[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 32 (Thursday, February 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6842-6848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03099]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XF776
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Gull and Climate Research in
Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the National Park Service to take, by harassment, one species of marine
mammal incidental to glaucous winged gull and climate monitoring
research activities in Glacier Bay National Park (GLBA NP), Alaska.
DATES: This IHA is applicable from March 1, 2018 through February 28,
2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Molineaux, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability
An electronic copy of the IHA and supporting documents, as well as
a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online
at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm. In case of
problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed
above (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) 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 IHA is
provided to the public for review.
An IHA 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.
The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt,
capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine
mammal.
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).
[[Page 6843]]
Summary of Request
On August 31 2017, NMFS received a request from the NPS for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to glaucous-winged gull and climate
monitoring research activities in GLBA NP, Alaska. The application was
considered adequate and complete on November 1, 2017. NPS's request is
for take of harbor seals by Level B harassment. NMFS previously issued
four IHAs to the NPS for similar work (82 FR 24681, May 20, 2017; 81 FR
34994, June 1, 2016; 80 FR 28229, March 24, 2015; 79 FR 56065,
September 18, 2014). Neither NPS nor NMFS expect mortality to result
from the research and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
Description of the Specified Activity
A detailed description of the planned GLBA NP project is provided
in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56953;
December 1, 2017). Since that time, no changes have been made to the
planned activities. Therefore, we provide only a summary here. Please
refer to that Federal Register notice for the full description of the
specific activity.
NPS plans to conduct two research projects within GLBA NP,
southeast Alaska: (1) Glaucous-winged gull monitoring and (2) the
installation and maintenance of a weather station operation for long-
term climate monitoring. NPS will conduct ground and vessel surveys at
four study sites within GLBA NP for gull monitoring: Boulder Island,
Lone Island, Geikie Rock, and Flapjack Island. These sites will be
accessed up to five times per year. In addition, NPS will access Lone
Island an additional four times per year for weather station
installation, maintenance, and operation bringing the total number of
site visits to Lone Island to nine. This includes adding one additional
trip for any emergency repairs that may be needed. Researchers
accessing the islands for gull monitoring and weather station operation
may occasionally cause behavioral disturbance (or Level B harassment)
of harbor seals. NPS expects that the disturbance to harbor seals from
both projects will be minimal and only limited to Level B harassment.
The purposes for the above-mentioned research activities are as
follows. Gull monitoring studies are mandated by a Record of Decision
of a Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) (NPS 2010) which
states that NPS must initiate a monitoring program for glaucous-winged
gulls (Larus glaucescens) to inform future native egg harvest by the
Hoonah Tlingit in Glacier Bay, Alaska. Installation of a new weather
station on Lone Island is being planned as one of several installations
intended to fill coverage gaps among existing weather stations in GLBA
NP (NPS 2015a). These new stations will be operated as the foundation
of a new long-term climate-monitoring program for GLBA NP.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to the NPS was
published in the Federal Register on December 1, 2017 (82 FR 56953).
That notice described, in detail, GLBA NP's activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated
effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment period,
NMFS received one comment letter from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission).
Comment 1: The Commission recommended that NMFS enumerate the
number of harbor seals that could be taken during the planned
activities by applying standard rounding rules before summing the
numbers of estimated takes across survey sites and survey days.
Response: Calculating predicted take is not an exact science and
there are arguments for taking different mathematical approaches in
different situations, and for making qualitative adjustments in other
situations. NMFS is currently engaged in developing a protocol to guide
more consistent take calculation given certain circumstances. We
believe, however, that the methodology for this action remains
appropriate.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by the
NPS project, including brief introductions to the species and relevant
stocks as well as available information regarding population trends and
threats, and information regarding local occurrence, are provided in
NPS's application and the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA
(82 FR 56953; December 1, 2017). We are not aware of any changes in the
status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed descriptions
are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for
these descriptions. Please refer to additional species information
available in the NMFS SARs for Alaska at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/region.htm.
Table 1--Marine Mammals That Could Occur in the Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance
ESA/MMPA status; (CV, Nmin, most Annual M/SI 3
Common name Scientific name Stock Strategic (Y/N) 1 recent abundance PBR
survey) 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller's sea lion............... Eumetopias jubatus.. Eastern U.S......... -/-; N.............. 41,638 (n/a, 306 236
41,638, 2015).
Western U.S......... E/D; Y.............. 50,983............. 2,498 108
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal...................... Phoca vitulina Glacier Bay/Icy -/-; N.............. 7,210 (n.a.; 5,647; 169 104
richardii. Strait. 2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
stock abundance.
[[Page 6844]]
3 These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated
with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
Note: Italicized species not authorized for take.
Both species in Table 1 are protected under the MMPA and the
Steller sea lion is listed as endangered (Western Distinct Population
Segment) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). It was determined that
take will not occur for Steller sea lions based on available survey
data and for the fact that NPS will maintain a distance of 100 meters
from all Steller sea lions in the action area. Therefore, Steller sea
lions are not discussed further in this IHA.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56953;
December 1, 2017) included a discussion of the effects of disturbance
on marine mammals and their habitat, therefore that information is not
repeated here; please refer to the Federal Register notice (82 FR
56953; December 1, 2017) for that information. We provide only a
summary here.
The project will not result in permanent impacts to habitats used
directly by marine mammals, such as haul out sites, nor impacts to food
sources. Based on the available data, previous monitoring reports from
GLBA NP, and studies described in the proposed IHA, we anticipate that
any pinnipeds found in the vicinity of the project could have short-
term behavioral reactions (i.e., may result in marine mammals avoiding
certain areas) due to noise and visual disturbance generated by: (1)
Motorboat approaches and departures and (2) human presence during gull
research activities. We expect pinnipeds to return to a haul out site
within minutes to hours of the stimulus based on previous research
(Johnson and Acevedo-Gutierrez, 2007; Allen et al., 1985). Pinnipeds
may be temporarily displaced from their haul out sites, but we do not
expect that the pinnipeds will permanently abandon a haul out site
during site monitoring as activities are short in duration (30 minutes
to up to 2 hours), and previous surveys have demonstrated that seals
have returned to their haul out sites and have not permanently
abandoned the sites.
Estimated Take
This section provides the amount of take authorized in the IHA,
which informs both NMFS's consideration of whether the number of takes
is ``small'' and the negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of 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).
Authorized takes will be by Level B harassment only, in the form of
disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to motorboats and the presence of NPS
personnel. Based on the nature of the activity, Level A harassment is
neither anticipated nor authorized. As described previously, no
mortality is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we
describe how the take is estimated.
Harbor seals may be disturbed when vessels approach or researchers
go ashore for the purpose of monitoring gull colonies and for the
installation and maintenance of the Lone Island weather tower. Harbor
seals tend to haul out in small numbers at study sites. Using
monitoring report data from 2015 to 2017 (see raw data from Tables 1 of
the 2017, 2016 and 2015 Monitoring Reports), the average number of
harbor seals per survey visit was calculated to estimate the
approximate number of seals observers will find on any given survey
day. As a result, the following averages were determined for each
island: Boulder Island--average 3.45 seals, Flapjack Island--average
10.10 seals, Geikie Rock--average 9.58 seals, and Lone Island average
of 18.63 seals (See Table 5). Estimated take for gull and climate
monitoring was calculated by multiplying the average number of seals
observed during past gull monitoring surveys (2015-2017) by the number
of total site visits. This includes five visits to Boulder Island,
Flapjack Island, and Geikie Rock and nine visits to Lone Island (to
include four site visits for climate monitoring activities). Therefore,
the total incidents of harassment equals 283 (See Table 5).
During climate monitoring, which is expected to take place between
March 2018 to April 2018, and October 2018 to February 2019, seal
numbers are expected to dramatically decline within the action area.
Although harbor seal survey data within GLBA NP is lacking during the
months of October through February, results from satellite telemetry
studies suggest that harbor seals travel extensively beyond the
boundaries of GLBA NP during the post-breeding season (September-April)
(Womble and Gende, 2013b). Therefore, using observation data from past
gull monitoring activities (that occurred from May to September) is
applicable when estimating take for climate monitoring activities, as
it will provide the most conservative estimates.
Table 2--Level B Takes by Harassment During NPS Gull and Climate Monitoring Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average number of
Site for survey seals observed per Number of site Level B take \1\ Percentage of
visit * visits population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boulder Island.................. 3.45 5 17.27 0.24
Flapjack Island................. 10.10 5 50.50 0.70
Geikie Rock..................... 9.58 5 47.92 0.66
Lone Island..................... 18.63 ** 9 167.73 2.33
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... .................. 283 3.93
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Table 3 for NMFS' three-point scale that categorizes pinniped disturbance reactions by severity. NMFS
only considers responses falling into Levels 2 and 3 as harassment (Level B) under the MMPA.
[[Page 6845]]
* Data from 2015-2017 NPS gull surveys (NPS 2015b; NPS 2016; NPS 2017).
** Number includes four additional days for climate monitoring activities.
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, ``and other means of effecting the least practicable impact
on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention
to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking'' for certain
subsistence uses. NMFS regulations require applicants for IHAs to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat, as
well as subsistence uses. This considers the nature of the potential
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further
considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if
implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if
implemented as planned) the likelihood of effective implementation
(probability implemented as planned) and;
(2) the practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost and impact on
operations.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
To reduce the potential for disturbance from acoustic and visual
stimuli associated with gull and climate monitoring activities within
GBLA NP, several mitigation measures for marine mammals were selected
for the NPS to conduct. The following is a summation of those
mitigation measures presented in the final IHA:
Pre-Survey Monitoring
Prior to deciding to land onshore to conduct gull and climate
monitoring, NPS researchers will use high-powered image stabilizing
binoculars from their watercraft to document the number, species, and
location of hauled-out marine mammals at each island. The vessels will
maintain a distance of 328 to 1,640 ft (100 to 500 m) from the
shoreline to allow the researchers to conduct pre-survey monitoring. If
offshore predators, harbor seal pups of less than one week of age, or
Steller sea lions are observed, researchers will follow the protocols
for site avoidance discussed below. If neither of these instances
occur, researchers will then perform a controlled landing on the survey
site.
Site Avoidance
If a harbor seal pup less than one week old is observed near or
within the action area, researchers will not go ashore to conduct the
gull or climate monitoring activities. Also, if Steller sea lions are
observed within or near the study site, researchers will maintain a
distance of at least 100 m from the animals at all times.
Controlled Landings
The researchers will determine whether to approach the island based
on type of animals present. Researchers will approach the island by
motorboat at a speed of approximately 2 to 3 knots (2.3 to 3.4 mph).
This will provide enough time for any marine mammals present to slowly
enter the water without panic (flushing). The researchers will also
select a pathway of approach farthest from the hauled-out harbor seals
to minimize disturbance.
Minimize Predator Interactions
If the researchers visually observe marine predators (i.e., killer
whales) present in the vicinity of hauled-out marine mammals, the
researchers will not approach the study site.
Disturbance Reduction Protocols
While onshore at study sites, the researchers will remain vigilant
for hauled-out marine mammals. If marine mammals are present, the
researchers will move slowly and use quiet voices to minimize
disturbance to the animals present.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's measures, as well as
other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the
mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds,
areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species
or stock for subsistence uses.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
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. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
GLBANP submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan in section 13 of
their application. Monitoring requirement NMFS prescribes shall improve
our understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (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 marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
[[Page 6846]]
NPS will conduct marine mammal monitoring during the project, in
order to implement the mitigation measures that require real-time
monitoring and to gain a better understanding of marine mammals and
their impacts to the project's activities. The researchers will monitor
the area for pinnipeds during all research activities. Monitoring
activities will consist of conducting and recording observations of
pinnipeds within the vicinity of the proposed research areas. The
monitoring notes will provide dates, location, species, the
researcher's activity, behavioral state, numbers of animals that were
alert or moved greater than one meter, and numbers of pinnipeds that
flushed into the water.
The method for recording disturbances is based on those developed
by Mortenson (1996). NPS will record disturbances on a three-point
scale that represents an increasing seal response to the disturbance
(Table 3). NPS will record the time, source, and duration of the
disturbance, as well as an estimated distance between the source and
haul out. NMFS considers only responses falling into Levels 2 and 3 as
harassment under the MMPA.
Table 3--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. Alerts will
be recorded, but
not counted as a
`take'.
2....................... Movement................ Movements in
response to the
source of
disturbance,
ranging from short
withdrawals at
least twice the
animal's body
length to longer
retreats over the
beach, or if
already moving a
change of direction
of greater than 90
degrees. These
movements will be
recorded and
counted as a
`take'.
3....................... Flush................... All retreats
(flushes) to the
water. Flushing
into the water will
be recorded and
counted as a
`take'.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous Monitoring Results
As described in the notice of proposed IHA, NPS has complied with
the monitoring requirements under the previous authorizations. NMFS
posted the 2017 report on our website at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm and the results from the previous NPS
monitoring reports. These reports support our findings that the
mitigation measures required under the 2014-2017 IHAs provide the means
of effecting the least practicable impact on the species or stock.
Coordination
NPS will add to the knowledge of pinnipeds in the proposed action
area by noting observations of: (1) Unusual behaviors, numbers, or
distributions of pinnipeds, such that any potential follow-up research
can be conducted by the appropriate personnel; (2) tag-bearing
carcasses of pinnipeds, allowing transmittal of the information to
appropriate agencies and personnel; and (3) rare or unusual species of
marine mammals for agency follow-up. NPS actively monitors harbor seals
at breeding and molting haul out locations to assess trends over time
(e.g., Mathews & Pendleton, 2006; Womble et al. 2010, Womble and Gende,
2013b). This monitoring program involves collaborations with biologists
from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and NMFS' Alaska Fisheries
Science Center. NPS will continue these collaborations and encourage
continued or renewed monitoring of marine mammal species. NPS will
coordinate with state and Federal marine mammal biologists to determine
what additional data or observations may be useful for monitoring
marine mammals and haul outs in GLBA NP. Additionally, NPS will report
vessel-based counts of marine mammals, branded, or injured animals, and
all observed disturbances to the appropriate state and Federal
agencies.
Reporting
NPS is required to submit a draft monitoring report to NMFS no
later than 90 days after the expiration of the Incidental Harassment
Authorization or sixty days prior to the issuance of any subsequent IHA
for this project, whichever comes first. The report will include a
summary of the information gathered pursuant to the monitoring
requirements set forth in the Authorization. NPS will submit a final
report to NMFS within 30 days after receiving comments on the draft
report. If NPS receives no comments from NMFS on the report, NMFS will
consider the draft report to be the final report.
The report will describe the operations conducted and sightings of
marine mammals near the proposed project. The report will provide full
documentation of methods, results, and interpretation pertaining to all
monitoring. The report will provide:
1. A summary and table of the dates, times, and weather during all
research activities;
2. Species, number, location, and behavior of any marine mammals
observed throughout all monitoring activities;
3. An estimate of the number (by species) of marine mammals exposed
to acoustic or visual stimuli associated with the research activities;
and
4. A description of the implementation and effectiveness of the
monitoring and mitigation measures of the Authorization and full
documentation of methods, results, and interpretation pertaining to all
monitoring.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the
authorization, such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury,
or mortality (e.g., vessel-strike, stampede, etc.), NPS shall
immediately cease the specified activities and immediately report the
incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the Alaska
Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report must include the following
information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
Description and location of the incident (including tide
level if applicable);
Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
NPS shall not resume its activities until NMFS is able to review
the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with NPS to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and
[[Page 6847]]
ensure MMPA compliance. NPS may not resume their activities until
notified by us via letter, email, or telephone.
In the event that NPS discovers an injured or dead marine mammal,
and the lead researcher determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as we describe in the next
paragraph), NPS will immediately report the incident to the Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS and the Alaska Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report must include the same information identified in
the paragraph above this section. Activities may continue while we
review the circumstances of the incident. We will work with NPS to
determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
In the event that NPS discovers an injured or dead marine mammal,
and the lead visual observer determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the authorized activities (e.g.,
previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), NPS will report the incident to
the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the Alaska
Regional Stranding Coordinator within 24 hours of the discovery. NPS
researchers will provide photographs or video footage (if available) or
other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to us. NPS can
continue their research activities.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
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'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the 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, or
ambient noise levels).
Due to the project's minimal levels of visual and acoustic
disturbance, NMFS does not expect NPS's specified activities to cause
long-term behavioral disturbance, abandonment of the haul out area,
injury, serious injury, or mortality. Additional factors for our
negligible impact determination are listed below:
The takes from Level B harassment will be due to potential
behavioral disturbance. The effects of the research activities will be
limited to short-term startle responses and localized behavioral
changes due to the short and sporadic duration of the research
activities;
The proposed activities will not take place in areas of
significance for marine mammal feeding, resting, breeding, or pupping
and will not adversely impact marine mammal habitat;
The proposed activities will affect a small portion of
harbor seal habitat within GLBA NP for only a short amount of time.
This, combined with a large availability of alternate areas for
pinnipeds to haul out enables the seals to effectively avoid
disturbances from research operations;
Anecdotal observations and results from previous
monitoring reports show that the pinnipeds returned to the various
sites and did not permanently abandon haul out sites after NPS
conducted their research activities; and
Harbor seals may flush in the water despite researchers'
best efforts to keep calm and quiet around seals; however, injury or
mortality has never been documented nor is anticipated from flushing
events. Researchers will approach study sites slowly to provide enough
time for any marine mammals present to slowly enter the water without
panic.
As stated, NMFS does not anticipate any injuries, serious injuries,
or mortalities to result from NPS's proposed activities and we do not
propose to authorize injury, serious injury, or mortality. Harbor seals
may exhibit behavioral modifications, including temporarily vacating
the area during the proposed gull and climate research activities to
avoid human disturbance. Further, these proposed activities will not
take place in areas of significance for marine mammal feeding, resting,
breeding, or pupping and will not adversely impact marine mammal
habitat. Due to the nature, degree, and context of the behavioral
harassment anticipated, we do not expect the activities to impact
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
NMFS does not expect pinnipeds to permanently abandon any area
surveyed by researchers, as is evidenced by continued presence of
pinnipeds at the sites during annual gull monitoring. In summary, NMFS
anticipates that impacts to hauled-out harbor seals during NPS'
research activities will be behavioral harassment of limited duration
(i.e., up to two hours per visit) and limited intensity (i.e.,
temporary flushing at most).
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 monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from
the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are
available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in
our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative factors may
be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of
the activities.
As mentioned previously, NMFS estimates that NPS' activities could
potentially affect, by Level B harassment only, one species of marine
mammal under our jurisdiction. For harbor seals, this estimate is small
(3.93 percent, see Table 4) relative to the Glacier Bay/Icy Strait
stock of harbor seals (7,210 seals, see Table 1). In addition to this,
there is a high probability that repetitive takes of the same animals
may occur which reduces the percentage of population even further.
[[Page 6848]]
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of
marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the
affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
There are no subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal stocks
or species implicated by this action. NPS prohibits subsistence harvest
of harbor seals within the GLBA NP (Catton, 1995). Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks will not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species
or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
National Environmental Policy Act
Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D) authorization requires compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act.
NMFS determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is consistent with
categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance of incidental
harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is anticipated) of the
Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A and we have not identified any
extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the Companion Manual
for NAO 216-6A that would preclude this categorical exclusion.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No incidental take of ESA-listed species is proposed for
authorization or expected to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS
has determined that formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is
not required for this action.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to the NPS at Glacier Bay NP for the
harassment of small numbers of harbor seals incidental to conducting
monitoring and research studies on glaucous-winged gulls within GLBA
NP, Alaska provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring,
and reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: February 9, 2018.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-03099 Filed 2-14-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P