Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Northwest Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Research, 36370-36397 [2018-16115]
Download as PDF
36370
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 219
[Docket No. 151027994–6421–02]
RIN 0648–BF47
Taking and Importing Marine
Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Northwest Fisheries
Science Center Fisheries Research
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS’ Office of Protected
Resources (OPR), upon request of
NMFS’ Northwest Fisheries Science
Center (NWFSC), hereby issues
regulations to govern the unintentional
taking of marine mammals incidental to
fisheries research conducted in the
Pacific Ocean over the course of five
years. These regulations, which allow
for the issuance of Letters of
Authorization (LOA) for the incidental
take of marine mammals during the
described activities and specified
timeframes, prescribe the permissible
methods of taking and other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on marine mammal species or
stocks and their habitat, as well as
requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking.
DATES: Effective from August 27, 2018,
through August 28, 2023.
ADDRESSES: A copy of NWFSC’s
application and supporting documents,
as well as a list of the references cited
in this document, may be obtained
online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
action/incidental-take-authorizationnoaa-fisheries-nwfsc-fisheries-andecosystem-research. In case of problems
accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed below (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Laws, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
SUMMARY:
Purpose and Need for Regulatory
Action
These regulations, issued under the
authority of the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA) (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.), establish a framework for
authorizing the take of marine mammals
incidental to the NWFSC’s fisheries
research activities in the California
Current and Pacific Northwest.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
The NWFSC collects a wide array of
information necessary to evaluate the
status of exploited fishery resources and
the marine environment. NWFSC
scientists conduct fishery-independent
research onboard NOAA-owned and
operated vessels or on chartered vessels.
A few surveys are conducted onboard
commercial fishing vessels, but the
NWFSC designs and executes the
studies and funds vessel time.
We received an application from the
NWFSC requesting five-year regulations
and authorization to take multiple
species of marine mammals. Take is
anticipated to occur by Level B
harassment incidental to the use of
active acoustic devices, as well as by
visual disturbance of pinnipeds, and by
Level A harassment, serious injury, or
mortality incidental to the use of
fisheries research gear. The regulations
are valid for five years from the date of
issuance. Please see ‘‘Background’’
below for definitions of harassment.
Legal Authority for the Proposed Action
Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A)) directs the
Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not
intentional taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region for up to five years
if, after notice and public comment, the
agency makes certain findings and
issues regulations that set forth
permissible methods of taking pursuant
to that activity, as well as monitoring
and reporting requirements. Section
101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and the
implementing regulations at 50 CFR part
216, subpart I provide the legal basis for
issuing this final rule containing fiveyear regulations, and a subsequent LOA.
As directed by this legal authority, this
final rule contains mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements.
Summary of Major Provisions Within
the Final Rule
The following provides a summary of
some of the major provisions within the
rulemaking for the NWFSC fisheries
research activities. We have determined
that the NWFSC’s adherence to the
planned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures listed below will
achieve the least practicable adverse
impact on the affected marine
mammals. They include:
• Required monitoring of the
sampling areas to detect the presence of
marine mammals before deployment of
certain research gear.
• Required use of acoustic deterrent
devices on surface trawl nets.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
• Required implementation of the
mitigation strategy known as the ‘‘moveon rule mitigation protocol’’ which
incorporates best professional judgment,
when necessary during certain research
fishing operations.
Background
Paragraphs 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A) and (D))
direct the Secretary of Commerce to
allow, upon request, the incidental, but
not intentional, taking of small numbers
of marine mammals by U.S. citizens
who engage in a specified activity (other
than commercial fishing) within a
specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations
are issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
An authorization for incidental
takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible
impact on the species or stock(s), will
not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible
methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set
forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘an
impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely
to, adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.’’
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B
harassment).
Summary of Request
On August 10, 2015, we received an
adequate and complete request from
NWFSC for authorization to take marine
mammals incidental to fisheries
research activities. We received an
initial draft of the request on January 2,
2015, followed by a revised draft on
April 28, 2015. On August 28, 2015 (80
FR 52256), we published a notice of
receipt of NWFSC’s application in the
Federal Register, requesting comments
and information related to the NWFSC
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
request for 30 days. We received
comments jointly from The Humane
Society of the United States and Whale
and Dolphin Conservation, which we
considered in development of the notice
of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016) and which are available
online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
action/incidental-take-authorizationnoaa-fisheries-nwfsc-fisheries-andecosystem-research.
NWFSC plans to conduct fisheries
research with trawl gear used at various
levels in the water column, hook-andline gears (including longlines with
multiple hooks, rod and reel, and troll
deployments), purse seine/tangle net
gear, and other gear. If a marine
mammal interacts with gear deployed
by NWFSC, the outcome could
potentially be Level A harassment,
serious injury (i.e., any injury that will
likely result in mortality), or mortality.
Therefore, NWFSC has pooled the
estimated number of incidents of take
that could reasonably result from gear
interactions, and we have assessed the
potential impacts accordingly. NWFSC
also uses various active acoustic devices
in the conduct of fisheries research, and
use of these devices has the potential to
result in Level B harassment of marine
mammals. Level B harassment of
pinnipeds hauled out may also occur, as
a result of visual disturbance from
vessels conducting NWFSC research.
These regulations are valid for five years
from the date of issuance.
NWFSC requests authorization to take
individuals of 16 species by Level A
harassment, serious injury, or mortality
(hereafter referred to as M/SI) and of 34
species by Level B harassment.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
The NWFSC collects a wide array of
information necessary to evaluate the
status of exploited fishery resources and
the marine environment. NWFSC
scientists conduct fishery-independent
research onboard NOAA-owned and
operated vessels or on chartered vessels.
A few surveys are conducted onboard
commercial fishing vessels, but the
NWFSC designs and executes the
studies and funds vessel time. The
NWFSC plans to administer and
conduct approximately 36 survey
programs over the 5-year period. The
gear types used fall into several
categories: Towed nets fished at various
levels in the water column, longline and
other hook and line gear, seine nets,
traps, and other gear. Only use of trawl
nets, hook and line gears, and purse
seine nets are likely to result in
interaction with marine mammals.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
Many of these surveys also use active
acoustic devices.
The Federal government has a
responsibility to conserve and protect
living marine resources in U.S. waters
and has also entered into a number of
international agreements and treaties
related to the management of living
marine resources in international waters
outside the United States. NOAA has
the primary responsibility for managing
marine finfish and shellfish species and
their habitats, with that responsibility
delegated within NOAA to NMFS.
In order to direct and coordinate the
collection of scientific information
needed to make informed fishery
management decisions, Congress
created six regional fisheries science
centers, each a distinct organizational
entity and the scientific focal point
within NMFS for region-based, Federal
fisheries-related research. This research
is aimed at monitoring fish stock
recruitment, abundance, survival and
biological rates, geographic distribution
of species and stocks, ecosystem process
changes, and marine ecological
research. The NWFSC is the research
arm of NMFS in the northwest region of
the United States. The NWFSC conducts
research and provides scientific advice
to manage fisheries and conserve
protected species in the geographic
research area described below and
provides scientific information to
support the Pacific Fishery Management
Council and numerous other domestic
and international fisheries management
organizations.
Dates and Duration
The specified activity may occur at
any time during the five-year period of
validity of the regulations. Dates and
duration of individual surveys are
inherently uncertain, based on
congressional funding levels for the
NWFSC, weather conditions, or ship
contingencies. In addition, cooperative
research is designed to provide
flexibility on a yearly basis in order to
address issues as they arise. Some
cooperative research projects last
multiple years or may continue with
modifications. Other projects only last
one year and are not continued. Most
cooperative research projects go through
an annual competitive selection process
to determine which projects should be
funded based on proposals developed
by many independent researchers and
fishing industry participants.
Specified Geographical Region
The NWFSC conducts research in the
Pacific Northwest and California
Current within three research areas: The
California Current Research Area
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36371
(CCRA), Puget Sound Research Area
(PSRA), and Lower Columbia River
Research Area (LCRRA). Please see
Figures 1–2 through 1–4 in the NWFSC
application for maps of the three
research areas. We note here that, while
the NWFSC specified geographical
region extends outside of the U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), from
the Mexican EEZ (not including
Mexican territorial waters) north into
the Canadian EEZ (not including
Canadian territorial waters), the
MMPA’s authority does not extend into
foreign territorial waters. These areas
were described in detail in our notice of
proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016); please see that document
for further detail.
Detailed Description of Activities
A detailed description of NWFSC’s
planned activities was provided in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR
38516; June 13, 2016) and is not
repeated here. No changes have been
made to the specified activities
described therein.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register on
June 13, 2016 (81 FR 38516; June 13,
2016), and requested comments and
information from the public. During the
thirty-day comment period, we received
a letter from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission). The
comments and our responses are
provided here, and the comments have
been posted online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/
incidental-take-authorization-noaafisheries-nwfsc-fisheries-and-ecosystemresearch. Please see the comment letter
for full rationale behind the
recommendations we respond to below.
No changes were made to the proposed
rule as a result of these comments.
Comment 1: The Commission
provides general recommendations—not
specific to the proposed NWFSC
rulemaking—that NMFS develop
criteria and guidance for determining
when prospective applicants should
request taking by Level B harassment
from the use of echosounders, other
sonars, and sub-bottom profilers and
that NMFS formulate a strategy for
updating its generic behavioral
harassment thresholds for all types of
sound sources as soon as possible.
Response: We appreciate the
recommendations and will consider the
need for applicant guidance specific to
the types of acoustic sources mentioned
by the Commission. Generally speaking,
there has been a lack of information and
scientific consensus regarding the
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
36372
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
potential effects of scientific sonars on
marine mammals, which may differ
depending on the system and species in
question as well as the environment in
which the system is operated. We are
currently working to ensure that the use
of these types of active acoustic sources
is considered consistently and look
forward to the Commission’s advice as
we proceed.
With regard to revision of existing
behavioral harassment criteria, NMFS
agrees that this is necessary. NMFS is
continuing our examination of the
effects of noise on marine mammal
behavior and plans to focus our work in
the coming years on developing
guidance regarding the effects of
anthropogenic sound on marine
mammal behavior. Behavioral response
is a complex question and we have
determined that additional time is
needed to research and address it
appropriately.
Comment 2: The Commission
recommends that OPR require NWFSC
to estimate the numbers of marine
mammals taken by Level B harassment
incidental to use of active acoustic
sources (e.g., echosounders) based on
the 120-decibel (dB) rather than the 160dB root mean square (rms) threshold.
Response: Please see our notice of
proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016) for discussion related to
acoustic terminology and thresholds.
The Commission repeats a
recommendation made in prior letters
and, as we have previously indicated,
we disagree with the recommendation.
Our previous response is repeated
below.
Continuous sounds are those whose
sound pressure level remains above that
of the ambient sound, with negligibly
small fluctuations in level (NIOSH,
1998; ANSI, 2005), while intermittent
sounds are defined as sounds with
interrupted levels of low or no sound
(NIOSH, 1998). Thus, echosounder
signals are not continuous sounds but
rather intermittent sounds. Intermittent
sounds can further be defined as either
impulsive or non-impulsive. Impulsive
sounds have been defined as sounds
which are typically transient, brief (<1
sec), broadband, and consist of a high
peak pressure with rapid rise time and
rapid decay (ANSI, 1986; NIOSH, 1998).
Echosounder signals also have durations
that are typically very brief (<1 sec),
with temporal characteristics that more
closely resemble those of impulsive
sounds than non-impulsive sounds,
which typically have more gradual rise
times and longer decays (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). With regard to behavioral
thresholds, we consider the temporal
and spectral characteristics of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
echosounder signals to more closely
resemble those of an impulse sound
than a continuous sound.
The Commission suggests that, for
certain sources considered here, the
interval between pulses would not be
discernible to the animal, rendering
them effectively continuous. However,
echosounder pulses are emitted in a
similar fashion as odontocete
echolocation click trains. Research
indicates that marine mammals, in
general, have extremely fine auditory
temporal resolution and can detect each
signal separately (e.g., Au et al., 1988;
Dolphin et al., 1995; Supin and Popov,
1995; Mooney et al., 2009), especially
for species with echolocation
capabilities. Therefore, it is highly
unlikely that marine mammals would
perceive echosounder signals as being
continuous.
In conclusion, echosounder signals
are intermittent rather than continuous
signals, and the fine temporal resolution
of the marine mammal auditory system
allows them to perceive these sounds as
such. Further, the physical
characteristics of these signals indicate
a greater similarity to the way that
intermittent, impulsive sounds are
received. Therefore, the 160-dB
threshold (typically associated with
impulsive sources) is more appropriate
than the 120-dB threshold (typically
associated with continuous sources) for
estimating takes by behavioral
harassment incidental to use of such
sources. This response represents the
consensus opinion of acoustics experts
from NMFS’ Office of Protected
Resources and Office of Science and
Technology.
Comment 3: The Commission notes
that NMFS has delineated two
categories of acoustic sources, largely
based on frequency, with those sources
operating at frequencies greater than the
known hearing ranges of any marine
mammal (i.e., >180 kilohertz (kHz))
lacking the potential to cause disruption
of behavioral patterns. The Commission
describes the recent scientific literature
on acoustic sources with frequencies
above 180 kHz (i.e., Deng et al., 2014;
Hastie et al., 2014) and recommends
that we estimate numbers of takes
associated with those acoustic sources
(or similar acoustic sources) with
frequencies above 180 kHz that have
been shown to elicit behavioral
responses above the 120-dB threshold.
Response: We considered the
information cited by the Commission in
our proposed rulemaking. NMFS’s
response regarding the appropriateness
of the 120-dB versus 160-dB rms
thresholds was provided above in the
response to Comment #2. In general, the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
referenced work indicates that ‘‘subharmonics’’ could be ‘‘detectable’’ by
certain species at distances up to several
hundred meters (m). However, this
detectability is in reference to ambient
noise, not to NMFS’s established 160-dB
threshold for assessing the potential for
incidental take for these sources. A
behavioral response to a stimulus does
not necessarily indicate that Level B
harassment, as defined by the MMPA,
has occurred. Source levels of the
secondary peaks considered in these
studies—those within the hearing range
of some marine mammals—range from
135–166 dB, meaning that these subharmonics would either be below the
threshold for behavioral harassment or
would attenuate to such a level within
a few meters. Beyond these important
study details, these high-frequency (i.e.,
Category 1) sources and any energy they
may produce below the primary
frequency that could be audible to
marine mammals would be dominated
by a few primary sources (e.g., EK60)
that are operated near-continuously—
much like other Category 2 sources
considered in our assessment of
potential incidental take from NWFSC’s
use of active acoustic sources—and the
potential range above threshold would
be so small as to essentially discount
them.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization under section 101(a)(5)(A)
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
subsistence uses. We provided a full
description of the planned mitigation
measures, including background
discussion related to certain elements of
the mitigation plan, in our notice of
proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016). Please see that document
for more detail.
NMFS has considered many potential
mitigation measures, including those
the NWFSC has determined to be
feasible and has implemented in recent
years as a standard part of sampling
protocols. These measures include the
move-on rule mitigation protocol (also
referred to in the preamble as the moveon rule), protected species visual
watches and use of acoustic pingers on
trawl gear, as well as use of a marine
mammal excluder device (MMED) in
Nordic 264 trawl nets.
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
General Measures
Coordination and communication—
We require that the NWFSC take all
necessary measures to coordinate and
communicate in advance of each
specific survey with NOAA’s Office of
Marine and Aviation Operations
(OMAO), or other relevant parties, to
ensure that all mitigation measures and
monitoring requirements described
herein, as well as the specific manner of
implementation and relevant eventcontingent decision-making processes,
are clearly understood and agreed-upon.
This may involve description of all
required measures when submitting
cruise instructions to OMAO or when
completing contracts with external
entities. NWFSC will coordinate and
conduct briefings at the outset of each
survey and as necessary between the
ship’s crew (commanding officer/master
or designee(s), as appropriate) and
scientific party in order to explain
responsibilities, communication
procedures, marine mammal monitoring
protocol, and operational procedures.
The chief scientist (CS) will be
responsible for coordination with the
Officer on Deck (OOD; or equivalent on
non-NOAA platforms) to ensure that
requirements, procedures, and decisionmaking processes are understood and
properly implemented.
Vessel speed—Vessel speed during
active sampling rarely exceeds 5 knots
(kn), with typical speeds being 2–4 kn.
Transit speeds vary from 6–14 kn but
average 10 kn. These low vessel speeds
minimize the potential for ship strike.
At any time during a survey or in
transit, if a crew member standing
watch or dedicated marine mammal
observer sights marine mammals that
may intersect with the vessel course,
that individual will immediately
communicate the presence of marine
mammals to the bridge for appropriate
course alteration or speed reduction, as
possible, to avoid incidental collisions.
Other gears—The NWFSC deploys a
wide variety of gear to sample the
marine environment during all of their
research cruises. Many of these types of
gear (e.g., plankton nets, video camera
and remotely-operated vehicle (ROV)
deployments) are not considered to pose
any risk to marine mammals and are
therefore not subject to specific
mitigation measures. However, at all
times when the NWFSC is conducting
survey operations at sea, the OOD and/
or CS and crew will monitor for any
unusual circumstances that may arise at
a sampling site and use best
professional judgment to avoid any
potential risks to marine mammals
during use of all research equipment.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
Handling procedures—The NWFSC
will implement a number of handling
protocols to minimize potential harm to
marine mammals that are incidentally
taken during the course of fisheries
research activities. In general, protocols
have already been prepared for use on
commercial fishing vessels. Because
incidental take of marine mammals in
fishing gear is similar for commercial
fisheries and research surveys, NWFSC
proposes to adopt these protocols,
which are expected to increase postrelease survival. In general, following a
‘‘common sense’’ approach to handling
captured or entangled marine mammals
will present the best chance of
minimizing injury to the animal and of
decreasing risks to scientists and vessel
crew. Handling or disentangling marine
mammals carries inherent safety risks,
and using best professional judgment
and ensuring human safety is
paramount.
Captured live or injured marine
mammals are released from research
gear and returned to the water as soon
as possible with no gear or as little gear
remaining on the animal as possible.
Animals are released without removing
them from the water if possible, and
data collection is conducted in such a
manner as not to delay release of the
animal(s) or endanger the crew. NWFSC
staff will be instructed on how to
identify different species, handle and
bring marine mammals aboard a vessel,
assess the level of consciousness,
remove fishing gear, and return marine
mammals to water.
Trawl Survey Visual Monitoring and
Operational Protocols
Specific mitigation protocols are
required for all trawl operations
conducted by the NWFSC using Nordic
264 surface trawl gear, midwater trawl
gear (modified Cobb, Aleutian Wing,
and various commercial nets), and
bottom trawl gear (double-rigged
shrimp, Poly Nor’easter, modified
Aberdeen, beam, and various
commercial nets). Separate protocols
(described below) are in place for the
Kodiak surface trawl and pair trawl
gear. Marine mammal watches will be
conducted for at least ten minutes prior
to the beginning of the planned set and
throughout the tow and net retrieval, by
scanning the surrounding waters with
the naked eye and rangefinding
binoculars (or monocular). Lookouts
immediately alert the OOD and CS as to
their best estimate of the species and
number of animals observed and any
observed animal’s distance, bearing, and
direction of travel relative to the ship’s
position. The CS must confirm with the
OOD that no marine mammals have
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36373
been seen within 500 m (or as far as may
be observed if less than 500 m) of the
ship or appear to be approaching the
ship during the pre-set watch period
prior to the deployment of any trawl
gear. During nighttime operations,
visual observation may be conducted
using the naked eye and available vessel
lighting but effectiveness is limited. The
visual observation period typically
occurs during transit leading up to
arrival at the sampling station, rather
than upon arrival on station. However,
in some cases it may be necessary to
conduct a plankton tow or other small
net cast prior to deploying trawl gear. In
these cases, the visual watch will
continue until trawl gear is ready to be
deployed. Aside from pre-trawl
monitoring, the OOD/CS and crew
standing watch will visually scan for
marine mammals during all daytime
operations.
It is important to note that the 500 m
distance is provided only as a frame of
reference for marine mammal
observations that would nominally be of
greater concern as regards the potential
for interaction with research fishing
gear. The primary concern is to avoid all
marine mammal interactions (regardless
of the numbers of takes proposed for
authorization here), and the most
appropriate course of action to achieve
this goal in any given instance is likely
to be related more to event-specific
elements than to an arbitrary distance
from the vessel. Depending on
unpredictable contextual elements,
animals sighted at distances greater than
500 m could provoke mitigation action
or, conversely, animals sighted at closer
range could be determined to not be at
risk of interacting with research fishing
gear. The NWFSC considers 500 m to be
the average effective observation
distance, but the actual effective range
is determined by numerous factors
related to the weather, ship
observations, and the species observed.
The primary purpose of conducting
pre-trawl visual monitoring is to
implement the move-on rule. If marine
mammals are sighted within 500 m (or
as far as may be observed if less than
500 m) of the vessel and are considered
at risk of interacting with the vessel or
research gear, or appear to be
approaching the vessel and are
considered at risk of interaction,
NWFSC may elect to either remain
onsite to see if the animals move off or
may move on to another sampling
location. When remaining onsite, the set
is delayed (typically for at least ten
minutes) and, if the animals depart or
appear to no longer be at risk of
interacting with the vessel or gear, a
further ten minute observation period is
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
36374
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
conducted. If no further observations are
made or the animals still do not appear
to be at risk of interaction, then the set
may be made. If the vessel is moved to
a different section of the sampling area,
move-on rule mitigation protocols
would begin anew. If, after moving on,
marine mammals remain at risk of
interaction, the CS or watch leader may
decide to move again or to skip the
station. Marine mammals that are
sighted further than 500 m from the
vessel would be monitored to determine
their position and movement in relation
to the vessel. If they appear to be closing
on the vessel, the move-on rule
protocols may be implemented even if
they are initially further than 500 m
from the vessel.
For surface trawl surveys (i.e., those
surveys deploying the Nordic 264 net),
which have historically presented the
greatest risk of marine mammal
interaction, dedicated crew are assigned
to marine mammal monitoring duty
(i.e., have no other tasks) and care is
taken to provide some rest periods for
observers to avoid fatigue. At least two
pairs of binoculars are available for
verification of potential sightings. As
the vessel approaches the station, the
OOD and at least one assigned member
of the scientific party monitor for
marine mammals. Within several
minutes of arriving on station and
finishing their sampling duties, two
additional members of the scientific
party are assigned to monitor for marine
mammals and, for the remainder of the
tow, there would be a minimum of three
members of the scientific party
watching for marine mammals.
Depending on the situational context
(e.g., numbers of marine mammals seen
during the station approach or expected
at that particular place and season),
additional crew may be assigned to
stand watch as necessary to provide full
monitoring coverage around the vessel.
Up to eight observers in total (including
ship’s crew standing watch) may be on
duty during active trawling. The focus
on the full area around the ship
continues until trawl retrieval begins, at
which point observational focus turns to
the stern and the trawl net itself.
For midwater and bottom trawl
surveys, the pre-set watch period is
conducted by the OOD and bridge crew
and typically occurs during transit prior
to arrival at the sampling station but
may also include time on station if other
types of gear or equipment (e.g., bongo
nets) are deployed before the trawl. For
these trawls, risk of interaction during
the tow is lower and monitoring effort
is reduced to the bridge crew until trawl
retrieval.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
For all surveys, although the
minimum pre-set watch period is ten
minutes, the actual monitoring period is
typically longer. During standard trawl
operations, at least some of the trackline
to be towed is typically traversed prior
to setting gear in order to check for
hazards. On surface trawl surveys, CTD
casts and plankton/bongo net hauls are
made prior to setting the trawl. These
activities can take 25–35 minutes after
the vessel arrives on station, depending
on water depth, and monitoring for
marine mammals continues throughout
these activities. Midwater trawls and
bottom trawls do not typically deploy
other gears before deploying trawl gear,
but reconnaissance of the trackline often
takes ten to fifteen minutes after arriving
on station. In addition, once the
decision is made to deploy the trawl
gear, monitoring continues while the net
is unspooled, which may take about ten
minutes. Before the trawl doors are
deployed, the net floats closed on the
surface behind the vessel, and
appropriate actions can be taken if
marine mammals are sighted near the
ship. Therefore, the marine mammal
monitoring period—which begins before
the vessel arrives on station and extends
continuously through gear
deployment—typically extends for over
thirty minutes for all trawl types.
The effectiveness of visual monitoring
may be limited depending on weather
and lighting conditions. The OOD, CS,
or watch leader will determine the best
strategy to avoid potential takes of
marine mammals based on the species
encountered and their numbers and
behavior, position, and vector relative to
the vessel, as well as any other factors.
For example, a whale transiting through
the sampling area in the distance may
only require a short move from the
designated station, whereas a pod of
dolphins in close proximity to the
vessel may require a longer move from
the station or possibly cancellation of
the planned tow if the group follows the
vessel.
In general, trawl operations will be
conducted immediately upon arrival on
station (and on conclusion of the prewatch period) in order to minimize the
time during which marine mammals
(particularly pinnipeds) may become
attracted to the vessel. However, in
some cases it will be necessary to
conduct small net tows (e.g., bongo net)
prior to deploying trawl gear.
Once the trawl net is in the water, the
OOD, CS, and/or crew standing watch
will continue to visually monitor the
surrounding waters and will maintain a
lookout for marine mammal presence as
far away as environmental conditions
allow. If marine mammals are sighted
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
before the gear is fully retrieved, the
most appropriate response to avoid
marine mammal interaction will be
determined by the professional
judgment of the CS, watch leader, OOD
and other experienced crew as
necessary. This judgment will be based
on past experience operating trawl gears
around marine mammals (i.e., best
professional judgment) and on NWFSC
training sessions that will facilitate
dissemination of expertise operating in
these situations (e.g., factors that
contribute to marine mammal gear
interactions and those that aid in
successfully avoiding such events). Best
professional judgment takes into
consideration the species, numbers, and
behavior of the animals, the status of the
trawl net operation (e.g., net opening,
depth, and distance from the stern), the
time it would take to retrieve the net,
and safety considerations for changing
speed or course. We recognize that it is
not possible to dictate in advance the
exact course of action that the OOD or
CS should take in any given event
involving the presence of marine
mammals in proximity to an ongoing
trawl tow, given the sheer number of
potential variables, combinations of
variables that may determine the
appropriate course of action, and the
need to consider human safety in the
operation of fishing gear at sea.
Nevertheless, we require a full
accounting of factors that shape both
successful and unsuccessful decisions,
and these details will be fed back into
NWFSC training efforts and ultimately
help to refine the best professional
judgment that determines the course of
action taken in any given scenario (see
further discussion in ‘‘Monitoring and
Reporting’’).
If trawling operations have been
suspended because of the presence of
marine mammals, the vessel will
resume trawl operations (when
practicable) only when the animals are
believed to have departed the area. This
decision is at the discretion of the OOD/
CS and is dependent on the situation.
Standard survey protocols that are
expected to lessen the likelihood of
marine mammal interactions include
standardized tow durations and
distances. Standard tow durations of not
more than thirty minutes at the target
depth will typically be implemented,
excluding deployment and retrieval
time (which may require an additional
thirty minutes, depending on target
depth), to reduce the likelihood of
attracting and incidentally taking
marine mammals. Short tow durations
decrease the opportunity for marine
mammals to find the vessel and
investigate. Trawl tow distances will be
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
less than 3 nautical miles (nmi)—
typically 1–2 nmi, depending on the
specific survey and trawl speed—which
is expected to reduce the likelihood of
attracting and incidentally taking
marine mammals. In addition, care will
be taken when emptying the trawl to
avoid damage to marine mammals that
may be caught in the gear but are not
visible upon retrieval. The gear will be
emptied as quickly as possible after
retrieval in order to determine whether
or not marine mammals are present. The
vessel’s crew will clean trawl nets prior
to deployment to remove prey items that
might attract marine mammals. Catch
volumes are typically small with every
attempt made to collect all organisms
caught in the trawl.
Marine mammal excluder device—
Excluder devices are specialized
modifications, typically used in trawl
nets, which are designed to reduce
bycatch by allowing non-target taxa to
escape the net. These devices generally
consist of a grid of bars fitted into the
net that allow target species to pass
through the bars into the codend while
larger, unwanted taxa (e.g., turtles,
sharks, mammals) strike the bars and are
ejected through an opening in the net.
Marine mammal excluder devices
(MMED) have not been proven to be
fully effective at preventing marine
mammal capture in trawl nets (e.g.,
Chilvers, 2008) and are not expected to
prevent marine mammal capture in
NWFSC trawl surveys. It is difficult to
effectively test such devices, in terms of
effectiveness in excluding marine
mammals as opposed to effects on target
species catchability, because realistic
field trials would necessarily involve
marine mammal interactions with trawl
nets. Use of artificial surrogates in field
trials has not been shown to be a
realistic substitute (Gibson and Isakssen,
1998). Nevertheless, we believe it
reasonable to assume that use of
MMEDs may reduce the likelihood of a
given marine mammal interaction with
trawl gear resulting in mortality. We do
not infer causality, but note that annual
marine mammal interactions with the
Nordic 264 trawl net have been much
reduced for NMFS’s Southwest
Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC)
(relative to 2008) since their use of the
MMED began.
Multiple types of midwater trawl nets
are used in NWFSC trawl surveys. The
Nordic 264 trawl net, used as a surface
trawl by NWFSC, is generally much
larger than the midwater trawls, is
fished at faster speeds, and has a
different shape and functionality than
these nets. Very few marine mammal
interactions with NWFSC pelagic trawl
gear have involved nets other than the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
Nordic 264 (one of 37 total incidents
since 1999). Therefore, MMED use is not
proposed for nets other than the Nordic
264.
The NWFSC has tested the MMED
design used by the SWFSC and found
that it caused a significant loss of some
salmon species that were the target of
their research. More recent experiments
have used video cameras attached to the
net opening and near the excluder
device to test different configurations of
the excluder device to minimize loss of
target species. The experiments have
looked at adding weight and stiffeners
to the flap covering the escape hatch to
keep it closed and flipping the MMED
so the escape hatch faces down rather
than up. Based on preliminary results,
this downward-pointing escape hatch
appears to be the best design for
minimizing loss of target species.
Additional research will be necessary to
calibrate catch levels in tows with the
excluder device compared to past tows
that did not contain the excluder (i.e., to
align the new catchability rates with
historical data sets). During these
configuration and calibration
experiments some nets will be fished
without the MMED in order to provide
controls for catchability. Once the
NWFSC completes these experiments
the MMED will be used in all future
trawls with the Nordic 264. Please see
‘‘Monitoring and Reporting’’ for
additional discussion.
Acoustic deterrent devices—Acoustic
deterrent devices (pingers) are
underwater sound-emitting devices that
have been shown to decrease the
probability of interactions with certain
species of marine mammals when
fishing gear is fitted with the devices.
Multiple studies have reported
significant decreases in marine mammal
interactions with fishing gear following
pinger deployment, with results
reported for multiple species and gears
(e.g., Kraus et al., 1997; Trippel et al.,
1999; Gearin et al., 2000; Palka et al.,
2008; Barlow and Cameron, 2003,
Carretta et al., 2008; Carretta and
Barlow, 2011). Pingers will be deployed
during all surface trawl operations (i.e.,
using the Nordic 264 net), with two
pairs of pingers installed near the net
opening. The vessel’s crew will ensure
that pingers are operational prior to
deployment. Pinger brands typically
used by NWFSC include the Aquatec
Subsea Limited model AQUAmark and
Fumunda Marine models F10 and F70,
with the following attributes: (1)
Operational depth of 10–200 m; (2)
tones range from 200–400 ms in
duration, repeated every five to six
seconds; (3) variable frequency of 10–
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36375
160 kHz; and (4) maximum source level
of 145 dB rms re 1 mPa.
Kodiak surface trawl and pair trawl
gear—The Kodiak surface trawl, used
only in Puget Sound, has only limited
potential for marine mammal
interaction. This gear type is a small net
towed at slow speeds (about 2 kn) as
close to shore as the net can be fished,
and these characteristics mean that
marine mammals would likely be able
to avoid the net or swim out of it if
necessary. However, rules for cetaceans
would be similar as for other net types
(i.e., delay and/or move-on if cetaceans
observed within approximately 500 m
or clearly approaching from greater
distance). If killer whales are observed
at any distance, the net would not be
deployed, and the move-on rule would
be invoked.
The pair trawl is used only in the
Columbia River and is fished with an
open codend. Although unlikely, there
is some potential for pinnipeds to
become entangled in the net material.
NWFSC’s practice, which would be
allowed under section 109(h) of the
MMPA, is to deter pinnipeds from
encountering the net using pyrotechnic
devices and other measures. Therefore,
separate mitigation is not warranted,
and we do not discuss NWFSC
deterrence of pinnipeds associated with
pair trawl surveys further in this
document. Please see the NWFSC’s
Programmatic Environmental
Assessment (EA) for further information
about this practice.
Longline and Other Hook and Line
Survey Visual Monitoring and
Operational Protocols
Visual monitoring requirements for all
longline surveys are similar to the
general protocols described above for
trawl surveys. Please see that section for
full details of the visual monitoring
protocol and the move-on rule
mitigation protocol. In summary,
requirements for longline surveys are to:
(1) Conduct visual monitoring during
the 30-minute period prior to arrival on
station; (2) implement the move-on rule
if marine mammals are observed within
the area around the vessel and may be
at risk of interacting with the vessel or
gear; (3) deploy gear as soon as possible
upon arrival on station (depending on
presence of marine mammals); and (4)
maintain visual monitoring effort
throughout deployment and retrieval of
the longline gear. As was described for
trawl gear, the OOD, CS, or watch leader
will use best professional judgment to
minimize the risk to marine mammals
from potential gear interactions during
deployment and retrieval of gear. If
marine mammals are detected during
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36376
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
setting operations and are considered to
be at risk, immediate retrieval or
suspension of operations may be
warranted. If operations have been
suspended because of the presence of
marine mammals, the vessel will
resume setting (when practicable) only
when the animals are believed to have
departed the area. If marine mammals
are detected during retrieval operations
and are considered to be at risk, haulback may be postponed. These decisions
are at the discretion of the OOD/CS and
are dependent on the situation. If killer
whales are observed at any distance, the
set would not occur and the move-on
rule would be invoked.
Other types of hook and line surveys
(e.g., rod and reel) generally use the
same protocols as longline surveys.
However, for hook and line surveys in
Puget Sound the move-on rule is not
required for pinnipeds because they are
commonly abundant on shore nearby
hook and line sampling locations. Use
of the move-on rule in these
circumstances would represent an
impracticable impact on NWFSC survey
operations, and we note that no marine
mammals have ever been captured in
NWFSC hook and line surveys.
However, the NWFSC would implement
the move-on rule for hook and line
surveys in Puget Sound for any
cetaceans that are within 500 m and
may be at risk of interaction with the
survey operation. If killer whales are
observed at any distance, fishing would
not occur.
As for trawl surveys, some standard
survey protocols are expected to
minimize the potential for marine
mammal interactions. Soak times are
typically short relative to commercial
fishing operations, measured from the
time the last hook is in the water to
when the first hook is brought out of the
water. NWFSC longline protocols
specifically prohibit chumming
(releasing additional bait to attract target
species to the gear) and spent bait and
offal is retained on the vessel until all
gear has been retrieved. Some hook and
line surveys use barbless hooks, which
are less likely to injure a hooked animal.
Seine Survey Visual Monitoring and
Operational Protocols
Visual monitoring and operational
protocols for seine surveys are similar to
those described previously for trawl
surveys, with a focus on visual
observation in the survey area and
avoidance of marine mammals that may
be at risk of interaction with survey
vessels or gear. For purse seine
operations, visual monitoring is focused
on avoidance of cetaceans and
aggregations of pinnipeds. Individual or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
small numbers of pinnipeds may be
attracted to purse seine operations,
especially in Puget Sound, and are
frequently observed to enter operational
purse seines to depredate the catch and
exit the net unharmed. Use of the moveon rule in these circumstances would
represent an impracticable impact on
NWFSC survey operations, and we note
that no marine mammals have ever been
captured in NWFSC seine surveys.
If pinnipeds are in the immediate
vicinity of a purse seine survey, the set
may be delayed until animals move
away or the move-on rule is determined
to be appropriate, but the net would not
be opened if already deployed and
pinnipeds enter it. However, delay
would not be invoked if only few
pinnipeds are present (e.g., less than
five), and they do not appear to
obviously be at risk.
If any dolphins or porpoises are
observed within approximately 500 m of
the purse seine survey location, the set
would be delayed. If any dolphins or
porpoises are observed in the net, the
net would be immediately opened to
free the animals. If killer whales or other
large whales are observed at any
distance the net would not be set, and
the move-on rule would be invoked.
Beach seines are typically set
nearshore by small boat crews, who
visually survey the area prior to the set.
The set would not be made within 200
m of any hauled pinnipeds. Otherwise,
marine mammals are unlikely to be at
risk of interaction with NWFSC beach
seine operations, as the nets are
relatively small and deployed and
retrieved slowly. If a marine mammal is
observed attempting to interact with the
beach seine gear, the gear would
immediately be lifted and removed from
the water.
Tangle net protocols—Tangle nets are
used only in the Columbia River.
NWFSC attempts to avoid pinnipeds by
rotating sampling locations on a daily
basis and by avoiding fishing near
haulout areas. However, as was
described for NWFSC use of pair trawl
gear in the LCRRA, NWFSC also deters
pinnipeds from interacting with tangle
net gear as necessary using pyrotechnic
devices and visual presence, a practice
allowed under section 109(h) of the
MMPA. Therefore, we do not discuss
NWFSC deterrence of pinnipeds
associated with tangle net surveys
further in this document. Please see the
NWFSC’s draft Programmatic EA for
further information about this practice.
If pinniped presence in the vicinity of
tangle net surveys is so abundant as to
be uncontrollable through deterrence,
sampling would be discontinued for a
given day.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
We have carefully evaluated the
NWFSC’s planned mitigation measures
and considered a range of other
measures in the context of ensuring that
we prescribed the means of effecting the
least practicable adverse impact on the
affected marine mammal species and
stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation
of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in
relation to one another: (1) The manner
in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the
measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2)
the proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and (3) the
practicability of the measure for
applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) we
prescribe should be able to accomplish,
have a reasonable likelihood of
accomplishing (based on current
science), or contribute to the
accomplishment of one or more of the
general goals listed below:
(1) Avoidance or minimization of
injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may
contribute to this goal);
(2) A reduction in the number (total
number or number at biologically
important time or location) of
individual marine mammals exposed to
stimuli expected to result in incidental
take (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only);
(3) A reduction in the number (total
number or number at a biologically
important time or location) of times any
individual marine mammal would be
exposed to stimuli expected to result in
incidental take (this goal may contribute
to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only);
(4) A reduction in the intensity of
exposure to stimuli expected to result in
incidental take (this goal may contribute
to 1, above, or to reducing the severity
of behavioral harassment only);
(5) Avoidance or minimization of
adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying particular attention to
the prey base, blockage or limitation of
passage to or from biologically
important areas, permanent destruction
of habitat, or temporary disturbance of
habitat during a biologically important
time; and
(6) For monitoring directly related to
mitigation, an increase in the
probability of detecting marine
mammals, thus allowing for more
effective implementation of the
mitigation.
Based on our evaluation of the
NWFSC’s proposed measures, as well as
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
other measures we considered, we have
determined that these mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting
the least practicable adverse impact on
marine mammal species or stocks and
their habitat, paying particular attention
to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas
of similar significance.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
We previously reviewed NWFSC’s
species descriptions—which summarize
available information regarding status
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
and trends, distribution and habitat
preferences, behavior and life history,
and auditory capabilities of the
potentially affected species—for
accuracy and completeness and referred
readers to Sections 3 and 4 of NWFSC’s
application, as well as to NMFS’s Stock
Assessment Reports (SARs;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments). We also
provided information related to all
species with expected potential for
occurrence in the specified geographical
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36377
region where NWFSC plans to conduct
the specified activities, summarizing
information related to the population or
stock, including potential biological
removal (PBR). Current information, as
reported in the most recent final 2016
and draft 2017 SARs, is summarized in
Table 1 below (Carretta et al., 2017;
Muto et al., 2017;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/draftmarine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports).
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36378
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Table 1. Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity of NWFSC Research
Activities.
Occurrence
Common
name
Scientific name
Stock
r
n
n
n
?0
'"t:l
Cfl
ESA/MMPA
status;
Strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock
abundance
(CV, Nmin,
most recent
abundance
survey)2
PBR
Annual
M/SI 3
-;N
20,990
(0.05;
20,125;
2011)
624
132
119
~9.2
3.5
~1.3
0.75
0
81
~2.0
2.39
~0.2
2.5
0.9
19.2
0
Undet.
0
21
<0.1
16
0
20
0.1
Order Cetartiodactyla- Cetacea- Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Eschrichtiidae
Gray whale
Eschrichtius
robustus
Eastern North Pacific
X
X
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals)
Humpback
whale
Minke
whale
Sei whale
Megaptera
novaeangliae
kuzira
Balaenoptera
acutorostrata
scammoni
B. borealis
borealis
California/Oregon/
Washington
(CA/ORIWA)
X
X
EID;Y
1,918
(0.03;
1,876;
2014)
CAIORIWA
X
X
-;N
636 (0.72;
369; 2014)
Eastern North Pacific
X
EID;Y
Fin whale
B.physalus
physalus
CAIORIWA
X
EID;Y
Blue whale
B. musculus
musculus
Eastern North Pacific
X
EID;Y
519 (0.4;
374; 2014)
9,029
(0.12;
8,127;
2014)
1,647
(0.07;
1,551;
2011)
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Physeteridae
Physeter
macrocephalus
Sperm
whale
CAIORIWA
EID;Y
X
1,997
(0.57;
1,270;
2014)
Family Kogiidae
Kogia breviceps
Dwarf
K. sima
sperm whale
Family Ziphiidae (beaked whales)
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Cuvier's
beaked
whale
Baird's
beaked
whale
Hubbs'
beaked
whale
Blainville's
beaked
VerDate Sep<11>2014
CAIORIWA
X
-;N
CA/OR/WA5
X
-;N
Zip hius
cavirostris
CAIORIWA
X
-; y
Berardius
bairdii
CAIORIWA
X
-;N
Mesoplodon
carlhubbsi
X
M densirostris
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
-; y
CA/OR/WA6
X
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
(1.12;
1,924;
2014)
Unknown
3,274
(0.67;
2,059;
2014)
2,697 (0.6;
1,633;
2014)
3,044
(0.54;
1,967;
2014)
27JYR2
ER27JY18.342
4,111
Pygmy
sperm whale
36379
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
whale
Ginkgotoothed
M ginkgodens
beaked
whale
Perrin's
Mperrini
beaked
whale
Lesser
(pygmy)
M peruvianus
beaked
whale
Stejneger's
M stejnegeri
beaked
whale
Family Delphinidae
X
X
X
X
X
-;N
California Coastal
X
-;N
CA/OR/WA
X
-;N
California
X
-;N
D. d. delphis
CA/OR/WA
X
-;N
Pacific
white-sided
dolphin
Lagenorhynchus
obliquidens
CA/OR/WA
X
Northern
right whale
dolphin
Lissodelphis
borealis
CA/OR/WA
X
-;N
Risso's
dolphin
Grampus
griseus
CA/OR/WA
X
-;N
West Coast Transiene
X
Striped
dolphin
Tursiops
truncatus
truncatus
Stenella
coeruleoalba
Longbeaked
common
dolphin
Shortbeaked
common
dolphin
Killer whale
Delphinus
delphis bairdii
Orcinus
orca4
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Short-finned Globicephala
macrorhynchus
pilot whale
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
Harbor
porpoise
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Phocoena
phocoena
vomerina
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
Eastern North Pacific
Offshore
Eastern North Pacific
Southern Resident
Eastern North Pacific
Northern Resident
CA/OR/WA
Morro Bay
PO 00000
Frm 00011
X
X
X
-;N
-;N
-;N
X
X
X
E/D;Y
X
X
-;N
-;N
X
-;N
X
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
2,917
(0.41;
2,102;
2012)
27JYR2
11
~1.6
2.7
~2.0
238
~0.8
657
~35.4
8,393
~40
191
7.5
179
3.8
46
~3.7
2.4
0
1.6
0
0.14
0
1.96
0
4.5
1.2
21
~0.6
ER27JY18.343
CAJORIWA Offshore
Common
bottlenose
dolphin
1,924
(0.54;
1,255;
2014)
453 (0.06;
346; 2011)
29,211
(0.2;
24,782;
2014)
101,305
(0.49;
68,432;
2014)
969,861
(0.17;
839,325;
2014)
26,814
(0.28;
21,195;
2014)
26,556
(0.44;
18,608;
2014)
6,336
(0.32;
4,817;
2014)
243 (nla;
2009)
240 (0.49;
162; 2014)
83 (nla;
2016)
261 (nla;
2011)
836 (0.79;
466; 2014)
36380
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Monterey Bay
X
-;N
San Francisco-Russian
River
X
-;N
Northern CA/Southern
OR
X
-;N
Northern ORIWA
Coast
X
Washington Inland
Waters
Dall's
porpoise
Phocoenoides
dalli dalli
CA/OR/WA
-;N
X
X
X
X
-;N
X
-;N
3,715
(0.51;
2,480;
2011)
9,886
(0.51;
6,625;
2011)
35,769
(0.52;
23,749;
2011)
21,487
(0.44;
15,123;
2011)
11,233
(0.37;
8,308;
2015)
25,750
(0.45;
17,954;
2014)
25
0
66
0
475
~0.6
151
~3
66
~7.2
172
0.3
542
~3.210
11,602
436
451
1.8
9,200
389
2,498
108
1,641
43
Undet.
10.6
Undet.
9.8
Undet.
3.4
Guadalupe
fur seal
Arctocephalus
philippii
townsendi
California
sea lion
Callorhinus
ursinus
Zalophus
californianus
Eumetopias
jubatus
monteriensis
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
Steller sea
lion
TID;Y
Pribilof
Islands/Eastern Pacific
X
D;Y
California
Northern fur
seal
X
X
-;N
United States
X
X
X
-;N
Eastern U.S.
X
X
X
D;Y
California
ORIWA Coasts
Harbor seal
X
-;N
X
-;N
X
Phoca vitulina
richardii
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Washington Northern
Inland W aterss
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
-;N
Southern Puget Sounds
VerDate Sep<11>2014
X
X
-;N
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
20,000
(nla;
15,830;
2010)
637,561
(0.2;
539,638;
2015)
14,050
(nla; 7,524;
2013)
296,750
(nla;
153,337;
2011)
41,638
(nla; 2015)
30,968
(nla;
27,348;
2012)
24,732
(0.12;
22,380;
1999)
11,036
(0.15;
7,213;
1999)
1,568
(0.15;
1,025;
1999)
27JYR2
ER27JY18.344
Order Carnivora- Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Prior to 2016, humpback whales were
listed under the ESA as an endangered
species worldwide. Following a 2015
global status review (Bettridge et al.,
2015), NMFS established 14 distinct
population segments (DPS) with
different listing statuses (81 FR 62259;
September 8, 2016) pursuant to the ESA.
The DPSs that occur in U.S. waters do
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
not necessarily equate to the existing
stocks designated under the MMPA and
shown in Table 1. Because MMPA
stocks cannot be portioned, i.e., parts
managed as ESA-listed while other parts
managed as not ESA-listed, until such
time as the MMPA stock delineations
are reviewed in light of the DPS
designations, NMFS considers the
existing humpback whale stocks under
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the MMPA to be endangered and
depleted for MMPA management
purposes (e.g., selection of a recovery
factor, stock status). Within U.S. west
coast waters, three current DPSs may
occur: The Hawaii DPS (not listed),
Mexico DPS (threatened), and Central
America DPS (endangered).
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
ER27JY18.345
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
36381
36382
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
We provided a summary and
discussion of the ways that components
of the specified activity may impact
marine mammals and their habitat in
our notice of proposed rulemaking (81
FR 38516; June 13, 2016). Specifically,
we considered potential effects to
marine mammals from ship strike,
physical interaction with various gear
types, use of active acoustic sources,
and visual disturbance of pinnipeds, as
well as effects to prey species and to
acoustic habitat. The information is not
reprinted here.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment, Serious Injury, or
Mortality
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). Serious injury means any
injury that will likely result in mortality
(50 CFR 216.3).
Take of marine mammals incidental
to NWFSC research activities could
occur as a result of (1) injury or
mortality due to gear interaction (Level
A harassment, serious injury, or
mortality); (2) behavioral disturbance
resulting from the use of active acoustic
sources (Level B harassment only); or (3)
behavioral disturbance of pinnipeds
resulting from incidental approach of
researchers (Level B harassment only).
Estimated Take Due to Gear Interaction
Historical Interactions—In order to
estimate the number of potential
incidents of take that could occur by
M/SI through gear interaction, we first
considered NWFSC’s record of past
such incidents, and then considered in
addition other species that may have
similar vulnerabilities to NWFSC trawl
gear as those species for which we have
historical interaction records. Historical
interactions with NWFSC research gear
were described in Table 4 of our notice
of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016). Please see that document
for more information. Available records
are for the years 1999 through present.
All historical interactions have taken
place in the CCRA, offshore Washington
and Oregon, and have occurred during
use of the Nordic 264 surface trawl net,
with a few exceptions. There is one
historical interaction in the PSRA (also
using the Nordic 264 surface trawl), and
one CCRA historical interaction using
the modified Cobb midwater trawl.
NWFSC has no historical interactions
for any bottom trawl, hook and line, or
seine gear, and has no historical
interactions in the LCRRA. Please see
Figure 6–1 in the NWFSC request for
authorization for specific locations of
these incidents.
Although some historical interactions
resulted in the animal(s) being released
alive, no serious injury determinations
(NMFS, 2012a; 2012b) were made, and
it is possible that some of these animals
later died. In order to use these
historical interaction records in a
precautionary manner as the basis for
the take estimation process, and because
we have no specific information to
indicate whether any given future
interaction might result in M/SI versus
Level A harassment, we conservatively
assume that all interactions equate to
mortality. Over the past seventeen years,
NWFSC has had only infrequent
interactions with marine mammals,
with 0.1–0.5 animals captured per year
for the pinniped species and 1.4 animals
captured per year for the Pacific whitesided dolphin. No Steller sea lion has
been captured since 2002, northern fur
seals have been involved in only one
incident (none since 2000), and only a
few California sea lions and harbor seals
have been involved in interactions with
research fishing gear. However, we
assume that any of these species could
be captured in any year.
In order to produce the most
precautionary take estimates possible,
we consider all of the data available to
us (i.e., since 1999). In consideration of
these interaction records, we assume
that one individual of each species of
otariid pinniped could be captured per
year over the course of the five-year
period of validity for these proposed
regulations, that two individual harbor
seals could be captured per year, and
that the worst case event could happen
each year for Pacific white-sided
dolphins (i.e., six dolphins could be
captured in a single trawl in each year).
Table 2 shows the projected five-year
total captures of these five species for
this final rule, as described above, for
trawl gear only. Although more than one
individual of the two sea lion species
has been captured in a single tow,
interactions with these species have
historically occurred only infrequently,
and we believe that the above
assumption appropriately reflects the
likely total number of individuals
involved in research gear interactions
over a five-year period. We assume that
two total harbor seals could be captured
per year in recognition of the
demonstrated vulnerability to capture in
the PSRA (all other species have been
captured only in the CCRA). These
estimates are based on the assumption
that annual effort (e.g., total annual
trawl tow time) over the five-year
authorization period will not exceed the
annual effort during prior years for
which we have interaction records.
TABLE 2—PROJECTED FIVE-YEAR TOTAL TAKE IN TRAWL GEAR FOR HISTORICALLY CAPTURED SPECIES
CCRA average annual take
(total)
Gear
Species
Trawl ...........
Pacific white-sided dolphin .....................................
California sea lion ...................................................
Harbor seal .............................................................
Northern fur seal ....................................................
Steller sea lion ........................................................
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
1 Because
6 (30)
1 (5)
1 (5)
1 (5)
1 (5)
PSRA average annual take
(total)
..................................................
..................................................
1 (5)
..................................................
..................................................
Projected 5-year total 1
30
5
10
5
5
there are no historical take records from the LCRRA, we incorporate all projected LCRRA takes in Table 3 below.
In order to estimate the total potential
number of incidents of M/SI that could
occur incidental to the NWFSC’s use of
trawl, hook and line, and seine gear over
the five-year period of validity for these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
regulations (i.e., takes additional to
those described in Table 4 of our notice
of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016)), we first considered
whether there are additional species
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that may have similar vulnerability to
capture in trawl gear as the five species
described above that have been taken
historically and then evaluate the
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
potential vulnerability of these and
other species to additional gears.
In order to evaluate the potential
vulnerability of additional species to
trawl and of all species to hook and line
and seine gear, we first consulted
NMFS’s List of Fisheries (LOF), which
classifies U.S. commercial fisheries into
one of three categories according to the
level of incidental marine mammal
M/SI that is known to occur on an
annual basis over the most recent fiveyear period (generally) for which data
has been analyzed. We provided this
information, as presented in the 2015
LOF (79 FR 77919; December 29, 2014),
in Table 6 of our notice of proposed
rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016)
and do not reproduce it here.
Information related to incidental M/SI
in relevant commercial fisheries is not,
however, the sole determinant of
whether it may be appropriate to
authorize M/SI incidental to NWFSC
survey operations. A number of factors
(e.g., species-specific knowledge
regarding animal behavior, overall
abundance in the geographic region,
density relative to NWFSC survey effort,
feeding ecology, propensity to travel in
groups commonly associated with other
species historically taken) were taken
into account by the NWFSC to
determine whether a species may have
a similar vulnerability to certain types
of gear as historically taken species. In
some cases, we have determined that
species without documented M/SI may
nevertheless be vulnerable to capture in
NWFSC research gear. Similarly, we
have determined that some species
groups with documented M/SI are not
likely to be vulnerable to capture in
NWFSC gear. In these instances, we
provide further explanation below.
Those species with no records of
historical interaction with NWFSC
research gear and no documented M/SI
in relevant commercial fisheries, and for
which the NWFSC has not requested the
authorization of incidental take, are not
considered further in this section. The
NWFSC believes generally that any sex
or age class of those species for which
take authorization is requested could be
captured.
In order to estimate a number of
individuals that could potentially be
captured in NWFSC research gear for
those species not historically captured,
we first determine which species may
have vulnerability to capture in a given
gear. Of those species, we then
determine whether any may have
similar propensity to capture in a given
gear as a historically captured species.
These species are limited to a few
delphinid species that we believe may
have similar risk of capture as that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
displayed by the Pacific white-sided
dolphin. For these species, we assume
it is possible that a worst-case scenario
of take could occur while at the same
time contending that, absent significant
range shifts or changes in habitat usage,
capture of a species not historically
captured would likely be a very rare
event. The former assumption also
accounts for the likelihood that, for
species that often travel in groups, an
incident involving capture of that
species is likely to involve more than
one individual.
For example, we believe that the
Risso’s dolphin is potentially vulnerable
to capture in trawl gear and may have
similar propensity to capture in that
gear as does the Pacific white-sided
dolphin. Because the greatest number of
Pacific white-sided dolphins captured
in any one trawl tow was six
individuals, we assume that six Risso’s
dolphins could also be captured in a
single incident. However, in recognition
of the fact that any incident involving
the capture of Risso’s dolphins would
likely be a rare event, we propose a total
take authorization over the five-year
period of the number that may result
from a single, worst-case incident (six
dolphins). While we do not necessarily
believe that six Risso’s dolphins would
be captured in a single incident—and
that more capture incidents involving
fewer individuals could occur, as
opposed to a single, worst-case
incident—we believe that this is a
reasonable approach to estimating
potential incidents of M/SI while
balancing what could happen in a
worst-case scenario with the potential
likelihood that no incidents of capture
would actually occur. The SWFSC
historical capture of northern right
whale dolphins in 2008 provides an
instructive example of a situation where
a worst-case scenario (six dolphins
captured in a single trawl tow) did
occur, but overall capture of this species
was very rare (no other capture
incidents before or since).
Separately, for those species that we
believe may have a vulnerability to
capture in given gear but that we do not
believe may have a similar propensity to
capture in that gear as a historicallycaptured species, we assume that
capture would be a rare event such that
authorization of a single take over the
five-year period is likely sufficient to
capture the risk of interaction. For
example, from the LOF we infer
vulnerability to capture in trawl gear for
the Dall’s porpoise but do not believe
that this species has a similar
propensity for interaction in trawl gear
as the Pacific white-sided dolphin.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36383
Trawl: From the LOF and SWFSC
historical gear interactions, we infer
vulnerability to trawl gear in the CCRA
for the Risso’s dolphin, short- and longbeaked common dolphins, northern
right whale dolphin, Dall’s porpoise,
harbor porpoise, and bottlenose dolphin
(offshore stock only; NWFSC research
has very little overlap with the
distribution of the coastal stock of
bottlenose dolphin). We consider some
of these species to have a similar
propensity for interaction with trawl
gear as that demonstrated by the Pacific
white-sided dolphin (Risso’s dolphin,
northern right whale dolphin) and the
rest to have lower risk of interaction.
Due to their likely presence in the
relevant areas and inference based on
historical interactions and the LOF, we
assume additional vulnerability and
therefore potential take for some of
these species in trawl gear used in the
PSRA and LCRRA. In the PSRA, these
include the harbor porpoise, Dall’s
porpoise, California sea lion, and Steller
sea lion. In the LCRRA these include the
harbor porpoise, harbor seal, California
sea lion, and Steller sea lion.
For the striped dolphin, we believe
that there is a reasonable likelihood of
incidental take in trawl gear although
there are no records of incidental M/SI
in relevant commercial fisheries. The
proposed take authorization for this
species was determined to be
appropriate based on analogy to other
similar species that have been taken
either in NWFSC operations or in
analogous commercial fishery
operations. We believe that the striped
dolphin has a similar propensity for
interaction with trawl gear as that
demonstrated by the Pacific white-sided
dolphin.
It is also possible that a captured
animal may not be able to be identified
to species with certainty. Certain
pinnipeds and small cetaceans are
difficult to differentiate at sea,
especially in low-light situations or
when a quick release is necessary. For
example, a captured delphinid that is
struggling in the net may escape or be
freed before positive identification is
made. This is only likely to occur in the
CCRA due to the greater diversity of
pinniped and small cetacean species
likely to be encountered in that area.
Therefore, the NWFSC has requested the
authorization of incidental M/SI for one
unidentified pinniped and one
unidentified small cetacean over the
course of the five-year period of
proposed authorization.
Hook and line: The process is the
same as is described above for trawl
gear. From the LOF and SWFSC
historical interactions, we infer
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36384
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
vulnerability to hook and line gear in
the CCRA for the Risso’s dolphin,
bottlenose dolphin, striped dolphin,
pygmy and dwarf sperm whale (i.e.,
Kogia spp.), short- and long-beaked
common dolphins, short-finned pilot
whale, and California and Steller sea
lions.
Due to their likely presence in the
relevant areas and inference based on
historical interactions and the LOF, we
assume additional vulnerability and
therefore potential take for some of
these species in hook and line gear used
in the PSRA (hook and line gear is not
used in the LCRRA). These include the
California sea lion and harbor seal.
Seine: The process is the same as is
described above for trawl gear. From the
LOF, we infer vulnerability to seine and
tangle net gear in the CCRA and/or
LCRRA for the short-beaked common
dolphin, harbor seal, and California sea
lion. Long-beaked common dolphin is
not included because they are much
rarer in Oregon and Washington where
seine surveys are conducted. Seine gear
is used infrequently in the PSRA (e.g.,
twelve purse seine sets per year) and the
move-on rule applied if any small
cetacean is seen within 500 m of the
planned set. We do not believe that any
take in seine gear is likely in the PSRA.
We also believe that there is a
reasonable potential of seine gear
interaction for a number of species in
the CCRA and/or LCRRA for which
there are no LOF records of interaction
in commercial fisheries gears. These
authorizations reflect the NWFSC’s
expert judgment regarding the
distribution of these species in relation
to NWFSC use of seine gear offshore
Oregon and Washington. For example,
several of these species have the
potential to interact with NWFSC purse
seine surveys in the Columbia River
plume, where there are no
corresponding commercial seine
fisheries. Therefore, we would not
expect the LOF to adequately reflect the
risk of marine mammal interaction
posed by NWFSC survey activities.
Species for which we authorize take in
seine gear in the CCRA and/or LCRRA
with no LOF interaction records include
the Dall’s porpoise, Pacific white-sided
dolphin, Risso’s dolphin, northern right
whale dolphin, Steller sea lion, and
harbor porpoise. For the harbor
porpoise, we expect that there is greater
vulnerability to take in these gears (i.e.,
we expect it could be taken in both the
CCRA and LCRRA) and have increased
the take authorization relative to the
other species accordingly. NWFSC
considers the delphinid species to be at
risk because of their occurrence in
coastal waters offshore Oregon and
Washington, and because they often
occur in mixed schools and could be
caught together in purse seines.
TABLE 3—TOTAL ESTIMATED M/SI DUE TO GEAR INTERACTION, 2018–23
Species
Estimated 5-year total, trawl 1
Estimated 5-year total, hook
and line 1
Estimated 5-year total, seine 1
Kogia spp. 2 .....................................
Bottlenose dolphin 3 .........................
Striped dolphin .................................
Short-beaked common dolphin .......
Long-beaked common dolphin ........
Pacific white-sided dolphin ..............
Northern right whale dolphin ...........
Risso’s dolphin ................................
Short-finned pilot whale ...................
Harbor porpoise 4 .............................
Dall’s porpoise .................................
Northern fur seal 5 ...........................
California sea lion ............................
Steller sea lion .................................
Harbor seal 4 ....................................
Unidentified pinniped .......................
Unidentified small cetacean ............
........................................................
1 .....................................................
6 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
30 ...................................................
6 .....................................................
6 .....................................................
........................................................
3 (CCRA/PSRA/LCRRA) ...............
2 (CCRA/PSRA) ............................
5 .....................................................
7 (5 CCRA/PSRA/LCRRA) ............
7 (5 CCRA/PSRA/LCRRA) ............
11 (5 CCRA/5 PSRA/LCRRA ........
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
........................................................
........................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
........................................................
........................................................
........................................................
2 (CCRA/PSRA) ............................
1 .....................................................
1 (PSRA) ........................................
........................................................
........................................................
........................................................
........................................................
........................................................
1 .....................................................
........................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
1 .....................................................
........................................................
2 (CCRA/LCRRA) ..........................
1 .....................................................
........................................................
1 (LCRRA) .....................................
1 (LCRRA) .....................................
1 (LCRRA) .....................................
........................................................
........................................................
Total,
all gears
1
2
7
3
2
31
7
8
1
5
3
5
10
9
13
1
1
1 Please see our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016) for full detail related to derivation of these take estimates. Takes
proposed for authorization are not specific to any area, but our estimates are informed by area-specific vulnerability. All takes are expected to
occur in the CCRA, except where the gear-specific breakdown of expected takes per area is provided. Note that hook and line surveys are not proposed for LCRRA and only limited seine surveys are proposed for PSRA.
2 We expect that only one Kogia spp. may be taken over the five-year timespan and that it could be either a pygmy or dwarf sperm whale.
3 Incidental take is expected only from the offshore stock.
4 Incidental take for these species may be of animals from any stock in California, Oregon, or Washington, but expected vulnerability may be assigned to CCE or Washington inland waters stocks according to the expected take proportions shown.
5 Incidental take may be of animals from either the eastern Pacific or California stock.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Estimated Take Due to Acoustic
Harassment
As described in our notice of
proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016; ‘‘Potential Effects of the
Specified Activity on Marine
Mammals’’), we believe that NWFSC use
of active acoustic sources has, at most,
the potential to cause Level B
harassment of marine mammals. In
order to attempt to quantify the
potential for Level B harassment to
occur, NMFS (including the NWFSC
and acoustics experts from other parts of
NMFS) developed an analytical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
framework considering characteristics of
the active acoustic systems described in
our notice of proposed rulemaking (81
FR 38516; June 13, 2016) under
Description of Active Acoustic Sound
Sources, their expected patterns of use,
and characteristics of the marine
mammal species that may interact with
them. We believe that this quantitative
assessment benefits from its simplicity
and consistency with current NMFS
acoustic guidance regarding Level B
harassment but caution that, based on a
number of deliberately precautionary
assumptions, the resulting take
estimates may be seen as an
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
overestimate of the potential for
behavioral harassment to occur as a
result of the operation of these systems.
In 2016, NMFS released updated
‘‘Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on
Marine Mammal Hearing’’ with revised
metrics and thresholds to assess the
potential for injury (e.g., permanent
threshold shift) from acoustic sources.
While the NWFSC’s EA and our
proposed rule refer to NMFS’s historic
guidelines, as the documents were
completed prior to the recent release of
the technical guidance, the conclusions
regarding the potential for injury remain
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36385
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
the same. Most importantly, the
technical guidance now explicitly takes
into account the duration of the sound
through the use of the sound exposure
level (SEL) metric, as opposed to the
previous use of rms sound pressure
level (SPL). The effect of this different
metric, in particular for the very short
duration sounds used for these
echosounders, is to largely reduce the
exposure level of sound an animal is
exposed to for short duration sounds
(e.g., for a 1 millisecond ping, an SPL
source level is reduced by 30 dB in the
SEL metric) offsetting changes in the
thresholds themselves. While energy is
accumulated over time using SEL, the
previous conclusion that an individual
would have to remain exceptionally
close to a sound source for unrealistic
lengths of time holds, suggesting the
likelihood of injury occurring is
exceedingly small and is therefore not
considered further in this analysis.
The operating frequencies of active
acoustic systems used by NWFSC
sources only go down to 27–33 kHz for
the trawl monitoring system, which is
not one of the predominant sources, and
to 38 kHz for the EK60 echosounder (see
Tables 2 and 8 from our notice of
proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016)). These frequencies are
above the hearing range of baleen
whales (i.e., mysticetes); therefore,
baleen whales would not be expected to
perceive signals from NWFSC active
acoustic sources. We would not expect
any exposures to these signals to result
in behavioral harassment. Baleen
whales are not considered further in this
section.
The assessment paradigm for active
acoustic sources used in NWFSC
fisheries research is relatively
straightforward and has a number of key
simplifying assumptions. NMFS’s
current acoustic guidance requires in
most cases that we assume Level B
harassment occurs when a marine
mammal receives an acoustic signal at
or above a simple step-function
threshold. For use of these active
acoustic systems, the appropriate
threshold is 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms).
Estimating the number of exposures at
the specified received level requires
several determinations, each of which is
described sequentially below:
(1) A detailed characterization of the
acoustic characteristics of the effective
sound source or sources in operation;
(2) The operational areas exposed to
levels at or above those associated with
Level B harassment when these sources
are in operation;
(3) A method for quantifying the
resulting sound fields around these
sources; and
(4) An estimate of the average density
for marine mammal species in each area
of operation.
Quantifying the spatial and temporal
dimension of the sound exposure
footprint (or ‘‘swath width’’) of the
active acoustic devices in operation on
moving vessels and their relationship to
the average density of marine mammals
enables a quantitative estimate of the
number of individuals for which sound
levels exceed the relevant threshold for
each area. The number of potential
incidents of Level B harassment is
ultimately estimated as the product of
the volume of water ensonified at 160
dB rms or higher and the volumetric
density of animals determined from
simple assumptions about their vertical
stratification in the water column.
Specifically, reasonable assumptions
based on what is known about diving
behavior across different marine
mammal species were made to segregate
those that predominately remain in the
upper 200 m of the water column versus
those that regularly dive deeper during
foraging and transit. We described the
approach used (including methods for
estimating each of the calculations
described above) and the assumptions
made that result in conservative
estimates in significant detail in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR
38516; June 13, 2016). There have been
no changes made to the approach, the
informational inputs, or the results.
Therefore, we do not repeat the
discussion here and refer the reader to
the proposed rule. Summaries of the
results are provided in Table 4 below.
Note that NWFSC only uses active
acoustic systems for data acquisition
purposes in the CCRA, not in the
LCRRA or PSRA.
TABLE 4—DENSITIES AND ESTIMATED SOURCE-, STRATUM-, AND SPECIES-SPECIFIC ANNUAL ESTIMATES OF LEVEL B
HARASSMENT
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Species
Shallow
Sperm whale .........................................................
Kogia spp ..............................................................
Cuvier’s beaked whale ..........................................
Baird’s beaked whale ............................................
Mesoplodont beaked whales ................................
Bottlenose dolphin .................................................
Striped dolphin ......................................................
Long-beaked common dolphin ..............................
Short-beaked common dolphin .............................
Pacific white-sided dolphin ....................................
Northern right whale dolphin .................................
Risso’s dolphin ......................................................
Killer whale ............................................................
Short-finned pilot whale ........................................
Harbor porpoise ....................................................
Dall’s porpoise .......................................................
Guadalupe fur seal ................................................
Northern fur seal ...................................................
California sea lion .................................................
Steller sea lion ......................................................
Harbor seal ............................................................
Northern elephant seal ..........................................
Deep
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
..............
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
..............
Area density
(animals/
km2) 1
X
X
X
X
X
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
X
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
X
0.002
0.001
0.004
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.017
0.019
0.309
0.021
0.010
0.010
0.001
0.0003
4 0.038
0.076
3 0.007
3 0.649
3 0.297
3 0.060
3 0.056
3 0.179
Volumetric
density
(animals/
km3) 2
0.003
0.002
0.008
0.002
0.002
0.009
0.083
0.096
1.547
0.105
0.049
0.052
0.004
0.001
0.189
0.378
0.037
3.245
1.484
0.301
0.279
0.358
Estimated Level B
harassment,
0–200 m
EK60
1
0
2
0
0
2
18
20
325
22
10
11
1
0
40
79
8
682
312
63
59
75
ME70
0
0
1
0
0
1
6
7
115
8
4
4
0
0
14
28
3
241
110
22
21
27
1 All
Estimated Level
B harassment,
>200 m
SX90
1
1
2
1
1
3
25
28
455
31
14
15
1
0
56
111
11
955
437
89
82
105
EK60
3
2
7
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
336
Total
SX90
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79
6
3
14
3
3
6
49
55
895
61
28
30
2
1
110
218
22
1,878
859
174
162
622
density estimates from Barlow and Forney (2007) unless otherwise indicated.
density estimates derived by dividing area density estimates by 0.2 km (for shallow species) or 0.5 km (for deep species), corresponding with defined
depth strata.
3 Density estimates derived by NWFSC from SAR abundance estimates and notional study area of 1,000,000 km2.
4 ManTech-SRS Technologies (2007) estimated a harbor porpoise density for coastal and inland waters of Washington, which is used as the best available proxy
here. There are no known density estimates for harbor porpoises in NWFSC survey areas in the CCRA.
2 Volumetric
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36386
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Estimated Take Due to Physical
Disturbance
Estimated take due to physical
disturbance could potentially happen in
the PSRA and LCRRA, and would result
in no greater than Level B harassment.
It is likely that some pinnipeds will
move or flush from known haulouts into
the water in response to the presence or
sound of NWFSC vessels or researchers,
as a result of unintentional approach
during survey activity. Behavioral
responses may be considered according
to the scale shown in Table 5 and based
on the method developed by Mortenson
(1996). We consider responses
corresponding to Levels 2–3 to
constitute Level B harassment.
TABLE 5—SEAL RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE
Level
Type of response
Definition
1 ......................
Alert ............................
2 ......................
Movement ...................
3 ......................
Flight ...........................
Seal head orientation or brief movement 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, changing from a lying to a sitting position, or brief movement of less than twice the animal’s body length.
Movements away from the source of disturbance, ranging from short withdrawals at least twice the animal’s body length to
longer retreats over the beach.
All retreats (flushes) to the water.
The NWFSC has estimated potential
incidents of Level B harassment due to
physical disturbance (Table 6) by
considering the number of seals
believed to potentially be present at
affected haul-outs and the number of
visits expected to be made by NWFSC
researchers. The number of haulouts
disturbed and number of animals
assumed to be on those haulouts was
determined by NWFSC on the basis of
anecdotal evidence from researchers.
Although not all individuals on
‘‘disturbed’’ haulouts would necessarily
actually be disturbed, and some
haulouts may experience some
disturbance at distances greater than
expected, we believe that this approach
is a reasonable effort towards
accounting for this potential source of
disturbance.
TABLE 6—ESTIMATED ANNUAL LEVEL B HARASSMENT OF PINNIPEDS ASSOCIATED WITH DISTURBANCE BY RESEARCHERS
Estimated total
number of animals
on potentially disturbed haul-outs
Species
Location
Harbor seal .............................................................
Puget Sound ..........................................................
Columbia River ......................................................
Puget Sound ..........................................................
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
California sea lion ...................................................
Summary of Estimated Incidental Take
Here we provide a summary of the
total incidental take authorization on an
annual basis, as well other information
relevant to the negligible impact
analysis. Table 7 shows information
relevant to our negligible impact
analysis concerning the total annual
taking that could occur for each stock
from NMFS’s scientific research
activities when considering incidental
take previously authorized for SWFSC
(80 FR 58982; September 30, 2015) and
take authorized for NWFSC. As
footnoted in Table 7, the indicated level
of take could occur to any species or
stock for those species with multiple
stocks (e.g., northern fur seal) or
considered as a group (e.g.,
Mesoplodont beaked whales). However,
the harbor porpoise and harbor seal
each have multiple stocks spanning the
three NWFSC research areas, and we
provide further detail regarding our
consideration of potential take specific
to stocks that may occur in the PSRA
and LCRRA. Many stocks do not occur
in those research areas and, therefore,
would not be vulnerable to interaction
with research gear deployed in those
areas.
For harbor porpoise, we authorize a
total of five takes by M/SI for all stocks
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
combined over the five-year period of
validity for these regulations. For the
purposes of the negligible impact
analysis, we assume that all of these
takes could potentially be in the form of
M/SI; PBR is not intended for
assessment of the significance of
harassment. These takes could occur to
any stock; however, our take
authorization is informed by reasonable
expectation regarding species
vulnerability to gear used in the three
research areas. Of the five total takes, we
expect that two might occur in the
CCRA, one in the PSRA, and two in the
LCRRA. Therefore, corresponding with
the relationship between stock ranges
and the location of NWFSC research
activities, the likely maximum takes that
could accrue to any harbor porpoise
stock from California to southern
Oregon would be two, while the
northern Oregon/Washington coast
stock could potentially accrue four takes
because it is vulnerable to the takes
expected in either the CCRA or LCRRA.
In Table 7 below, the total take
authorization column reflects the total
of four takes that could occur in either
the CCRA or LCRRA (and the one take
expected in the PSRA, which would
occur to the Washington inland waters
stock). However, the estimated
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1,440
3,000
350
Number of visits
per year
8
25
8
Estimated annual
Level B harassment
11,520
75,000
2,800
maximum annual take column reflects
the annualized stock-specific risk, i.e.,
any stock in the CA-southern OR
grouping is expected to be vulnerable to
a maximum of two takes over the 5-year
period (0.4/year) while the northern OR/
WA coast stock could be vulnerable to
as many as four takes over the five years
(0.8/year). This stock-specific
accounting does not change our
expectation that a total of five takes
would occur for all stocks combined but
informs our stock-specific negligible
impact analysis.
Similarly, the harbor seal has separate
designated stocks that may occur in all
three research areas. We will authorize
a total of thirteen takes by M/SI for all
harbor seal stocks combined, and expect
that five of these may occur in the
CCRA, six in the PSRA, and two in the
LCRRA. Therefore, while we would
expect that a maximum of five takes
could accrue to the California stock, as
many as seven takes could occur for the
Oregon/Washington coastal stock
(which is the only stock that may occur
in the LCRRA). Although NMFS has
split the former Washington inland
waters stock of harbor seals into three
separate stocks, we do not have
sufficient information to assess stockspecific risk in the PSRA. Separately,
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
we have estimated that 162 incidents of
acoustic harassment may occur for
harbor seals due to NWFSC use of active
acoustic systems (in the CCRA only) and
that, due to the physical presence of
researchers, individual harbor seals on
haulouts (as many as 3,000) may be
disturbed up to 25 times per year in the
LCRRA. Therefore, as shown in Table 7,
the California stock of harbor seals is
vulnerable to only the estimated 162
acoustic harassment takes, but the OR/
WA coast stock would be vulnerable to
both the acoustic harassment takes as
well as the physical disturbance takes.
However, note that the percent of
estimated population is calculated
considering the number of individuals
36387
estimates of realized or actual annual
mortality reported in the SARs and does
not include authorized or unknown
mortality. Below, we consider the total
taking by M/SI authorized for NWFSC
and previously authorized for SWFSC
together to produce a maximum annual
M/SI take level (including take of
unidentified marine mammals that
could accrue to any relevant stock) and
compare that value to the stock’s PBR
value, considering ongoing sources of
anthropogenic mortality (as described in
footnote 4 of Table 7 and in the
following discussion). PBR and annual
M/SI values considered in Table 7
reflect the most recent information
available.
anticipated to be disturbed rather than
the number of incidents of disturbance.
We previously authorized take of
marine mammals incidental to fisheries
research operations conducted by the
SWFSC (see 80 FR 58982 and 80 FR
68512). This take would occur to some
of the same stocks for which we will
authorize take incidental to NWFSC
fisheries research operations. Therefore,
in order to evaluate the likely impact of
the take by M/SI to be authorized
pursuant to this rule, we consider not
only other ongoing sources of humancaused mortality but the potential
mortality authorized for SWFSC. As
used in this document, other ongoing
sources of human-caused
(anthropogenic) mortality refers to
TABLE 7—SUMMARY INFORMATION RELATED TO NWFSC ANNUAL TAKE AUTHORIZATION, 2018–23
Species 1
Sperm whale ........................
Kogia spp .............................
Cuvier’s beaked whale ........
Baird’s beaked whale ..........
Mesoplodont beaked whales
Bottlenose dolphin (offshore
stock).
Striped dolphin .....................
Long-beaked common dolphin.
Short-beaked common dolphin.
Pacific white-sided dolphin ..
Northern right whale dolphin
Risso’s dolphin .....................
Killer whale 7 ........................
Short-finned pilot whale .......
Harbor porpoise (CA-southern OR stocks) 7.
Harbor porpoise (Northern
OR/WA coast).
Harbor porpoise (WA inland
waters).
Dall’s porpoise .....................
Guadalupe fur seal ..............
Northern fur seal 6 ................
California sea lion ................
Steller sea lion .....................
Harbor seal (CA) ..................
Harbor seal (OR/WA coast)
Harbor seal (WA inland
waters).
Northern elephant seal ........
Unidentified small cetacean
Unidentified pinniped ...........
Total annual
Level B
harassment
authorization 2
Percent of
estimated
population
abundance
Proposed total
M/SI 3
authorization,
2018–23
SWFSC total
M/SI
authorization,
2015–20
Estimated
maximum
annual M/SI 4
Stock
trend 6
6
3
14
3
3
6
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.3
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
9
0
0.4
0
0
0
2.6
n/a ..................
19.2 (2.1) .......
n/a ..................
n/a ..................
n/a ..................
9.4 (27.7) .......
?
?
↓
?
↓
?
49
55
0.2
0.1
7
2
12
12
4.2
3.2
237.2 (1.8) .....
621.6 (0.5) .....
?
↑
895
0.1
3
12
3.4
8,353 (<0.1) ...
?
61
28
30
2
1
110
0.2
0.1
0.5
0.8
0.1
3.8
31
7
8
0
1
4
35
10
12
0
1
5
13.6
3.8
4.4
0
0.4
1.8
189.1 (7.2) .....
175.2 (2.2) .....
42.3 (10.4) .....
n/a ..................
3.3 (12.1) .......
20.4 (8.8) .......
?
?
?
?
?
?
........................
........................
........................
........................
2.2
148 (1.5) ........
?
0
n/a
1
0
0.2
58.8 (0.3) .......
?
218
22
8 1,878
3,659
174
75,162
........................
11,520
0.9
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.6
12.8
10.5
3
0
5
10
9
5
2
6
5
0
5
25
10
9
........................
0
2
0
2.4
7.6
4.4
3.2
1.8
1.2
171.7 (1.2) .....
n/a ..................
449.4 (0.5) .....
8,815 (0.1) .....
2,390.6 (0.2) ..
1,598.2 (0.2) ..
Unknown ........
Unknown ........
?
↑
↑
↑
↑
→
→
→
622
n/a
n/a
0.3
n/a
n/a
5
1
1
5
1
2
2.2
n/a
n/a
4,873.2 (0.1) ..
n/a ..................
n/a ..................
↑
n/a
n/a
Please see our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016) for full details.
species with multiple stocks or for species groups (Kogia spp. and Mesoplodont beaked whales), indicated level of take could occur to individuals from any stock or species except as indicated in table.
2 Level B harassment totals include estimated take due to acoustic harassment and, for harbor seals and California sea lions, estimated take
due to physical disturbance. Active acoustic devices are not used for data acquisition in the PSRA; therefore, no takes by acoustic harassment
are expected for stocks that occur entirely or largely in inland waters (e.g., resident killer whales). Takes by physical disturbance for pinniped
species represent repeated takes of smaller numbers of individuals (e.g., we expect as many as 1,440 harbor seals in the PSRA to be harassed
on as many as eight occasions). The ‘‘percent of estimated population’’ column represents this smaller number of individuals taken rather than
the total number of take incidents.
3 As explained earlier in this document, gear interaction could result in mortality, serious injury, or Level A harassment. Because we do not
have sufficient information to enable us to parse out these outcomes, we present such take as a pool. For purposes of this negligible impact
analysis we assume the worst case scenario (that all such takes result in mortality).
1 For
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
PBR minus
annual M/SI
(%) 5
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36388
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
4 This column represents the total number of incidents of M/SI that could potentially accrue to the specified species or stock as a result of
NMFS’ fisheries research activities and is the number carried forward for evaluation in the negligible impact analysis (later in this document). To
reach this total, we add one to the total for each pinniped or cetacean that may be captured in trawl gear in the CCRA. This represents the potential that the take of an unidentified pinniped or small cetacean could accrue to any given stock captured in that gear in that area. The take authorization is formulated as a five-year total; the annual average is used only for purposes of negligible impact analysis. We recognize that portions of an animal may not be taken in a given year.
5 This value represents the calculated PBR less the average annual estimate of ongoing anthropogenic mortalities (i.e., total annual humancaused M/SI, which is presented in the SARs). For the Pacific-white sided dolphin, harbor seal (California stock), northern fur seal (California
stock), Steller sea lion, and California sea lion, we subtract the annual average of mortalities occurring incidental to fisheries research from the
total human-caused M/SI prior to calculating this value, as we explicitly account for predicted future mortalities incidental to fisheries research via
the estimated maximum annual M/SI column. In parentheses, we provide the estimated maximum annual M/SI expressed as a percentage of this
value.
6 See relevant SARs for more information regarding stock status and trends. Interannual increases may not be interpreted as evidence of a
trend. Based on the most recent abundance estimates, harbor seal stocks may have reached carrying capacity and appear stable. A time series
of stock-specific abundance estimates for harbor porpoise shows either increasing or stable estimates, but it is not statistically valid to infer a
trend.
7 These species have multiple stocks that may be affected. Values for ‘‘percent of estimated population’’ and ‘‘PBR—annual M/SI’’ (where relevant) calculated for the stock with the lowest population abundance and/or PBR (as appropriate). This approach assumes that all indicated
takes would accrue to the stock in question, which is a very conservative assumption. Stocks in question are the offshore killer whale, Morro Bay
harbor porpoise, and California northern fur seal.
8 Calculated on the basis of relative abundance; i.e., of 1,878 total estimated incidents of Level B harassment, we would expect on the basis of
relative abundance in the study area that 98 percent would accrue to the Pribilof Islands/Eastern Pacific stock and two percent would accrue to
the California stock.
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination
We received no public comments or
new information indicating any
deficiencies in our preliminary
determinations, as provided in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR
38516; June 13, 2016).
Introduction—NMFS has defined
negligible impact 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
(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact
finding is based on the lack of likely
adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of 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’’
by mortality, serious injury, and Level A
or Level B harassment, we consider
other factors, such as the likely nature
of any behavioral responses (e.g.,
intensity, duration), the context of any
such responses (e.g., critical
reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat,
and the likely effectiveness of
mitigation. We also assess the number,
intensity, and context of estimated takes
by evaluating this information relative
to population status. Consistent with the
1989 preamble for NMFS’s
implementing regulations (54 FR 40338;
September 29, 1989), the impacts from
other past and ongoing anthropogenic
activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the
environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the
species, population size and growth rate
where known, ongoing sources of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
human-caused mortality, and specific
consideration of take by M/SI
previously authorized for other NMFS
research activities).
We note here that the takes from
potential gear interactions enumerated
below could result in non-serious
injury, but their worse potential
outcome (mortality) is analyzed for the
purposes of the negligible impact
determination. We discuss here the
connection between the mechanisms for
authorizing incidental take under
section 101(a)(5) for activities, such as
NWFSC’s research activities, and for
authorizing incidental take from
commercial fisheries. In 1988, Congress
amended the MMPA’s provisions for
addressing incidental take of marine
mammals in commercial fishing
operations. Congress directed NMFS to
develop and recommend a new longterm regime to govern such incidental
taking (see MMC, 1994). The need to
develop a system suited to the unique
circumstances of commercial fishing
operations led NMFS to suggest a new
conceptual means and associated
regulatory framework. That concept,
Potential Biological Removal (PBR), and
a system for developing plans
containing regulatory and voluntary
measures to reduce incidental take for
fisheries that exceed PBR were
incorporated as sections 117 and 118 in
the 1994 amendments to the MMPA.
PBR is defined in the MMPA (16
U.S.C. 1362(20)) as the maximum
number of animals, not including
natural mortalities, that may be removed
from a marine mammal stock while
allowing that stock to reach or maintain
its optimum sustainable population, and
is a measure to be considered when
evaluating the effects of M/SI on a
marine mammal species or stock.
Optimum sustainable population (OSP)
is defined by the MMPA (16 U.S.C.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1362(9)) as the number of animals
which will result in the maximum
productivity of the population or the
species, keeping in mind the carrying
capacity of the habitat and the health of
the ecosystem of which they form a
constituent element. A primary goal of
the MMPA is to ensure that each species
or stock of marine mammal is
maintained at or returned to its OSP.
PBR values are calculated by NMFS as
the level of annual removal from a stock
that will allow that stock to equilibrate
within OSP at least 95 percent of the
time, and is the product of factors
relating to the minimum population
estimate of the stock (Nmin); the
productivity rate of the stock at a small
population size; and a recovery factor.
Determination of appropriate values for
these three elements incorporates
significant precaution, such that
application of the parameter to the
management of marine mammal stocks
may be reasonably certain to achieve the
goals of the MMPA. For example,
calculation of Nmin incorporates the
precision and variability associated with
abundance information and is intended
to provide reasonable assurance that the
stock size is equal to or greater than the
estimate (Barlow et al., 1995). In
general, the three factors are developed
on a stock-specific basis in
consideration of one another in order to
produce conservative PBR values that
appropriately account for both
imprecision that may be estimated as
well as potential bias stemming from
lack of knowledge (Wade, 1998).
PBR can be used as a consideration of
the effects of M/SI on a marine mammal
stock but was applied specifically to
work within the management
framework for commercial fishing
incidental take. PBR cannot be applied
appropriately outside of the section 118
regulatory framework for which it was
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
designed without consideration of how
it applies in section 118 and how other
statutory management frameworks in
the MMPA differ. PBR was not designed
as an absolute threshold limiting
commercial fisheries, but rather as a
means to evaluate the relative impacts
of those activities on marine mammal
stocks. Even where commercial fishing
is causing M/SI at levels that exceed
PBR, the fishery is not suspended.
When M/SI exceeds PBR, NMFS may
develop a take reduction plan, usually
with the assistance of a take reduction
team. The take reduction plan will
include measures to reduce and/or
minimize the taking of marine mammals
by commercial fisheries to a level below
the stock’s PBR. That is, where the total
annual human-caused M/SI exceeds
PBR, NMFS is not required to halt
fishing activities contributing to total
M/SI but rather utilizes the take
reduction process to further mitigate the
effects of fishery activities via additional
bycatch reduction measures. PBR is not
used to grant or deny authorization of
commercial fisheries that may
incidentally take marine mammals.
Similarly, to the extent consideration
of PBR may be relevant to considering
the impacts of incidental take from
activities other than commercial
fisheries, using it as the sole reason to
deny incidental take authorization for
those activities would be inconsistent
with Congress’s intent under section
101(a)(5) and the use of PBR under
section 118. The standard for
authorizing incidental take under
section 101(a)(5) continues to be, among
other things, whether the total taking
will have a negligible impact on the
species or stock. When Congress
amended the MMPA in 1994 to add
section 118 for commercial fishing, it
did not alter the standards for
authorizing non-commercial fishing
incidental take under section 101(a)(5),
acknowledging that negligible impact
under section 101(a)(5) is a separate
standard from PBR under section 118. In
fact, in 1994 Congress also amended
section 101(a)(5)(E) (a separate
provision governing commercial fishing
incidental take for species listed under
the Endangered Species Act) to add
compliance with the new section 118
but kept the requirement for a negligible
impact finding, showing that the
determination of negligible impact and
application of PBR may share certain
features but are different.
Since the introduction of PBR, NMFS
has used the concept almost entirely
within the context of implementing
sections 117 and 118 and other
commercial fisheries managementrelated provisions of the MMPA. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
MMPA requires that PBR be estimated
in stock assessment reports and that it
be used in applications related to the
management of take incidental to
commercial fisheries (i.e., the take
reduction planning process described in
section 118 of the MMPA and the
determination of whether a stock is
‘‘strategic’’ (16 U.S.C. 1362(19))), but
nothing in the MMPA requires the
application of PBR outside the
management of commercial fisheries
interactions with marine mammals.
Nonetheless, NMFS recognizes that as
a quantitative metric, PBR may be useful
in certain instances as a consideration
when evaluating the impacts of other
human-caused activities on marine
mammal stocks. Outside the commercial
fishing context, and in consideration of
all known human-caused mortality, PBR
can help inform the potential effects of
M/SI caused by activities authorized
under 101(a)(5)(A) on marine mammal
stocks. As noted by NMFS and the
USFWS in our implementation
regulations for the 1986 amendments to
the MMPA (54 FR 40341, September 29,
1989), the Services consider many
factors, when available, in making a
negligible impact determination,
including, but not limited to, the status
of the species or stock relative to OSP
(if known), whether the recruitment rate
for the species or stock is increasing,
decreasing, stable, or unknown, the size
and distribution of the population, and
existing impacts and environmental
conditions. To specifically use PBR,
along with other factors, to evaluate the
effects of M/SI, we first calculate a
metric for each species or stock that
incorporates information regarding
ongoing anthropogenic M/SI into the
PBR value (i.e., PBR minus the total
annual anthropogenic mortality/serious
injury estimate), which is called
‘‘residual PBR’’ (Wood et al., 2012). We
then consider how the anticipated
potential incidental M/SI from the
activities being evaluated compares to
residual PBR. Anticipated or potential
M/SI that exceeds residual PBR is
considered to have a higher likelihood
of adversely affecting rates of
recruitment or survival, while
anticipated M/SI that is equal to or less
than residual PBR has a lower
likelihood (both examples given without
consideration of other types of take,
which also factor into a negligible
impact determination). In such cases
where the anticipated M/SI is near, at,
or above residual PBR, consideration of
other factors, including those outlined
above as well as mitigation and other
factors (positive or negative), is
especially important to assessing
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36389
whether the M/SI will have a negligible
impact on the stock. As described
above, PBR is a conservative metric and
is not intended to be used as a solid cap
on mortality—accordingly, impacts from
M/SI that exceed residual PBR may still
potentially be found to be negligible in
light of other factors that offset concern,
especially when robust mitigation and
adaptive management provisions are
included.
Alternately, for a species or stock with
incidental M/SI less than 10 percent of
residual PBR, we consider M/SI from
the specified activities to represent an
insignificant incremental increase in
ongoing anthropogenic M/SI that alone
(i.e., in the absence of any other take)
cannot affect annual rates of recruitment
and survival. In a prior incidental take
rulemaking and in the commercial
fishing context, this threshold is
identified as the significance threshold,
but it is more accurately an
insignificance threshold outside
commercial fishing because it represents
the level at which there is no need to
consider other factors in determining
the role of M/SI in affecting rates of
recruitment and survival. Assuming that
any additional incidental take by
harassment would not exceed the
negligible impact level, the anticipated
M/SI caused by the activities being
evaluated would have a negligible
impact on the species or stock. This 10
percent was identified as a workload
simplification consideration to avoid
the need to provide unnecessary
additional information when the
conclusion is relatively obvious, but as
described above, values above 10
percent have no particular significance
associated with them until and unless
they approach residual PBR.
Our evaluation of the M/SI for each of
the species and stocks for which
mortality could occur follows. In
addition, all mortality authorized for
some of the same species or stocks over
the next several years pursuant to our
final rulemaking for the NMFS
Southwest Fisheries Science Center has
been incorporated into the residual PBR.
We first consider maximum potential
incidental M/SI for each stock (Table 7)
in consideration of NMFS’s threshold
for identifying insignificant M/SI take
(10 percent of residual PBR (69 FR
43338; July 20, 2004)). By considering
the maximum potential incidental M/SI
in relation to PBR and ongoing sources
of anthropogenic mortality, we begin
our evaluation of whether the potential
incremental addition of M/SI through
NWFSC research activities may affect
the species’ or stock’s annual rates of
recruitment or survival. We also
consider the interaction of those
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
36390
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
mortalities with incidental taking of that
species or stock by harassment pursuant
to the specified activity.
Analysis—Please see Table 7 for
information related to this analysis. The
large majority of stocks that may
potentially be taken by M/SI (18 of 21)
fall below the insignificance threshold,
while an additional four stocks do not
have current PBR values and therefore
are evaluated using other factors. We
first consider stocks expected to be
affected only by behavioral harassment
and those stocks that fall below the
insignificance threshold. Next, we
consider those stocks above the
insignificance threshold (i.e., the
offshore stock of bottlenose dolphin,
Risso’s dolphin, and short-finned pilot
whale) and those without PBR values
(harbor seals along the Oregon and
Washington coasts and in Washington
inland waters).
As described in greater depth in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR
38516; June 13, 2016), we do not believe
that NWFSC use of active acoustic
sources has the likely potential to cause
any effect exceeding Level B harassment
of marine mammals. In addition, for the
majority of species, the annual take by
Level B harassment is very low in
relation to the population abundance
estimate (less than one percent). We
have produced what we believe to be
precautionary estimates of potential
incidents of Level B harassment. The
procedure for producing these
estimates, described in detail in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR
38516; June 13, 2016), represents
NMFS’s best effort towards balancing
the need to quantify the potential for
occurrence of Level B harassment due to
production of underwater sound with a
general lack of information related to
the specific way that these acoustic
signals, which are generally highly
directional and transient, interact with
the physical environment and to a
meaningful understanding of marine
mammal perception of these signals and
occurrence in the areas where NWFSC
operates. The sources considered here
have moderate to high output
frequencies (10 to 180 kHz), generally
short ping durations, and are typically
focused (highly directional) to serve
their intended purpose of mapping
specific objects, depths, or
environmental features. In addition,
some of these sources can be operated
in different output modes (e.g., energy
can be distributed among multiple
output beams) that may lessen the
likelihood of perception by and
potential impacts on marine mammals
in comparison with the quantitative
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
estimates that guide our proposed take
authorization.
In addition, otariid pinnipeds are less
likely than other taxa to perceive
acoustic signals generated by NWFSC
or, given perception, to react to these
signals than the quantitative estimates
indicate. This group of pinnipeds has
reduced functional hearing at the higher
frequencies produced by active acoustic
sources considered here (e.g., primary
operating frequencies of 40–180 kHz)
and, based purely on their auditory
capabilities, the potential impacts are
likely much less than we have
calculated as these relevant factors are
not taken into account.
As described previously, there is
some minimal potential for temporary
effects to hearing for certain marine
mammals, but most effects would likely
be limited to temporary behavioral
disturbance. Effects on individuals that
are taken by Level B harassment will
likely be limited to reactions such as
increased swimming speeds, increased
surfacing time, or decreased foraging (if
such activity were occurring), reactions
that are considered to be of low severity
(e.g., Ellison et al., 2012). Individuals
may move away from the source if
disturbed, but because the source is
itself moving and because of the
directional nature of the sources
considered here, there is unlikely to be
even temporary displacement from areas
of significance and any disturbance
would be of short duration. Although
there is no information on which to base
any distinction between incidents of
harassment and individuals harassed,
the same factors, in conjunction with
the fact that NWFSC survey effort is
widely dispersed in space and time,
indicate that repeated exposures of the
same individuals would be very
unlikely. For these reasons, we do not
consider the level of take by acoustic
disturbance to represent a significant
additional population stressor when
considered in context with the proposed
level of take by M/SI for any species.
Similarly, disturbance of pinnipeds
on haulouts by researchers approaching
on foot or in small vessels (as is
expected for harbor seals in the lower
Columbia River and Puget Sound and
for California sea lions in Puget Sound)
are expected to be infrequent and cause
only a temporary disturbance on the
order of minutes. As noted previously,
monitoring results from other activities
involving the disturbance of pinnipeds
and relevant studies of pinniped
populations that experience more
regular vessel disturbance indicate that
individually significant or population
level impacts are unlikely to occur.
When considering the individual
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
animals likely affected by this
disturbance, only a small fraction (less
than fifteen percent) of the estimated
population abundance of the affected
stocks would be expected to experience
the disturbance.
As noted above, authorized M/SI
above the insignificance threshold does
not necessarily indicate that the take is
unsustainable or that it may constitute
more than a negligible impact. Rather,
we simply use this metric as a guide to
indicate when further evaluation of the
available information is warranted. For
the offshore stock of bottlenose dolphin,
Risso’s dolphin, and short-finned pilot
whale, maximum total potential M/SI
due to NMFS’s fisheries research
activity (SWFSC and NWFSC
combined), while above the
insignificance threshold, is low relative
to residual PBR (approximately 28, 10,
and 12 percent, respectively).
The only known source of other
anthropogenic mortality for the offshore
stock of bottlenose dolphin and the
Risso’s dolphin is in commercial
fisheries, and such take is considered to
be insignificant and approaching zero
mortality and serious injury. Therefore,
there is no information to suggest that
the incremental additional removals due
to NWFSC fisheries research cause any
concern with regard to annual rates of
recruitment or survival for these stocks.
Similarly, commercial fisheries
provide the only known cause of
anthropogenic mortality for the shortfinned pilot whale. However, due to the
relatively low PBR value for this stock,
such take cannot be considered to be
insignificant and approaching zero
mortality and serious injury. The only
takes in commercial fisheries from
2010–14 were due to interactions with
the California drift gillnet fishery, and
occurred only in 2014. Therefore, it is
unclear that these fishery takes will
constitute an ongoing source of
mortality and, regardless, any level of
removals up to PBR could occur while
still allowing the stock to reach or
maintain its optimum sustainable
population, as indicated in the
definition of the PBR metric. The
available information, i.e., that there is
only one other source of anthropogenic
mortality, which has resulted in a low
level of mortalities in one year and may
not be an ongoing source of mortality,
and that the authorized take is low
compared to residual PBR (10 percent),
indicates that there is no concern
regarding the impacts of incremental
additional removals due to NWFSC
fisheries research on annual rates of
recruitment or survival for this stock.
Nevertheless, if bycatch in commercial
fisheries increases, or other sources of
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
mortality are recorded for this stock, we
will use the adaptive management
provisions of these regulations to
prescribe increased mitigation sufficient
to reduce the likelihood of incidental
take in NMFS fisheries research
activities. No population trends are
known for these three stocks.
PBR is unknown for harbor seals on
the Oregon and Washington coasts and
in Washington inland waters
(comprised of the Hood Canal, southern
Puget Sound, and Washington northern
inland waters stocks). The Hood Canal,
southern Puget Sound, and Washington
northern inland waters stocks were
formerly a single inland waters stock.
Both the Oregon/Washington coast and
Washington inland waters stocks of
harbor seal were considered to be stable
following the most recent abundance
estimates (in 1999, stock abundances
were estimated at 24,732 and 13,692,
respectively). However, a Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife expert
(S. Jeffries) stated an unofficial
abundance of 32,000 harbor seals in
Washington (Mapes, 2013). Therefore, it
is reasonable to assume that at worst,
the stocks have not declined since the
last abundance estimates. Ongoing
anthropogenic mortality is estimated at
10.6 harbor seals per year for the coastal
stock and 13.4 for inland waters seals;
therefore, we reasonably assume that the
maximum potential annual M/SI
incidental to NMFS’s fisheries research
activities (1.8 and 1.2, respectively) is a
small fraction of any sustainable take
level that might be calculated for either
stock. For the reasons stated above, we
do not consider the level of take by
acoustic and physical disturbance for
harbor seals to represent a significant
additional population stressor when
considered in context with the proposed
level of take by M/SI.
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
planned mitigation measures, we find
that the total marine mammal take from
NWFSC’s fisheries research activities
will have a negligible impact on the
affected marine mammal species or
stocks. In summary, this finding of
negligible impact is founded on the
following factors: (1) The possibility of
injury, serious injury, or mortality from
the use of active acoustic devices may
reasonably be considered discountable;
(2) the anticipated incidents of Level B
harassment from the use of active
acoustic devices and physical
disturbance of pinnipeds consist of, at
worst, temporary and relatively minor
modifications in behavior; (3) the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
predicted number of incidents of
potential mortality are at insignificant
levels (i.e., below ten percent of residual
PBR) for a majority of affected stocks; (4)
consideration of additional factors for
the Risso’s dolphin, offshore stock of
bottlenose dolphin, and short-finned
pilot whale do not reveal cause for
concern; (5) available information
regarding two harbor seal stocks
indicates that total maximum potential
M/SI is sustainable; and (6) the
presumed efficacy of the planned
mitigation measures in reducing the
effects of the specified activity to the
level of least practicable adverse impact.
In addition, no M/SI is authorized for
any species or stock that is listed under
the ESA or considered depleted under
the MMPA. In combination, we believe
that these factors demonstrate that the
specified activity will have only shortterm effects on individuals (resulting
from Level B harassment) and that the
total level of taking will not impact rates
of recruitment or survival sufficiently to
result in population-level impacts.
Small Numbers Analysis
Please see Table 7 for information
relating to this small numbers analysis.
The total amount of taking authorized is
less than one percent for a large majority
of stocks. The total amount of taking for
remaining stocks ranges from four to
thirteen percent.
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 measures, we find
that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the populations
of the affected species or stocks.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization for an activity, section
101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA states that
NMFS must set forth requirements
pertaining to the monitoring and
reporting of such taking. The MMPA
implementing regulations at 50 CFR
216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
incidental take authorizations must
include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring
and reporting that will result in
increased knowledge of the species and
of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are
expected to be present in the proposed
action area.
Any monitoring requirement we
prescribe should improve our
understanding of one or more of the
following:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36391
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species in action area (e.g., presence,
abundance, distribution, density);
• Nature, scope, or context of likely
marine mammal exposure to potential
stressors/impacts (individual or
cumulative, acute or chronic), through
better understanding of: (1) Action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the
action; or (4) biological or behavioral
context of exposure (e.g., age, calving, or
feeding areas);
• Individual responses to acute
stressors, or impacts of chronic
exposures (behavioral or physiological);
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of an individual; or
(2) population, species, or stock;
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
and resultant impacts to marine
mammals; and
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
NWFSC plans to make more
systematic its training, operations, data
collection, animal handling and
sampling protocols, etc., in order to
improve its ability to understand how
mitigation measures influence
interaction rates and ensure its research
operations are conducted in an
informed manner and consistent with
lessons learned from those with
experience operating these gears in
close proximity to marine mammals. It
is in this spirit that the monitoring
requirements described below were
crafted.
Visual Monitoring
Marine mammal watches are a
standard part of conducting fisheries
research activities, and are implemented
as described previously in ‘‘Mitigation.’’
Dedicated marine mammal visual
monitoring occurs as described (1) for
some period prior to deployment of
most research gear; (2) throughout
deployment and active fishing of all
research gears; (3) for some period prior
to retrieval of longline gear; and (4)
throughout retrieval of all research gear.
This visual monitoring is performed by
trained NWFSC personnel with no other
responsibilities during the monitoring
period. Observers record the species and
estimated number of animals present
and their behaviors, which may be
valuable information towards an
understanding of whether certain
species may be attracted to vessels or
certain survey gears. Separately, marine
mammal watches are conducted by
watch-standers (those navigating the
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36392
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
vessel and other crew; these will
typically not be NWFSC personnel) at
all times when the vessel is being
operated. The primary focus for this
type of watch is to avoid striking marine
mammals and to generally avoid
navigational hazards. These watchstanders typically have other duties
associated with navigation and other
vessel operations and are not required to
record or report to the scientific party
data on marine mammal sightings,
except when gear is being deployed or
retrieved.
In the PSRA and LCRRA only, the
NWFSC will monitor any potential
disturbance of hauled-out pinnipeds,
paying particular attention to the
distance at which different species of
pinniped are disturbed. Disturbance
will be recorded according to the threepoint scale, representing increasing seal
response to disturbance, shown in Table
5.
Training
NWFSC anticipates that additional
information on practices to avoid
marine mammal interactions can be
gleaned from training sessions and more
systematic data collection standards.
The NWFSC will conduct annual
trainings for all CSs and other personnel
who may be responsible for conducting
dedicated marine mammal visual
observations to explain mitigation
measures and monitoring and reporting
requirements, mitigation and
monitoring protocols, marine mammal
identification, recording of count and
disturbance observations, completion of
datasheets, and use of equipment. Some
of these topics may be familiar to
NWFSC staff, who may be professional
biologists. The NWFSC shall determine
the agenda for these trainings and
ensure that all relevant staff have
necessary familiarity with these topics.
The first such training will include
three primary elements:
First, the course will provide an
overview of the purpose and need for
the authorization, including mandatory
mitigation measures by gear and the
purpose for each, and species that
NWFSC is authorized to incidentally
take.
Second, the training will provide
detailed descriptions of reporting, data
collection, and sampling protocols. This
portion of the training will include
instruction on how to complete new
data collection forms such as the marine
mammal watch log, the incidental take
form (e.g., specific gear configuration
and details relevant to an interaction
with protected species), and forms used
for species identification and biological
sampling. The biological data collection
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
and sampling training module will
include the same sampling and
necropsy training that is used for the
West Coast Regional Observer training.
Third, NWFSC will also dedicate a
portion of training to discussion of best
professional judgment (which is
recognized as an integral component of
mitigation implementation; see
‘‘Mitigation’’), including use in any
incidents of marine mammal interaction
and instructive examples where use of
best professional judgment was
determined to be successful or
unsuccessful. We recognize that many
factors come into play regarding
decision-making at sea and that it is not
practicable to simplify what are
inherently variable and complex
situational decisions into rules that may
be defined on paper. However, it is our
intent that use of best professional
judgment be an iterative process from
year to year, in which any at-sea
decision-maker (i.e., responsible for
decisions regarding the avoidance of
marine mammal interactions with
survey gear through the application of
best professional judgment) learns from
the prior experience of all relevant
NWFSC personnel (rather than from
solely their own experience). The
outcome should be increased
transparency in decision-making
processes where best professional
judgment is appropriate and, to the
extent possible, some degree of
standardization across common
situations, with an ultimate goal of
reducing marine mammal interactions.
It is the responsibility of the NWFSC to
facilitate such exchange.
Handling Procedures and Data
Collection
Improved standardization of handling
procedures were discussed previously
in ‘‘Mitigation.’’ In addition to the
benefits implementing these protocols
are believed to have on the animals
through increased post-release survival,
NWFSC believes adopting these
protocols for data collection will also
increase the information on which
‘‘serious injury’’ (SI) determinations
(NMFS, 2012a, b) are based and improve
scientific knowledge about marine
mammals that interact with fisheries
research gears and the factors that
contribute to these interactions. NWFSC
personnel will be provided standard
guidance and training regarding
handling of marine mammals, including
how to identify different species, bring
an individual aboard a vessel, assess the
level of consciousness, remove fishing
gear, return an individual to water and
log activities pertaining to the
interaction.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
NWFSC will record interaction
information on either existing data
forms created by other NMFS programs
or will develop their own standardized
forms. To aid in SI determinations and
comply with the current NMFS Serious
Injury Guidelines (NMFS, 2012a, b),
researchers will also answer a series of
supplemental questions on the details of
marine mammal interactions.
Finally, for any marine mammals that
are killed during fisheries research
activities, scientists will collect data and
samples pursuant to Appendix D of the
NWFSC DEA, ‘‘Protected Species
Handling Procedures for NWFSC
Fisheries Research Vessels.’’
Reporting
As is normally the case, NWFSC will
coordinate with the relevant stranding
coordinators for any unusual marine
mammal behavior and any stranding,
beached live/dead, or floating marine
mammals that are encountered during
field research activities. The NWFSC
will follow a phased approach with
regard to the cessation of its activities
and/or reporting of such events, as
described in the proposed regulatory
texts following this preamble. In
addition, CSs or the cruise leader will
provide reports to NWFSC leadership
and to the Office of Protected Resources
(OPR). As a result, when marine
mammals interact with survey gear,
whether killed or released alive, a report
provided by the CS will fully describe
any observations of the animals, the
context (vessel and conditions),
decisions made and rationale for
decisions made in vessel and gear
handling. The circumstances of these
events are critical in enabling NWFSC
and OPR to better evaluate the
conditions under which takes are most
likely occur. We believe in the long term
this will allow the avoidance of these
types of events in the future.
The NWFSC will submit annual
summary reports to OPR including: (1)
Annual line-kilometers surveyed during
which the EK60, ME70, SX90 (or
equivalent sources) were predominant
(see ‘‘Estimated Take by Acoustic
Harassment’’ for further discussion),
specific to each region; (2) summary
information regarding use of all hook
and line, seine, and trawl gear,
including number of sets, hook hours,
tows, etc., specific to each research area
and gear; (3) accounts of all incidents of
marine mammal interactions, including
circumstances of the event and
descriptions of any mitigation
procedures implemented or not
implemented and why; (4) summary
information related to any disturbance
of pinnipeds, including event-specific
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
total counts of animals present, counts
of reactions according to the three-point
scale shown in Table 5, and distance of
closest approach; and (5) a written
evaluation of the effectiveness of
NWFSC mitigation strategies in
reducing the number of marine mammal
interactions with survey gear, including
best professional judgment and
suggestions for changes to the mitigation
strategies, if any. The period of
reporting will be annually, beginning
one year post-issuance of any LOA, and
the report must be submitted not less
than ninety days following the end of a
given year. Submission of this
information is in service of an adaptive
management framework allowing NMFS
to make appropriate modifications to
mitigation and/or monitoring strategies,
as necessary, during the five-year period
of validity for these regulations.
NMFS has established a formal
incidental take reporting system, the
Protected Species Incidental Take
(PSIT) database, requiring that
incidental takes of protected species be
reported within 48 hours of the
occurrence. The PSIT generates
automated messages to NMFS
leadership and other relevant staff,
alerting them to the event and to the fact
that updated information describing the
circumstances of the event has been
inputted to the database. The PSIT and
CS reports represent not only valuable
real-time reporting and information
dissemination tools but also serve as an
archive of information that may be
mined in the future to study why takes
occur by species, gear, region, etc.
NWFSC will also collect and report
all necessary data, to the extent
practicable given the primacy of human
safety and the well-being of captured or
entangled marine mammals, to facilitate
SI determinations for marine mammals
that are released alive. NWFSC will
require that the CS complete data forms
and address supplemental questions,
both of which have been developed to
aid in SI determinations. NWFSC
understands the critical need to provide
as much relevant information as
possible about marine mammal
interactions to inform decisions
regarding SI determinations. In
addition, the NWFSC will perform all
necessary reporting to ensure that any
incidental M/SI is incorporated as
appropriate into relevant SARs.
Adaptive Management
The regulations governing the take of
marine mammals incidental to NWFSC
fisheries research survey operations
contain an adaptive management
component. The inclusion of an
adaptive management component will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
be both valuable and necessary within
the context of five-year regulations for
activities that have been associated with
marine mammal mortality.
The reporting requirements associated
with this final rule are designed to
provide OPR with monitoring data from
the previous year to allow consideration
of whether any changes are appropriate.
OPR and the NWFSC will meet annually
to discuss the monitoring reports and
current science and whether mitigation
or monitoring modifications are
appropriate. The use of adaptive
management allows OPR to consider
new information from different sources
to determine (with input from the
NWFSC regarding practicability) on an
annual or biennial basis if mitigation or
monitoring measures should be
modified (including additions or
deletions). Mitigation measures could be
modified if new data suggests that such
modifications would have a reasonable
likelihood of reducing adverse effects to
marine mammals and if the measures
are practicable.
The following are some of the
possible sources of applicable data to be
considered through the adaptive
management process: (1) Results from
monitoring reports, as required by
MMPA authorizations; (2) results from
general marine mammal and sound
research; and (3) any information which
reveals that marine mammals may have
been taken in a manner, extent, or
number not authorized by these
regulations or subsequent LOAs.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by these
actions. Therefore, we have determined
that the total taking of affected species
or stocks would not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are multiple marine mammal
species listed under the ESA with
confirmed or possible occurrence in the
proposed specified geographical region.
The authorization of incidental take
pursuant to the NWFSC’s specified
activity would not affect any designated
critical habitat. OPR requested initiation
of consultation with NMFS’s West Coast
Regional Office (WCRO) under section 7
of the ESA on the promulgation of fiveyear regulations and the subsequent
issuance of LOAs to NWFSC under
section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA.
On November 10, 2016, the WCRO
issued a biological opinion to OPR and
to the NWFSC (concerning the conduct
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36393
of the specified activities) which
concluded that the issuance of the
authorizations is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any listed
species and is not likely to adversely
affect any listed marine mammal
species. The opinion also concluded
that the issuance of the authorizations
would not affect any designated critical
habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by
the regulations published by the
Council on Environmental Quality (40
CFR parts 1500–1508), NWFSC
prepared a Programmatic EA to consider
the direct, indirect and cumulative
effects to the human environment
resulting from the described research
activities. OPR made NWFSC’s EA
available to the public for review and
comment, in relation to its suitability for
adoption by OPR in order to assess the
impacts to the human environment of
issuance of regulations and subsequent
LOA to NWFSC. Also in compliance
with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as
well as NOAA Administrative Order
216–6, OPR relies on NWFSC’s EA,
which also addresses OPR’s action of
issuing incidental take authorizations to
NWFSC, and signed a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) on March
27, 2018. NWFSC’s EA and OPR’s
FONSI for this action may be found
online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental/research.htm.
Classification
Pursuant to the procedures
established to implement Executive
Order 12866, the Office of Management
and Budget has determined that this
rule is not significant.
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the
Chief Counsel for Regulation of the
Department of Commerce certified to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration at the
proposed rule stage that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for the
certification was published in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
No comments were received regarding
this certification. As a result, a
regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required and none has been prepared.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, no person is required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information (COI) subject
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36394
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
to the requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) unless that COI
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. This rule does not contain a
COI requirement subject to the
provisions of the PRA because the
applicant is a Federal agency.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 219
Exports, Fish, Imports, Indians,
Labeling, Marine mammals, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Seafood, Transportation.
Dated: July 24, 2018.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For reasons set forth in the preamble,
NMFS amends 50 CFR part 219 as
follows:
PART 219—REGULATIONS
GOVERNING THE TAKING AND
IMPORTING OF MARINE MAMMALS
1. The authority citation for part 219
continues to read as follows:
■
2. Add subpart E to part 219 to read
as follows:
Subpart E—Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Northwest Fisheries Science
Center Fisheries Research in the Pacific
Ocean
Sec.
219.41 Specified activity and specified
geographical region.
219.42 Effective dates.
219.43 Permissible methods of taking.
219.44 Prohibitions.
219.45 Mitigation requirements.
219.46 Requirements for monitoring and
reporting.
219.47 Letters of Authorization.
219.48 Renewals and modifications of
Letters of Authorization.
219.49 [Reserved]
219.50 [Reserved]
Subpart E—Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Northwest Fisheries
Science Center Fisheries Research in
the Pacific Ocean
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
§ 219.41 Specified activity and specified
geographical region.
(a) Regulations in this subpart apply
only to the National Marine Fisheries
Service’s (NMFS) Northwest Fisheries
Science Center (NWFSC) and those
persons it authorizes or funds to
conduct activities on its behalf for the
taking of marine mammals that occurs
in the area outlined in paragraph (b) of
this section and that occurs incidental
to research survey program operations.
(b) The taking of marine mammals by
NWFSC may be authorized in a Letter
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
§ 219.42
Effective dates.
Regulations in this subpart are
effective from August 27, 2018, through
August 28, 2023.
§ 219.43
Permissible methods of taking.
(a) Under LOAs issued pursuant to
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 219.47,
the Holder of the LOA (hereinafter
‘‘NWFSC’’) may incidentally, but not
intentionally, take marine mammals
within the area described in § 219.41(b)
by Level B harassment associated with
use of active acoustic systems and
physical or visual disturbance of
hauled-out pinnipeds and by Level A
harassment, serious injury, or mortality
associated with use of hook and line
gear, trawl gear, and seine gear,
provided the activity is in compliance
with all terms, conditions, and
requirements of the regulations in this
subpart and the applicable LOA.
§ 219.44
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
of Authorization (LOA) only if it occurs
within the California Current
Ecosystem, including Puget Sound and
the Columbia River.
Prohibitions.
Notwithstanding takings
contemplated in § 219.41 and
authorized by a LOA issued under
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 219.47,
no person in connection with the
activities described in § 219.41 may:
(a) Violate, or fail to comply with, the
terms, conditions, and requirements of
this subpart or a LOA issued under
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 219.47;
(b) Take any marine mammal not
specified in such LOA;
(c) Take any marine mammal
specified in such LOAs in any manner
other than as specified;
(d) Take a marine mammal specified
in such LOA if NMFS determines such
taking results in more than a negligible
impact on the species or stocks of such
marine mammal; or
(e) Take a marine mammal specified
in such LOA if NMFS determines such
taking results in an unmitigable adverse
impact on the availability of such
species or stock of marine mammal for
taking for subsistence uses.
§ 219.45
Mitigation requirements.
When conducting the activities
identified in § 219.41(a), the mitigation
measures contained in any LOA issued
under § 216.106 of this chapter and
§ 219.47 must be implemented. These
mitigation measures shall include but
are not limited to:
(a) General conditions:
(1) NWFSC shall take all necessary
measures to coordinate and
communicate in advance of each
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
specific survey with the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s (NOAA) Office of
Marine and Aviation Operations
(OMAO) or other relevant parties on
non-NOAA platforms to ensure that all
mitigation measures and monitoring
requirements described herein, as well
as the specific manner of
implementation and relevant eventcontingent decision-making processes,
are clearly understood and agreed upon;
(2) NWFSC shall coordinate and
conduct briefings at the outset of each
survey and as necessary between ship’s
crew (Commanding Officer/master or
designee(s), as appropriate) and
scientific party in order to explain
responsibilities, communication
procedures, marine mammal monitoring
protocol, and operational procedures;
(3) NWFSC shall coordinate as
necessary on a daily basis during survey
cruises with OMAO personnel or other
relevant personnel on non-NOAA
platforms to ensure that requirements,
procedures, and decision-making
processes are understood and properly
implemented;
(4) When deploying any type of
sampling gear at sea, NWFSC shall at all
times monitor for any unusual
circumstances that may arise at a
sampling site and use best professional
judgment to avoid any potential risks to
marine mammals during use of all
research equipment; and
(5) NWFSC shall implement handling
and/or disentanglement protocols as
specified in the guidance that shall be
provided to NWFSC survey personnel.
(b) For all research surveys using
trawl, hook and line, or seine gear in
Puget Sound, the move-on rule
mitigation protocol described in
paragraph (c)(3) of this section shall be
implemented upon observation of killer
whales at any distance.
(c) Trawl survey protocols:
(1) NWFSC shall conduct trawl
operations as soon as is practicable
upon arrival at the sampling station;
(2) NWFSC shall initiate marine
mammal watches (visual observation) a
minimum of ten minutes prior to
beginning of net deployment but shall
also conduct monitoring during pre-set
activities including trackline
reconnaissance, CTD casts, and
plankton or bongo net hauls. Marine
mammal watches shall be conducted by
scanning the surrounding waters with
the naked eye and rangefinding
binoculars (or monocular). During
nighttime operations, visual observation
shall be conducted using the naked eye
and available vessel lighting;
(3) NWFSC shall implement the
move-on rule mitigation protocol, as
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
described in this paragraph. If one or
more marine mammals are observed
within 500 meters (m) of the planned
location in the 10 minutes before setting
the trawl gear, and are considered at risk
of interacting with the vessel or research
gear, or appear to be approaching the
vessel and are considered at risk of
interaction, NWFSC shall either remain
onsite or move on to another sampling
location. If remaining onsite, the set
shall be delayed. If the animals depart
or appear to no longer be at risk of
interacting with the vessel or gear, a
further 10 minute observation period
shall be conducted. If no further
observations are made or the animals
still do not appear to be at risk of
interaction, then the set may be made.
If the vessel is moved to a different
section of the sampling area, the moveon rule mitigation protocol would begin
anew. If, after moving on, marine
mammals remain at risk of interaction,
the NWFSC shall move again or skip the
station. Marine mammals that are
sighted further than 500 m from the
vessel shall be monitored to determine
their position and movement in relation
to the vessel to determine whether the
move-on rule mitigation protocol should
be implemented. NWFSC may use best
professional judgment in making these
decisions;
(4) NWFSC shall maintain visual
monitoring effort during the entire
period of time that trawl gear is in the
water (i.e., throughout gear deployment,
fishing, and retrieval). If marine
mammals are sighted before the gear is
fully removed from the water, NWFSC
shall take the most appropriate action to
avoid marine mammal interaction.
NWFSC may use best professional
judgment in making this decision;
(5) If trawling operations have been
suspended because of the presence of
marine mammals, NWFSC may resume
trawl operations when practicable only
when the animals are believed to have
departed the area. NWFSC may use best
professional judgment in making this
determination;
(6) When conducting surface trawls
using the Nordic 264 net, dedicated
crew with no other tasks shall conduct
required marine mammal monitoring.
Marine mammal monitoring shall be
staffed in a stepwise process, with a
minimum of two observers beginning
pre-set monitoring and increasing to a
minimum of four observers prior to and
during gear deployment. During the
tow, a minimum of three observers shall
conduct required monitoring;
(7) NWFSC shall implement standard
survey protocols to minimize potential
for marine mammal interactions,
including maximum tow durations at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
target depth and maximum tow
distance, and shall carefully empty the
trawl as quickly as possible upon
retrieval. Trawl nets must be cleaned
prior to deployment;
(8) NWFSC must install and use a
marine mammal excluder device at all
times when the Nordic 264 trawl net is
used;
(9) NWFSC must install and use
acoustic deterrent devices whenever the
Nordic 264 trawl net is used, with two
pairs of the devices installed near the
net opening. NWFSC must ensure that
the devices are operating properly
before deploying the net;
(10) For use of the Kodiak surface
trawl in Puget Sound, trawl survey
protocols described in this section apply
only to cetaceans; and
(11) Trawl survey protocols described
in this section do not apply to use of
pair trawl gear in the Columbia River.
(d) Hook and line (including longline)
survey protocols:
(1) NWFSC shall deploy hook and
line gear as soon as is practicable upon
arrival at the sampling station;
(2) NWFSC shall initiate marine
mammal watches (visual observation)
no less than 30 minutes prior to both
deployment and retrieval of longline
gear. Marine mammal watches shall be
conducted by scanning the surrounding
waters with the naked eye and rangefinding binoculars (or monocular).
During nighttime operations, visual
observation shall be conducted using
the naked eye and available vessel
lighting;
(3) NWFSC shall implement the
move-on rule mitigation protocol, as
described in this paragraph. If one or
more marine mammals are observed
within 500 m of the planned location in
the ten minutes before gear deployment,
and are considered at risk of interacting
with the vessel or research gear, or
appear to be approaching the vessel and
are considered at risk of interaction,
NWFSC shall either remain onsite or
move on to another sampling location.
If remaining onsite, the set shall be
delayed. If the animals depart or appear
to no longer be at risk of interacting
with the vessel or gear, a further 10
minute observation period shall be
conducted. If no further observations are
made or the animals still do not appear
to be at risk of interaction, then the set
may be made. If the vessel is moved to
a different section of the sampling area,
the move-on rule mitigation protocol
would begin anew. If, after moving on,
marine mammals remain at risk of
interaction, the NWFSC shall move
again or skip the station. Marine
mammals that are sighted further than
500 m from the vessel shall be
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36395
monitored to determine their position
and movement in relation to the vessel
to determine whether the move-on rule
mitigation protocol should be
implemented. NWFSC may use best
professional judgment in making these
decisions;
(4) NWFSC shall maintain visual
monitoring effort during the entire
period of gear deployment and retrieval.
If marine mammals are sighted before
the gear is fully deployed or retrieved,
NWFSC shall take the most appropriate
action to avoid marine mammal
interaction. NWFSC may use best
professional judgment in making this
decision;
(5) If deployment or retrieval
operations have been suspended
because of the presence of marine
mammals, NWFSC may resume such
operations when practicable only when
the animals are believed to have
departed the area. NWFSC may use best
professional judgment in making this
decision;
(6) NWFSC shall implement standard
survey protocols, including maximum
soak durations and a prohibition on
chumming; and
(7) For hook and line surveys in Puget
Sound, but not including longline
surveys, hook and line survey protocols
described in this section apply only to
cetaceans.
(e) Seine survey protocols:
(1) NWFSC shall conduct seine
operations as soon as is practicable
upon arrival at the sampling station;
(2) NWFSC shall conduct marine
mammal watches (visual observation)
prior to beginning of net deployment.
Marine mammal watches shall be
conducted by scanning the surrounding
waters with the naked eye and
rangefinding binoculars (or monocular);
(3) NWFSC shall implement the
move-on rule mitigation protocol, as
described in this paragraph for use of
purse seine gear. If one or more small
cetaceans (i.e., dolphin or porpoise) or
five or more pinnipeds are observed
within 500 m of the planned location
before setting the seine gear, and are
considered at risk of interacting with the
vessel or research gear, or appear to be
approaching the vessel and are
considered at risk of interaction,
NWFSC shall either remain onsite or
move on to another sampling location.
If remaining onsite, the set shall be
delayed. If the animals depart or appear
to no longer be at risk of interacting
with the vessel or gear, a further ten
minute observation period shall be
conducted. If no further observations are
made or the animals still do not appear
to be at risk of interaction, then the set
may be made. If the vessel is moved to
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
36396
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
a different area, the move-on rule
mitigation protocol would begin anew.
If, after moving on, marine mammals
remain at risk of interaction, the
NWFSC shall move again or skip the
station. Marine mammals that are
sighted further than 500 m from the
vessel shall be monitored to determine
their position and movement in relation
to the vessel to determine whether the
move-on rule mitigation protocol should
be implemented. NWFSC may use best
professional judgment in making these
decisions;
(4) NWFSC shall maintain visual
monitoring effort during the entire
period of time that seine gear is in the
water (i.e., throughout gear deployment,
fishing, and retrieval). If marine
mammals are sighted before the gear is
fully removed from the water, NWFSC
shall take the most appropriate action to
avoid marine mammal interaction.
NWFSC may use best professional
judgment in making this decision;
(5) If seine operations have been
suspended because of the presence of
marine mammals, NWFSC may resume
seine operations when practicable only
when the animals are believed to have
departed the area. NWFSC may use best
professional judgment in making this
determination;
(6) If any cetaceans are observed in a
purse seine net, NWFSC shall
immediately open the net and free the
animals; and
(7) NWFSC shall not make beach
seine sets within 200 m of any hauledout pinniped, and shall immediately
remove the gear from the water upon
observation of any marine mammal
attempting to interact with the gear.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
§ 219.46 Requirements for monitoring and
reporting.
(a) NWFSC shall designate a
compliance coordinator who shall be
responsible for ensuring compliance
with all requirements of any LOA issued
pursuant to § 216.106 of this chapter
and § 219.47 and for preparing for any
subsequent request(s) for incidental take
authorization.
(b) Visual monitoring program:
(1) Marine mammal visual monitoring
shall occur prior to deployment of trawl,
seine, and hook and line gear,
respectively; throughout deployment of
gear and active fishing of research gears
(not including longline soak time); prior
to retrieval of longline gear; and
throughout retrieval of all research gear;
(2) Marine mammal watches shall be
conducted by watch-standers (those
navigating the vessel and/or other crew)
at all times when the vessel is being
operated; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
(3) NWFSC shall conduct census
counts of established pinniped haulouts
in the Columbia River and Puget Sound
that are disturbed by NWFSC research
activity, and shall record disturbance of
hauled-out pinnipeds due to NWFSC
research activity, paying particular
attention to the distance at which
different species of pinniped are
disturbed. Disturbance shall be recorded
according to a three-point scale of
response severity.
(c) Training:
(1) NWFSC must conduct annual
training for all chief scientists and other
personnel who may be responsible for
conducting dedicated marine mammal
visual observations to explain
mitigation measures and monitoring and
reporting requirements, mitigation and
monitoring protocols, marine mammal
identification, completion of datasheets,
and use of equipment. NWFSC may
determine the agenda for these
trainings;
(2) NWFSC shall also dedicate a
portion of training to discussion of best
professional judgment, including use in
any incidents of marine mammal
interaction and instructive examples
where use of best professional judgment
was determined to be successful or
unsuccessful; and
(3) NWFSC shall coordinate with
NMFS’s Southwest Fisheries Science
Center (SWFSC) regarding surveys
conducted in the California Current
Ecosystem, such that training and
guidance related to handling procedures
and data collection is consistent.
(d) Handling procedures and data
collection:
(1) NWFSC must develop and
implement standardized marine
mammal handling, disentanglement,
and data collection procedures. These
standard procedures will be subject to
approval by NMFS’s Office of Protected
Resources (OPR);
(2) When practicable, for any marine
mammal interaction involving the
release of a live animal, NWFSC shall
collect necessary data to facilitate a
serious injury determination;
(3) NWFSC shall provide its relevant
personnel with standard guidance and
training regarding handling of marine
mammals, including how to identify
different species, bring an individual
aboard a vessel, assess the level of
consciousness, remove fishing gear,
return an individual to water, and log
activities pertaining to the interaction;
and
(4) NWFSC shall record such data on
standardized forms, which will be
subject to approval by OPR. NWFSC
shall also answer a standard series of
supplemental questions regarding the
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
details of any marine mammal
interaction.
(e) Reporting:
(1) NWFSC shall report all incidents
of marine mammal interaction to
NMFS’s Protected Species Incidental
Take database within 48 hours of
occurrence and shall provide
supplemental information to OPR upon
request. Information related to marine
mammal interaction (animal captured or
entangled in research gear) must include
details of survey effort, full descriptions
of any observations of the animals, the
context (vessel and conditions),
decisions made, and rationale for
decisions made in vessel and gear
handling;
(2) Annual reporting:
(i) NWFSC shall submit an annual
summary report to OPR not later than 90
days following the end of a given year.
NWFSC shall provide a final report
within thirty days following resolution
of comments on the draft report:
(ii) These reports shall contain, at
minimum, the following:
(A) Annual line-kilometers surveyed
during which the EK60, ME70, SX90 (or
equivalent sources) were predominant
and associated pro-rated estimates of
actual take;
(B) Summary information regarding
use of all hook and line, seine, and trawl
gear, including number of sets, hook
hours, tows, etc., specific to each gear;
(C) Accounts of all incidents of
marine mammal interactions, including
circumstances of the event and
descriptions of any mitigation
procedures implemented or not
implemented and why;
(D) Summary information related to
disturbance of hauled-out pinnipeds,
including event-specific total counts of
animals present, counts of reactions
according to the three-point scale, and
distance of closest approach;
(E) A written evaluation of the
effectiveness of NWFSC mitigation
strategies in reducing the number of
marine mammal interactions with
survey gear, including best professional
judgment and suggestions for changes to
the mitigation strategies, if any;
(F) Final outcome of serious injury
determinations for all incidents of
marine mammal interactions where the
animal(s) were released alive; and
(G) A summary of all relevant training
provided by NWFSC and any
coordination with SWFSC or NMFS’s
West Coast Regional Office.
(f) Reporting of injured or dead
marine mammals:
(1) In the unanticipated event that the
activity defined in § 219.41(a) clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in
a prohibited manner, NWFSC personnel
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
engaged in the research activity shall
immediately cease such activity until
such time as an appropriate decision
regarding activity continuation can be
made by the NWFSC Director (or
designee). The incident must be
reported immediately to OPR and the
West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator, NMFS. OPR will review
the circumstances of the prohibited take
and work with NWFSC to determine
what measures are necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. The immediate decision
made by NWFSC regarding continuation
of the specified activity is subject to
OPR concurrence. The report must
include the following information:
(i) Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
(ii) Description of the incident;
(iii) Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, visibility);
(iv) Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
(v) Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
(vi) Status of all sound source use in
the 24 hours preceding the incident;
(vii) Water depth;
(viii) Fate of the animal(s); and
(ix) Photographs or video footage of
the animal(s);
(2) In the event that NWFSC discovers
an injured or dead marine mammal and
determines that the cause of the injury
or death is unknown and the death is
relatively recent (e.g., in less than a
moderate state of decomposition),
NWFSC shall immediately report the
incident to OPR and the West Coast
Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS.
The report must include the information
identified in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section. Activities may continue while
OPR reviews the circumstances of the
incident. OPR will work with NWFSC to
determine whether additional
mitigation measures or modifications to
the activities are appropriate;
(3) In the event that NWFSC discovers
an injured or dead marine mammal and
determines that the injury or death is
not associated with or related to the
activities defined in § 219.41(a) (e.g.,
previously wounded animal, carcass
with moderate to advanced
decomposition, scavenger damage),
NWFSC shall report the incident to OPR
and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator, NMFS, within 24 hours of
the discovery. NWFSC shall provide
photographs or video footage or other
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:24 Jul 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to OPR.
§ 219.47
Letters of Authorization.
(a) To incidentally take marine
mammals pursuant to these regulations,
NWFSC must apply for and obtain a
Letter of Authorization (LOA).
(b) An LOA, unless suspended or
revoked, may be effective for a period of
time not to exceed the expiration date
of these regulations.
(c) If an LOA expires prior to the
expiration date of these regulations,
NWFSC may apply for and obtain a
renewal of the LOA.
(d) In the event of projected changes
to the activity or to mitigation and
monitoring measures required by an
LOA, NWFSC must apply for and obtain
a modification of the LOA as described
in § 219.48 of this chapter.
(e) The LOA shall set forth:
(1) Permissible methods of incidental
taking;
(2) Means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact (i.e.,
mitigation) on the species, its habitat,
and on the availability of the species for
subsistence uses; and
(3) Requirements for monitoring and
reporting.
(f) Issuance of the LOA shall be based
on a determination that the level of
taking will be consistent with the
findings made for the total taking
allowable under these regulations.
(g) Notice of issuance or denial of an
LOA shall be published in the Federal
Register within thirty days of a
determination.
§ 219.48 Renewals and modifications of
Letters of Authorization.
(a) An LOA issued under § 216.106 of
this chapter and § 219.47 for the activity
identified in § 219.41(a) shall be
renewed or modified upon request by
the applicant, provided that:
(1) The proposed specified activity
and mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures, as well as the
anticipated impacts, are the same as
those described and analyzed for these
regulations (excluding changes made
pursuant to the adaptive management
provision in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section), and
(2) OPR determines that the
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
measures required by the previous LOA
under these regulations were
implemented.
(b) For an LOA modification or
renewal requests by the applicant that
include changes to the activity or the
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
36397
measures (excluding changes made
pursuant to the adaptive management
provision in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section) that do not change the findings
made for the regulations or result in no
more than a minor change in the total
estimated number of takes (or
distribution by species or years), OPR
may publish a notice of proposed LOA
in the Federal Register, including the
associated analysis of the change, and
solicit public comment before issuing
the LOA.
(c) An LOA issued under § 216.106 of
this chapter and § 219.47 for the activity
identified in § 219.41(a) may be
modified by OPR under the following
circumstances:
(1) Adaptive Management—OPR may
modify (including augment) the existing
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting
measures (after consulting with NWFSC
regarding the practicability of the
modifications) if doing so creates a
reasonable likelihood of more
effectively accomplishing the goals of
the mitigation and monitoring set forth
in the preamble for these regulations;
(i) Possible sources of data that could
contribute to the decision to modify the
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting
measures in an LOA:
(A) Results from NWFSC’s monitoring
from the previous year(s);
(B) Results from other marine
mammal and/or sound research or
studies; and
(C) Any information that reveals
marine mammals may have been taken
in a manner, extent or number not
authorized by these regulations or
subsequent LOAs.
(ii) If, through adaptive management,
the modifications to the mitigation,
monitoring, or reporting measures are
substantial, OPR will publish a notice of
proposed LOA in the Federal Register
and solicit public comment.
(2) Emergencies—If OPR determines
that an emergency exists that poses a
significant risk to the well-being of the
species or stocks of marine mammals
specified in LOAs issued pursuant to
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 219.47,
an LOA may be modified without prior
notice or opportunity for public
comment. Notice would be published in
the Federal Register within thirty days
of the action.
§ 219.49
[Reserved]
§ 219.50
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2018–16115 Filed 7–26–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.SGM
27JYR2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36370-36397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16115]
[[Page 36369]]
Vol. 83
Friday,
No. 145
July 27, 2018
Part III
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 219
Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental
to Northwest Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Research; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 83 , No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2018 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 36370]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 219
[Docket No. 151027994-6421-02]
RIN 0648-BF47
Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Northwest Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Research
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS' Office of Protected Resources (OPR), upon request of
NMFS' Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC), hereby issues
regulations to govern the unintentional taking of marine mammals
incidental to fisheries research conducted in the Pacific Ocean over
the course of five years. These regulations, which allow for the
issuance of Letters of Authorization (LOA) for the incidental take of
marine mammals during the described activities and specified
timeframes, prescribe the permissible methods of taking and other means
of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on marine mammal
species or stocks and their habitat, as well as requirements pertaining
to the monitoring and reporting of such taking.
DATES: Effective from August 27, 2018, through August 28, 2023.
ADDRESSES: A copy of NWFSC's application and supporting documents, as
well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be
obtained online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-noaa-fisheries-nwfsc-fisheries-and-ecosystem-research. In
case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact
listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Regulatory Action
These regulations, issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA) (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), establish a framework
for authorizing the take of marine mammals incidental to the NWFSC's
fisheries research activities in the California Current and Pacific
Northwest.
The NWFSC collects a wide array of information necessary to
evaluate the status of exploited fishery resources and the marine
environment. NWFSC scientists conduct fishery-independent research
onboard NOAA-owned and operated vessels or on chartered vessels. A few
surveys are conducted onboard commercial fishing vessels, but the NWFSC
designs and executes the studies and funds vessel time.
We received an application from the NWFSC requesting five-year
regulations and authorization to take multiple species of marine
mammals. Take is anticipated to occur by Level B harassment incidental
to the use of active acoustic devices, as well as by visual disturbance
of pinnipeds, and by Level A harassment, serious injury, or mortality
incidental to the use of fisheries research gear. The regulations are
valid for five years from the date of issuance. Please see
``Background'' below for definitions of harassment.
Legal Authority for the Proposed Action
Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A)) directs
the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but
not intentional taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial
fishing) within a specified geographical region for up to five years
if, after notice and public comment, the agency makes certain findings
and issues regulations that set forth permissible methods of taking
pursuant to that activity, as well as monitoring and reporting
requirements. Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and the implementing
regulations at 50 CFR part 216, subpart I provide the legal basis for
issuing this final rule containing five-year regulations, and a
subsequent LOA. As directed by this legal authority, this final rule
contains mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements.
Summary of Major Provisions Within the Final Rule
The following provides a summary of some of the major provisions
within the rulemaking for the NWFSC fisheries research activities. We
have determined that the NWFSC's adherence to the planned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting measures listed below will achieve the least
practicable adverse impact on the affected marine mammals. They
include:
Required monitoring of the sampling areas to detect the
presence of marine mammals before deployment of certain research gear.
Required use of acoustic deterrent devices on surface
trawl nets.
Required implementation of the mitigation strategy known
as the ``move-on rule mitigation protocol'' which incorporates best
professional judgment, when necessary during certain research fishing
operations.
Background
Paragraphs 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C.
1371(a)(5)(A) and (D)) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers
of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity
(other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region
if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if
the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103
as ``an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.''
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
Summary of Request
On August 10, 2015, we received an adequate and complete request
from NWFSC for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to
fisheries research activities. We received an initial draft of the
request on January 2, 2015, followed by a revised draft on April 28,
2015. On August 28, 2015 (80 FR 52256), we published a notice of
receipt of NWFSC's application in the Federal Register, requesting
comments and information related to the NWFSC
[[Page 36371]]
request for 30 days. We received comments jointly from The Humane
Society of the United States and Whale and Dolphin Conservation, which
we considered in development of the notice of proposed rulemaking (81
FR 38516; June 13, 2016) and which are available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-noaa-fisheries-nwfsc-fisheries-and-ecosystem-research.
NWFSC plans to conduct fisheries research with trawl gear used at
various levels in the water column, hook-and-line gears (including
longlines with multiple hooks, rod and reel, and troll deployments),
purse seine/tangle net gear, and other gear. If a marine mammal
interacts with gear deployed by NWFSC, the outcome could potentially be
Level A harassment, serious injury (i.e., any injury that will likely
result in mortality), or mortality. Therefore, NWFSC has pooled the
estimated number of incidents of take that could reasonably result from
gear interactions, and we have assessed the potential impacts
accordingly. NWFSC also uses various active acoustic devices in the
conduct of fisheries research, and use of these devices has the
potential to result in Level B harassment of marine mammals. Level B
harassment of pinnipeds hauled out may also occur, as a result of
visual disturbance from vessels conducting NWFSC research. These
regulations are valid for five years from the date of issuance.
NWFSC requests authorization to take individuals of 16 species by
Level A harassment, serious injury, or mortality (hereafter referred to
as M/SI) and of 34 species by Level B harassment.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
The NWFSC collects a wide array of information necessary to
evaluate the status of exploited fishery resources and the marine
environment. NWFSC scientists conduct fishery-independent research
onboard NOAA-owned and operated vessels or on chartered vessels. A few
surveys are conducted onboard commercial fishing vessels, but the NWFSC
designs and executes the studies and funds vessel time. The NWFSC plans
to administer and conduct approximately 36 survey programs over the 5-
year period. The gear types used fall into several categories: Towed
nets fished at various levels in the water column, longline and other
hook and line gear, seine nets, traps, and other gear. Only use of
trawl nets, hook and line gears, and purse seine nets are likely to
result in interaction with marine mammals. Many of these surveys also
use active acoustic devices.
The Federal government has a responsibility to conserve and protect
living marine resources in U.S. waters and has also entered into a
number of international agreements and treaties related to the
management of living marine resources in international waters outside
the United States. NOAA has the primary responsibility for managing
marine finfish and shellfish species and their habitats, with that
responsibility delegated within NOAA to NMFS.
In order to direct and coordinate the collection of scientific
information needed to make informed fishery management decisions,
Congress created six regional fisheries science centers, each a
distinct organizational entity and the scientific focal point within
NMFS for region-based, Federal fisheries-related research. This
research is aimed at monitoring fish stock recruitment, abundance,
survival and biological rates, geographic distribution of species and
stocks, ecosystem process changes, and marine ecological research. The
NWFSC is the research arm of NMFS in the northwest region of the United
States. The NWFSC conducts research and provides scientific advice to
manage fisheries and conserve protected species in the geographic
research area described below and provides scientific information to
support the Pacific Fishery Management Council and numerous other
domestic and international fisheries management organizations.
Dates and Duration
The specified activity may occur at any time during the five-year
period of validity of the regulations. Dates and duration of individual
surveys are inherently uncertain, based on congressional funding levels
for the NWFSC, weather conditions, or ship contingencies. In addition,
cooperative research is designed to provide flexibility on a yearly
basis in order to address issues as they arise. Some cooperative
research projects last multiple years or may continue with
modifications. Other projects only last one year and are not continued.
Most cooperative research projects go through an annual competitive
selection process to determine which projects should be funded based on
proposals developed by many independent researchers and fishing
industry participants.
Specified Geographical Region
The NWFSC conducts research in the Pacific Northwest and California
Current within three research areas: The California Current Research
Area (CCRA), Puget Sound Research Area (PSRA), and Lower Columbia River
Research Area (LCRRA). Please see Figures 1-2 through 1-4 in the NWFSC
application for maps of the three research areas. We note here that,
while the NWFSC specified geographical region extends outside of the
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), from the Mexican EEZ (not including
Mexican territorial waters) north into the Canadian EEZ (not including
Canadian territorial waters), the MMPA's authority does not extend into
foreign territorial waters. These areas were described in detail in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016); please see
that document for further detail.
Detailed Description of Activities
A detailed description of NWFSC's planned activities was provided
in our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016) and
is not repeated here. No changes have been made to the specified
activities described therein.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register on June 13, 2016 (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016), and requested
comments and information from the public. During the thirty-day comment
period, we received a letter from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission). The comments and our responses are provided here, and the
comments have been posted online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-noaa-fisheries-nwfsc-fisheries-and-ecosystem-research. Please see the comment letter for full rationale
behind the recommendations we respond to below. No changes were made to
the proposed rule as a result of these comments.
Comment 1: The Commission provides general recommendations--not
specific to the proposed NWFSC rulemaking--that NMFS develop criteria
and guidance for determining when prospective applicants should request
taking by Level B harassment from the use of echosounders, other
sonars, and sub-bottom profilers and that NMFS formulate a strategy for
updating its generic behavioral harassment thresholds for all types of
sound sources as soon as possible.
Response: We appreciate the recommendations and will consider the
need for applicant guidance specific to the types of acoustic sources
mentioned by the Commission. Generally speaking, there has been a lack
of information and scientific consensus regarding the
[[Page 36372]]
potential effects of scientific sonars on marine mammals, which may
differ depending on the system and species in question as well as the
environment in which the system is operated. We are currently working
to ensure that the use of these types of active acoustic sources is
considered consistently and look forward to the Commission's advice as
we proceed.
With regard to revision of existing behavioral harassment criteria,
NMFS agrees that this is necessary. NMFS is continuing our examination
of the effects of noise on marine mammal behavior and plans to focus
our work in the coming years on developing guidance regarding the
effects of anthropogenic sound on marine mammal behavior. Behavioral
response is a complex question and we have determined that additional
time is needed to research and address it appropriately.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that OPR require NWFSC to
estimate the numbers of marine mammals taken by Level B harassment
incidental to use of active acoustic sources (e.g., echosounders) based
on the 120-decibel (dB) rather than the 160-dB root mean square (rms)
threshold.
Response: Please see our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR
38516; June 13, 2016) for discussion related to acoustic terminology
and thresholds. The Commission repeats a recommendation made in prior
letters and, as we have previously indicated, we disagree with the
recommendation. Our previous response is repeated below.
Continuous sounds are those whose sound pressure level remains
above that of the ambient sound, with negligibly small fluctuations in
level (NIOSH, 1998; ANSI, 2005), while intermittent sounds are defined
as sounds with interrupted levels of low or no sound (NIOSH, 1998).
Thus, echosounder signals are not continuous sounds but rather
intermittent sounds. Intermittent sounds can further be defined as
either impulsive or non-impulsive. Impulsive sounds have been defined
as sounds which are typically transient, brief (<1 sec), broadband, and
consist of a high peak pressure with rapid rise time and rapid decay
(ANSI, 1986; NIOSH, 1998). Echosounder signals also have durations that
are typically very brief (<1 sec), with temporal characteristics that
more closely resemble those of impulsive sounds than non-impulsive
sounds, which typically have more gradual rise times and longer decays
(ANSI, 1995; NIOSH, 1998). With regard to behavioral thresholds, we
consider the temporal and spectral characteristics of echosounder
signals to more closely resemble those of an impulse sound than a
continuous sound.
The Commission suggests that, for certain sources considered here,
the interval between pulses would not be discernible to the animal,
rendering them effectively continuous. However, echosounder pulses are
emitted in a similar fashion as odontocete echolocation click trains.
Research indicates that marine mammals, in general, have extremely fine
auditory temporal resolution and can detect each signal separately
(e.g., Au et al., 1988; Dolphin et al., 1995; Supin and Popov, 1995;
Mooney et al., 2009), especially for species with echolocation
capabilities. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that marine mammals
would perceive echosounder signals as being continuous.
In conclusion, echosounder signals are intermittent rather than
continuous signals, and the fine temporal resolution of the marine
mammal auditory system allows them to perceive these sounds as such.
Further, the physical characteristics of these signals indicate a
greater similarity to the way that intermittent, impulsive sounds are
received. Therefore, the 160-dB threshold (typically associated with
impulsive sources) is more appropriate than the 120-dB threshold
(typically associated with continuous sources) for estimating takes by
behavioral harassment incidental to use of such sources. This response
represents the consensus opinion of acoustics experts from NMFS' Office
of Protected Resources and Office of Science and Technology.
Comment 3: The Commission notes that NMFS has delineated two
categories of acoustic sources, largely based on frequency, with those
sources operating at frequencies greater than the known hearing ranges
of any marine mammal (i.e., >180 kilohertz (kHz)) lacking the potential
to cause disruption of behavioral patterns. The Commission describes
the recent scientific literature on acoustic sources with frequencies
above 180 kHz (i.e., Deng et al., 2014; Hastie et al., 2014) and
recommends that we estimate numbers of takes associated with those
acoustic sources (or similar acoustic sources) with frequencies above
180 kHz that have been shown to elicit behavioral responses above the
120-dB threshold.
Response: We considered the information cited by the Commission in
our proposed rulemaking. NMFS's response regarding the appropriateness
of the 120-dB versus 160-dB rms thresholds was provided above in the
response to Comment #2. In general, the referenced work indicates that
``sub-harmonics'' could be ``detectable'' by certain species at
distances up to several hundred meters (m). However, this detectability
is in reference to ambient noise, not to NMFS's established 160-dB
threshold for assessing the potential for incidental take for these
sources. A behavioral response to a stimulus does not necessarily
indicate that Level B harassment, as defined by the MMPA, has occurred.
Source levels of the secondary peaks considered in these studies--those
within the hearing range of some marine mammals--range from 135-166 dB,
meaning that these sub-harmonics would either be below the threshold
for behavioral harassment or would attenuate to such a level within a
few meters. Beyond these important study details, these high-frequency
(i.e., Category 1) sources and any energy they may produce below the
primary frequency that could be audible to marine mammals would be
dominated by a few primary sources (e.g., EK60) that are operated near-
continuously--much like other Category 2 sources considered in our
assessment of potential incidental take from NWFSC's use of active
acoustic sources--and the potential range above threshold would be so
small as to essentially discount them.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section
101(a)(5)(A) 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 subsistence uses. We provided a full description of the
planned mitigation measures, including background discussion related to
certain elements of the mitigation plan, in our notice of proposed
rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016). Please see that document for
more detail.
NMFS has considered many potential mitigation measures, including
those the NWFSC has determined to be feasible and has implemented in
recent years as a standard part of sampling protocols. These measures
include the move-on rule mitigation protocol (also referred to in the
preamble as the move-on rule), protected species visual watches and use
of acoustic pingers on trawl gear, as well as use of a marine mammal
excluder device (MMED) in Nordic 264 trawl nets.
[[Page 36373]]
General Measures
Coordination and communication--We require that the NWFSC take all
necessary measures to coordinate and communicate in advance of each
specific survey with NOAA's Office of Marine and Aviation Operations
(OMAO), or other relevant parties, to ensure that all mitigation
measures and monitoring requirements described herein, as well as the
specific manner of implementation and relevant event-contingent
decision-making processes, are clearly understood and agreed-upon. This
may involve description of all required measures when submitting cruise
instructions to OMAO or when completing contracts with external
entities. NWFSC will coordinate and conduct briefings at the outset of
each survey and as necessary between the ship's crew (commanding
officer/master or designee(s), as appropriate) and scientific party in
order to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine
mammal monitoring protocol, and operational procedures. The chief
scientist (CS) will be responsible for coordination with the Officer on
Deck (OOD; or equivalent on non-NOAA platforms) to ensure that
requirements, procedures, and decision-making processes are understood
and properly implemented.
Vessel speed--Vessel speed during active sampling rarely exceeds 5
knots (kn), with typical speeds being 2-4 kn. Transit speeds vary from
6-14 kn but average 10 kn. These low vessel speeds minimize the
potential for ship strike. At any time during a survey or in transit,
if a crew member standing watch or dedicated marine mammal observer
sights marine mammals that may intersect with the vessel course, that
individual will immediately communicate the presence of marine mammals
to the bridge for appropriate course alteration or speed reduction, as
possible, to avoid incidental collisions.
Other gears--The NWFSC deploys a wide variety of gear to sample the
marine environment during all of their research cruises. Many of these
types of gear (e.g., plankton nets, video camera and remotely-operated
vehicle (ROV) deployments) are not considered to pose any risk to
marine mammals and are therefore not subject to specific mitigation
measures. However, at all times when the NWFSC is conducting survey
operations at sea, the OOD and/or CS and crew will monitor for any
unusual circumstances that may arise at a sampling site and use best
professional judgment to avoid any potential risks to marine mammals
during use of all research equipment.
Handling procedures--The NWFSC will implement a number of handling
protocols to minimize potential harm to marine mammals that are
incidentally taken during the course of fisheries research activities.
In general, protocols have already been prepared for use on commercial
fishing vessels. Because incidental take of marine mammals in fishing
gear is similar for commercial fisheries and research surveys, NWFSC
proposes to adopt these protocols, which are expected to increase post-
release survival. In general, following a ``common sense'' approach to
handling captured or entangled marine mammals will present the best
chance of minimizing injury to the animal and of decreasing risks to
scientists and vessel crew. Handling or disentangling marine mammals
carries inherent safety risks, and using best professional judgment and
ensuring human safety is paramount.
Captured live or injured marine mammals are released from research
gear and returned to the water as soon as possible with no gear or as
little gear remaining on the animal as possible. Animals are released
without removing them from the water if possible, and data collection
is conducted in such a manner as not to delay release of the animal(s)
or endanger the crew. NWFSC staff will be instructed on how to identify
different species, handle and bring marine mammals aboard a vessel,
assess the level of consciousness, remove fishing gear, and return
marine mammals to water.
Trawl Survey Visual Monitoring and Operational Protocols
Specific mitigation protocols are required for all trawl operations
conducted by the NWFSC using Nordic 264 surface trawl gear, midwater
trawl gear (modified Cobb, Aleutian Wing, and various commercial nets),
and bottom trawl gear (double-rigged shrimp, Poly Nor'easter, modified
Aberdeen, beam, and various commercial nets). Separate protocols
(described below) are in place for the Kodiak surface trawl and pair
trawl gear. Marine mammal watches will be conducted for at least ten
minutes prior to the beginning of the planned set and throughout the
tow and net retrieval, by scanning the surrounding waters with the
naked eye and rangefinding binoculars (or monocular). Lookouts
immediately alert the OOD and CS as to their best estimate of the
species and number of animals observed and any observed animal's
distance, bearing, and direction of travel relative to the ship's
position. The CS must confirm with the OOD that no marine mammals have
been seen within 500 m (or as far as may be observed if less than 500
m) of the ship or appear to be approaching the ship during the pre-set
watch period prior to the deployment of any trawl gear. During
nighttime operations, visual observation may be conducted using the
naked eye and available vessel lighting but effectiveness is limited.
The visual observation period typically occurs during transit leading
up to arrival at the sampling station, rather than upon arrival on
station. However, in some cases it may be necessary to conduct a
plankton tow or other small net cast prior to deploying trawl gear. In
these cases, the visual watch will continue until trawl gear is ready
to be deployed. Aside from pre-trawl monitoring, the OOD/CS and crew
standing watch will visually scan for marine mammals during all daytime
operations.
It is important to note that the 500 m distance is provided only as
a frame of reference for marine mammal observations that would
nominally be of greater concern as regards the potential for
interaction with research fishing gear. The primary concern is to avoid
all marine mammal interactions (regardless of the numbers of takes
proposed for authorization here), and the most appropriate course of
action to achieve this goal in any given instance is likely to be
related more to event-specific elements than to an arbitrary distance
from the vessel. Depending on unpredictable contextual elements,
animals sighted at distances greater than 500 m could provoke
mitigation action or, conversely, animals sighted at closer range could
be determined to not be at risk of interacting with research fishing
gear. The NWFSC considers 500 m to be the average effective observation
distance, but the actual effective range is determined by numerous
factors related to the weather, ship observations, and the species
observed.
The primary purpose of conducting pre-trawl visual monitoring is to
implement the move-on rule. If marine mammals are sighted within 500 m
(or as far as may be observed if less than 500 m) of the vessel and are
considered at risk of interacting with the vessel or research gear, or
appear to be approaching the vessel and are considered at risk of
interaction, NWFSC may elect to either remain onsite to see if the
animals move off or may move on to another sampling location. When
remaining onsite, the set is delayed (typically for at least ten
minutes) and, if the animals depart or appear to no longer be at risk
of interacting with the vessel or gear, a further ten minute
observation period is
[[Page 36374]]
conducted. If no further observations are made or the animals still do
not appear to be at risk of interaction, then the set may be made. If
the vessel is moved to a different section of the sampling area, move-
on rule mitigation protocols would begin anew. If, after moving on,
marine mammals remain at risk of interaction, the CS or watch leader
may decide to move again or to skip the station. Marine mammals that
are sighted further than 500 m from the vessel would be monitored to
determine their position and movement in relation to the vessel. If
they appear to be closing on the vessel, the move-on rule protocols may
be implemented even if they are initially further than 500 m from the
vessel.
For surface trawl surveys (i.e., those surveys deploying the Nordic
264 net), which have historically presented the greatest risk of marine
mammal interaction, dedicated crew are assigned to marine mammal
monitoring duty (i.e., have no other tasks) and care is taken to
provide some rest periods for observers to avoid fatigue. At least two
pairs of binoculars are available for verification of potential
sightings. As the vessel approaches the station, the OOD and at least
one assigned member of the scientific party monitor for marine mammals.
Within several minutes of arriving on station and finishing their
sampling duties, two additional members of the scientific party are
assigned to monitor for marine mammals and, for the remainder of the
tow, there would be a minimum of three members of the scientific party
watching for marine mammals. Depending on the situational context
(e.g., numbers of marine mammals seen during the station approach or
expected at that particular place and season), additional crew may be
assigned to stand watch as necessary to provide full monitoring
coverage around the vessel. Up to eight observers in total (including
ship's crew standing watch) may be on duty during active trawling. The
focus on the full area around the ship continues until trawl retrieval
begins, at which point observational focus turns to the stern and the
trawl net itself.
For midwater and bottom trawl surveys, the pre-set watch period is
conducted by the OOD and bridge crew and typically occurs during
transit prior to arrival at the sampling station but may also include
time on station if other types of gear or equipment (e.g., bongo nets)
are deployed before the trawl. For these trawls, risk of interaction
during the tow is lower and monitoring effort is reduced to the bridge
crew until trawl retrieval.
For all surveys, although the minimum pre-set watch period is ten
minutes, the actual monitoring period is typically longer. During
standard trawl operations, at least some of the trackline to be towed
is typically traversed prior to setting gear in order to check for
hazards. On surface trawl surveys, CTD casts and plankton/bongo net
hauls are made prior to setting the trawl. These activities can take
25-35 minutes after the vessel arrives on station, depending on water
depth, and monitoring for marine mammals continues throughout these
activities. Midwater trawls and bottom trawls do not typically deploy
other gears before deploying trawl gear, but reconnaissance of the
trackline often takes ten to fifteen minutes after arriving on station.
In addition, once the decision is made to deploy the trawl gear,
monitoring continues while the net is unspooled, which may take about
ten minutes. Before the trawl doors are deployed, the net floats closed
on the surface behind the vessel, and appropriate actions can be taken
if marine mammals are sighted near the ship. Therefore, the marine
mammal monitoring period--which begins before the vessel arrives on
station and extends continuously through gear deployment--typically
extends for over thirty minutes for all trawl types.
The effectiveness of visual monitoring may be limited depending on
weather and lighting conditions. The OOD, CS, or watch leader will
determine the best strategy to avoid potential takes of marine mammals
based on the species encountered and their numbers and behavior,
position, and vector relative to the vessel, as well as any other
factors. For example, a whale transiting through the sampling area in
the distance may only require a short move from the designated station,
whereas a pod of dolphins in close proximity to the vessel may require
a longer move from the station or possibly cancellation of the planned
tow if the group follows the vessel.
In general, trawl operations will be conducted immediately upon
arrival on station (and on conclusion of the pre-watch period) in order
to minimize the time during which marine mammals (particularly
pinnipeds) may become attracted to the vessel. However, in some cases
it will be necessary to conduct small net tows (e.g., bongo net) prior
to deploying trawl gear.
Once the trawl net is in the water, the OOD, CS, and/or crew
standing watch will continue to visually monitor the surrounding waters
and will maintain a lookout for marine mammal presence as far away as
environmental conditions allow. If marine mammals are sighted before
the gear is fully retrieved, the most appropriate response to avoid
marine mammal interaction will be determined by the professional
judgment of the CS, watch leader, OOD and other experienced crew as
necessary. This judgment will be based on past experience operating
trawl gears around marine mammals (i.e., best professional judgment)
and on NWFSC training sessions that will facilitate dissemination of
expertise operating in these situations (e.g., factors that contribute
to marine mammal gear interactions and those that aid in successfully
avoiding such events). Best professional judgment takes into
consideration the species, numbers, and behavior of the animals, the
status of the trawl net operation (e.g., net opening, depth, and
distance from the stern), the time it would take to retrieve the net,
and safety considerations for changing speed or course. We recognize
that it is not possible to dictate in advance the exact course of
action that the OOD or CS should take in any given event involving the
presence of marine mammals in proximity to an ongoing trawl tow, given
the sheer number of potential variables, combinations of variables that
may determine the appropriate course of action, and the need to
consider human safety in the operation of fishing gear at sea.
Nevertheless, we require a full accounting of factors that shape both
successful and unsuccessful decisions, and these details will be fed
back into NWFSC training efforts and ultimately help to refine the best
professional judgment that determines the course of action taken in any
given scenario (see further discussion in ``Monitoring and
Reporting'').
If trawling operations have been suspended because of the presence
of marine mammals, the vessel will resume trawl operations (when
practicable) only when the animals are believed to have departed the
area. This decision is at the discretion of the OOD/CS and is dependent
on the situation.
Standard survey protocols that are expected to lessen the
likelihood of marine mammal interactions include standardized tow
durations and distances. Standard tow durations of not more than thirty
minutes at the target depth will typically be implemented, excluding
deployment and retrieval time (which may require an additional thirty
minutes, depending on target depth), to reduce the likelihood of
attracting and incidentally taking marine mammals. Short tow durations
decrease the opportunity for marine mammals to find the vessel and
investigate. Trawl tow distances will be
[[Page 36375]]
less than 3 nautical miles (nmi)--typically 1-2 nmi, depending on the
specific survey and trawl speed--which is expected to reduce the
likelihood of attracting and incidentally taking marine mammals. In
addition, care will be taken when emptying the trawl to avoid damage to
marine mammals that may be caught in the gear but are not visible upon
retrieval. The gear will be emptied as quickly as possible after
retrieval in order to determine whether or not marine mammals are
present. The vessel's crew will clean trawl nets prior to deployment to
remove prey items that might attract marine mammals. Catch volumes are
typically small with every attempt made to collect all organisms caught
in the trawl.
Marine mammal excluder device--Excluder devices are specialized
modifications, typically used in trawl nets, which are designed to
reduce bycatch by allowing non-target taxa to escape the net. These
devices generally consist of a grid of bars fitted into the net that
allow target species to pass through the bars into the codend while
larger, unwanted taxa (e.g., turtles, sharks, mammals) strike the bars
and are ejected through an opening in the net. Marine mammal excluder
devices (MMED) have not been proven to be fully effective at preventing
marine mammal capture in trawl nets (e.g., Chilvers, 2008) and are not
expected to prevent marine mammal capture in NWFSC trawl surveys. It is
difficult to effectively test such devices, in terms of effectiveness
in excluding marine mammals as opposed to effects on target species
catchability, because realistic field trials would necessarily involve
marine mammal interactions with trawl nets. Use of artificial
surrogates in field trials has not been shown to be a realistic
substitute (Gibson and Isakssen, 1998). Nevertheless, we believe it
reasonable to assume that use of MMEDs may reduce the likelihood of a
given marine mammal interaction with trawl gear resulting in mortality.
We do not infer causality, but note that annual marine mammal
interactions with the Nordic 264 trawl net have been much reduced for
NMFS's Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) (relative to 2008)
since their use of the MMED began.
Multiple types of midwater trawl nets are used in NWFSC trawl
surveys. The Nordic 264 trawl net, used as a surface trawl by NWFSC, is
generally much larger than the midwater trawls, is fished at faster
speeds, and has a different shape and functionality than these nets.
Very few marine mammal interactions with NWFSC pelagic trawl gear have
involved nets other than the Nordic 264 (one of 37 total incidents
since 1999). Therefore, MMED use is not proposed for nets other than
the Nordic 264.
The NWFSC has tested the MMED design used by the SWFSC and found
that it caused a significant loss of some salmon species that were the
target of their research. More recent experiments have used video
cameras attached to the net opening and near the excluder device to
test different configurations of the excluder device to minimize loss
of target species. The experiments have looked at adding weight and
stiffeners to the flap covering the escape hatch to keep it closed and
flipping the MMED so the escape hatch faces down rather than up. Based
on preliminary results, this downward-pointing escape hatch appears to
be the best design for minimizing loss of target species. Additional
research will be necessary to calibrate catch levels in tows with the
excluder device compared to past tows that did not contain the excluder
(i.e., to align the new catchability rates with historical data sets).
During these configuration and calibration experiments some nets will
be fished without the MMED in order to provide controls for
catchability. Once the NWFSC completes these experiments the MMED will
be used in all future trawls with the Nordic 264. Please see
``Monitoring and Reporting'' for additional discussion.
Acoustic deterrent devices--Acoustic deterrent devices (pingers)
are underwater sound-emitting devices that have been shown to decrease
the probability of interactions with certain species of marine mammals
when fishing gear is fitted with the devices. Multiple studies have
reported significant decreases in marine mammal interactions with
fishing gear following pinger deployment, with results reported for
multiple species and gears (e.g., Kraus et al., 1997; Trippel et al.,
1999; Gearin et al., 2000; Palka et al., 2008; Barlow and Cameron,
2003, Carretta et al., 2008; Carretta and Barlow, 2011). Pingers will
be deployed during all surface trawl operations (i.e., using the Nordic
264 net), with two pairs of pingers installed near the net opening. The
vessel's crew will ensure that pingers are operational prior to
deployment. Pinger brands typically used by NWFSC include the Aquatec
Subsea Limited model AQUAmark and Fumunda Marine models F10 and F70,
with the following attributes: (1) Operational depth of 10-200 m; (2)
tones range from 200-400 ms in duration, repeated every five to six
seconds; (3) variable frequency of 10-160 kHz; and (4) maximum source
level of 145 dB rms re 1 [mu]Pa.
Kodiak surface trawl and pair trawl gear--The Kodiak surface trawl,
used only in Puget Sound, has only limited potential for marine mammal
interaction. This gear type is a small net towed at slow speeds (about
2 kn) as close to shore as the net can be fished, and these
characteristics mean that marine mammals would likely be able to avoid
the net or swim out of it if necessary. However, rules for cetaceans
would be similar as for other net types (i.e., delay and/or move-on if
cetaceans observed within approximately 500 m or clearly approaching
from greater distance). If killer whales are observed at any distance,
the net would not be deployed, and the move-on rule would be invoked.
The pair trawl is used only in the Columbia River and is fished
with an open codend. Although unlikely, there is some potential for
pinnipeds to become entangled in the net material. NWFSC's practice,
which would be allowed under section 109(h) of the MMPA, is to deter
pinnipeds from encountering the net using pyrotechnic devices and other
measures. Therefore, separate mitigation is not warranted, and we do
not discuss NWFSC deterrence of pinnipeds associated with pair trawl
surveys further in this document. Please see the NWFSC's Programmatic
Environmental Assessment (EA) for further information about this
practice.
Longline and Other Hook and Line Survey Visual Monitoring and
Operational Protocols
Visual monitoring requirements for all longline surveys are similar
to the general protocols described above for trawl surveys. Please see
that section for full details of the visual monitoring protocol and the
move-on rule mitigation protocol. In summary, requirements for longline
surveys are to: (1) Conduct visual monitoring during the 30-minute
period prior to arrival on station; (2) implement the move-on rule if
marine mammals are observed within the area around the vessel and may
be at risk of interacting with the vessel or gear; (3) deploy gear as
soon as possible upon arrival on station (depending on presence of
marine mammals); and (4) maintain visual monitoring effort throughout
deployment and retrieval of the longline gear. As was described for
trawl gear, the OOD, CS, or watch leader will use best professional
judgment to minimize the risk to marine mammals from potential gear
interactions during deployment and retrieval of gear. If marine mammals
are detected during
[[Page 36376]]
setting operations and are considered to be at risk, immediate
retrieval or suspension of operations may be warranted. If operations
have been suspended because of the presence of marine mammals, the
vessel will resume setting (when practicable) only when the animals are
believed to have departed the area. If marine mammals are detected
during retrieval operations and are considered to be at risk, haul-back
may be postponed. These decisions are at the discretion of the OOD/CS
and are dependent on the situation. If killer whales are observed at
any distance, the set would not occur and the move-on rule would be
invoked.
Other types of hook and line surveys (e.g., rod and reel) generally
use the same protocols as longline surveys. However, for hook and line
surveys in Puget Sound the move-on rule is not required for pinnipeds
because they are commonly abundant on shore nearby hook and line
sampling locations. Use of the move-on rule in these circumstances
would represent an impracticable impact on NWFSC survey operations, and
we note that no marine mammals have ever been captured in NWFSC hook
and line surveys. However, the NWFSC would implement the move-on rule
for hook and line surveys in Puget Sound for any cetaceans that are
within 500 m and may be at risk of interaction with the survey
operation. If killer whales are observed at any distance, fishing would
not occur.
As for trawl surveys, some standard survey protocols are expected
to minimize the potential for marine mammal interactions. Soak times
are typically short relative to commercial fishing operations, measured
from the time the last hook is in the water to when the first hook is
brought out of the water. NWFSC longline protocols specifically
prohibit chumming (releasing additional bait to attract target species
to the gear) and spent bait and offal is retained on the vessel until
all gear has been retrieved. Some hook and line surveys use barbless
hooks, which are less likely to injure a hooked animal.
Seine Survey Visual Monitoring and Operational Protocols
Visual monitoring and operational protocols for seine surveys are
similar to those described previously for trawl surveys, with a focus
on visual observation in the survey area and avoidance of marine
mammals that may be at risk of interaction with survey vessels or gear.
For purse seine operations, visual monitoring is focused on avoidance
of cetaceans and aggregations of pinnipeds. Individual or small numbers
of pinnipeds may be attracted to purse seine operations, especially in
Puget Sound, and are frequently observed to enter operational purse
seines to depredate the catch and exit the net unharmed. Use of the
move-on rule in these circumstances would represent an impracticable
impact on NWFSC survey operations, and we note that no marine mammals
have ever been captured in NWFSC seine surveys.
If pinnipeds are in the immediate vicinity of a purse seine survey,
the set may be delayed until animals move away or the move-on rule is
determined to be appropriate, but the net would not be opened if
already deployed and pinnipeds enter it. However, delay would not be
invoked if only few pinnipeds are present (e.g., less than five), and
they do not appear to obviously be at risk.
If any dolphins or porpoises are observed within approximately 500
m of the purse seine survey location, the set would be delayed. If any
dolphins or porpoises are observed in the net, the net would be
immediately opened to free the animals. If killer whales or other large
whales are observed at any distance the net would not be set, and the
move-on rule would be invoked.
Beach seines are typically set nearshore by small boat crews, who
visually survey the area prior to the set. The set would not be made
within 200 m of any hauled pinnipeds. Otherwise, marine mammals are
unlikely to be at risk of interaction with NWFSC beach seine
operations, as the nets are relatively small and deployed and retrieved
slowly. If a marine mammal is observed attempting to interact with the
beach seine gear, the gear would immediately be lifted and removed from
the water.
Tangle net protocols--Tangle nets are used only in the Columbia
River. NWFSC attempts to avoid pinnipeds by rotating sampling locations
on a daily basis and by avoiding fishing near haulout areas. However,
as was described for NWFSC use of pair trawl gear in the LCRRA, NWFSC
also deters pinnipeds from interacting with tangle net gear as
necessary using pyrotechnic devices and visual presence, a practice
allowed under section 109(h) of the MMPA. Therefore, we do not discuss
NWFSC deterrence of pinnipeds associated with tangle net surveys
further in this document. Please see the NWFSC's draft Programmatic EA
for further information about this practice. If pinniped presence in
the vicinity of tangle net surveys is so abundant as to be
uncontrollable through deterrence, sampling would be discontinued for a
given day.
We have carefully evaluated the NWFSC's planned mitigation measures
and considered a range of other measures in the context of ensuring
that we prescribed the means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their
habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of
the following factors in relation to one another: (1) The manner in
which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the
measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2)
the proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize
adverse impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of
the general goals listed below:
(1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal);
(2) A reduction in the number (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) of individual marine mammals
exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may
contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment
only);
(3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at a
biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine
mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental
take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only);
(4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to
result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to
reducing the severity of behavioral harassment only);
(5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or
limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas,
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary disturbance of habitat
during a biologically important time; and
(6) For monitoring directly related to mitigation, an increase in
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more
effective implementation of the mitigation.
Based on our evaluation of the NWFSC's proposed measures, as well
as
[[Page 36377]]
other measures we considered, we have determined that these mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
We previously reviewed NWFSC's species descriptions--which
summarize available information regarding status and trends,
distribution and habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and
auditory capabilities of the potentially affected species--for accuracy
and completeness and referred readers to Sections 3 and 4 of NWFSC's
application, as well as to NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SARs;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments). We also provided information related to all species
with expected potential for occurrence in the specified geographical
region where NWFSC plans to conduct the specified activities,
summarizing information related to the population or stock, including
potential biological removal (PBR). Current information, as reported in
the most recent final 2016 and draft 2017 SARs, is summarized in Table
1 below (Carretta et al., 2017; Muto et al., 2017;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).
[[Page 36378]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27JY18.342
[[Page 36379]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27JY18.343
[[Page 36380]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27JY18.344
[[Page 36381]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27JY18.345
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Prior to 2016, humpback whales were listed under the ESA as an
endangered species worldwide. Following a 2015 global status review
(Bettridge et al., 2015), NMFS established 14 distinct population
segments (DPS) with different listing statuses (81 FR 62259; September
8, 2016) pursuant to the ESA. The DPSs that occur in U.S. waters do not
necessarily equate to the existing stocks designated under the MMPA and
shown in Table 1. Because MMPA stocks cannot be portioned, i.e., parts
managed as ESA-listed while other parts managed as not ESA-listed,
until such time as the MMPA stock delineations are reviewed in light of
the DPS designations, NMFS considers the existing humpback whale stocks
under the MMPA to be endangered and depleted for MMPA management
purposes (e.g., selection of a recovery factor, stock status). Within
U.S. west coast waters, three current DPSs may occur: The Hawaii DPS
(not listed), Mexico DPS (threatened), and Central America DPS
(endangered).
[[Page 36382]]
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
We provided a summary and discussion of the ways that components of
the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat in
our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016).
Specifically, we considered potential effects to marine mammals from
ship strike, physical interaction with various gear types, use of
active acoustic sources, and visual disturbance of pinnipeds, as well
as effects to prey species and to acoustic habitat. The information is
not reprinted here.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment, Serious Injury, or Mortality
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). Serious injury means any injury that
will likely result in mortality (50 CFR 216.3).
Take of marine mammals incidental to NWFSC research activities
could occur as a result of (1) injury or mortality due to gear
interaction (Level A harassment, serious injury, or mortality); (2)
behavioral disturbance resulting from the use of active acoustic
sources (Level B harassment only); or (3) behavioral disturbance of
pinnipeds resulting from incidental approach of researchers (Level B
harassment only).
Estimated Take Due to Gear Interaction
Historical Interactions--In order to estimate the number of
potential incidents of take that could occur by M/SI through gear
interaction, we first considered NWFSC's record of past such incidents,
and then considered in addition other species that may have similar
vulnerabilities to NWFSC trawl gear as those species for which we have
historical interaction records. Historical interactions with NWFSC
research gear were described in Table 4 of our notice of proposed
rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016). Please see that document for
more information. Available records are for the years 1999 through
present. All historical interactions have taken place in the CCRA,
offshore Washington and Oregon, and have occurred during use of the
Nordic 264 surface trawl net, with a few exceptions. There is one
historical interaction in the PSRA (also using the Nordic 264 surface
trawl), and one CCRA historical interaction using the modified Cobb
midwater trawl. NWFSC has no historical interactions for any bottom
trawl, hook and line, or seine gear, and has no historical interactions
in the LCRRA. Please see Figure 6-1 in the NWFSC request for
authorization for specific locations of these incidents.
Although some historical interactions resulted in the animal(s)
being released alive, no serious injury determinations (NMFS, 2012a;
2012b) were made, and it is possible that some of these animals later
died. In order to use these historical interaction records in a
precautionary manner as the basis for the take estimation process, and
because we have no specific information to indicate whether any given
future interaction might result in M/SI versus Level A harassment, we
conservatively assume that all interactions equate to mortality. Over
the past seventeen years, NWFSC has had only infrequent interactions
with marine mammals, with 0.1-0.5 animals captured per year for the
pinniped species and 1.4 animals captured per year for the Pacific
white-sided dolphin. No Steller sea lion has been captured since 2002,
northern fur seals have been involved in only one incident (none since
2000), and only a few California sea lions and harbor seals have been
involved in interactions with research fishing gear. However, we assume
that any of these species could be captured in any year.
In order to produce the most precautionary take estimates possible,
we consider all of the data available to us (i.e., since 1999). In
consideration of these interaction records, we assume that one
individual of each species of otariid pinniped could be captured per
year over the course of the five-year period of validity for these
proposed regulations, that two individual harbor seals could be
captured per year, and that the worst case event could happen each year
for Pacific white-sided dolphins (i.e., six dolphins could be captured
in a single trawl in each year). Table 2 shows the projected five-year
total captures of these five species for this final rule, as described
above, for trawl gear only. Although more than one individual of the
two sea lion species has been captured in a single tow, interactions
with these species have historically occurred only infrequently, and we
believe that the above assumption appropriately reflects the likely
total number of individuals involved in research gear interactions over
a five-year period. We assume that two total harbor seals could be
captured per year in recognition of the demonstrated vulnerability to
capture in the PSRA (all other species have been captured only in the
CCRA). These estimates are based on the assumption that annual effort
(e.g., total annual trawl tow time) over the five-year authorization
period will not exceed the annual effort during prior years for which
we have interaction records.
Table 2--Projected Five-Year Total Take in Trawl Gear for Historically Captured Species
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCRA average annual take PSRA average annual take
Gear Species (total) (total) Projected 5-year total 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl........................ Pacific white-sided dolphin.... 6 (30) ............................ 30
California sea lion............ 1 (5) ............................ 5
Harbor seal.................... 1 (5) 1 (5) 10
Northern fur seal.............. 1 (5) ............................ 5
Steller sea lion............... 1 (5) ............................ 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Because there are no historical take records from the LCRRA, we incorporate all projected LCRRA takes in Table 3 below.
In order to estimate the total potential number of incidents of M/
SI that could occur incidental to the NWFSC's use of trawl, hook and
line, and seine gear over the five-year period of validity for these
regulations (i.e., takes additional to those described in Table 4 of
our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016)), we
first considered whether there are additional species that may have
similar vulnerability to capture in trawl gear as the five species
described above that have been taken historically and then evaluate the
[[Page 36383]]
potential vulnerability of these and other species to additional gears.
In order to evaluate the potential vulnerability of additional
species to trawl and of all species to hook and line and seine gear, we
first consulted NMFS's List of Fisheries (LOF), which classifies U.S.
commercial fisheries into one of three categories according to the
level of incidental marine mammal M/SI that is known to occur on an
annual basis over the most recent five-year period (generally) for
which data has been analyzed. We provided this information, as
presented in the 2015 LOF (79 FR 77919; December 29, 2014), in Table 6
of our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016) and
do not reproduce it here.
Information related to incidental M/SI in relevant commercial
fisheries is not, however, the sole determinant of whether it may be
appropriate to authorize M/SI incidental to NWFSC survey operations. A
number of factors (e.g., species-specific knowledge regarding animal
behavior, overall abundance in the geographic region, density relative
to NWFSC survey effort, feeding ecology, propensity to travel in groups
commonly associated with other species historically taken) were taken
into account by the NWFSC to determine whether a species may have a
similar vulnerability to certain types of gear as historically taken
species. In some cases, we have determined that species without
documented M/SI may nevertheless be vulnerable to capture in NWFSC
research gear. Similarly, we have determined that some species groups
with documented M/SI are not likely to be vulnerable to capture in
NWFSC gear. In these instances, we provide further explanation below.
Those species with no records of historical interaction with NWFSC
research gear and no documented M/SI in relevant commercial fisheries,
and for which the NWFSC has not requested the authorization of
incidental take, are not considered further in this section. The NWFSC
believes generally that any sex or age class of those species for which
take authorization is requested could be captured.
In order to estimate a number of individuals that could potentially
be captured in NWFSC research gear for those species not historically
captured, we first determine which species may have vulnerability to
capture in a given gear. Of those species, we then determine whether
any may have similar propensity to capture in a given gear as a
historically captured species. These species are limited to a few
delphinid species that we believe may have similar risk of capture as
that displayed by the Pacific white-sided dolphin. For these species,
we assume it is possible that a worst-case scenario of take could occur
while at the same time contending that, absent significant range shifts
or changes in habitat usage, capture of a species not historically
captured would likely be a very rare event. The former assumption also
accounts for the likelihood that, for species that often travel in
groups, an incident involving capture of that species is likely to
involve more than one individual.
For example, we believe that the Risso's dolphin is potentially
vulnerable to capture in trawl gear and may have similar propensity to
capture in that gear as does the Pacific white-sided dolphin. Because
the greatest number of Pacific white-sided dolphins captured in any one
trawl tow was six individuals, we assume that six Risso's dolphins
could also be captured in a single incident. However, in recognition of
the fact that any incident involving the capture of Risso's dolphins
would likely be a rare event, we propose a total take authorization
over the five-year period of the number that may result from a single,
worst-case incident (six dolphins). While we do not necessarily believe
that six Risso's dolphins would be captured in a single incident--and
that more capture incidents involving fewer individuals could occur, as
opposed to a single, worst-case incident--we believe that this is a
reasonable approach to estimating potential incidents of M/SI while
balancing what could happen in a worst-case scenario with the potential
likelihood that no incidents of capture would actually occur. The SWFSC
historical capture of northern right whale dolphins in 2008 provides an
instructive example of a situation where a worst-case scenario (six
dolphins captured in a single trawl tow) did occur, but overall capture
of this species was very rare (no other capture incidents before or
since).
Separately, for those species that we believe may have a
vulnerability to capture in given gear but that we do not believe may
have a similar propensity to capture in that gear as a historically-
captured species, we assume that capture would be a rare event such
that authorization of a single take over the five-year period is likely
sufficient to capture the risk of interaction. For example, from the
LOF we infer vulnerability to capture in trawl gear for the Dall's
porpoise but do not believe that this species has a similar propensity
for interaction in trawl gear as the Pacific white-sided dolphin.
Trawl: From the LOF and SWFSC historical gear interactions, we
infer vulnerability to trawl gear in the CCRA for the Risso's dolphin,
short- and long-beaked common dolphins, northern right whale dolphin,
Dall's porpoise, harbor porpoise, and bottlenose dolphin (offshore
stock only; NWFSC research has very little overlap with the
distribution of the coastal stock of bottlenose dolphin). We consider
some of these species to have a similar propensity for interaction with
trawl gear as that demonstrated by the Pacific white-sided dolphin
(Risso's dolphin, northern right whale dolphin) and the rest to have
lower risk of interaction.
Due to their likely presence in the relevant areas and inference
based on historical interactions and the LOF, we assume additional
vulnerability and therefore potential take for some of these species in
trawl gear used in the PSRA and LCRRA. In the PSRA, these include the
harbor porpoise, Dall's porpoise, California sea lion, and Steller sea
lion. In the LCRRA these include the harbor porpoise, harbor seal,
California sea lion, and Steller sea lion.
For the striped dolphin, we believe that there is a reasonable
likelihood of incidental take in trawl gear although there are no
records of incidental M/SI in relevant commercial fisheries. The
proposed take authorization for this species was determined to be
appropriate based on analogy to other similar species that have been
taken either in NWFSC operations or in analogous commercial fishery
operations. We believe that the striped dolphin has a similar
propensity for interaction with trawl gear as that demonstrated by the
Pacific white-sided dolphin.
It is also possible that a captured animal may not be able to be
identified to species with certainty. Certain pinnipeds and small
cetaceans are difficult to differentiate at sea, especially in low-
light situations or when a quick release is necessary. For example, a
captured delphinid that is struggling in the net may escape or be freed
before positive identification is made. This is only likely to occur in
the CCRA due to the greater diversity of pinniped and small cetacean
species likely to be encountered in that area. Therefore, the NWFSC has
requested the authorization of incidental M/SI for one unidentified
pinniped and one unidentified small cetacean over the course of the
five-year period of proposed authorization.
Hook and line: The process is the same as is described above for
trawl gear. From the LOF and SWFSC historical interactions, we infer
[[Page 36384]]
vulnerability to hook and line gear in the CCRA for the Risso's
dolphin, bottlenose dolphin, striped dolphin, pygmy and dwarf sperm
whale (i.e., Kogia spp.), short- and long-beaked common dolphins,
short-finned pilot whale, and California and Steller sea lions.
Due to their likely presence in the relevant areas and inference
based on historical interactions and the LOF, we assume additional
vulnerability and therefore potential take for some of these species in
hook and line gear used in the PSRA (hook and line gear is not used in
the LCRRA). These include the California sea lion and harbor seal.
Seine: The process is the same as is described above for trawl
gear. From the LOF, we infer vulnerability to seine and tangle net gear
in the CCRA and/or LCRRA for the short-beaked common dolphin, harbor
seal, and California sea lion. Long-beaked common dolphin is not
included because they are much rarer in Oregon and Washington where
seine surveys are conducted. Seine gear is used infrequently in the
PSRA (e.g., twelve purse seine sets per year) and the move-on rule
applied if any small cetacean is seen within 500 m of the planned set.
We do not believe that any take in seine gear is likely in the PSRA.
We also believe that there is a reasonable potential of seine gear
interaction for a number of species in the CCRA and/or LCRRA for which
there are no LOF records of interaction in commercial fisheries gears.
These authorizations reflect the NWFSC's expert judgment regarding the
distribution of these species in relation to NWFSC use of seine gear
offshore Oregon and Washington. For example, several of these species
have the potential to interact with NWFSC purse seine surveys in the
Columbia River plume, where there are no corresponding commercial seine
fisheries. Therefore, we would not expect the LOF to adequately reflect
the risk of marine mammal interaction posed by NWFSC survey activities.
Species for which we authorize take in seine gear in the CCRA and/or
LCRRA with no LOF interaction records include the Dall's porpoise,
Pacific white-sided dolphin, Risso's dolphin, northern right whale
dolphin, Steller sea lion, and harbor porpoise. For the harbor
porpoise, we expect that there is greater vulnerability to take in
these gears (i.e., we expect it could be taken in both the CCRA and
LCRRA) and have increased the take authorization relative to the other
species accordingly. NWFSC considers the delphinid species to be at
risk because of their occurrence in coastal waters offshore Oregon and
Washington, and because they often occur in mixed schools and could be
caught together in purse seines.
Table 3--Total Estimated M/SI Due to Gear Interaction, 2018-23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated 5-year
Species Estimated 5-year total, hook and Estimated 5-year Total, all
total, trawl \1\ line \1\ total, seine \1\ gears
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kogia spp. \2\................... ................... 1.................. ................... 1
Bottlenose dolphin \3\........... 1.................. 1.................. ................... 2
Striped dolphin.................. 6.................. 1.................. ................... 7
Short-beaked common dolphin...... 1.................. 1.................. 1.................. 3
Long-beaked common dolphin....... 1.................. 1.................. ................... 2
Pacific white-sided dolphin...... 30................. ................... 1.................. 31
Northern right whale dolphin..... 6.................. ................... 1.................. 7
Risso's dolphin.................. 6.................. 1.................. 1.................. 8
Short-finned pilot whale......... ................... 1.................. ................... 1
Harbor porpoise \4\.............. 3 (CCRA/PSRA/LCRRA) ................... 2 (CCRA/LCRRA)..... 5
Dall's porpoise.................. 2 (CCRA/PSRA)...... ................... 1.................. 3
Northern fur seal \5\............ 5.................. ................... ................... 5
California sea lion.............. 7 (5 CCRA/PSRA/ 2 (CCRA/PSRA)...... 1 (LCRRA).......... 10
LCRRA).
Steller sea lion................. 7 (5 CCRA/PSRA/ 1.................. 1 (LCRRA).......... 9
LCRRA).
Harbor seal \4\.................. 11 (5 CCRA/5 PSRA/ 1 (PSRA)........... 1 (LCRRA).......... 13
LCRRA.
Unidentified pinniped............ 1.................. ................... ................... 1
Unidentified small cetacean...... 1.................. ................... ................... 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Please see our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016) for full detail related to
derivation of these take estimates. Takes proposed for authorization are not specific to any area, but our
estimates are informed by area-specific vulnerability. All takes are expected to occur in the CCRA, except
where the gear-specific breakdown of expected takes per area is provided. Note that hook and line surveys are
not proposed for LCRRA and only limited seine surveys are proposed for PSRA.
\2\ We expect that only one Kogia spp. may be taken over the five-year timespan and that it could be either a
pygmy or dwarf sperm whale.
\3\ Incidental take is expected only from the offshore stock.
\4\ Incidental take for these species may be of animals from any stock in California, Oregon, or Washington, but
expected vulnerability may be assigned to CCE or Washington inland waters stocks according to the expected
take proportions shown.
\5\ Incidental take may be of animals from either the eastern Pacific or California stock.
Estimated Take Due to Acoustic Harassment
As described in our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516;
June 13, 2016; ``Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine
Mammals''), we believe that NWFSC use of active acoustic sources has,
at most, the potential to cause Level B harassment of marine mammals.
In order to attempt to quantify the potential for Level B harassment to
occur, NMFS (including the NWFSC and acoustics experts from other parts
of NMFS) developed an analytical framework considering characteristics
of the active acoustic systems described in our notice of proposed
rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016) under Description of Active
Acoustic Sound Sources, their expected patterns of use, and
characteristics of the marine mammal species that may interact with
them. We believe that this quantitative assessment benefits from its
simplicity and consistency with current NMFS acoustic guidance
regarding Level B harassment but caution that, based on a number of
deliberately precautionary assumptions, the resulting take estimates
may be seen as an overestimate of the potential for behavioral
harassment to occur as a result of the operation of these systems.
In 2016, NMFS released updated ``Technical Guidance for Assessing
the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing'' with
revised metrics and thresholds to assess the potential for injury
(e.g., permanent threshold shift) from acoustic sources. While the
NWFSC's EA and our proposed rule refer to NMFS's historic guidelines,
as the documents were completed prior to the recent release of the
technical guidance, the conclusions regarding the potential for injury
remain
[[Page 36385]]
the same. Most importantly, the technical guidance now explicitly takes
into account the duration of the sound through the use of the sound
exposure level (SEL) metric, as opposed to the previous use of rms
sound pressure level (SPL). The effect of this different metric, in
particular for the very short duration sounds used for these
echosounders, is to largely reduce the exposure level of sound an
animal is exposed to for short duration sounds (e.g., for a 1
millisecond ping, an SPL source level is reduced by 30 dB in the SEL
metric) offsetting changes in the thresholds themselves. While energy
is accumulated over time using SEL, the previous conclusion that an
individual would have to remain exceptionally close to a sound source
for unrealistic lengths of time holds, suggesting the likelihood of
injury occurring is exceedingly small and is therefore not considered
further in this analysis.
The operating frequencies of active acoustic systems used by NWFSC
sources only go down to 27-33 kHz for the trawl monitoring system,
which is not one of the predominant sources, and to 38 kHz for the EK60
echosounder (see Tables 2 and 8 from our notice of proposed rulemaking
(81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016)). These frequencies are above the hearing
range of baleen whales (i.e., mysticetes); therefore, baleen whales
would not be expected to perceive signals from NWFSC active acoustic
sources. We would not expect any exposures to these signals to result
in behavioral harassment. Baleen whales are not considered further in
this section.
The assessment paradigm for active acoustic sources used in NWFSC
fisheries research is relatively straightforward and has a number of
key simplifying assumptions. NMFS's current acoustic guidance requires
in most cases that we assume Level B harassment occurs when a marine
mammal receives an acoustic signal at or above a simple step-function
threshold. For use of these active acoustic systems, the appropriate
threshold is 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). Estimating the number of
exposures at the specified received level requires several
determinations, each of which is described sequentially below:
(1) A detailed characterization of the acoustic characteristics of
the effective sound source or sources in operation;
(2) The operational areas exposed to levels at or above those
associated with Level B harassment when these sources are in operation;
(3) A method for quantifying the resulting sound fields around
these sources; and
(4) An estimate of the average density for marine mammal species in
each area of operation.
Quantifying the spatial and temporal dimension of the sound
exposure footprint (or ``swath width'') of the active acoustic devices
in operation on moving vessels and their relationship to the average
density of marine mammals enables a quantitative estimate of the number
of individuals for which sound levels exceed the relevant threshold for
each area. The number of potential incidents of Level B harassment is
ultimately estimated as the product of the volume of water ensonified
at 160 dB rms or higher and the volumetric density of animals
determined from simple assumptions about their vertical stratification
in the water column. Specifically, reasonable assumptions based on what
is known about diving behavior across different marine mammal species
were made to segregate those that predominately remain in the upper 200
m of the water column versus those that regularly dive deeper during
foraging and transit. We described the approach used (including methods
for estimating each of the calculations described above) and the
assumptions made that result in conservative estimates in significant
detail in our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13,
2016). There have been no changes made to the approach, the
informational inputs, or the results. Therefore, we do not repeat the
discussion here and refer the reader to the proposed rule. Summaries of
the results are provided in Table 4 below. Note that NWFSC only uses
active acoustic systems for data acquisition purposes in the CCRA, not
in the LCRRA or PSRA.
Table 4--Densities and Estimated Source-, Stratum-, and Species-Specific Annual Estimates of Level B Harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Level B Estimated Level
Area density Volumetric harassment, 0-200 m B harassment,
Species Shallow Deep (animals/ density --------------------------- >200 m Total
km\2\) \1\ (animals/ ------------------
km\3\) \2\ EK60 ME70 SX90 EK60 SX90
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale................................. ......... X 0.002 0.003 1 0 1 3 1 6
Kogia spp................................... ......... X 0.001 0.002 0 0 1 2 0 3
Cuvier's beaked whale....................... ......... X 0.004 0.008 2 1 2 7 2 14
Baird's beaked whale........................ ......... X 0.001 0.002 0 0 1 2 0 3
Mesoplodont beaked whales................... ......... X 0.001 0.002 0 0 1 2 0 3
Bottlenose dolphin.......................... X ......... 0.002 0.009 2 1 3 0 0 6
Striped dolphin............................. X ......... 0.017 0.083 18 6 25 0 0 49
Long-beaked common dolphin.................. X ......... 0.019 0.096 20 7 28 0 0 55
Short-beaked common dolphin................. X ......... 0.309 1.547 325 115 455 0 0 895
Pacific white-sided dolphin................. X ......... 0.021 0.105 22 8 31 0 0 61
Northern right whale dolphin................ X ......... 0.010 0.049 10 4 14 0 0 28
Risso's dolphin............................. X ......... 0.010 0.052 11 4 15 0 0 30
Killer whale................................ X ......... 0.001 0.004 1 0 1 0 0 2
Short-finned pilot whale.................... ......... X 0.0003 0.001 0 0 0 1 0 1
Harbor porpoise............................. X ......... \4\ 0.038 0.189 40 14 56 0 0 110
Dall's porpoise............................. X ......... 0.076 0.378 79 28 111 0 0 218
Guadalupe fur seal.......................... X ......... \3\ 0.007 0.037 8 3 11 0 0 22
Northern fur seal........................... X ......... \3\ 0.649 3.245 682 241 955 0 0 1,878
California sea lion......................... X ......... \3\ 0.297 1.484 312 110 437 0 0 859
Steller sea lion............................ X ......... \3\ 0.060 0.301 63 22 89 0 0 174
Harbor seal................................. X ......... \3\ 0.056 0.279 59 21 82 0 0 162
Northern elephant seal...................... ......... X \3\ 0.179 0.358 75 27 105 336 79 622
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All density estimates from Barlow and Forney (2007) unless otherwise indicated.
\2\ Volumetric density estimates derived by dividing area density estimates by 0.2 km (for shallow species) or 0.5 km (for deep species), corresponding
with defined depth strata.
\3\ Density estimates derived by NWFSC from SAR abundance estimates and notional study area of 1,000,000 km\2\.
\4\ ManTech-SRS Technologies (2007) estimated a harbor porpoise density for coastal and inland waters of Washington, which is used as the best available
proxy here. There are no known density estimates for harbor porpoises in NWFSC survey areas in the CCRA.
[[Page 36386]]
Estimated Take Due to Physical Disturbance
Estimated take due to physical disturbance could potentially happen
in the PSRA and LCRRA, and would result in no greater than Level B
harassment. It is likely that some pinnipeds will move or flush from
known haulouts into the water in response to the presence or sound of
NWFSC vessels or researchers, as a result of unintentional approach
during survey activity. Behavioral responses may be considered
according to the scale shown in Table 5 and based on the method
developed by Mortenson (1996). We consider responses corresponding to
Levels 2-3 to constitute Level B harassment.
Table 5--Seal Response to Disturbance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Type of response Definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................. Alert...................... Seal head orientation
or brief movement 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, changing
from a lying to a
sitting position, or
brief movement of
less than twice the
animal's body length.
2.................. Movement................... Movements away from
the source of
disturbance, ranging
from short
withdrawals at least
twice the animal's
body length to longer
retreats over the
beach.
3.................. Flight..................... All retreats (flushes)
to the water.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NWFSC has estimated potential incidents of Level B harassment
due to physical disturbance (Table 6) by considering the number of
seals believed to potentially be present at affected haul-outs and the
number of visits expected to be made by NWFSC researchers. The number
of haulouts disturbed and number of animals assumed to be on those
haulouts was determined by NWFSC on the basis of anecdotal evidence
from researchers. Although not all individuals on ``disturbed''
haulouts would necessarily actually be disturbed, and some haulouts may
experience some disturbance at distances greater than expected, we
believe that this approach is a reasonable effort towards accounting
for this potential source of disturbance.
Table 6--Estimated Annual Level B Harassment of Pinnipeds Associated With Disturbance by Researchers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated total
number of animals Estimated annual
Species Location on potentially Number of visits Level B
disturbed haul- per year harassment
outs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal...................... Puget Sound......... 1,440 8 11,520
Columbia River...... 3,000 25 75,000
California sea lion.............. Puget Sound......... 350 8 2,800
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Estimated Incidental Take
Here we provide a summary of the total incidental take
authorization on an annual basis, as well other information relevant to
the negligible impact analysis. Table 7 shows information relevant to
our negligible impact analysis concerning the total annual taking that
could occur for each stock from NMFS's scientific research activities
when considering incidental take previously authorized for SWFSC (80 FR
58982; September 30, 2015) and take authorized for NWFSC. As footnoted
in Table 7, the indicated level of take could occur to any species or
stock for those species with multiple stocks (e.g., northern fur seal)
or considered as a group (e.g., Mesoplodont beaked whales). However,
the harbor porpoise and harbor seal each have multiple stocks spanning
the three NWFSC research areas, and we provide further detail regarding
our consideration of potential take specific to stocks that may occur
in the PSRA and LCRRA. Many stocks do not occur in those research areas
and, therefore, would not be vulnerable to interaction with research
gear deployed in those areas.
For harbor porpoise, we authorize a total of five takes by M/SI for
all stocks combined over the five-year period of validity for these
regulations. For the purposes of the negligible impact analysis, we
assume that all of these takes could potentially be in the form of M/
SI; PBR is not intended for assessment of the significance of
harassment. These takes could occur to any stock; however, our take
authorization is informed by reasonable expectation regarding species
vulnerability to gear used in the three research areas. Of the five
total takes, we expect that two might occur in the CCRA, one in the
PSRA, and two in the LCRRA. Therefore, corresponding with the
relationship between stock ranges and the location of NWFSC research
activities, the likely maximum takes that could accrue to any harbor
porpoise stock from California to southern Oregon would be two, while
the northern Oregon/Washington coast stock could potentially accrue
four takes because it is vulnerable to the takes expected in either the
CCRA or LCRRA. In Table 7 below, the total take authorization column
reflects the total of four takes that could occur in either the CCRA or
LCRRA (and the one take expected in the PSRA, which would occur to the
Washington inland waters stock). However, the estimated maximum annual
take column reflects the annualized stock-specific risk, i.e., any
stock in the CA-southern OR grouping is expected to be vulnerable to a
maximum of two takes over the 5-year period (0.4/year) while the
northern OR/WA coast stock could be vulnerable to as many as four takes
over the five years (0.8/year). This stock-specific accounting does not
change our expectation that a total of five takes would occur for all
stocks combined but informs our stock-specific negligible impact
analysis.
Similarly, the harbor seal has separate designated stocks that may
occur in all three research areas. We will authorize a total of
thirteen takes by M/SI for all harbor seal stocks combined, and expect
that five of these may occur in the CCRA, six in the PSRA, and two in
the LCRRA. Therefore, while we would expect that a maximum of five
takes could accrue to the California stock, as many as seven takes
could occur for the Oregon/Washington coastal stock (which is the only
stock that may occur in the LCRRA). Although NMFS has split the former
Washington inland waters stock of harbor seals into three separate
stocks, we do not have sufficient information to assess stock-specific
risk in the PSRA. Separately,
[[Page 36387]]
we have estimated that 162 incidents of acoustic harassment may occur
for harbor seals due to NWFSC use of active acoustic systems (in the
CCRA only) and that, due to the physical presence of researchers,
individual harbor seals on haulouts (as many as 3,000) may be disturbed
up to 25 times per year in the LCRRA. Therefore, as shown in Table 7,
the California stock of harbor seals is vulnerable to only the
estimated 162 acoustic harassment takes, but the OR/WA coast stock
would be vulnerable to both the acoustic harassment takes as well as
the physical disturbance takes. However, note that the percent of
estimated population is calculated considering the number of
individuals anticipated to be disturbed rather than the number of
incidents of disturbance.
We previously authorized take of marine mammals incidental to
fisheries research operations conducted by the SWFSC (see 80 FR 58982
and 80 FR 68512). This take would occur to some of the same stocks for
which we will authorize take incidental to NWFSC fisheries research
operations. Therefore, in order to evaluate the likely impact of the
take by M/SI to be authorized pursuant to this rule, we consider not
only other ongoing sources of human-caused mortality but the potential
mortality authorized for SWFSC. As used in this document, other ongoing
sources of human-caused (anthropogenic) mortality refers to estimates
of realized or actual annual mortality reported in the SARs and does
not include authorized or unknown mortality. Below, we consider the
total taking by M/SI authorized for NWFSC and previously authorized for
SWFSC together to produce a maximum annual M/SI take level (including
take of unidentified marine mammals that could accrue to any relevant
stock) and compare that value to the stock's PBR value, considering
ongoing sources of anthropogenic mortality (as described in footnote 4
of Table 7 and in the following discussion). PBR and annual M/SI values
considered in Table 7 reflect the most recent information available.
Table 7--Summary Information Related to NWFSC Annual Take Authorization, 2018-23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total annual
Level B Percent of Proposed total SWFSC total M/ Estimated
Species \1\ harassment estimated M/SI \3\ SI maximum PBR minus annual M/SI Stock
authorization population authorization, authorization, annual M/SI (%) \5\ trend \6\
\2\ abundance 2018-23 2015-20 \4\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale....................... 6 0.3 0 0 0 n/a..................... ?
Kogia spp......................... 3 0.1 1 1 0.4 19.2 (2.1).............. ?
Cuvier's beaked whale............. 14 0.4 0 0 0 n/a..................... [darr]
Baird's beaked whale.............. 3 0.1 0 0 0 n/a..................... ?
Mesoplodont beaked whales......... 3 0.1 0 0 0 n/a..................... [darr]
Bottlenose dolphin (offshore 6 0.3 2 9 2.6 9.4 (27.7).............. ?
stock).
Striped dolphin................... 49 0.2 7 12 4.2 237.2 (1.8)............. ?
Long-beaked common dolphin........ 55 0.1 2 12 3.2 621.6 (0.5)............. [uarr]
Short-beaked common dolphin....... 895 0.1 3 12 3.4 8,353 (<0.1)............ ?
Pacific white-sided dolphin....... 61 0.2 31 35 13.6 189.1 (7.2)............. ?
Northern right whale dolphin...... 28 0.1 7 10 3.8 175.2 (2.2)............. ?
Risso's dolphin................... 30 0.5 8 12 4.4 42.3 (10.4)............. ?
Killer whale \7\.................. 2 0.8 0 0 0 n/a..................... ?
Short-finned pilot whale.......... 1 0.1 1 1 0.4 3.3 (12.1).............. ?
Harbor porpoise (CA-southern OR 110 3.8 4 5 1.8 20.4 (8.8).............. ?
stocks) \7\.
Harbor porpoise (Northern OR/WA .............. .............. .............. .............. 2.2 148 (1.5)............... ?
coast).
Harbor porpoise (WA inland waters) 0 n/a 1 0 0.2 58.8 (0.3).............. ?
Dall's porpoise................... 218 0.9 3 5 2 171.7 (1.2)............. ?
Guadalupe fur seal................ 22 0.1 0 0 0 n/a..................... [uarr]
Northern fur seal \6\............. \8\ 1,878 0.3 5 5 2.4 449.4 (0.5)............. [uarr]
California sea lion............... 3,659 0.4 10 25 7.6 8,815 (0.1)............. [uarr]
Steller sea lion.................. 174 0.4 9 10 4.4 2,390.6 (0.2)........... [uarr]
Harbor seal (CA).................. 75,162 0.6 5 9 3.2 1,598.2 (0.2)........... [rarr]
Harbor seal (OR/WA coast)......... .............. 12.8 2 .............. 1.8 Unknown................. [rarr]
Harbor seal (WA inland waters).... 11,520 10.5 6 0 1.2 Unknown................. [rarr]
Northern elephant seal............ 622 0.3 5 5 2.2 4,873.2 (0.1)........... [uarr]
Unidentified small cetacean....... n/a n/a 1 1 n/a n/a..................... n/a
Unidentified pinniped............. n/a n/a 1 2 n/a n/a..................... n/a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please see our notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016) for full details.
\1\ For species with multiple stocks or for species groups (Kogia spp. and Mesoplodont beaked whales), indicated level of take could occur to
individuals from any stock or species except as indicated in table.
\2\ Level B harassment totals include estimated take due to acoustic harassment and, for harbor seals and California sea lions, estimated take due to
physical disturbance. Active acoustic devices are not used for data acquisition in the PSRA; therefore, no takes by acoustic harassment are expected
for stocks that occur entirely or largely in inland waters (e.g., resident killer whales). Takes by physical disturbance for pinniped species
represent repeated takes of smaller numbers of individuals (e.g., we expect as many as 1,440 harbor seals in the PSRA to be harassed on as many as
eight occasions). The ``percent of estimated population'' column represents this smaller number of individuals taken rather than the total number of
take incidents.
\3\ As explained earlier in this document, gear interaction could result in mortality, serious injury, or Level A harassment. Because we do not have
sufficient information to enable us to parse out these outcomes, we present such take as a pool. For purposes of this negligible impact analysis we
assume the worst case scenario (that all such takes result in mortality).
[[Page 36388]]
\4\ This column represents the total number of incidents of M/SI that could potentially accrue to the specified species or stock as a result of NMFS'
fisheries research activities and is the number carried forward for evaluation in the negligible impact analysis (later in this document). To reach
this total, we add one to the total for each pinniped or cetacean that may be captured in trawl gear in the CCRA. This represents the potential that
the take of an unidentified pinniped or small cetacean could accrue to any given stock captured in that gear in that area. The take authorization is
formulated as a five-year total; the annual average is used only for purposes of negligible impact analysis. We recognize that portions of an animal
may not be taken in a given year.
\5\ This value represents the calculated PBR less the average annual estimate of ongoing anthropogenic mortalities (i.e., total annual human-caused M/
SI, which is presented in the SARs). For the Pacific-white sided dolphin, harbor seal (California stock), northern fur seal (California stock),
Steller sea lion, and California sea lion, we subtract the annual average of mortalities occurring incidental to fisheries research from the total
human-caused M/SI prior to calculating this value, as we explicitly account for predicted future mortalities incidental to fisheries research via the
estimated maximum annual M/SI column. In parentheses, we provide the estimated maximum annual M/SI expressed as a percentage of this value.
\6\ See relevant SARs for more information regarding stock status and trends. Interannual increases may not be interpreted as evidence of a trend. Based
on the most recent abundance estimates, harbor seal stocks may have reached carrying capacity and appear stable. A time series of stock-specific
abundance estimates for harbor porpoise shows either increasing or stable estimates, but it is not statistically valid to infer a trend.
\7\ These species have multiple stocks that may be affected. Values for ``percent of estimated population'' and ``PBR--annual M/SI'' (where relevant)
calculated for the stock with the lowest population abundance and/or PBR (as appropriate). This approach assumes that all indicated takes would accrue
to the stock in question, which is a very conservative assumption. Stocks in question are the offshore killer whale, Morro Bay harbor porpoise, and
California northern fur seal.
\8\ Calculated on the basis of relative abundance; i.e., of 1,878 total estimated incidents of Level B harassment, we would expect on the basis of
relative abundance in the study area that 98 percent would accrue to the Pribilof Islands/Eastern Pacific stock and two percent would accrue to the
California stock.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
We received no public comments or new information indicating any
deficiencies in our preliminary determinations, as provided in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016).
Introduction--NMFS has defined negligible impact 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 (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the
lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of
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'' by mortality, serious injury,
and Level A or Level B harassment, we consider other factors, such as
the likely nature of any behavioral responses (e.g., intensity,
duration), the context of any such responses (e.g., critical
reproductive time or location, migration), as well as effects on
habitat, and the likely effectiveness of mitigation. We also assess the
number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this
information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS's implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September
29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic
activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the
environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of
the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of human-caused mortality, and specific consideration of take
by M/SI previously authorized for other NMFS research activities).
We note here that the takes from potential gear interactions
enumerated below could result in non-serious injury, but their worse
potential outcome (mortality) is analyzed for the purposes of the
negligible impact determination. We discuss here the connection between
the mechanisms for authorizing incidental take under section 101(a)(5)
for activities, such as NWFSC's research activities, and for
authorizing incidental take from commercial fisheries. In 1988,
Congress amended the MMPA's provisions for addressing incidental take
of marine mammals in commercial fishing operations. Congress directed
NMFS to develop and recommend a new long-term regime to govern such
incidental taking (see MMC, 1994). The need to develop a system suited
to the unique circumstances of commercial fishing operations led NMFS
to suggest a new conceptual means and associated regulatory framework.
That concept, Potential Biological Removal (PBR), and a system for
developing plans containing regulatory and voluntary measures to reduce
incidental take for fisheries that exceed PBR were incorporated as
sections 117 and 118 in the 1994 amendments to the MMPA.
PBR is defined in the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1362(20)) as the maximum
number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be
removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach
or maintain its optimum sustainable population, and is a measure to be
considered when evaluating the effects of M/SI on a marine mammal
species or stock. Optimum sustainable population (OSP) is defined by
the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1362(9)) as the number of animals which will result
in the maximum productivity of the population or the species, keeping
in mind the carrying capacity of the habitat and the health of the
ecosystem of which they form a constituent element. A primary goal of
the MMPA is to ensure that each species or stock of marine mammal is
maintained at or returned to its OSP.
PBR values are calculated by NMFS as the level of annual removal
from a stock that will allow that stock to equilibrate within OSP at
least 95 percent of the time, and is the product of factors relating to
the minimum population estimate of the stock (Nmin); the
productivity rate of the stock at a small population size; and a
recovery factor. Determination of appropriate values for these three
elements incorporates significant precaution, such that application of
the parameter to the management of marine mammal stocks may be
reasonably certain to achieve the goals of the MMPA. For example,
calculation of Nmin incorporates the precision and
variability associated with abundance information and is intended to
provide reasonable assurance that the stock size is equal to or greater
than the estimate (Barlow et al., 1995). In general, the three factors
are developed on a stock-specific basis in consideration of one another
in order to produce conservative PBR values that appropriately account
for both imprecision that may be estimated as well as potential bias
stemming from lack of knowledge (Wade, 1998).
PBR can be used as a consideration of the effects of M/SI on a
marine mammal stock but was applied specifically to work within the
management framework for commercial fishing incidental take. PBR cannot
be applied appropriately outside of the section 118 regulatory
framework for which it was
[[Page 36389]]
designed without consideration of how it applies in section 118 and how
other statutory management frameworks in the MMPA differ. PBR was not
designed as an absolute threshold limiting commercial fisheries, but
rather as a means to evaluate the relative impacts of those activities
on marine mammal stocks. Even where commercial fishing is causing M/SI
at levels that exceed PBR, the fishery is not suspended. When M/SI
exceeds PBR, NMFS may develop a take reduction plan, usually with the
assistance of a take reduction team. The take reduction plan will
include measures to reduce and/or minimize the taking of marine mammals
by commercial fisheries to a level below the stock's PBR. That is,
where the total annual human-caused M/SI exceeds PBR, NMFS is not
required to halt fishing activities contributing to total M/SI but
rather utilizes the take reduction process to further mitigate the
effects of fishery activities via additional bycatch reduction
measures. PBR is not used to grant or deny authorization of commercial
fisheries that may incidentally take marine mammals.
Similarly, to the extent consideration of PBR may be relevant to
considering the impacts of incidental take from activities other than
commercial fisheries, using it as the sole reason to deny incidental
take authorization for those activities would be inconsistent with
Congress's intent under section 101(a)(5) and the use of PBR under
section 118. The standard for authorizing incidental take under section
101(a)(5) continues to be, among other things, whether the total taking
will have a negligible impact on the species or stock. When Congress
amended the MMPA in 1994 to add section 118 for commercial fishing, it
did not alter the standards for authorizing non-commercial fishing
incidental take under section 101(a)(5), acknowledging that negligible
impact under section 101(a)(5) is a separate standard from PBR under
section 118. In fact, in 1994 Congress also amended section
101(a)(5)(E) (a separate provision governing commercial fishing
incidental take for species listed under the Endangered Species Act) to
add compliance with the new section 118 but kept the requirement for a
negligible impact finding, showing that the determination of negligible
impact and application of PBR may share certain features but are
different.
Since the introduction of PBR, NMFS has used the concept almost
entirely within the context of implementing sections 117 and 118 and
other commercial fisheries management-related provisions of the MMPA.
The MMPA requires that PBR be estimated in stock assessment reports and
that it be used in applications related to the management of take
incidental to commercial fisheries (i.e., the take reduction planning
process described in section 118 of the MMPA and the determination of
whether a stock is ``strategic'' (16 U.S.C. 1362(19))), but nothing in
the MMPA requires the application of PBR outside the management of
commercial fisheries interactions with marine mammals.
Nonetheless, NMFS recognizes that as a quantitative metric, PBR may
be useful in certain instances as a consideration when evaluating the
impacts of other human-caused activities on marine mammal stocks.
Outside the commercial fishing context, and in consideration of all
known human-caused mortality, PBR can help inform the potential effects
of M/SI caused by activities authorized under 101(a)(5)(A) on marine
mammal stocks. As noted by NMFS and the USFWS in our implementation
regulations for the 1986 amendments to the MMPA (54 FR 40341, September
29, 1989), the Services consider many factors, when available, in
making a negligible impact determination, including, but not limited
to, the status of the species or stock relative to OSP (if known),
whether the recruitment rate for the species or stock is increasing,
decreasing, stable, or unknown, the size and distribution of the
population, and existing impacts and environmental conditions. To
specifically use PBR, along with other factors, to evaluate the effects
of M/SI, we first calculate a metric for each species or stock that
incorporates information regarding ongoing anthropogenic M/SI into the
PBR value (i.e., PBR minus the total annual anthropogenic mortality/
serious injury estimate), which is called ``residual PBR'' (Wood et
al., 2012). We then consider how the anticipated potential incidental
M/SI from the activities being evaluated compares to residual PBR.
Anticipated or potential M/SI that exceeds residual PBR is considered
to have a higher likelihood of adversely affecting rates of recruitment
or survival, while anticipated M/SI that is equal to or less than
residual PBR has a lower likelihood (both examples given without
consideration of other types of take, which also factor into a
negligible impact determination). In such cases where the anticipated
M/SI is near, at, or above residual PBR, consideration of other
factors, including those outlined above as well as mitigation and other
factors (positive or negative), is especially important to assessing
whether the M/SI will have a negligible impact on the stock. As
described above, PBR is a conservative metric and is not intended to be
used as a solid cap on mortality--accordingly, impacts from M/SI that
exceed residual PBR may still potentially be found to be negligible in
light of other factors that offset concern, especially when robust
mitigation and adaptive management provisions are included.
Alternately, for a species or stock with incidental M/SI less than
10 percent of residual PBR, we consider M/SI from the specified
activities to represent an insignificant incremental increase in
ongoing anthropogenic M/SI that alone (i.e., in the absence of any
other take) cannot affect annual rates of recruitment and survival. In
a prior incidental take rulemaking and in the commercial fishing
context, this threshold is identified as the significance threshold,
but it is more accurately an insignificance threshold outside
commercial fishing because it represents the level at which there is no
need to consider other factors in determining the role of M/SI in
affecting rates of recruitment and survival. Assuming that any
additional incidental take by harassment would not exceed the
negligible impact level, the anticipated M/SI caused by the activities
being evaluated would have a negligible impact on the species or stock.
This 10 percent was identified as a workload simplification
consideration to avoid the need to provide unnecessary additional
information when the conclusion is relatively obvious, but as described
above, values above 10 percent have no particular significance
associated with them until and unless they approach residual PBR.
Our evaluation of the M/SI for each of the species and stocks for
which mortality could occur follows. In addition, all mortality
authorized for some of the same species or stocks over the next several
years pursuant to our final rulemaking for the NMFS Southwest Fisheries
Science Center has been incorporated into the residual PBR.
We first consider maximum potential incidental M/SI for each stock
(Table 7) in consideration of NMFS's threshold for identifying
insignificant M/SI take (10 percent of residual PBR (69 FR 43338; July
20, 2004)). By considering the maximum potential incidental M/SI in
relation to PBR and ongoing sources of anthropogenic mortality, we
begin our evaluation of whether the potential incremental addition of
M/SI through NWFSC research activities may affect the species' or
stock's annual rates of recruitment or survival. We also consider the
interaction of those
[[Page 36390]]
mortalities with incidental taking of that species or stock by
harassment pursuant to the specified activity.
Analysis--Please see Table 7 for information related to this
analysis. The large majority of stocks that may potentially be taken by
M/SI (18 of 21) fall below the insignificance threshold, while an
additional four stocks do not have current PBR values and therefore are
evaluated using other factors. We first consider stocks expected to be
affected only by behavioral harassment and those stocks that fall below
the insignificance threshold. Next, we consider those stocks above the
insignificance threshold (i.e., the offshore stock of bottlenose
dolphin, Risso's dolphin, and short-finned pilot whale) and those
without PBR values (harbor seals along the Oregon and Washington coasts
and in Washington inland waters).
As described in greater depth in our notice of proposed rulemaking
(81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016), we do not believe that NWFSC use of
active acoustic sources has the likely potential to cause any effect
exceeding Level B harassment of marine mammals. In addition, for the
majority of species, the annual take by Level B harassment is very low
in relation to the population abundance estimate (less than one
percent). We have produced what we believe to be precautionary
estimates of potential incidents of Level B harassment. The procedure
for producing these estimates, described in detail in our notice of
proposed rulemaking (81 FR 38516; June 13, 2016), represents NMFS's
best effort towards balancing the need to quantify the potential for
occurrence of Level B harassment due to production of underwater sound
with a general lack of information related to the specific way that
these acoustic signals, which are generally highly directional and
transient, interact with the physical environment and to a meaningful
understanding of marine mammal perception of these signals and
occurrence in the areas where NWFSC operates. The sources considered
here have moderate to high output frequencies (10 to 180 kHz),
generally short ping durations, and are typically focused (highly
directional) to serve their intended purpose of mapping specific
objects, depths, or environmental features. In addition, some of these
sources can be operated in different output modes (e.g., energy can be
distributed among multiple output beams) that may lessen the likelihood
of perception by and potential impacts on marine mammals in comparison
with the quantitative estimates that guide our proposed take
authorization.
In addition, otariid pinnipeds are less likely than other taxa to
perceive acoustic signals generated by NWFSC or, given perception, to
react to these signals than the quantitative estimates indicate. This
group of pinnipeds has reduced functional hearing at the higher
frequencies produced by active acoustic sources considered here (e.g.,
primary operating frequencies of 40-180 kHz) and, based purely on their
auditory capabilities, the potential impacts are likely much less than
we have calculated as these relevant factors are not taken into
account.
As described previously, there is some minimal potential for
temporary effects to hearing for certain marine mammals, but most
effects would likely be limited to temporary behavioral disturbance.
Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment will likely
be limited to reactions such as increased swimming speeds, increased
surfacing time, or decreased foraging (if such activity were
occurring), reactions that are considered to be of low severity (e.g.,
Ellison et al., 2012). Individuals may move away from the source if
disturbed, but because the source is itself moving and because of the
directional nature of the sources considered here, there is unlikely to
be even temporary displacement from areas of significance and any
disturbance would be of short duration. Although there is no
information on which to base any distinction between incidents of
harassment and individuals harassed, the same factors, in conjunction
with the fact that NWFSC survey effort is widely dispersed in space and
time, indicate that repeated exposures of the same individuals would be
very unlikely. For these reasons, we do not consider the level of take
by acoustic disturbance to represent a significant additional
population stressor when considered in context with the proposed level
of take by M/SI for any species.
Similarly, disturbance of pinnipeds on haulouts by researchers
approaching on foot or in small vessels (as is expected for harbor
seals in the lower Columbia River and Puget Sound and for California
sea lions in Puget Sound) are expected to be infrequent and cause only
a temporary disturbance on the order of minutes. As noted previously,
monitoring results from other activities involving the disturbance of
pinnipeds and relevant studies of pinniped populations that experience
more regular vessel disturbance indicate that individually significant
or population level impacts are unlikely to occur. When considering the
individual animals likely affected by this disturbance, only a small
fraction (less than fifteen percent) of the estimated population
abundance of the affected stocks would be expected to experience the
disturbance.
As noted above, authorized M/SI above the insignificance threshold
does not necessarily indicate that the take is unsustainable or that it
may constitute more than a negligible impact. Rather, we simply use
this metric as a guide to indicate when further evaluation of the
available information is warranted. For the offshore stock of
bottlenose dolphin, Risso's dolphin, and short-finned pilot whale,
maximum total potential M/SI due to NMFS's fisheries research activity
(SWFSC and NWFSC combined), while above the insignificance threshold,
is low relative to residual PBR (approximately 28, 10, and 12 percent,
respectively).
The only known source of other anthropogenic mortality for the
offshore stock of bottlenose dolphin and the Risso's dolphin is in
commercial fisheries, and such take is considered to be insignificant
and approaching zero mortality and serious injury. Therefore, there is
no information to suggest that the incremental additional removals due
to NWFSC fisheries research cause any concern with regard to annual
rates of recruitment or survival for these stocks.
Similarly, commercial fisheries provide the only known cause of
anthropogenic mortality for the short-finned pilot whale. However, due
to the relatively low PBR value for this stock, such take cannot be
considered to be insignificant and approaching zero mortality and
serious injury. The only takes in commercial fisheries from 2010-14
were due to interactions with the California drift gillnet fishery, and
occurred only in 2014. Therefore, it is unclear that these fishery
takes will constitute an ongoing source of mortality and, regardless,
any level of removals up to PBR could occur while still allowing the
stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population, as
indicated in the definition of the PBR metric. The available
information, i.e., that there is only one other source of anthropogenic
mortality, which has resulted in a low level of mortalities in one year
and may not be an ongoing source of mortality, and that the authorized
take is low compared to residual PBR (10 percent), indicates that there
is no concern regarding the impacts of incremental additional removals
due to NWFSC fisheries research on annual rates of recruitment or
survival for this stock. Nevertheless, if bycatch in commercial
fisheries increases, or other sources of
[[Page 36391]]
mortality are recorded for this stock, we will use the adaptive
management provisions of these regulations to prescribe increased
mitigation sufficient to reduce the likelihood of incidental take in
NMFS fisheries research activities. No population trends are known for
these three stocks.
PBR is unknown for harbor seals on the Oregon and Washington coasts
and in Washington inland waters (comprised of the Hood Canal, southern
Puget Sound, and Washington northern inland waters stocks). The Hood
Canal, southern Puget Sound, and Washington northern inland waters
stocks were formerly a single inland waters stock. Both the Oregon/
Washington coast and Washington inland waters stocks of harbor seal
were considered to be stable following the most recent abundance
estimates (in 1999, stock abundances were estimated at 24,732 and
13,692, respectively). However, a Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife expert (S. Jeffries) stated an unofficial abundance of 32,000
harbor seals in Washington (Mapes, 2013). Therefore, it is reasonable
to assume that at worst, the stocks have not declined since the last
abundance estimates. Ongoing anthropogenic mortality is estimated at
10.6 harbor seals per year for the coastal stock and 13.4 for inland
waters seals; therefore, we reasonably assume that the maximum
potential annual M/SI incidental to NMFS's fisheries research
activities (1.8 and 1.2, respectively) is a small fraction of any
sustainable take level that might be calculated for either stock. For
the reasons stated above, we do not consider the level of take by
acoustic and physical disturbance for harbor seals to represent a
significant additional population stressor when considered in context
with the proposed level of take by M/SI.
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 planned mitigation measures, we
find that the total marine mammal take from NWFSC's fisheries research
activities will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal
species or stocks. In summary, this finding of negligible impact is
founded on the following factors: (1) The possibility of injury,
serious injury, or mortality from the use of active acoustic devices
may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the anticipated
incidents of Level B harassment from the use of active acoustic devices
and physical disturbance of pinnipeds consist of, at worst, temporary
and relatively minor modifications in behavior; (3) the predicted
number of incidents of potential mortality are at insignificant levels
(i.e., below ten percent of residual PBR) for a majority of affected
stocks; (4) consideration of additional factors for the Risso's
dolphin, offshore stock of bottlenose dolphin, and short-finned pilot
whale do not reveal cause for concern; (5) available information
regarding two harbor seal stocks indicates that total maximum potential
M/SI is sustainable; and (6) the presumed efficacy of the planned
mitigation measures in reducing the effects of the specified activity
to the level of least practicable adverse impact. In addition, no M/SI
is authorized for any species or stock that is listed under the ESA or
considered depleted under the MMPA. In combination, we believe that
these factors demonstrate that the specified activity will have only
short-term effects on individuals (resulting from Level B harassment)
and that the total level of taking will not impact rates of recruitment
or survival sufficiently to result in population-level impacts.
Small Numbers Analysis
Please see Table 7 for information relating to this small numbers
analysis. The total amount of taking authorized is less than one
percent for a large majority of stocks. The total amount of taking for
remaining stocks ranges from four to thirteen percent.
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 measures,
we find that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to
the populations of the affected species or stocks.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an incidental take authorization for an activity,
section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking.
The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate
that requests for incidental take authorizations must include the
suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting
that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level
of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected
to be present in the proposed action area.
Any monitoring requirement we prescribe should improve our
understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species in action area (e.g.,
presence, abundance, distribution, density);
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving, or feeding areas);
Individual responses to acute stressors, or impacts of
chronic exposures (behavioral or physiological);
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of an individual; or (2) population,
species, or stock;
Effects on marine mammal habitat and resultant impacts to
marine mammals; and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
NWFSC plans to make more systematic its training, operations, data
collection, animal handling and sampling protocols, etc., in order to
improve its ability to understand how mitigation measures influence
interaction rates and ensure its research operations are conducted in
an informed manner and consistent with lessons learned from those with
experience operating these gears in close proximity to marine mammals.
It is in this spirit that the monitoring requirements described below
were crafted.
Visual Monitoring
Marine mammal watches are a standard part of conducting fisheries
research activities, and are implemented as described previously in
``Mitigation.'' Dedicated marine mammal visual monitoring occurs as
described (1) for some period prior to deployment of most research
gear; (2) throughout deployment and active fishing of all research
gears; (3) for some period prior to retrieval of longline gear; and (4)
throughout retrieval of all research gear. This visual monitoring is
performed by trained NWFSC personnel with no other responsibilities
during the monitoring period. Observers record the species and
estimated number of animals present and their behaviors, which may be
valuable information towards an understanding of whether certain
species may be attracted to vessels or certain survey gears.
Separately, marine mammal watches are conducted by watch-standers
(those navigating the
[[Page 36392]]
vessel and other crew; these will typically not be NWFSC personnel) at
all times when the vessel is being operated. The primary focus for this
type of watch is to avoid striking marine mammals and to generally
avoid navigational hazards. These watch-standers typically have other
duties associated with navigation and other vessel operations and are
not required to record or report to the scientific party data on marine
mammal sightings, except when gear is being deployed or retrieved.
In the PSRA and LCRRA only, the NWFSC will monitor any potential
disturbance of hauled-out pinnipeds, paying particular attention to the
distance at which different species of pinniped are disturbed.
Disturbance will be recorded according to the three-point scale,
representing increasing seal response to disturbance, shown in Table 5.
Training
NWFSC anticipates that additional information on practices to avoid
marine mammal interactions can be gleaned from training sessions and
more systematic data collection standards. The NWFSC will conduct
annual trainings for all CSs and other personnel who may be responsible
for conducting dedicated marine mammal visual observations to explain
mitigation measures and monitoring and reporting requirements,
mitigation and monitoring protocols, marine mammal identification,
recording of count and disturbance observations, completion of
datasheets, and use of equipment. Some of these topics may be familiar
to NWFSC staff, who may be professional biologists. The NWFSC shall
determine the agenda for these trainings and ensure that all relevant
staff have necessary familiarity with these topics. The first such
training will include three primary elements:
First, the course will provide an overview of the purpose and need
for the authorization, including mandatory mitigation measures by gear
and the purpose for each, and species that NWFSC is authorized to
incidentally take.
Second, the training will provide detailed descriptions of
reporting, data collection, and sampling protocols. This portion of the
training will include instruction on how to complete new data
collection forms such as the marine mammal watch log, the incidental
take form (e.g., specific gear configuration and details relevant to an
interaction with protected species), and forms used for species
identification and biological sampling. The biological data collection
and sampling training module will include the same sampling and
necropsy training that is used for the West Coast Regional Observer
training.
Third, NWFSC will also dedicate a portion of training to discussion
of best professional judgment (which is recognized as an integral
component of mitigation implementation; see ``Mitigation''), including
use in any incidents of marine mammal interaction and instructive
examples where use of best professional judgment was determined to be
successful or unsuccessful. We recognize that many factors come into
play regarding decision-making at sea and that it is not practicable to
simplify what are inherently variable and complex situational decisions
into rules that may be defined on paper. However, it is our intent that
use of best professional judgment be an iterative process from year to
year, in which any at-sea decision-maker (i.e., responsible for
decisions regarding the avoidance of marine mammal interactions with
survey gear through the application of best professional judgment)
learns from the prior experience of all relevant NWFSC personnel
(rather than from solely their own experience). The outcome should be
increased transparency in decision-making processes where best
professional judgment is appropriate and, to the extent possible, some
degree of standardization across common situations, with an ultimate
goal of reducing marine mammal interactions. It is the responsibility
of the NWFSC to facilitate such exchange.
Handling Procedures and Data Collection
Improved standardization of handling procedures were discussed
previously in ``Mitigation.'' In addition to the benefits implementing
these protocols are believed to have on the animals through increased
post-release survival, NWFSC believes adopting these protocols for data
collection will also increase the information on which ``serious
injury'' (SI) determinations (NMFS, 2012a, b) are based and improve
scientific knowledge about marine mammals that interact with fisheries
research gears and the factors that contribute to these interactions.
NWFSC personnel will be provided standard guidance and training
regarding handling of marine mammals, including how to identify
different species, bring an individual aboard a vessel, assess the
level of consciousness, remove fishing gear, return an individual to
water and log activities pertaining to the interaction.
NWFSC will record interaction information on either existing data
forms created by other NMFS programs or will develop their own
standardized forms. To aid in SI determinations and comply with the
current NMFS Serious Injury Guidelines (NMFS, 2012a, b), researchers
will also answer a series of supplemental questions on the details of
marine mammal interactions.
Finally, for any marine mammals that are killed during fisheries
research activities, scientists will collect data and samples pursuant
to Appendix D of the NWFSC DEA, ``Protected Species Handling Procedures
for NWFSC Fisheries Research Vessels.''
Reporting
As is normally the case, NWFSC will coordinate with the relevant
stranding coordinators for any unusual marine mammal behavior and any
stranding, beached live/dead, or floating marine mammals that are
encountered during field research activities. The NWFSC will follow a
phased approach with regard to the cessation of its activities and/or
reporting of such events, as described in the proposed regulatory texts
following this preamble. In addition, CSs or the cruise leader will
provide reports to NWFSC leadership and to the Office of Protected
Resources (OPR). As a result, when marine mammals interact with survey
gear, whether killed or released alive, a report provided by the CS
will fully describe any observations of the animals, the context
(vessel and conditions), decisions made and rationale for decisions
made in vessel and gear handling. The circumstances of these events are
critical in enabling NWFSC and OPR to better evaluate the conditions
under which takes are most likely occur. We believe in the long term
this will allow the avoidance of these types of events in the future.
The NWFSC will submit annual summary reports to OPR including: (1)
Annual line-kilometers surveyed during which the EK60, ME70, SX90 (or
equivalent sources) were predominant (see ``Estimated Take by Acoustic
Harassment'' for further discussion), specific to each region; (2)
summary information regarding use of all hook and line, seine, and
trawl gear, including number of sets, hook hours, tows, etc., specific
to each research area and gear; (3) accounts of all incidents of marine
mammal interactions, including circumstances of the event and
descriptions of any mitigation procedures implemented or not
implemented and why; (4) summary information related to any disturbance
of pinnipeds, including event-specific
[[Page 36393]]
total counts of animals present, counts of reactions according to the
three-point scale shown in Table 5, and distance of closest approach;
and (5) a written evaluation of the effectiveness of NWFSC mitigation
strategies in reducing the number of marine mammal interactions with
survey gear, including best professional judgment and suggestions for
changes to the mitigation strategies, if any. The period of reporting
will be annually, beginning one year post-issuance of any LOA, and the
report must be submitted not less than ninety days following the end of
a given year. Submission of this information is in service of an
adaptive management framework allowing NMFS to make appropriate
modifications to mitigation and/or monitoring strategies, as necessary,
during the five-year period of validity for these regulations.
NMFS has established a formal incidental take reporting system, the
Protected Species Incidental Take (PSIT) database, requiring that
incidental takes of protected species be reported within 48 hours of
the occurrence. The PSIT generates automated messages to NMFS
leadership and other relevant staff, alerting them to the event and to
the fact that updated information describing the circumstances of the
event has been inputted to the database. The PSIT and CS reports
represent not only valuable real-time reporting and information
dissemination tools but also serve as an archive of information that
may be mined in the future to study why takes occur by species, gear,
region, etc.
NWFSC will also collect and report all necessary data, to the
extent practicable given the primacy of human safety and the well-being
of captured or entangled marine mammals, to facilitate SI
determinations for marine mammals that are released alive. NWFSC will
require that the CS complete data forms and address supplemental
questions, both of which have been developed to aid in SI
determinations. NWFSC understands the critical need to provide as much
relevant information as possible about marine mammal interactions to
inform decisions regarding SI determinations. In addition, the NWFSC
will perform all necessary reporting to ensure that any incidental M/SI
is incorporated as appropriate into relevant SARs.
Adaptive Management
The regulations governing the take of marine mammals incidental to
NWFSC fisheries research survey operations contain an adaptive
management component. The inclusion of an adaptive management component
will be both valuable and necessary within the context of five-year
regulations for activities that have been associated with marine mammal
mortality.
The reporting requirements associated with this final rule are
designed to provide OPR with monitoring data from the previous year to
allow consideration of whether any changes are appropriate. OPR and the
NWFSC will meet annually to discuss the monitoring reports and current
science and whether mitigation or monitoring modifications are
appropriate. The use of adaptive management allows OPR to consider new
information from different sources to determine (with input from the
NWFSC regarding practicability) on an annual or biennial basis if
mitigation or monitoring measures should be modified (including
additions or deletions). Mitigation measures could be modified if new
data suggests that such modifications would have a reasonable
likelihood of reducing adverse effects to marine mammals and if the
measures are practicable.
The following are some of the possible sources of applicable data
to be considered through the adaptive management process: (1) Results
from monitoring reports, as required by MMPA authorizations; (2)
results from general marine mammal and sound research; and (3) any
information which reveals that marine mammals may have been taken in a
manner, extent, or number not authorized by these regulations or
subsequent LOAs.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by these actions. Therefore, we have determined that the total taking
of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse
impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are multiple marine mammal species listed under the ESA with
confirmed or possible occurrence in the proposed specified geographical
region. The authorization of incidental take pursuant to the NWFSC's
specified activity would not affect any designated critical habitat.
OPR requested initiation of consultation with NMFS's West Coast
Regional Office (WCRO) under section 7 of the ESA on the promulgation
of five-year regulations and the subsequent issuance of LOAs to NWFSC
under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA.
On November 10, 2016, the WCRO issued a biological opinion to OPR
and to the NWFSC (concerning the conduct of the specified activities)
which concluded that the issuance of the authorizations is not likely
to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species and is not
likely to adversely affect any listed marine mammal species. The
opinion also concluded that the issuance of the authorizations would
not affect any designated critical habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published
by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), NWFSC
prepared a Programmatic EA to consider the direct, indirect and
cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from the
described research activities. OPR made NWFSC's EA available to the
public for review and comment, in relation to its suitability for
adoption by OPR in order to assess the impacts to the human environment
of issuance of regulations and subsequent LOA to NWFSC. Also in
compliance with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA
Administrative Order 216-6, OPR relies on NWFSC's EA, which also
addresses OPR's action of issuing incidental take authorizations to
NWFSC, and signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on March
27, 2018. NWFSC's EA and OPR's FONSI for this action may be found
online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm.
Classification
Pursuant to the procedures established to implement Executive Order
12866, the Office of Management and Budget has determined that this
rule is not significant.
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration at the proposed rule stage that this rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for the certification was published in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments were received
regarding this certification. As a result, a regulatory flexibility
analysis is not required and none has been prepared.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required
to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure
to comply with a collection of information (COI) subject
[[Page 36394]]
to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) unless that
COI displays a currently valid OMB control number. This rule does not
contain a COI requirement subject to the provisions of the PRA because
the applicant is a Federal agency.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 219
Exports, Fish, Imports, Indians, Labeling, Marine mammals,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seafood,
Transportation.
Dated: July 24, 2018.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For reasons set forth in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR part 219
as follows:
PART 219--REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKING AND IMPORTING OF MARINE
MAMMALS
0
1. The authority citation for part 219 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
0
2. Add subpart E to part 219 to read as follows:
Subpart E--Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Northwest Fisheries
Science Center Fisheries Research in the Pacific Ocean
Sec.
219.41 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
219.42 Effective dates.
219.43 Permissible methods of taking.
219.44 Prohibitions.
219.45 Mitigation requirements.
219.46 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
219.47 Letters of Authorization.
219.48 Renewals and modifications of Letters of Authorization.
219.49 [Reserved]
219.50 [Reserved]
Subpart E--Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Northwest Fisheries
Science Center Fisheries Research in the Pacific Ocean
Sec. 219.41 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
(a) Regulations in this subpart apply only to the National Marine
Fisheries Service's (NMFS) Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC)
and those persons it authorizes or funds to conduct activities on its
behalf for the taking of marine mammals that occurs in the area
outlined in paragraph (b) of this section and that occurs incidental to
research survey program operations.
(b) The taking of marine mammals by NWFSC may be authorized in a
Letter of Authorization (LOA) only if it occurs within the California
Current Ecosystem, including Puget Sound and the Columbia River.
Sec. 219.42 Effective dates.
Regulations in this subpart are effective from August 27, 2018,
through August 28, 2023.
Sec. 219.43 Permissible methods of taking.
(a) Under LOAs issued pursuant to Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and
Sec. 219.47, the Holder of the LOA (hereinafter ``NWFSC'') may
incidentally, but not intentionally, take marine mammals within the
area described in Sec. 219.41(b) by Level B harassment associated with
use of active acoustic systems and physical or visual disturbance of
hauled-out pinnipeds and by Level A harassment, serious injury, or
mortality associated with use of hook and line gear, trawl gear, and
seine gear, provided the activity is in compliance with all terms,
conditions, and requirements of the regulations in this subpart and the
applicable LOA.
Sec. 219.44 Prohibitions.
Notwithstanding takings contemplated in Sec. 219.41 and authorized
by a LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec. 219.47,
no person in connection with the activities described in Sec. 219.41
may:
(a) Violate, or fail to comply with, the terms, conditions, and
requirements of this subpart or a LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of
this chapter and Sec. 219.47;
(b) Take any marine mammal not specified in such LOA;
(c) Take any marine mammal specified in such LOAs in any manner
other than as specified;
(d) Take a marine mammal specified in such LOA if NMFS determines
such taking results in more than a negligible impact on the species or
stocks of such marine mammal; or
(e) Take a marine mammal specified in such LOA if NMFS determines
such taking results in an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of such species or stock of marine mammal for taking for
subsistence uses.
Sec. 219.45 Mitigation requirements.
When conducting the activities identified in Sec. 219.41(a), the
mitigation measures contained in any LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of
this chapter and Sec. 219.47 must be implemented. These mitigation
measures shall include but are not limited to:
(a) General conditions:
(1) NWFSC shall take all necessary measures to coordinate and
communicate in advance of each specific survey with the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Office of Marine and
Aviation Operations (OMAO) or other relevant parties on non-NOAA
platforms to ensure that all mitigation measures and monitoring
requirements described herein, as well as the specific manner of
implementation and relevant event-contingent decision-making processes,
are clearly understood and agreed upon;
(2) NWFSC shall coordinate and conduct briefings at the outset of
each survey and as necessary between ship's crew (Commanding Officer/
master or designee(s), as appropriate) and scientific party in order to
explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal
monitoring protocol, and operational procedures;
(3) NWFSC shall coordinate as necessary on a daily basis during
survey cruises with OMAO personnel or other relevant personnel on non-
NOAA platforms to ensure that requirements, procedures, and decision-
making processes are understood and properly implemented;
(4) When deploying any type of sampling gear at sea, NWFSC shall at
all times monitor for any unusual circumstances that may arise at a
sampling site and use best professional judgment to avoid any potential
risks to marine mammals during use of all research equipment; and
(5) NWFSC shall implement handling and/or disentanglement protocols
as specified in the guidance that shall be provided to NWFSC survey
personnel.
(b) For all research surveys using trawl, hook and line, or seine
gear in Puget Sound, the move-on rule mitigation protocol described in
paragraph (c)(3) of this section shall be implemented upon observation
of killer whales at any distance.
(c) Trawl survey protocols:
(1) NWFSC shall conduct trawl operations as soon as is practicable
upon arrival at the sampling station;
(2) NWFSC shall initiate marine mammal watches (visual observation)
a minimum of ten minutes prior to beginning of net deployment but shall
also conduct monitoring during pre-set activities including trackline
reconnaissance, CTD casts, and plankton or bongo net hauls. Marine
mammal watches shall be conducted by scanning the surrounding waters
with the naked eye and rangefinding binoculars (or monocular). During
nighttime operations, visual observation shall be conducted using the
naked eye and available vessel lighting;
(3) NWFSC shall implement the move-on rule mitigation protocol, as
[[Page 36395]]
described in this paragraph. If one or more marine mammals are observed
within 500 meters (m) of the planned location in the 10 minutes before
setting the trawl gear, and are considered at risk of interacting with
the vessel or research gear, or appear to be approaching the vessel and
are considered at risk of interaction, NWFSC shall either remain onsite
or move on to another sampling location. If remaining onsite, the set
shall be delayed. If the animals depart or appear to no longer be at
risk of interacting with the vessel or gear, a further 10 minute
observation period shall be conducted. If no further observations are
made or the animals still do not appear to be at risk of interaction,
then the set may be made. If the vessel is moved to a different section
of the sampling area, the move-on rule mitigation protocol would begin
anew. If, after moving on, marine mammals remain at risk of
interaction, the NWFSC shall move again or skip the station. Marine
mammals that are sighted further than 500 m from the vessel shall be
monitored to determine their position and movement in relation to the
vessel to determine whether the move-on rule mitigation protocol should
be implemented. NWFSC may use best professional judgment in making
these decisions;
(4) NWFSC shall maintain visual monitoring effort during the entire
period of time that trawl gear is in the water (i.e., throughout gear
deployment, fishing, and retrieval). If marine mammals are sighted
before the gear is fully removed from the water, NWFSC shall take the
most appropriate action to avoid marine mammal interaction. NWFSC may
use best professional judgment in making this decision;
(5) If trawling operations have been suspended because of the
presence of marine mammals, NWFSC may resume trawl operations when
practicable only when the animals are believed to have departed the
area. NWFSC may use best professional judgment in making this
determination;
(6) When conducting surface trawls using the Nordic 264 net,
dedicated crew with no other tasks shall conduct required marine mammal
monitoring. Marine mammal monitoring shall be staffed in a stepwise
process, with a minimum of two observers beginning pre-set monitoring
and increasing to a minimum of four observers prior to and during gear
deployment. During the tow, a minimum of three observers shall conduct
required monitoring;
(7) NWFSC shall implement standard survey protocols to minimize
potential for marine mammal interactions, including maximum tow
durations at target depth and maximum tow distance, and shall carefully
empty the trawl as quickly as possible upon retrieval. Trawl nets must
be cleaned prior to deployment;
(8) NWFSC must install and use a marine mammal excluder device at
all times when the Nordic 264 trawl net is used;
(9) NWFSC must install and use acoustic deterrent devices whenever
the Nordic 264 trawl net is used, with two pairs of the devices
installed near the net opening. NWFSC must ensure that the devices are
operating properly before deploying the net;
(10) For use of the Kodiak surface trawl in Puget Sound, trawl
survey protocols described in this section apply only to cetaceans; and
(11) Trawl survey protocols described in this section do not apply
to use of pair trawl gear in the Columbia River.
(d) Hook and line (including longline) survey protocols:
(1) NWFSC shall deploy hook and line gear as soon as is practicable
upon arrival at the sampling station;
(2) NWFSC shall initiate marine mammal watches (visual observation)
no less than 30 minutes prior to both deployment and retrieval of
longline gear. Marine mammal watches shall be conducted by scanning the
surrounding waters with the naked eye and range-finding binoculars (or
monocular). During nighttime operations, visual observation shall be
conducted using the naked eye and available vessel lighting;
(3) NWFSC shall implement the move-on rule mitigation protocol, as
described in this paragraph. If one or more marine mammals are observed
within 500 m of the planned location in the ten minutes before gear
deployment, and are considered at risk of interacting with the vessel
or research gear, or appear to be approaching the vessel and are
considered at risk of interaction, NWFSC shall either remain onsite or
move on to another sampling location. If remaining onsite, the set
shall be delayed. If the animals depart or appear to no longer be at
risk of interacting with the vessel or gear, a further 10 minute
observation period shall be conducted. If no further observations are
made or the animals still do not appear to be at risk of interaction,
then the set may be made. If the vessel is moved to a different section
of the sampling area, the move-on rule mitigation protocol would begin
anew. If, after moving on, marine mammals remain at risk of
interaction, the NWFSC shall move again or skip the station. Marine
mammals that are sighted further than 500 m from the vessel shall be
monitored to determine their position and movement in relation to the
vessel to determine whether the move-on rule mitigation protocol should
be implemented. NWFSC may use best professional judgment in making
these decisions;
(4) NWFSC shall maintain visual monitoring effort during the entire
period of gear deployment and retrieval. If marine mammals are sighted
before the gear is fully deployed or retrieved, NWFSC shall take the
most appropriate action to avoid marine mammal interaction. NWFSC may
use best professional judgment in making this decision;
(5) If deployment or retrieval operations have been suspended
because of the presence of marine mammals, NWFSC may resume such
operations when practicable only when the animals are believed to have
departed the area. NWFSC may use best professional judgment in making
this decision;
(6) NWFSC shall implement standard survey protocols, including
maximum soak durations and a prohibition on chumming; and
(7) For hook and line surveys in Puget Sound, but not including
longline surveys, hook and line survey protocols described in this
section apply only to cetaceans.
(e) Seine survey protocols:
(1) NWFSC shall conduct seine operations as soon as is practicable
upon arrival at the sampling station;
(2) NWFSC shall conduct marine mammal watches (visual observation)
prior to beginning of net deployment. Marine mammal watches shall be
conducted by scanning the surrounding waters with the naked eye and
rangefinding binoculars (or monocular);
(3) NWFSC shall implement the move-on rule mitigation protocol, as
described in this paragraph for use of purse seine gear. If one or more
small cetaceans (i.e., dolphin or porpoise) or five or more pinnipeds
are observed within 500 m of the planned location before setting the
seine gear, and are considered at risk of interacting with the vessel
or research gear, or appear to be approaching the vessel and are
considered at risk of interaction, NWFSC shall either remain onsite or
move on to another sampling location. If remaining onsite, the set
shall be delayed. If the animals depart or appear to no longer be at
risk of interacting with the vessel or gear, a further ten minute
observation period shall be conducted. If no further observations are
made or the animals still do not appear to be at risk of interaction,
then the set may be made. If the vessel is moved to
[[Page 36396]]
a different area, the move-on rule mitigation protocol would begin
anew. If, after moving on, marine mammals remain at risk of
interaction, the NWFSC shall move again or skip the station. Marine
mammals that are sighted further than 500 m from the vessel shall be
monitored to determine their position and movement in relation to the
vessel to determine whether the move-on rule mitigation protocol should
be implemented. NWFSC may use best professional judgment in making
these decisions;
(4) NWFSC shall maintain visual monitoring effort during the entire
period of time that seine gear is in the water (i.e., throughout gear
deployment, fishing, and retrieval). If marine mammals are sighted
before the gear is fully removed from the water, NWFSC shall take the
most appropriate action to avoid marine mammal interaction. NWFSC may
use best professional judgment in making this decision;
(5) If seine operations have been suspended because of the presence
of marine mammals, NWFSC may resume seine operations when practicable
only when the animals are believed to have departed the area. NWFSC may
use best professional judgment in making this determination;
(6) If any cetaceans are observed in a purse seine net, NWFSC shall
immediately open the net and free the animals; and
(7) NWFSC shall not make beach seine sets within 200 m of any
hauled-out pinniped, and shall immediately remove the gear from the
water upon observation of any marine mammal attempting to interact with
the gear.
Sec. 219.46 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
(a) NWFSC shall designate a compliance coordinator who shall be
responsible for ensuring compliance with all requirements of any LOA
issued pursuant to Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec. 219.47 and
for preparing for any subsequent request(s) for incidental take
authorization.
(b) Visual monitoring program:
(1) Marine mammal visual monitoring shall occur prior to deployment
of trawl, seine, and hook and line gear, respectively; throughout
deployment of gear and active fishing of research gears (not including
longline soak time); prior to retrieval of longline gear; and
throughout retrieval of all research gear;
(2) Marine mammal watches shall be conducted by watch-standers
(those navigating the vessel and/or other crew) at all times when the
vessel is being operated; and
(3) NWFSC shall conduct census counts of established pinniped
haulouts in the Columbia River and Puget Sound that are disturbed by
NWFSC research activity, and shall record disturbance of hauled-out
pinnipeds due to NWFSC research activity, paying particular attention
to the distance at which different species of pinniped are disturbed.
Disturbance shall be recorded according to a three-point scale of
response severity.
(c) Training:
(1) NWFSC must conduct annual training for all chief scientists and
other personnel who may be responsible for conducting dedicated marine
mammal visual observations to explain mitigation measures and
monitoring and reporting requirements, mitigation and monitoring
protocols, marine mammal identification, completion of datasheets, and
use of equipment. NWFSC may determine the agenda for these trainings;
(2) NWFSC shall also dedicate a portion of training to discussion
of best professional judgment, including use in any incidents of marine
mammal interaction and instructive examples where use of best
professional judgment was determined to be successful or unsuccessful;
and
(3) NWFSC shall coordinate with NMFS's Southwest Fisheries Science
Center (SWFSC) regarding surveys conducted in the California Current
Ecosystem, such that training and guidance related to handling
procedures and data collection is consistent.
(d) Handling procedures and data collection:
(1) NWFSC must develop and implement standardized marine mammal
handling, disentanglement, and data collection procedures. These
standard procedures will be subject to approval by NMFS's Office of
Protected Resources (OPR);
(2) When practicable, for any marine mammal interaction involving
the release of a live animal, NWFSC shall collect necessary data to
facilitate a serious injury determination;
(3) NWFSC shall provide its relevant personnel with standard
guidance and training regarding handling of marine mammals, including
how to identify different species, bring an individual aboard a vessel,
assess the level of consciousness, remove fishing gear, return an
individual to water, and log activities pertaining to the interaction;
and
(4) NWFSC shall record such data on standardized forms, which will
be subject to approval by OPR. NWFSC shall also answer a standard
series of supplemental questions regarding the details of any marine
mammal interaction.
(e) Reporting:
(1) NWFSC shall report all incidents of marine mammal interaction
to NMFS's Protected Species Incidental Take database within 48 hours of
occurrence and shall provide supplemental information to OPR upon
request. Information related to marine mammal interaction (animal
captured or entangled in research gear) must include details of survey
effort, full descriptions of any observations of the animals, the
context (vessel and conditions), decisions made, and rationale for
decisions made in vessel and gear handling;
(2) Annual reporting:
(i) NWFSC shall submit an annual summary report to OPR not later
than 90 days following the end of a given year. NWFSC shall provide a
final report within thirty days following resolution of comments on the
draft report:
(ii) These reports shall contain, at minimum, the following:
(A) Annual line-kilometers surveyed during which the EK60, ME70,
SX90 (or equivalent sources) were predominant and associated pro-rated
estimates of actual take;
(B) Summary information regarding use of all hook and line, seine,
and trawl gear, including number of sets, hook hours, tows, etc.,
specific to each gear;
(C) Accounts of all incidents of marine mammal interactions,
including circumstances of the event and descriptions of any mitigation
procedures implemented or not implemented and why;
(D) Summary information related to disturbance of hauled-out
pinnipeds, including event-specific total counts of animals present,
counts of reactions according to the three-point scale, and distance of
closest approach;
(E) A written evaluation of the effectiveness of NWFSC mitigation
strategies in reducing the number of marine mammal interactions with
survey gear, including best professional judgment and suggestions for
changes to the mitigation strategies, if any;
(F) Final outcome of serious injury determinations for all
incidents of marine mammal interactions where the animal(s) were
released alive; and
(G) A summary of all relevant training provided by NWFSC and any
coordination with SWFSC or NMFS's West Coast Regional Office.
(f) Reporting of injured or dead marine mammals:
(1) In the unanticipated event that the activity defined in Sec.
219.41(a) clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a prohibited
manner, NWFSC personnel
[[Page 36397]]
engaged in the research activity shall immediately cease such activity
until such time as an appropriate decision regarding activity
continuation can be made by the NWFSC Director (or designee). The
incident must be reported immediately to OPR and the West Coast
Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. OPR will review the circumstances
of the prohibited take and work with NWFSC to determine what measures
are necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and
ensure MMPA compliance. The immediate decision made by NWFSC regarding
continuation of the specified activity is subject to OPR concurrence.
The report must include the following information:
(i) Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
(ii) Description of the incident;
(iii) Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility);
(iv) Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hours
preceding the incident;
(v) Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
(vi) Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the
incident;
(vii) Water depth;
(viii) Fate of the animal(s); and
(ix) Photographs or video footage of the animal(s);
(2) In the event that NWFSC discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown
and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than a moderate state
of decomposition), NWFSC shall immediately report the incident to OPR
and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. The report
must include the information identified in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section. Activities may continue while OPR reviews the circumstances of
the incident. OPR will work with NWFSC to determine whether additional
mitigation measures or modifications to the activities are appropriate;
(3) In the event that NWFSC discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the injury or death is not associated with
or related to the activities defined in Sec. 219.41(a) (e.g.,
previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, scavenger damage), NWFSC shall report the incident to
OPR and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS, within 24
hours of the discovery. NWFSC shall provide photographs or video
footage or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to OPR.
Sec. 219.47 Letters of Authorization.
(a) To incidentally take marine mammals pursuant to these
regulations, NWFSC must apply for and obtain a Letter of Authorization
(LOA).
(b) An LOA, unless suspended or revoked, may be effective for a
period of time not to exceed the expiration date of these regulations.
(c) If an LOA expires prior to the expiration date of these
regulations, NWFSC may apply for and obtain a renewal of the LOA.
(d) In the event of projected changes to the activity or to
mitigation and monitoring measures required by an LOA, NWFSC must apply
for and obtain a modification of the LOA as described in Sec. 219.48
of this chapter.
(e) The LOA shall set forth:
(1) Permissible methods of incidental taking;
(2) Means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact (i.e.,
mitigation) on the species, its habitat, and on the availability of the
species for subsistence uses; and
(3) Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
(f) Issuance of the LOA shall be based on a determination that the
level of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total
taking allowable under these regulations.
(g) Notice of issuance or denial of an LOA shall be published in
the Federal Register within thirty days of a determination.
Sec. 219.48 Renewals and modifications of Letters of Authorization.
(a) An LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec.
219.47 for the activity identified in Sec. 219.41(a) shall be renewed
or modified upon request by the applicant, provided that:
(1) The proposed specified activity and mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures, as well as the anticipated impacts, are the same as
those described and analyzed for these regulations (excluding changes
made pursuant to the adaptive management provision in paragraph (c)(1)
of this section), and
(2) OPR determines that the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
measures required by the previous LOA under these regulations were
implemented.
(b) For an LOA modification or renewal requests by the applicant
that include changes to the activity or the mitigation, monitoring, or
reporting measures (excluding changes made pursuant to the adaptive
management provision in paragraph (c)(1) of this section) that do not
change the findings made for the regulations or result in no more than
a minor change in the total estimated number of takes (or distribution
by species or years), OPR may publish a notice of proposed LOA in the
Federal Register, including the associated analysis of the change, and
solicit public comment before issuing the LOA.
(c) An LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec.
219.47 for the activity identified in Sec. 219.41(a) may be modified
by OPR under the following circumstances:
(1) Adaptive Management--OPR may modify (including augment) the
existing mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures (after
consulting with NWFSC regarding the practicability of the
modifications) if doing so creates a reasonable likelihood of more
effectively accomplishing the goals of the mitigation and monitoring
set forth in the preamble for these regulations;
(i) Possible sources of data that could contribute to the decision
to modify the mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures in an LOA:
(A) Results from NWFSC's monitoring from the previous year(s);
(B) Results from other marine mammal and/or sound research or
studies; and
(C) Any information that reveals marine mammals may have been taken
in a manner, extent or number not authorized by these regulations or
subsequent LOAs.
(ii) If, through adaptive management, the modifications to the
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures are substantial, OPR will
publish a notice of proposed LOA in the Federal Register and solicit
public comment.
(2) Emergencies--If OPR determines that an emergency exists that
poses a significant risk to the well-being of the species or stocks of
marine mammals specified in LOAs issued pursuant to Sec. 216.106 of
this chapter and Sec. 219.47, an LOA may be modified without prior
notice or opportunity for public comment. Notice would be published in
the Federal Register within thirty days of the action.
Sec. 219.49 [Reserved]
Sec. 219.50 [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2018-16115 Filed 7-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P