Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Seabird Monitoring and Research in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska, 2016, 34994-35000 [2016-12817]
Download as PDF
34994
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2016 / Notices
for adoption by NMFS in order to assess
the impacts to the human environment
of issuance of an IHA to SpaceX. Also
in compliance with NEPA and the CEQ
regulations, as well as NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6, NMFS has
reviewed the USAF’s EA, determined it
to be sufficient, and adopted that EA
and signed a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) on May 6, 2016.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There is one marine mammal species
(Guadalupe fur seal) listed under the
ESA with confirmed occurrence in the
area expected to be impacted by the
planned activities. The NMFS West
Coast Region Protected Resources
Division has determined that the NMFS
Permits and Conservation Division’s
authorization of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 First
Stage recovery activities are not likely to
adversely affect the Guadalupe fur seal.
Therefore, formal ESA section 7
consultation on this authorization is not
required.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to SpaceX
for the potential harassment of small
numbers of six marine mammal species
incidental to the Falcon 9 First Stage
recovery project in California and in the
Pacific Ocean offshore California,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation.
Dated: May 25, 2016.
Perry Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–12818 Filed 5–31–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XE503
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Seabird
Monitoring and Research in Glacier
Bay National Park, Alaska, 2016
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) regulations, we, the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
hereby give notification that NMFS has
issued an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to Glacier Bay
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:59 May 31, 2016
Jkt 238001
National Park (Glacier Bay NP), to take
marine mammals, by Level B
harassment, incidental to conducting
seabird monitoring and research
activities in Alaska, May through
September, 2016.
DATES: Effective May 16, 2016 through
September 30, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The public may obtain an
electronic copy of Glacier Bay NP’s
application, supporting documentation,
the authorization, and a list of the
references cited in this document by
visiting: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental.htm#applications. In
the case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed
here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Pauline, NMFS, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS (301) 427–
8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine
Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as
amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq.) directs the Secretary of Commerce
to allow, upon request, the incidental,
but not intentional, taking of small
numbers of marine mammals of a
species or population stock, by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified
activity (other than commercial fishing)
within a specified geographical region
if, after NMFS provides a notice of a
proposed authorization to the public for
review and comment: (1) NMFS makes
certain findings; and (2) the taking is
limited to harassment.
An Authorization shall be granted for
the incidental taking of small numbers
of marine mammals if NMFS finds that
the taking will have a negligible impact
on the species or stock(s), and will not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on
the availability of the species or stock(s)
for subsistence uses (where relevant).
The Authorization must also set forth
the permissible methods of taking; other
means of effecting the least practicable
adverse impact on the species or stock
and its habitat; and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such taking. 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.’’
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 January 12, 2016, NMFS received
an application from Glacier Bay NP
requesting that we issue an
Authorization for the take of marine
mammals, incidental to conducting
monitoring and research studies on
glaucus-winged gulls (Larus
glaucescens) within Glacier Bay
National Park and Preserve in Alaska.
NMFS determined the application
complete and adequate on February 25,
2016.
NMFS previously issued two
Authorizations to Glacier Bay NP for the
same activities in 2014 and 2015 (79 FR
56065, September 18, 2014 and 80 FR
28229, May 18, 2015).
Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct
ground-based and vessel-based surveys
to collect data on the number and
distribution of nesting gulls within five
study sites in Glacier Bay, AK. Glacier
Bay NP proposes to complete up to five
visits per study site, from May through
September, 2016.
The activities are within the vicinity
of pinniped haulout sites and the
following aspects of the proposed
activities are likely to result in the take
of marine mammals: Noise generated by
motorboat approaches and departures;
noise generated by researchers while
conducting ground surveys; and human
presence during the monitoring and
research activities. NMFS anticipates
that take by Level B harassment only, of
individuals of harbor seals (Phoca
vitulina) would result from the specified
activity. Although Steller sea lions
(Eumetopias jubatus) may be present in
the action area, Glacier Bay NP has
proposed to avoid any site used by
Steller sea lions, therefore, take is not
requested for this species.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Glacier Bay NP proposes to identify
the onset of gull nesting; conduct midseason surveys of adult gulls, and locate
and document gull nest sites within the
following study areas: Boulder, Lone,
and Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock.
Each of these study sites contains harbor
seal haulout sites and Glacier Bay NP
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2016 / Notices
proposes to visit each study site up to
five times during the research season.
Glacier Bay NP must conduct the gull
monitoring studies to meet the
requirements of a 2010 Record of
Decision for a Legislative Environmental
Impact Statement (NPS, 2010) which
states that Glacier Bay NP must initiate
a monitoring program for the gulls to
inform future native egg harvests by the
Hoonah Tlingit in Glacier Bay, AK.
Glacier Bay NP actively monitors harbor
seals at breeding and molting sites to
assess population trends over time (e.g.,
Mathews & Pendleton, 2006; Womble et
al., 2010). Glacier Bay NP also
coordinates pinniped monitoring
programs with NMFS’ National Marine
Mammal Laboratory and the Alaska
Department of Fish & Game and plans
to continue these collaborations and
sharing of monitoring data and
observations in the future.
Dates and Duration
The Authorization would be effective
from May 16, 2016 through September
30, 2016. Following is a brief summary
of the activities.
Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct a
maximum of three ground-based
surveys per each study site and a
maximum of two vessel-based surveys
per each study site. NMFS refers the
reader to the notice of proposed
Authorization (81 FR 15684, March 24,
2016) for detailed information on the
scope of the proposed activities.
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Specified Geographic Region
The proposed study sites would occur
in the vicinity of the following
locations: Boulder (58°33′18.08″ N.;
136°1′13.36″ W.), Lone (58°43′17.67″ N.;
136°17′41.32″ W.), and Flapjack
Islands,(58°35′10.19″ N.; 135°58′50.78″
W.) and Geikie Rock (58°41′39.75″ N.;
136°18′39.06″ W.) in Glacier Bay,
Alaska. Glacier Bay NP will also
conduct studies at Tlingit Point Islet
located at 58°45′16.86″ N.;
136°10′41.74″ W.; however, there are no
reported pinniped haulout sites at that
location.
Detailed Description of Activities
Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct:
(1) Ground-based surveys at a maximum
frequency of three visits per site; and (2)
vessel-based surveys at a maximum
frequency of two visits per site from the
period of May 16 through September 30,
2016.
Ground-Based Surveys: These surveys
involve two trained observers visiting
the largest gull colony on each island to:
(1) Obtain information on the numbers
of nests, their location, and contents
(i.e., eggs or chicks); (2) determine the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:59 May 31, 2016
Jkt 238001
onset of laying, distribution, abundance,
and predation of gull nests and eggs;
and (3) record the proximity of other
species relative to colony locations.
The observers would access each
island using a kayak, a 32.8 to 39.4-foot
(ft) (10 to 12 meter (m)) motorboat, or a
12 ft (4 m) inflatable rowing dinghy. The
landing craft’s transit speed would not
exceed 4 knots (4.6 miles per hour
(mph). Ground surveys generally last
from 30 minutes to up to two hours
depending on the size of the island and
the number of nesting gulls. Glacier Bay
NP will discontinue ground surveys
after they detect the first hatchling to
minimize disturbance to the gull
colonies.
Vessel-Based Surveys: These surveys
involve two trained observers observing
and counting the number of adult and
fledgling gulls from the deck of a
motorized vessel which would transit
around each island at a distance of
approximately 328 ft (100 m) to avoid
flushing the birds from the colonies.
Vessel-based surveys generally last from
30 minutes to up to two hours
depending on the size of the island and
the number of nesting gulls.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of
Glacier Bay NP’s application and
proposed Authorization in the Federal
Register (81 FR 15684, March 24, 2016).
During the 30-day comment period, we
received one comment letter from the
Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission) which recommended that
we issue the requested Authorization,
provided that Glacier Bay NP carries out
the required monitoring and mitigation
measures as described in the notice of
the proposed authorization (81 FR
15684, March 24, 2016) and the
application. We have included all
measures proposed in the notice of the
proposed authorization (81 FR 15684,
March 24, 2016) in the final
Authorization.
We also received a comment letter
from one private citizen who opposed
the authorization on the basis that
NMFS should not allow any
Authorizations for harassment. We
considered the commenter’s general
opposition to Glacier Bay NP’s activities
and to our issuance of an Authorization;
however, the Authorization, described
in detail in the Federal Register notice
of the proposed Authorization (81 FR
15684, March 24, 2016) includes
mitigation and monitoring measures to
effect the least practicable impact to
marine mammals and their habitat.
Further, it is our responsibility to
determine whether the activities will
have a negligible impact on the affected
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34995
species or stocks; will have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses, where relevant; and to
prescribe the means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact on the
affected species or stocks and their
habitat, as well as monitoring and
reporting requirements.
Regarding the commenter’s
opposition to authorizing harassment,
the MMPA allows U.S. citizens (which
includes Glacier Bay NP) to request take
of marine mammals incidental to
specified activities, and requires us to
authorize such taking if we can make
the necessary findings required by law
and if we set forth the appropriate
prescriptions. As explained throughout
the Federal Register notice (81 FR
15684, March 24, 2016) we made the
necessary preliminary findings under 16
U.S.C. 1361(a)(5)(D) to support issuance
of Authorization.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
The marine mammals most likely to
be harassed incidental to conducting
seabird monitoring and research are
Pacific harbor seals. We do not
anticipate harassment of Steller sea
lions due to the researchers avoiding
any site with Steller sea lions present.
NMFS refers the public to the Glacier
Bay NP’s application and the 2015
NMFS Marine Mammal Stock
Assessment Report available online at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/
species.htm for further information on
the biology and local distribution of
these species.
Other Marine Mammals in the
Proposed Action Area
Northern sea otters (Enhydra lutris
kenyoni) and polar bears (Ursis
maritimus) listed as threatened under
the Endangered Species Act could occur
in the proposed area. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service manages these species
and we do not consider them further in
this notice of issuance of an
Authorization.
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activities on Marine Mammals
Acoustic and visual stimuli generated
by: (1) Noise generated by kayak,
motorboat, or dinghy approaches and
departures; (2) human presence during
seabird monitoring and research
activities, have the potential to cause
Pacific harbor seals hauled out on
Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands,
and Geikie Rock to flush into the
surrounding water or to cause a shortterm behavioral disturbance for marine
mammals.
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
34996
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2016 / Notices
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
We expect that acoustic and visual
stimuli resulting from the proposed
activities have the potential to harass
marine mammals. We also expect that
these disturbances would be temporary
and result, at worst, in a temporary
modification in behavior and/or lowlevel physiological effects (Level B
harassment) of harbor seals.
We included a summary and
discussion of the ways that the types of
stressors associated with Glacier Bay
NP’s specified activities (i.e., visual and
acoustic disturbance) have the potential
to impact marine mammals in the notice
of proposed authorization (81 FR 15684,
March 24, 2016).
Vessel Strike: The potential for
striking marine mammals is a concern
with vessel traffic. However, it is highly
unlikely that the use of small, slowmoving kayaks or boats to access the
research areas would result in injury,
serious injury, or mortality to any
marine mammal. Typically, the reasons
for vessel strikes are fast transit speeds,
lack of maneuverability, or not seeing
the animal because the boat is so large.
Glacier Bay NP’s researchers will access
areas at slow transit speeds in easily
maneuverable kayaks or small boats
negating any chance of an accidental
strike.
Rookeries: No monitoring or research
activities would occur on pinniped
rookeries and breeding animals are
concentrated in areas where researchers
would not visit. Therefore, we do not
expect mother and pup separation or
crushing of pups during flushing.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat
We considered these impacts in detail
in the notice for the proposed
authorization (81 FR 15684, March 24,
2016). Briefly, we do not anticipate that
the proposed research would result in
any temporary or permanent effects on
the habitats used by the marine
mammals in the proposed area,
including the food sources they use (i.e.,
fish and invertebrates). While NMFS
anticipates that the specified activity
may result in marine mammals avoiding
certain areas due to motorboat
operations or human presence, this
impact to habitat is temporary and
reversible. NMFS considered these as
behavioral modification. The main
impact associated with the proposed
activity will be temporarily elevated
noise levels and the associated direct
effects on marine mammals, previously
discussed in this notice. Based on the
preceding discussion, NMFS does not
anticipate that the proposed activity
would have any habitat-related effects
that could cause significant or long-term
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:59 May 31, 2016
Jkt 238001
consequences for individual marine
mammals or their populations.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization 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
(where relevant). Applications for
incidental take authorizations must
include the availability and feasibility
(economic and technological) of
equipment, methods, and manner of
conducting the activity or other means
of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on the affected species or stock
and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
The Glacier Bay NP has reviewed the
following source documents and has
incorporated a suite of proposed
mitigation measures into their project
description.
(1) Recommended best practices in
Womble et al. (2013); Richardson et al.
(1995); Pierson et al. (1998); and Weir
and Dolman, (2007).
(2) To reduce the potential for
disturbance from acoustic and visual
stimuli associated with the activities
Glacier Bay NP and/or its designees has
proposed to implement the following
mitigation measures for marine
mammals:
• Perform pre-survey monitoring
before deciding to access a study site;
• Avoid accessing a site based on a
pre-determined threshold number of
animals present; sites used by pinnipeds
for pupping; or sites used by Steller sea
lions;
• Perform controlled and slow ingress
to the study site to prevent a stampede
and select a pathway of approach to
minimize the number of marine
mammals harassed;
• Monitor for offshore predators at
study sites. Avoid approaching the
study site if killer whales (Orcinus orca)
are present. If Glacier Bay NP and/or its
designees see predators in the area, they
must not disturb the pinnipeds until the
area is free of predators.
• Maintain a quiet research
atmosphere in the visual presence of
pinnipeds.
Pre-Survey Monitoring: Prior to
deciding to land onshore to conduct the
study, the researchers would use highpowered image stabilizing binoculars
from the watercraft to document the
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
number, species, and location of hauled
out marine mammals at each island. The
vessels would maintain a distance of
328 to 1,640 ft (100 to 500 m) from the
shoreline to allow the researchers to
conduct pre-survey monitoring. During
every visit, the researchers will examine
each study site closely using high
powered image stabilizing binoculars
before approaching at distances of
greater than 500 m (1,640 ft) to
determine and document the number,
species, and location of hauled out
marine mammals.
Site Avoidance: Researchers would
decide whether or not to approach the
island based on the species present,
number of individuals, and the presence
of pups. If there are high numbers (more
than 25) harbor seals hauled out (with
or without young pups present), any
time pups are present, or any time that
Steller sea lions are present, the
researchers will not approach the island
and will not conduct gull monitoring
research.
Controlled Landings: The researchers
would determine whether to approach
the island based on the number and
type of animals present. If the island has
25 or fewer individuals without pups,
the researchers would approach the
island by motorboat at a speed of
approximately 2 to 3 knots (2.3 to 3.4
mph). This would provide enough time
for any marine mammals present to
slowly enter the water without panic or
stampede. The researchers would also
select a pathway of approach farthest
from the hauled out harbor seals to
minimize disturbance.
Minimize Predator Interactions: If the
researchers visually observe marine
predators (i.e. killer whales) present in
the vicinity of hauled out marine
mammals, the researchers would not
approach the study site.
Noise Reduction Protocols: While
onshore at study sites, the researchers
would remain vigilant for hauled out
marine mammals. If marine mammals
are present, the researchers would move
slowly and use quiet voices to minimize
disturbance to the animals present.
Mitigation Conclusions
NMFS has carefully evaluated Glacier
Bay NP’s proposed mitigation measures
in the context of ensuring that we
prescribe the means of effecting 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:
• The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2016 / Notices
expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals;
• The proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and
• The practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed
by NMFS 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 here:
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 numbers of
marine mammals (total number or
number at biologically important time
or location) exposed to motorboat
operations or visual presence that we
expect to result in the take of marine
mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing harassment takes
only).
3. A reduction in the number of times
(total number or number at biologically
important time or location) individuals
exposed to motorboat operations or
visual presence that we expect to result
in the take of marine mammals (this
goal may contribute to 1, above, or to
reducing harassment takes only).
4. A reduction in the intensity of
exposures (either total number or
number at biologically important time
or location) to motorboat operations or
visual presence that we expect to result
in the take of marine mammals (this
goal may contribute to 1 above, or to
reducing the severity of harassment
takes only).
5. Avoidance or minimization of
adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying special attention to the
food base, activities that block or limit
passage to or from biologically
important areas, permanent destruction
of habitat, or temporary destruction/
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 the evaluation of Glacier
Bay NP’s proposed measures, NMFS has
determined that the proposed 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:59 May 31, 2016
Jkt 238001
Monitoring
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 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 we
expect to be present in the proposed
action area. Glacier Bay NP submitted a
marine mammal monitoring plan in
section 13 of their Authorization
application. NMFS or the Glacier Bay
NP has not modified or supplemented
the plan based on comments or new
information received from the public
during the public comment period.
Monitoring measures prescribed by
NMFS should accomplish one or more
of the following general goals:
1. An increase in our understanding
of the likely occurrence of marine
mammal species in the vicinity of the
action, (i.e., presence, abundance,
distribution, and/or density of species).
2. An increase in our understanding
of the nature, scope, or context of the
likely exposure of marine mammal
species to any of the potential stressor(s)
associated with the action (e.g., sound
or visual stimuli), through better
understanding of one or more of the
following: The action itself and its
environment (e.g., sound source
characterization, propagation, and
ambient noise levels); the affected
species (e.g., life history or dive
pattern); the likely co-occurrence of
marine mammal species with the action
(in whole or part) associated with
specific adverse effects; and/or the
likely biological or behavioral context of
exposure to the stressor for the marine
mammal (e.g., age class of exposed
animals or known pupping, calving or
feeding areas).
3. An increase in our understanding
of how individual marine mammals
respond (behaviorally or
physiologically) to the specific stressors
associated with the action (in specific
contexts, where possible, e.g., at what
distance or received level).
4. An increase in our understanding
of how anticipated individual
responses, to individual stressors or
anticipated combinations of stressors,
may impact either: The long-term fitness
and survival of an individual; or the
population, species, or stock (e.g.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34997
through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival).
5. An increase in our understanding
of how the activity affects marine
mammal habitat, such as through effects
on prey sources or acoustic habitat (e.g.,
through characterization of longer-term
contributions of multiple sound sources
to rising ambient noise levels and
assessment of the potential chronic
effects on marine mammals).
6. An increase in understanding of the
impacts of the activity on marine
mammals in combination with the
impacts of other anthropogenic
activities or natural factors occurring in
the region.
7. An increase in our understanding
of the effectiveness of mitigation and
monitoring measures.
8. An increase in the probability of
detecting marine mammals (through
improved technology or methodology),
both specifically within the safety zone
(thus allowing for more effective
implementation of the mitigation) and
in general, to better achieve the above
goals.
As part of its Authorization
application, Glacier Bay NP proposes to
sponsor marine mammal monitoring
during the project, in order to
implement the mitigation measures that
require real-time monitoring, and to
satisfy the monitoring requirements of
the MMPA.
The Glacier Bay NP researchers will
monitor the area for pinnipeds during
all research activities. Monitoring
activities will consist of conducting and
recording observations on pinnipeds
within the vicinity of the proposed
research areas. The monitoring notes
would provide dates and location of the
researcher’s activities and the number
and type of species present. The
researchers would document the
behavioral state of animals present, and
any apparent disturbance reactions or
lack thereof.
Glacier Bay NP can add to the
knowledge of pinnipeds in the proposed
action area 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 results from the IHA
issued on May 18, 2015 IHA indicated
that the three survey sites were accessed
a total of 15 times with 57 takes of
harbor seals. Glacier Bay NP had been
authorized to take 500 harbor seals.
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
34998
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2016 / Notices
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 proposed land survey, Glacier Bay
NP would suspend research and
monitoring 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.
Encouraging and Coordinating
Research
Glacier Bay NP actively monitors
harbor seals at breeding and molting
haul out locations to assess trends over
time. This monitoring program involves
collaborations with biologists from the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
and the National Marine Mammal
Laboratory. Glacier Bay NP will
continue these collaborations and
encourage continued or renewed
monitoring of marine mammal species.
Additionally, they would report vesselbased counts of marine mammals,
branded, or injured animals, and all
observed disturbances to the
appropriate state and federal agencies.
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Reporting
Glacier Bay NP will submit a draft
monitoring report to NMFS no later than
90 days after the expiration of the
Incidental Harassment Authorization.
The report will describe the operations
conducted and sightings of marine
mammals near the proposed project.
The report will provide full
documentation of methods, results, and
interpretation pertaining to all
monitoring. The report will provide:
1. A summary and table of the dates,
times, and weather during all research
activities.
2. Species, number, location, and
behavior of any marine mammals
observed throughout all monitoring
activities. Report the numbers of
disturbances, by species and age,
according to a three-point scale of
intensity including: (1) Head orientation
in response to disturbance, which may
include turning head towards the
disturbance, craning head and neck
while holding the body rigid in a ushaped position, or changing from a
lying to a sitting position and/or slight
movement of less than 1 meter; ‘‘alert’’;
(2) Movements in response to or away
from disturbance, typically over short
distances (1–3 meters) and including
dramatic changes in direction or speed
of locomotion for animals already in
motion; ‘‘movement’’; and (3) All
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:59 May 31, 2016
Jkt 238001
flushes to the water as well as lengthier
retreats (>3 meters); ‘‘flight’’.
3. An estimate of the number (by
species) of marine mammals exposed to
acoustic or visual stimuli associated
with the research activities.
4. A description of the
implementation and effectiveness of the
monitoring and mitigation measures of
the Authorization and full
documentation of methods, results, and
interpretation pertaining to all
monitoring.
In the unanticipated event that the
specified activity clearly causes the take
of a marine mammal in a manner
prohibited by the authorization, such as
an injury (Level A harassment), serious
injury, or mortality (e.g., vessel-strike,
stampede, etc.), Glacier Bay NP shall
immediately cease the specified
activities and immediately report the
incident to the Division Chief, Permits
and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–
427–8401 and the Alaska Regional
Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586–
7248. The report must include the
following information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
• Description and location of the
incident (including water depth, if
applicable);
• Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, and visibility);
• Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
• Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the
animal(s) (if equipment is available).
Glacier Bay NP shall not resume its
activities until NMFS is able to review
the circumstances of the prohibited
take. We will work with Glacier Bay to
determine what is necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. Glacier Bay NP may not
resume their activities until notified by
us via letter, email, or telephone.
In the event that Glacier Bay NP
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead researcher
determines that the cause of the injury
or death is unknown and the death is
relatively recent (i.e., in less than a
moderate state of decomposition as we
describe in the next paragraph), Glacier
Bay NP will immediately report the
incident to the Division Chief, Permits
and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–
427–8401 and the Alaska Regional
Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586–
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7248. The report must include the same
information identified in the paragraph
above this section. Activities may
continue while we review the
circumstances of the incident. We will
work with Glacier Bay NP to determine
whether modifications in the activities
are appropriate.
In the event that Glacier Bay NP
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead visual observer
determines that the injury or death is
not associated with or related to the
authorized activities (e.g., previously
wounded animal, carcass with moderate
to advanced decomposition, or
scavenger damage), Glacier Bay will
report the incident to the Division Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at
301–427–8401 and the Alaska Regional
Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586–
7248 within 24 hours of the discovery.
Glacier Bay NP researchers will provide
photographs or video footage (if
available) or other documentation of the
stranded animal sighting to us. Glacier
Bay NP can continue their research
activities.
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. NMFS
expects that the proposed mitigation
and monitoring measures would
minimize the possibility of injurious or
lethal takes. NMFS considers the
potential for take by injury, serious
injury, or mortality as remote. NMFS
expects that the presence of Glacier Bay
NP personnel could disturb animals
hauled out and that the animals 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
1 m (3.3 ft) in response to the surveyors’
presence or if the animal was already
moving and changed direction and/or
speed, or if the animal flushed into the
water. NMFS does not consider animals
that became alert without such
movements as harassed.
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
34999
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2016 / Notices
Based on pinniped survey counts
conducted by Glacier Bay NP (e.g.,
Mathews & Pendleton, 2006; Womble et
al., 2010), NMFS estimates that the
research activities could potentially
affect by Level B behavioral harassment
500 harbor seals over the course of the
Authorization (Table 1). This estimate
represents 6.9 percent of the Glacier
Bay/Icy Strait stock of harbor seals and
accounts for a maximum disturbance of
25 harbor seals each per visit at Boulder,
Lone, and Flapjack Islands, and Geikie
Rock, Alaska over a maximum level of
five visits.
TABLE 1—ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO ACOUSTIC AND VISUAL STIMULI
DURING THE PROPOSED RESEARCH ACTIVITIES ON BOULDER, LONE, AND FLAPJACK ISLANDS, AND GEIKIE ROCK,
ALASKA, MAY THROUGH SEPTEMBER, 2016
Est. number of
individuals
exposed
Species
Proposed take
authorization
500
0
500
0
Harbor seal ...................................................................................................
Steller sea lion ..............................................................................................
Percent of
species or
stock 1
6.9
0
Population
trend 2
Declining.
Increasing.
1 Table
2 The
1 in this notice lists the stock species abundance estimates that NMFS used to calculate the percentage of species/stock.
population trend information is from Muto and Angliss, 2015.
Harbor seals tend to haul out in small
numbers (on average, less than 50
animals) at most sites with the
exception of Flapjack Island (Womble,
Pers. Comm.). Animals on Flapjack
Boulder Islands generally haul out on
the south side of the Islands and are not
located near the research sites located
on the northern side of the Islands.
Aerial survey maximum counts show
that harbor seals sometimes haul out in
large numbers at all four locations (see
Table 2 in Glacier Bays NP’s
application), and sometimes individuals
and mother/pup pairs occupy different
terrestrial locations than the main
haulout (J. Womble, personal
observation).
Considering the conservation status
for the Western stock of the Steller sea
lion, the Glacier Bay NP researchers
would not conduct ground-based or
vessel-based surveys if they observe
Steller sea lions before accessing
Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands,
and Geikie Rock. Thus, NMFS expects
no takes to occur for this species during
the proposed activities.
NMFS does not propose to authorize
any injury, serious injury, or mortality.
NMFS expect all potential takes to fall
under the category of Level B
harassment only.
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Analysis and Determinations
Negligible Impact
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.’’ A negligible
impact finding is based on the lack of
likely adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of Level B harassment takes alone is not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:59 May 31, 2016
Jkt 238001
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, we
consider other factors, such as the likely
nature of any responses (e.g., intensity,
duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or
location, migration), as well as the
number and nature of estimated Level A
harassment takes, the number of
estimated mortalities, and effects on
habitat.
To avoid repetition, the discussion
below applies to all four species
discussed in this notice. In making a
negligible impact determination, we
consider:
• The number of anticipated injuries,
serious injuries, or mortalities;
• The number, nature, and intensity,
and duration of Level B harassment;
• The context in which the takes
occur (e.g., impacts to areas of
significance, impacts to local
populations, and cumulative impacts
when taking into account successive/
contemporaneous actions when added
to baseline data);
• The status of stock or species of
marine mammals (i.e., depleted, not
depleted, decreasing, increasing, stable,
impact relative to the size of the
population);
• Impacts on habitat affecting rates of
recruitment/survival; and
The effectiveness of monitoring and
mitigation measures to reduce the
number or severity of incidental take.
For reasons stated previously in this
document and based on the following
factors, NMFS does not expect Glacier
Bay NP’s specified activities to cause
long-term behavioral disturbance,
abandonment of the haul-out area,
injury, serious injury, or mortality:
1. The takes from Level B harassment
would be due to potential behavioral
disturbance. The effects of the research
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
activities would be limited to short-term
startle responses and localized
behavioral changes due to the short and
sporadic duration of the research
activities. Minor and brief responses,
such as short-duration startle or alert
reactions, are not likely to constitute
disruption of behavioral patterns, such
as migration, nursing, breeding, feeding,
or sheltering.
2. The availability of alternate areas
for pinnipeds to avoid the resultant
acoustic and visual disturbances from
the research operations. Anecdotal
observations and results from previous
monitoring reports also show that the
pinnipeds returned to the various sites
and did not permanently abandon haulout sites after Glacier Bay NP conducted
their research activities.
3. There is no potential for large-scale
movements leading to injury, serious
injury, or mortality because the
researchers will delay ingress into the
landing areas only after the pinnipeds
have slowly entered the water.
4. Glacier Bay NP would limit access
to Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands,
and Geikie Rock when there are high
numbers (more than 25) harbor seals
hauled out (with or without young pups
present), any time pups are present, or
any time that Steller sea lions are
present, the researchers will not
approach the island and will not
conduct gull monitoring research.
We do not anticipate that any injuries,
serious injuries, or mortalities would
occur as a result of Glacier Bay NP’s
proposed activities and we do not
propose to authorize injury, serious
injury, or mortality. These species may
exhibit behavioral modifications,
including temporarily vacating the area
during the proposed seabird and
pinniped research activities to avoid the
resultant acoustic and visual
disturbances. Further, these proposed
activities would not take place in areas
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
35000
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2016 / Notices
of significance for marine mammal
feeding, resting, breeding, or calving
and would not adversely impact marine
mammal habitat. Due to the nature,
degree, and context of the behavioral
harassment anticipated, we do not
expect the activities to impact annual
rates of recruitment or survival.
NMFS does not expect pinnipeds to
permanently abandon any area surveyed
by researchers, as is evidenced by
continued presence of pinnipeds at the
sites during annual seabird monitoring.
In summary, NMFS anticipates that
impacts to hauled-out harbor seals
during Glacier Bay NP’s research
activities would be behavioral
harassment of limited duration (i.e., up
to two hours per visit) and limited
intensity (i.e., temporary flushing at
most). NMFS does not expect
stampeding, and therefore injury or
mortality, to occur (see ‘‘Mitigation’’ for
more details).
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
proposed mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS finds that the total
marine mammal take from Glacier Bay
NP’s proposed research activities will
not adversely affect annual rates of
recruitment or survival and therefore
will have a negligible impact on the
affected species or stocks
Small Numbers
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
As mentioned previously, NMFS
estimates that Glacier Bay NP’s
activities could potentially affect, by
Level B harassment only, one species of
marine mammal under our jurisdiction.
For harbor seals, this estimate is small
(6.9 percent) relative to the population
size.
Based on the analysis contained in
this notice 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 Glacier Bay NP’s
proposed activities would take small
numbers of marine mammals relative to
the populations of the affected species
or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action. Glacier Bay National Park
prohibits subsistence harvest of harbor
seals within the Park (Catton, 1995).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:59 May 31, 2016
Jkt 238001
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
NMFS does not expect that Glacier
Bay NP’s proposed research activities
(which includes mitigation measures to
avoid harassment of Steller sea lions)
would affect any species listed under
the ESA. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that a section 7 consultation
under the ESA is not required.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
In 2014, NMFS prepared an
Environmental Assessment (EA)
analyzing the potential effects to the
human environment from NMFS’
issuance of an Authorization to Glacier
Bay NP for their seabird research
activities.
In September 2014, NMFS issued a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) on the issuance of an
Authorization for Glacier Bay NP’s
research activities 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). Glacier Bay NP’s proposed
activities and impacts for 2016 are
within the scope of the 2014 EA and
FONSI. NMFS provided relevant
environmental information to the public
through a previous notice for the
proposed Authorization (79 FR 32226,
June 4, 2014) and considered public
comments received in response prior to
finalizing the 2014 EA and deciding
whether or not to issue a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI). NMFS has
performed an environmental review of
the 2014 EA and other relevant
documents under NEPA and CEQ
guidelines in determining that there are
no new direct, indirect, or cumulative
impacts to the human and natural
environment associated with the
Authorization requiring evaluation in a
supplemental EA and NMFS.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
we have issued an Incidental
Harassment Authorization to Glacier
Bay National Park for conducting
seabird research from May 16, 2016
through September 30, 2016, provided
they incorporate the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements.
Dated: May 26, 2016.
Perry Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–12817 Filed 5–31–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Proposed Information Collection;
Comment Request; Alaska Saltwater
Sport Fishing Economic Survey
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Commerce, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork and
respondent burden, invites the general
public and other Federal agencies to
take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before August 1, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental
Paperwork Clearance Officer,
Department of Commerce, Room 6616,
14th and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230 (or via the
Internet at JJessup@doc.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument and instructions should be
directed to Dr. Dan Lew (Phone: (530)
554–1842; Email: Dan.Lew@noaa.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Abstract
This request is for a reinstatement,
with changes, of a previously approved
data collect (OMB Control Number
0648–0639).
The National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) previously collected survey
data in 2007 and 2012 for conducting
economic analyses of marine sport
fishing in Alaska. These surveys were
necessary to understand the factors that
affect the economic value of marine
recreational fishing trips and improve
estimates of fishing trip values that can
aid fishery managers evaluate
management options pertaining to sport
fisheries. The proposed survey is an
update of the previously conducted
surveys and is needed to improve
estimates of fishing trip values
potentially affected by recent changes in
federal recreational fisheries off Alaska,
most notably the Halibut Catch Sharing
Plan (76 FR 44156) which went into
effect in 2014 for the Pacific halibut
fishery. Several questions in the survey
have been updated to better reflect these
recent fishery management changes.
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34994-35000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12817]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XE503
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Seabird Monitoring and Research in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska,
2016
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 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
regulations, we, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), hereby
give notification that NMFS has issued an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to Glacier Bay National Park (Glacier Bay NP), to
take marine mammals, by Level B harassment, incidental to conducting
seabird monitoring and research activities in Alaska, May through
September, 2016.
DATES: Effective May 16, 2016 through September 30, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The public may obtain an electronic copy of Glacier Bay NP's
application, supporting documentation, the authorization, and a list of
the references cited in this document by visiting: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications. In the case
of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed
here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pauline, NMFS, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) directs the Secretary of
Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine mammals of a species or population
stock, by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if, after
NMFS provides a notice of a proposed authorization to the public for
review and comment: (1) NMFS makes certain findings; and (2) the taking
is limited to harassment.
An Authorization shall be granted for the incidental taking of
small numbers of marine mammals if NMFS finds that the taking will have
a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), and will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant). The Authorization must
also set forth the permissible methods of taking; other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the species or stock
and its habitat; and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of such taking. 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.''
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 January 12, 2016, NMFS received an application from Glacier Bay
NP requesting that we issue an Authorization for the take of marine
mammals, incidental to conducting monitoring and research studies on
glaucus-winged gulls (Larus glaucescens) within Glacier Bay National
Park and Preserve in Alaska. NMFS determined the application complete
and adequate on February 25, 2016.
NMFS previously issued two Authorizations to Glacier Bay NP for the
same activities in 2014 and 2015 (79 FR 56065, September 18, 2014 and
80 FR 28229, May 18, 2015).
Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct ground-based and vessel-based
surveys to collect data on the number and distribution of nesting gulls
within five study sites in Glacier Bay, AK. Glacier Bay NP proposes to
complete up to five visits per study site, from May through September,
2016.
The activities are within the vicinity of pinniped haulout sites
and the following aspects of the proposed activities are likely to
result in the take of marine mammals: Noise generated by motorboat
approaches and departures; noise generated by researchers while
conducting ground surveys; and human presence during the monitoring and
research activities. NMFS anticipates that take by Level B harassment
only, of individuals of harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) would result from
the specified activity. Although Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus)
may be present in the action area, Glacier Bay NP has proposed to avoid
any site used by Steller sea lions, therefore, take is not requested
for this species.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Glacier Bay NP proposes to identify the onset of gull nesting;
conduct mid-season surveys of adult gulls, and locate and document gull
nest sites within the following study areas: Boulder, Lone, and
Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock. Each of these study sites contains
harbor seal haulout sites and Glacier Bay NP
[[Page 34995]]
proposes to visit each study site up to five times during the research
season.
Glacier Bay NP must conduct the gull monitoring studies to meet the
requirements of a 2010 Record of Decision for a Legislative
Environmental Impact Statement (NPS, 2010) which states that Glacier
Bay NP must initiate a monitoring program for the gulls to inform
future native egg harvests by the Hoonah Tlingit in Glacier Bay, AK.
Glacier Bay NP actively monitors harbor seals at breeding and molting
sites to assess population trends over time (e.g., Mathews & Pendleton,
2006; Womble et al., 2010). Glacier Bay NP also coordinates pinniped
monitoring programs with NMFS' National Marine Mammal Laboratory and
the Alaska Department of Fish & Game and plans to continue these
collaborations and sharing of monitoring data and observations in the
future.
Dates and Duration
The Authorization would be effective from May 16, 2016 through
September 30, 2016. Following is a brief summary of the activities.
Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct a maximum of three ground-based
surveys per each study site and a maximum of two vessel-based surveys
per each study site. NMFS refers the reader to the notice of proposed
Authorization (81 FR 15684, March 24, 2016) for detailed information on
the scope of the proposed activities.
Specified Geographic Region
The proposed study sites would occur in the vicinity of the
following locations: Boulder (58[deg]33'18.08'' N.; 136[deg]1'13.36''
W.), Lone (58[deg]43'17.67'' N.; 136[deg]17'41.32'' W.), and Flapjack
Islands,(58[deg]35'10.19'' N.; 135[deg]58'50.78'' W.) and Geikie Rock
(58[deg]41'39.75'' N.; 136[deg]18'39.06'' W.) in Glacier Bay, Alaska.
Glacier Bay NP will also conduct studies at Tlingit Point Islet located
at 58[deg]45'16.86'' N.; 136[deg]10'41.74'' W.; however, there are no
reported pinniped haulout sites at that location.
Detailed Description of Activities
Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct: (1) Ground-based surveys at a
maximum frequency of three visits per site; and (2) vessel-based
surveys at a maximum frequency of two visits per site from the period
of May 16 through September 30, 2016.
Ground-Based Surveys: These surveys involve two trained observers
visiting the largest gull colony on each island to: (1) Obtain
information on the numbers of nests, their location, and contents
(i.e., eggs or chicks); (2) determine the onset of laying,
distribution, abundance, and predation of gull nests and eggs; and (3)
record the proximity of other species relative to colony locations.
The observers would access each island using a kayak, a 32.8 to
39.4-foot (ft) (10 to 12 meter (m)) motorboat, or a 12 ft (4 m)
inflatable rowing dinghy. The landing craft's transit speed would not
exceed 4 knots (4.6 miles per hour (mph). Ground surveys generally last
from 30 minutes to up to two hours depending on the size of the island
and the number of nesting gulls. Glacier Bay NP will discontinue ground
surveys after they detect the first hatchling to minimize disturbance
to the gull colonies.
Vessel-Based Surveys: These surveys involve two trained observers
observing and counting the number of adult and fledgling gulls from the
deck of a motorized vessel which would transit around each island at a
distance of approximately 328 ft (100 m) to avoid flushing the birds
from the colonies. Vessel-based surveys generally last from 30 minutes
to up to two hours depending on the size of the island and the number
of nesting gulls.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of Glacier Bay NP's application
and proposed Authorization in the Federal Register (81 FR 15684, March
24, 2016). During the 30-day comment period, we received one comment
letter from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) which recommended
that we issue the requested Authorization, provided that Glacier Bay NP
carries out the required monitoring and mitigation measures as
described in the notice of the proposed authorization (81 FR 15684,
March 24, 2016) and the application. We have included all measures
proposed in the notice of the proposed authorization (81 FR 15684,
March 24, 2016) in the final Authorization.
We also received a comment letter from one private citizen who
opposed the authorization on the basis that NMFS should not allow any
Authorizations for harassment. We considered the commenter's general
opposition to Glacier Bay NP's activities and to our issuance of an
Authorization; however, the Authorization, described in detail in the
Federal Register notice of the proposed Authorization (81 FR 15684,
March 24, 2016) includes mitigation and monitoring measures to effect
the least practicable impact to marine mammals and their habitat.
Further, it is our responsibility to determine whether the activities
will have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks; will
have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species
or stock(s) for subsistence uses, where relevant; and to prescribe the
means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the affected
species or stocks and their habitat, as well as monitoring and
reporting requirements.
Regarding the commenter's opposition to authorizing harassment, the
MMPA allows U.S. citizens (which includes Glacier Bay NP) to request
take of marine mammals incidental to specified activities, and requires
us to authorize such taking if we can make the necessary findings
required by law and if we set forth the appropriate prescriptions. As
explained throughout the Federal Register notice (81 FR 15684, March
24, 2016) we made the necessary preliminary findings under 16 U.S.C.
1361(a)(5)(D) to support issuance of Authorization.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
The marine mammals most likely to be harassed incidental to
conducting seabird monitoring and research are Pacific harbor seals. We
do not anticipate harassment of Steller sea lions due to the
researchers avoiding any site with Steller sea lions present.
NMFS refers the public to the Glacier Bay NP's application and the
2015 NMFS Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report available online at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm for further information on
the biology and local distribution of these species.
Other Marine Mammals in the Proposed Action Area
Northern sea otters (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) and polar bears (Ursis
maritimus) listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act could
occur in the proposed area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages
these species and we do not consider them further in this notice of
issuance of an Authorization.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activities on Marine Mammals
Acoustic and visual stimuli generated by: (1) Noise generated by
kayak, motorboat, or dinghy approaches and departures; (2) human
presence during seabird monitoring and research activities, have the
potential to cause Pacific harbor seals hauled out on Boulder, Lone,
and Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock to flush into the surrounding
water or to cause a short-term behavioral disturbance for marine
mammals.
[[Page 34996]]
We expect that acoustic and visual stimuli resulting from the
proposed activities have the potential to harass marine mammals. We
also expect that these disturbances would be temporary and result, at
worst, in a temporary modification in behavior and/or low-level
physiological effects (Level B harassment) of harbor seals.
We included a summary and discussion of the ways that the types of
stressors associated with Glacier Bay NP's specified activities (i.e.,
visual and acoustic disturbance) have the potential to impact marine
mammals in the notice of proposed authorization (81 FR 15684, March 24,
2016).
Vessel Strike: The potential for striking marine mammals is a
concern with vessel traffic. However, it is highly unlikely that the
use of small, slow-moving kayaks or boats to access the research areas
would result in injury, serious injury, or mortality to any marine
mammal. Typically, the reasons for vessel strikes are fast transit
speeds, lack of maneuverability, or not seeing the animal because the
boat is so large. Glacier Bay NP's researchers will access areas at
slow transit speeds in easily maneuverable kayaks or small boats
negating any chance of an accidental strike.
Rookeries: No monitoring or research activities would occur on
pinniped rookeries and breeding animals are concentrated in areas where
researchers would not visit. Therefore, we do not expect mother and pup
separation or crushing of pups during flushing.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
We considered these impacts in detail in the notice for the
proposed authorization (81 FR 15684, March 24, 2016). Briefly, we do
not anticipate that the proposed research would result in any temporary
or permanent effects on the habitats used by the marine mammals in the
proposed area, including the food sources they use (i.e., fish and
invertebrates). While NMFS anticipates that the specified activity may
result in marine mammals avoiding certain areas due to motorboat
operations or human presence, this impact to habitat is temporary and
reversible. NMFS considered these as behavioral modification. The main
impact associated with the proposed activity will be temporarily
elevated noise levels and the associated direct effects on marine
mammals, previously discussed in this notice. Based on the preceding
discussion, NMFS does not anticipate that the proposed activity would
have any habitat-related effects that could cause significant or long-
term consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization 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 (where relevant).
Applications for incidental take authorizations must include the
availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment,
methods, and manner of conducting the activity or other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species
or stock and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).
The Glacier Bay NP has reviewed the following source documents and
has incorporated a suite of proposed mitigation measures into their
project description.
(1) Recommended best practices in Womble et al. (2013); Richardson
et al. (1995); Pierson et al. (1998); and Weir and Dolman, (2007).
(2) To reduce the potential for disturbance from acoustic and
visual stimuli associated with the activities Glacier Bay NP and/or its
designees has proposed to implement the following mitigation measures
for marine mammals:
Perform pre-survey monitoring before deciding to access a
study site;
Avoid accessing a site based on a pre-determined threshold
number of animals present; sites used by pinnipeds for pupping; or
sites used by Steller sea lions;
Perform controlled and slow ingress to the study site to
prevent a stampede and select a pathway of approach to minimize the
number of marine mammals harassed;
Monitor for offshore predators at study sites. Avoid
approaching the study site if killer whales (Orcinus orca) are present.
If Glacier Bay NP and/or its designees see predators in the area, they
must not disturb the pinnipeds until the area is free of predators.
Maintain a quiet research atmosphere in the visual
presence of pinnipeds.
Pre-Survey Monitoring: Prior to deciding to land onshore to conduct
the study, the researchers would use high-powered image stabilizing
binoculars from the watercraft to document the number, species, and
location of hauled out marine mammals at each island. The vessels would
maintain a distance of 328 to 1,640 ft (100 to 500 m) from the
shoreline to allow the researchers to conduct pre-survey monitoring.
During every visit, the researchers will examine each study site
closely using high powered image stabilizing binoculars before
approaching at distances of greater than 500 m (1,640 ft) to determine
and document the number, species, and location of hauled out marine
mammals.
Site Avoidance: Researchers would decide whether or not to approach
the island based on the species present, number of individuals, and the
presence of pups. If there are high numbers (more than 25) harbor seals
hauled out (with or without young pups present), any time pups are
present, or any time that Steller sea lions are present, the
researchers will not approach the island and will not conduct gull
monitoring research.
Controlled Landings: The researchers would determine whether to
approach the island based on the number and type of animals present. If
the island has 25 or fewer individuals without pups, the researchers
would approach the island by motorboat at a speed of approximately 2 to
3 knots (2.3 to 3.4 mph). This would provide enough time for any marine
mammals present to slowly enter the water without panic or stampede.
The researchers would also select a pathway of approach farthest from
the hauled out harbor seals to minimize disturbance.
Minimize Predator Interactions: If the researchers visually observe
marine predators (i.e. killer whales) present in the vicinity of hauled
out marine mammals, the researchers would not approach the study site.
Noise Reduction Protocols: While onshore at study sites, the
researchers would remain vigilant for hauled out marine mammals. If
marine mammals are present, the researchers would move slowly and use
quiet voices to minimize disturbance to the animals present.
Mitigation Conclusions
NMFS has carefully evaluated Glacier Bay NP's proposed mitigation
measures in the context of ensuring that we prescribe the means of
effecting 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:
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the measure is
[[Page 34997]]
expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals;
The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
The practicability of the measure for applicant
implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS 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 here:
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 numbers of marine mammals (total number or
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to motorboat
operations or visual presence that we expect to result in the take of
marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing
harassment takes only).
3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) individuals exposed to
motorboat operations or visual presence that we expect to result in the
take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to
reducing harassment takes only).
4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number
or number at biologically important time or location) to motorboat
operations or visual presence that we expect to result in the take of
marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1 above, or to reducing the
severity of harassment takes only).
5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas,
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/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 the evaluation of Glacier Bay NP's proposed measures, NMFS
has determined that the proposed 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
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
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 we expect to be present in the
proposed action area. Glacier Bay NP submitted a marine mammal
monitoring plan in section 13 of their Authorization application. NMFS
or the Glacier Bay NP has not modified or supplemented the plan based
on comments or new information received from the public during the
public comment period.
Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or
more of the following general goals:
1. An increase in our understanding of the likely occurrence of
marine mammal species in the vicinity of the action, (i.e., presence,
abundance, distribution, and/or density of species).
2. An increase in our understanding of the nature, scope, or
context of the likely exposure of marine mammal species to any of the
potential stressor(s) associated with the action (e.g., sound or visual
stimuli), through better understanding of one or more of the following:
The action itself and its environment (e.g., sound source
characterization, propagation, and ambient noise levels); the affected
species (e.g., life history or dive pattern); the likely co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action (in whole or part) associated
with specific adverse effects; and/or the likely biological or
behavioral context of exposure to the stressor for the marine mammal
(e.g., age class of exposed animals or known pupping, calving or
feeding areas).
3. An increase in our understanding of how individual marine
mammals respond (behaviorally or physiologically) to the specific
stressors associated with the action (in specific contexts, where
possible, e.g., at what distance or received level).
4. An increase in our understanding of how anticipated individual
responses, to individual stressors or anticipated combinations of
stressors, may impact either: The long-term fitness and survival of an
individual; or the population, species, or stock (e.g. through effects
on annual rates of recruitment or survival).
5. An increase in our understanding of how the activity affects
marine mammal habitat, such as through effects on prey sources or
acoustic habitat (e.g., through characterization of longer-term
contributions of multiple sound sources to rising ambient noise levels
and assessment of the potential chronic effects on marine mammals).
6. An increase in understanding of the impacts of the activity on
marine mammals in combination with the impacts of other anthropogenic
activities or natural factors occurring in the region.
7. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of
mitigation and monitoring measures.
8. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals
(through improved technology or methodology), both specifically within
the safety zone (thus allowing for more effective implementation of the
mitigation) and in general, to better achieve the above goals.
As part of its Authorization application, Glacier Bay NP proposes
to sponsor marine mammal monitoring during the project, in order to
implement the mitigation measures that require real-time monitoring,
and to satisfy the monitoring requirements of the MMPA.
The Glacier Bay NP researchers will monitor the area for pinnipeds
during all research activities. Monitoring activities will consist of
conducting and recording observations on pinnipeds within the vicinity
of the proposed research areas. The monitoring notes would provide
dates and location of the researcher's activities and the number and
type of species present. The researchers would document the behavioral
state of animals present, and any apparent disturbance reactions or
lack thereof.
Glacier Bay NP can add to the knowledge of pinnipeds in the
proposed action area 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 results from the IHA issued on May 18, 2015 IHA
indicated that the three survey sites were accessed a total of 15 times
with 57 takes of harbor seals. Glacier Bay NP had been authorized to
take 500 harbor seals.
[[Page 34998]]
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
proposed land survey, Glacier Bay NP would suspend research and
monitoring 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.
Encouraging and Coordinating Research
Glacier Bay NP actively monitors harbor seals at breeding and
molting haul out locations to assess trends over time. This monitoring
program involves collaborations with biologists from the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, and the National Marine Mammal Laboratory.
Glacier Bay NP will continue these collaborations and encourage
continued or renewed monitoring of marine mammal species. Additionally,
they would report vessel-based counts of marine mammals, branded, or
injured animals, and all observed disturbances to the appropriate state
and federal agencies.
Reporting
Glacier Bay NP will submit a draft monitoring report to NMFS no
later than 90 days after the expiration of the Incidental Harassment
Authorization. The report will describe the operations conducted and
sightings of marine mammals near the proposed project. The report will
provide full documentation of methods, results, and interpretation
pertaining to all monitoring. The report will provide:
1. A summary and table of the dates, times, and weather during all
research activities.
2. Species, number, location, and behavior of any marine mammals
observed throughout all monitoring activities. Report the numbers of
disturbances, by species and age, according to a three-point scale of
intensity including: (1) Head orientation in response to disturbance,
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 meter; ``alert''; (2) Movements in response to or away from
disturbance, typically over short distances (1-3 meters) 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 meters); ``flight''.
3. An estimate of the number (by species) of marine mammals exposed
to acoustic or visual stimuli associated with the research activities.
4. A description of the implementation and effectiveness of the
monitoring and mitigation measures of the Authorization and full
documentation of methods, results, and interpretation pertaining to all
monitoring.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the
authorization, such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury,
or mortality (e.g., vessel-strike, stampede, etc.), Glacier Bay NP
shall immediately cease the specified activities and immediately report
the incident to the Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and the Alaska
Regional Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586-7248. The report must
include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
Description and location of the incident (including water
depth, if applicable);
Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Glacier Bay NP shall not resume its activities until NMFS is able
to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. We will work with
Glacier Bay to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood
of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Glacier Bay NP
may not resume their activities until notified by us via letter, email,
or telephone.
In the event that Glacier Bay NP discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal, and the lead researcher determines that the cause of the
injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in
less than a moderate state of decomposition as we describe in the next
paragraph), Glacier Bay NP will immediately report the incident to the
Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and the Alaska Regional Stranding
Coordinator at (907) 586-7248. The report must include the same
information identified in the paragraph above this section. Activities
may continue while we review the circumstances of the incident. We will
work with Glacier Bay NP to determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
In the event that Glacier Bay NP discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the injury
or death is not associated with or related to the authorized activities
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), Glacier Bay will report the
incident to the Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and the Alaska
Regional Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586-7248 within 24 hours of the
discovery. Glacier Bay NP researchers will provide photographs or video
footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to us. Glacier Bay NP can continue their research activities.
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. NMFS expects that the proposed
mitigation and monitoring measures would minimize the possibility of
injurious or lethal takes. NMFS considers the potential for take by
injury, serious injury, or mortality as remote. NMFS expects that the
presence of Glacier Bay NP personnel could disturb animals hauled out
and that the animals 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 1 m (3.3 ft) in response to the surveyors' presence or if the
animal was already moving and changed direction and/or speed, or if the
animal flushed into the water. NMFS does not consider animals that
became alert without such movements as harassed.
[[Page 34999]]
Based on pinniped survey counts conducted by Glacier Bay NP (e.g.,
Mathews & Pendleton, 2006; Womble et al., 2010), NMFS estimates that
the research activities could potentially affect by Level B behavioral
harassment 500 harbor seals over the course of the Authorization (Table
1). This estimate represents 6.9 percent of the Glacier Bay/Icy Strait
stock of harbor seals and accounts for a maximum disturbance of 25
harbor seals each per visit at Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands, and
Geikie Rock, Alaska over a maximum level of five visits.
Table 1--Estimates of the Possible Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Acoustic and Visual Stimuli During the
Proposed Research Activities on Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock, Alaska, May Through
September, 2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Est. number of Percent of
Species individuals Proposed take species or Population trend \2\
exposed authorization stock \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal......................... 500 500 6.9 Declining.
Steller sea lion.................... 0 0 0 Increasing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Table 1 in this notice lists the stock species abundance estimates that NMFS used to calculate the
percentage of species/stock.
\2\ The population trend information is from Muto and Angliss, 2015.
Harbor seals tend to haul out in small numbers (on average, less
than 50 animals) at most sites with the exception of Flapjack Island
(Womble, Pers. Comm.). Animals on Flapjack Boulder Islands generally
haul out on the south side of the Islands and are not located near the
research sites located on the northern side of the Islands. Aerial
survey maximum counts show that harbor seals sometimes haul out in
large numbers at all four locations (see Table 2 in Glacier Bays NP's
application), and sometimes individuals and mother/pup pairs occupy
different terrestrial locations than the main haulout (J. Womble,
personal observation).
Considering the conservation status for the Western stock of the
Steller sea lion, the Glacier Bay NP researchers would not conduct
ground-based or vessel-based surveys if they observe Steller sea lions
before accessing Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock.
Thus, NMFS expects no takes to occur for this species during the
proposed activities.
NMFS does not propose to authorize any injury, serious injury, or
mortality. NMFS expect all potential takes to fall under the category
of Level B harassment only.
Analysis and Determinations
Negligible Impact
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.'' 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, we consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as
the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number
of estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
To avoid repetition, the discussion below applies to all four
species discussed in this notice. In making a negligible impact
determination, we consider:
The number of anticipated injuries, serious injuries, or
mortalities;
The number, nature, and intensity, and duration of Level B
harassment;
The context in which the takes occur (e.g., impacts to
areas of significance, impacts to local populations, and cumulative
impacts when taking into account successive/contemporaneous actions
when added to baseline data);
The status of stock or species of marine mammals (i.e.,
depleted, not depleted, decreasing, increasing, stable, impact relative
to the size of the population);
Impacts on habitat affecting rates of recruitment/
survival; and
The effectiveness of monitoring and mitigation measures to reduce
the number or severity of incidental take.
For reasons stated previously in this document and based on the
following factors, NMFS does not expect Glacier Bay NP's specified
activities to cause long-term behavioral disturbance, abandonment of
the haul-out area, injury, serious injury, or mortality:
1. The takes from Level B harassment would be due to potential
behavioral disturbance. The effects of the research activities would be
limited to short-term startle responses and localized behavioral
changes due to the short and sporadic duration of the research
activities. Minor and brief responses, such as short-duration startle
or alert reactions, are not likely to constitute disruption of
behavioral patterns, such as migration, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering.
2. The availability of alternate areas for pinnipeds to avoid the
resultant acoustic and visual disturbances from the research
operations. Anecdotal observations and results from previous monitoring
reports also show that the pinnipeds returned to the various sites and
did not permanently abandon haul-out sites after Glacier Bay NP
conducted their research activities.
3. There is no potential for large-scale movements leading to
injury, serious injury, or mortality because the researchers will delay
ingress into the landing areas only after the pinnipeds have slowly
entered the water.
4. Glacier Bay NP would limit access to Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack
Islands, and Geikie Rock when there are high numbers (more than 25)
harbor seals hauled out (with or without young pups present), any time
pups are present, or any time that Steller sea lions are present, the
researchers will not approach the island and will not conduct gull
monitoring research.
We do not anticipate that any injuries, serious injuries, or
mortalities would occur as a result of Glacier Bay NP's proposed
activities and we do not propose to authorize injury, serious injury,
or mortality. These species may exhibit behavioral modifications,
including temporarily vacating the area during the proposed seabird and
pinniped research activities to avoid the resultant acoustic and visual
disturbances. Further, these proposed activities would not take place
in areas
[[Page 35000]]
of significance for marine mammal feeding, resting, breeding, or
calving and would not adversely impact marine mammal habitat. Due to
the nature, degree, and context of the behavioral harassment
anticipated, we do not expect the activities to impact annual rates of
recruitment or survival.
NMFS does not expect pinnipeds to permanently abandon any area
surveyed by researchers, as is evidenced by continued presence of
pinnipeds at the sites during annual seabird monitoring. In summary,
NMFS anticipates that impacts to hauled-out harbor seals during Glacier
Bay NP's research activities would be behavioral harassment of limited
duration (i.e., up to two hours per visit) and limited intensity (i.e.,
temporary flushing at most). NMFS does not expect stampeding, and
therefore injury or mortality, to occur (see ``Mitigation'' for more
details).
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 proposed mitigation and
monitoring measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from
Glacier Bay NP's proposed research activities will not adversely affect
annual rates of recruitment or survival and therefore will have a
negligible impact on the affected species or stocks
Small Numbers
As mentioned previously, NMFS estimates that Glacier Bay NP's
activities could potentially affect, by Level B harassment only, one
species of marine mammal under our jurisdiction. For harbor seals, this
estimate is small (6.9 percent) relative to the population size.
Based on the analysis contained in this notice 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 Glacier Bay NP's proposed
activities would take small numbers of marine mammals relative to the
populations of the affected species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action. Glacier Bay National Park prohibits subsistence harvest
of harbor seals within the Park (Catton, 1995).
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
NMFS does not expect that Glacier Bay NP's proposed research
activities (which includes mitigation measures to avoid harassment of
Steller sea lions) would affect any species listed under the ESA.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that a section 7 consultation under the
ESA is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In 2014, NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) analyzing
the potential effects to the human environment from NMFS' issuance of
an Authorization to Glacier Bay NP for their seabird research
activities.
In September 2014, NMFS issued a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) on the issuance of an Authorization for Glacier Bay NP's
research activities 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).
Glacier Bay NP's proposed activities and impacts for 2016 are within
the scope of the 2014 EA and FONSI. NMFS provided relevant
environmental information to the public through a previous notice for
the proposed Authorization (79 FR 32226, June 4, 2014) and considered
public comments received in response prior to finalizing the 2014 EA
and deciding whether or not to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI). NMFS has performed an environmental review of the 2014 EA and
other relevant documents under NEPA and CEQ guidelines in determining
that there are no new direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to the
human and natural environment associated with the Authorization
requiring evaluation in a supplemental EA and NMFS.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, we have issued an Incidental
Harassment Authorization to Glacier Bay National Park for conducting
seabird research from May 16, 2016 through September 30, 2016, provided
they incorporate the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements.
Dated: May 26, 2016.
Perry Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-12817 Filed 5-31-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P