas which may be subjected to Level B 
harassment. These are the California sea lion, harbor seal and northern 
elephant seal. Steller sea lions are also observed rarely but take for 
this animal is not requested.
    We have reviewed PISCO's detailed species descriptions, including 
life history information, for accuracy and completeness and refer the 
reader to POA's application as well as the proposed incidental 
harassment authorization published in the Federal Register (80 FR 
76448) instead of reprinting the information here. We have also 
provided information for the potentially affected stocks, including 
details of stock-wide status, trends, and threats, in our Federal 
Register. Please refer to NMFS' Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals) for generalized species accounts which provide information 
regarding the biology and behavior of the marine resources that occur 
in the vicinity of the project area.

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

    The Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 76448) 
provides a general background on sound relevant to the specified 
activity as well as a detailed description of marine mammal hearing and 
of the potential effects of these construction activities on marine 
mammals, and is not repeated here.

Anticipated Effects on Habitat

    We described potential impacts to marine mammal habitat in detail 
in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization. In summary, 
the project activities would not modify existing marine mammal habitat. 
Because of the

[[Page 7321]]

short duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the 
habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are 
not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences 
for individual marine mammals or their populations

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 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.
    PISCO shall implement several mitigation measures to reduce 
potential take by Level B (behavioral disturbance) harassment. Measures 
include: (1) Conducting slow movements and staying close to the ground 
to prevent or minimize stampeding; (2) avoiding loud noises (i.e., 
using hushed voices); (3) avoiding pinnipeds along access ways to sites 
by locating and taking a different access way and vacating the area as 
soon as sampling of the site is completed; (4) monitoring the offshore 
area for predators (such as killer whales and white sharks) and avoid 
flushing of pinnipeds when predators are observed in nearshore waters; 
(5) using binoculars to detect pinnipeds before close approach to avoid 
being seen by animals; and (6) only approaching pinnipeds when are 
located in the sampling plots if there are no other means to accomplish 
the survey.
    The methodologies and actions noted in this section shall be 
utilized and included as mitigation measures in the IHA to ensure that 
impacts to marine mammals are mitigated to the lowest level 
practicable. The primary method of mitigating the risk of disturbance 
to pinnipeds, which will be in use at all times, is the selection of 
judicious routes of approach to study sites, avoiding close contact 
with pinnipeds hauled out on shore, and the use of extreme caution upon 
approach. In no case will marine mammals be deliberately approached by 
survey personnel, unless they are located in sampling plots and there 
is no other method available and in all cases every possible measure 
will be taken to select a pathway of approach to study sites that 
minimizes the number of marine mammals potentially harassed. In 
general, researchers will stay inshore of pinnipeds whenever possible 
to allow maximum escape to the ocean. Each visit to a given study site 
will last for approximately 4-6 hours, after which the site is vacated 
and can be re-occupied by any marine mammals that may have been 
disturbed by the presence of researchers. By arriving before low tide, 
worker presence will tend to encourage pinnipeds to move to other areas 
for the day before they haul out and settle onto rocks at low tide.

Mitigation Conclusions

    We have carefully evaluated PISCO's mitigation measures and 
considered their effectiveness in past implementation to determine 
whether they are likely to effect the least practicable impact on the 
affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our 
evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the 
following factors in relation to one another: (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; and (3) the practicability of the measure for 
applicant implementation.
    Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to 
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on 
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of 
the general goals listed below:
    (1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals 
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
    (2) A reduction in the number (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) of individual marine mammals 
exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may 
contribute to 1 above).
    (3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine 
mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental 
take (this goal may contribute to 1 above).
    (4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to 
result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1 above).
    (5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal 
habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or 
limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas, 
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary disturbance of habitat 
during a biologically important time.
    (6) For monitoring directly related to mitigation, an increase in 
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more 
effective implementation of the mitigation.
    Based on our evaluation of PISCO's proposed measures, including 
information from monitoring of implementation of mitigation measures 
very similar to those described here under previous IHAs from other 
research projects, we have determined that the mitigation measures 
provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine 
mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention 
to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA 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 
incidental take authorizations 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 in the action area.
    PISCO can add to the knowledge of pinnipeds in California and 
Oregon by noting observations of: (1) Unusual behaviors, numbers, or 
distributions of pinnipeds, such that any potential follow-up research 
can be conducted by the appropriate personnel; (2) tag-bearing 
carcasses of pinnipeds, allowing transmittal of the information to 
appropriate agencies and personnel; and (3) rare or unusual species of 
marine mammals for agency follow-up.
    Monitoring requirements in relation to PISCO's rocky intertidal 
monitoring will include observations made by project field biologists 
who will function as marine mammal observers (MMOs). Minimum 
qualifications for MMOs include an undergraduate degree in biology. 
Information recorded will include species counts (with numbers of pups/
juveniles when possible) of animals present before approaching, numbers 
of observed disturbances, and descriptions of the disturbance behaviors 
during the monitoring surveys, including location, date, and time of 
the event. Disturbances will be recorded according to a three-point 
scale of intensity including: (1) Head orientation in response to 
disturbance,

[[Page 7322]]

which may include turning head towards the disturbance, craning head 
and neck while holding the body rigid in a u-shaped position, or 
changing from a lying to a sitting position and/or slight movement of 
less than 1 m; ``alert''; (2) Movements in response to or away from 
disturbance, over short distances (typically two times its body length) 
and including dramatic changes in direction or speed of locomotion for 
animals already in motion; ``movement''; and (3) All flushes to the 
water as well as lengthier retreats (>3 m); ``flight''. However, only 
observations fitting the descriptions of # 2 and # 3 on the three-point 
scale need to be recorded as authorized takes. Observations regarding 
the number and species of any marine mammals observed, either in the 
water or hauled out, at or adjacent to the site, will be recorded as 
part of field observations during research activities. Observations of 
unusual behaviors, numbers, or distributions of pinnipeds will be 
reported to NMFS so that any potential follow-up observations can be 
conducted by the appropriate personnel. In addition, observations of 
tag-bearing pinniped carcasses as well as any rare or unusual species 
of marine mammals will be reported to NMFS. Information regarding 
physical and biological conditions pertaining to a site, as well as the 
date and time that research was conducted will also be noted.
    If at any time injury, serious injury, or mortality of the species 
for which take is authorized should occur, or if take of any kind of 
any other marine mammal occurs, and such action may be a result of the 
research, PISCO will suspend research activities and contact NMFS 
immediately to determine how best to proceed to ensure that another 
injury or death does not occur and to ensure that the applicant remains 
in compliance with the MMPA.

Summary of Previous Monitoring

    PISCO complied with the mitigation and monitoring required under 
the previous authorization (2014-2015). However, in compliance with 
that Authorization, PISCO submitted a report on activities covering the 
period of December 17, 2014 through September 30, 2015. PISCO was 
authorized to take 60 California sea lions, 183 Pacific harbor seals 
and 30 Northern elephant seals and actual recorded takes were 
documented at 19, 37 and 4 respectively.

Reporting

    PISCO must submit a draft final report to NMFS Office of Protected 
Resources within 60 days after the conclusion of the 2016-2017 field 
season or 60 days prior to the start of the next field season if a new 
IHA will be requested. The report will include a summary of the 
information gathered pursuant to the monitoring requirements set forth 
in the IHA. A final report must be submitted to the Director of the 
NMFS Office of Protected Resources and to the NMFS West Coast Regional 
Administrator within 30 days after receiving comments from NMFS on the 
draft final report. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft 
final report will be considered to be the final report.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the 
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or 
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or 
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the 
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not 
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or 
sheltering [Level B harassment].
    All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment, involving 
temporary changes in behavior. The mitigation and monitoring measures 
are expected to minimize the possibility of injurious or lethal takes 
such that take by injury, serious injury, or mortality is considered 
remote. Animals hauled out close to the actual survey sites may be 
disturbed by the presence of biologists and may alter their behavior or 
attempt to move away from the researchers.
    NMFS considers an animal to have been harassed if it moved greater 
than 2 times its body length in response to the researcher's presence 
or if the animal was already moving and changed direction and/or speed, 
or if the animal flushed into the water. Animals that became alert 
without such movements were not considered harassed.
    For the purpose of this IHA, only Oregon and California sites that 
are frequently sampled and have a marine mammal presence during 
sampling were included in generating take estimates. Sites where only 
Biodiversity Surveys are conducted did not provide enough data to 
confidently estimate takes since they are sampled infrequently (once 
every 3-5 years). A small number of harbor seal, northern elephant seal 
and California sea lion pup takes are anticipated as pups may be 
present at several sites during spring and summer sampling.
    Take estimates are based on marine mammal observations from each 
site. Marine mammal observations are done as part of PISCO site 
observations, which include notes on physical and biological conditions 
at the site. The maximum number of marine mammals, by species, seen at 
any given time throughout the sampling day is recorded at the 
conclusion of sampling. A marine mammal is counted if it is seen on 
access ways to the site, at the site, or immediately up-coast or down-
coast of the site. Marine mammals in the water immediately offshore are 
also recorded. Any other relevant information, including the location 
of a marine mammal relevant to the site, any unusual behavior, and the 
presence of pups is also noted.
    These observations formed the basis from which researchers with 
extensive knowledge and experience at each site estimated the actual 
number of marine mammals that may be subject to take. In most cases the 
number of takes is based on the maximum number of marine mammals that 
have been observed at a site throughout the history of the site (1-3 
observation per year for 5-10 years or more). Section 6 in PISCO's 
application outlines the number of visits per year for each sampling 
site and the potential number of pinnipeds anticipated to be 
encountered at each site. Tables 3, 4, 5 in PISCO's application 
outlines the number of potential takes per site (see ADDRESSES).
    Harbor seals are expected to occur at 15 locations in numbers 
ranging from 30 per visit (25 adults and 5 pups) at the Pebble Beach 
site to 5 per visit (all adults) at the Shelter Cove, Kibesillah Hill, 
Sea Ranch and Franklin Point sites (Table 3 in Application). These 
numbers are based on past observations at each site as well as input 
from researchers with extensive knowledge of individual sites. NMFS 
took the number of takes estimated at each site, based on past 
observations as well as input from researchers with extensive site 
knowledge, and multiplied by the number of site visits scheduled during 
the authorization period. Nine sites were scheduled for one visit while 
six sites were projected to have 2 sites. A total of 190 adults and 13 
pups were anticipated for take and, therefore, NMFS has permitted the 
take of 203 harbor seals.
    Due to the potentially significant effect of El Ni[ntilde]o on 
California sea lions NMFS will increase the number of California sea 
lion takes beyond what PISCO requested. Changes in sea surface 
temperature associated with El Ni[ntilde]o can have significant impacts 
throughout the food web. Historically, El Ni[ntilde]o years

[[Page 7323]]

have resulted in high numbers of marine mammal strandings, likely due 
to changes in prey availability and increased physiologic stress on the 
animals. NOAA fisheries west coast region office has reported elevated 
strandings at locations in central and southern California. For a five-
month period from January to May 2015, strandings were over ten times 
higher than the average stranding level for the same 5 month period 
during 2004-2012. PISCO plans to conduct 8 visits under this 
authorization at 5 different sites during the one-year authorization 
period (see Table 2 in Application). PISCO had requested 90 takes for 
these 8 visits at five sites. However, given the increased numbers of 
California sea lions recorded earlier in 2015 during the current El 
Ni[ntilde]o event, NMFS authorized 8 times that number for a total of 
720 authorized takes. While all of the five sites may not experience 
numbers that are ten times greater than is typical, as was reported 
from January through May 2015, it is likely that observations will be 
significantly elevated. As such, NMFS has elected to increase the total 
number of takes originally anticipated by PISCO to 720 California sea 
lions.
    Northern elephant seals are only expected to occur at one site this 
year, Piedras Blancs, which will experience two separate visits. Up to 
twenty takes are expected during each visit for a total of 40 
authorized takes.
    PISCO researchers report that they have very rarely observed 
Steller sea lions at any of their research sites and none have been 
seen the last several years. Given that the likelihood of taking 
Steller sea lions is extremely low, NMFS has not authorized take of 
Steller sea lions and PISCO has agreed to re-schedule surveys if when 
Steller sea lions are present to avoid take of this species.
    NMFS has authorized the take, by Level B harassment only, of 720 
California sea lions, 203 harbor seals and 40 northern elephant seals. 
These numbers are considered to be maximum take estimates; therefore, 
actual take may be less if animals decide to haul out at a different 
location for the day or animals are out foraging at the time of the 
survey activities.

Analyses and Determinations

Negligible Impact Analysis

    Negligible impact is ``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'' (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes, 
alone, is not enough information on which to base an impact 
determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of 
marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral harassment, 
NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any 
responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any 
responses (critical reproductive time or location, feeding, migration, 
etc.), as well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment 
takes, the number of estimated mortalities, effects on habitat, and the 
status of the species.
    No injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of 
PISCO's rocky intertidal monitoring, and none are authorized. The risk 
of marine mammal injury, serious injury, or mortality associated with 
rocky intertidal monitoring increases somewhat if disturbances occur 
during breeding season. These situations present increased potential 
for mothers and dependent pups to become separated and, if separated 
pairs do not quickly reunite, the risk of mortality to pups (through 
starvation) may increase. Separately, adult male elephant seals may 
trample elephant seal pups if disturbed, which could potentially result 
in the injury, serious injury, or mortality of the pups. The risk of 
either of these situations is greater in the event of a stampede.
    Very few pups are anticipated to be encountered during the 
monitoring surveys. However, a small number of harbor seal, northern 
elephant seal and California sea lion pups have been observed at 
several of the monitoring sites during past years. Harbor seals are 
very precocious with only a short period of time in which separation of 
a mother from a pup could occur. Though elephant seal pups are 
occasionally present when researchers visit survey sites, risk of pup 
mortalities is very low because elephant seals are far less reactive to 
researcher presence than the other two species. Furthermore, pups are 
typically found on sand beaches, while study sites are located in the 
rocky intertidal zone, meaning that there is typically a buffer between 
researchers and pups. Finally, the caution used by researchers in 
approaching sites generally precludes the possibility of behavior, such 
as stampeding, that could result in extended separation of mothers and 
dependent pups or trampling of pups. No research would occur where 
separation of mother and her nursing pup or crushing of pups can become 
a concern.
    Typically, even those reactions constituting Level B harassment 
would result at most in temporary, short-term disturbance. In any given 
study season, researchers will visit sites one to two times per year 
for a total of 4-6 hours per visit. Therefore, disturbance of pinnipeds 
resulting from the presence of researchers lasts only for short periods 
of time and is separated by significant amounts of time in which no 
disturbance occurs.
    Some of the pinniped species may use some of the sites during 
certain times of year to conduct pupping and/or breeding. However, some 
of these species prefer to use the offshore islands for these 
activities. At the sites where pups may be present, PISCO has shall 
implement certain mitigation measures, such as no intentional flushing 
if dependent pups are present, which will avoid mother/pup separation 
and trampling of pups.
    Of the three marine mammal species most likely to occur in the 
activity areas, none are listed under the ESA. Taking into account the 
mitigation measures that are planned, effects to marine mammals are 
generally expected to be restricted to short-term changes in behavior 
or temporary abandonment of haulout sites. Pinnipeds are not expected 
to permanently abandon any area that is surveyed by researchers, as is 
evidenced by continued presence of pinnipeds at the sites during annual 
monitoring counts. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely 
effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, 
and taking into consideration the implementation of the mitigation and 
monitoring measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from 
PISCO's rocky intertidal monitoring program will not adversely affect 
annual rates of recruitment or survival and therefore will have a 
negligible impact on the affected species or stocks.


[[Page 7324]]



 Table 1--Population Abundance Estimates, Total Level B Take, and Percentage of Population That May Be Taken for
                 the Potentially Affected Species During the Rocky Intertidal Monitoring Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Percentage of
                             Species                                Abundance *    Total Level B     stock or
                                                                                       take         population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal.....................................................     \1\ 30,968,             203         0.6-0.8
                                                                      \2\ 24,732
California sea lion.............................................         296,750             720             0.2
Northern elephant seal..........................................         179,000              40           <0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Abundance estimates are taken from the 2014 U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments (Carretta et al.,
  2014).
\1\ California stock abundance estimate;
\2\ Oregon/Washington stock abundance estimate from 1999--Most recent surveys.

Small Numbers Analysis

    Table 1 in this document presents the abundance of each species or 
stock, the authorized take estimates, the percentage of the affected 
populations or stocks that may be taken by harassment, and the species 
or stock trends. According to these estimates, PISCO would take less 
than 0.8% of each species or stock. Because these are maximum 
estimates, actual take numbers are likely to be lower, as some animals 
may select other haulout sites the day the researchers are present.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring 
measures, which are expected to reduce the number of marine mammals 
potentially affected by the action, NMFS finds that small numbers of 
marine mammals will be taken relative to the populations of the 
affected species or 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. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of 
affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact 
on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for 
subsistence purposes.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    None of the marine mammals for which incidental take is authorized 
are listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. Therefore, NMFS 
has determined that issuance of the IHA to PISCO under section 
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA will have no effect on species listed as 
threatened or endangered under the ESA.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    In 2012, NMFS prepared an EA analyzing the potential effects to the 
human environment from conducting rocky intertidal surveys along the 
California and Oregon coasts and issued a Finding of No Significant 
Impact (FONSI) on November 26, 2012 on the issuance of an IHA for 
PISCO's rocky intertidal surveys in accordance with section 6.01 of the 
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental Review Procedures for 
Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999). We 
have reviewed the application for a renewed IHA for ongoing monitoring 
activities for 2016-17 as well as results from the 2014-15 monitoring 
report. Based on that review, we have determined that the action is 
very similar to that considered in the previous IHA. In addition, no 
significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental 
concerns have been identified. Thus, we have determined that the 
preparation of a new or supplemental NEPA document is not necessary, 
and will, after review of public comments determine whether or not to 
reaffirm our 2012 FONSI. The 2012 NEPA documents are available for 
review at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm.

Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to PISCO 
for conducting the described activities related to rocky intertidal 
monitoring surveys along the Oregon and Washington coasts from February 
3, 2016 and end on February 2, 2017 provided the previously described 
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: February 3, 2016.
Perry Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-02802 Filed 2-10-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P