80 FR 24237 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Russian River Estuary Management Activities

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 83 (April 30, 2015)

Page Range		24237-24245
FR Document		2015-10115

In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, three species of marine mammals during estuary management activities conducted at the mouth of the Russian River, Sonoma County, California.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 83 (Thursday, April 30, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 83 (Thursday, April 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24237-24245]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10115]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XD810

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Russian River Estuary Management
Activities

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) to incidentally harass, by Level
B harassment only, three species of marine mammals during estuary
management activities conducted at the mouth of the Russian River,
Sonoma County, California.

DATES: This IHA is effective for the period of one year, from April 21,
2015, through April 20, 2016.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability

Electronic copies of SCWA's application and any supporting
documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained by visiting the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In the case of problems accessing
these documents, please call the contact listed above. NMFS'
Environmental Assessment (2010) and associated Finding of No
Significant Impact, prepared pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act, and NMFS' Biological Opinion (2008) on the effects of
Russian River management activities on salmonids, prepared pursuant to
the Endangered Species Act, are also available at the same site.

Background

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361, et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial
fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine mammals, providing that certain
findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established.
The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals may be
allowed only if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary)
finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the
specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species
or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking
must be set forth.
The allowance of such incidental taking under section 101(a)(5)(A),
by harassment, serious injury, death, or a combination thereof,
requires that regulations be established. Subsequently, a Letter of
Authorization may be issued pursuant to the prescriptions established
in such regulations, providing that the level of taking will be
consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under
the specific regulations. Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may
authorize such incidental taking by harassment only, for periods of not
more than one year, pursuant to requirements and conditions contained
within an IHA. The establishment of these prescriptions requires notice
and opportunity for public comment.
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, 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].''

Summary of Request

On January 21, 2015, we received an adequate and complete request
from SCWA for authorization of the taking of marine mammals incidental
to Russian River estuary management activities in

[[Page 24238]]

Sonoma County, California. SCWA plans to continue ongoing actions
necessary to manage the naturally-formed barrier beach at the mouth of
the Russian River in order to minimize potential for flooding adjacent
to the estuary and to enhance habitat for juvenile salmonids, as well
as to conduct biological and physical monitoring of the barrier beach
and estuary. Flood control-related breaching of barrier beach at the
mouth of the river may include artificial breaches, as well as
construction and maintenance of a lagoon outlet channel. The latter
activity, an alternative management technique conducted to mitigate
impacts of flood control on rearing habitat for Endangered Species Act
(ESA)-listed salmonids, occurs only from May 15 through October 15
(hereafter, the ``lagoon management period''). Artificial breaching and
monitoring activities may occur at any time during the one-year period
of validity of the IHA.
Breaching of naturally-formed barrier beach at the mouth of the
Russian River requires the use of heavy equipment (e.g., bulldozer,
excavator) and increased human presence, and monitoring in the estuary
requires the use of small boats. As a result, pinnipeds hauled out on
the beach or at peripheral haul-outs in the estuary may exhibit
behavioral responses that indicate incidental take by Level B
harassment under the MMPA. Species known from the haul-out at the mouth
of the Russian River or from peripheral haul-outs, and therefore
anticipated to be taken incidental to the specified activity, include
the harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardii), California sea lion
(Zalophus californianus), and northern elephant seal (Mirounga
angustirostris).
This is the sixth such IHA issued to SCWA. SCWA was first issued an
IHA, valid for a period of one year, effective on April 1, 2010 (75 FR
17382), and was subsequently issued one-year IHAs for incidental take
associated with the same activities, effective on April 21, 2011 (76 FR
23306), April 21, 2012 (77 FR 24471), April 21, 2013 (78 FR 23746), and
April 21, 2014 (79 FR 20180).

Description of the Specified Activity

Additional detail regarding the specified activity was provided in
our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 14073;
March 18, 2015) and in past notices cited herein; please see those
documents or SCWA's application for more information.

Overview

The planned action involves management of the estuary to prevent
flooding while preventing adverse modification to critical habitat for
ESA-listed salmonids. Requirements related to the ESA are described in
further detail below. During the lagoon management period, this
involves construction and maintenance of a lagoon outlet channel that
would facilitate formation of a perched lagoon. A perched lagoon, which
is an estuary closed to tidal influence in which water surface
elevation is above mean high tide, reduces flooding while maintaining
beneficial conditions for juvenile salmonids. Additional breaches of
barrier beach may be conducted for the sole purpose of reducing flood
risk. SCWA's planned activity was described in detail in our notice of
proposed authorization prior to the 2011 IHA (76 FR 14924; March 18,
2011); please see that document for a detailed description of SCWA's
estuary management activities. Aside from minor additions to SCWA's
biological and physical estuary monitoring measures, the specified
activity remains the same as that described in the 2011 document.

Dates and Duration

The specified activity may occur at any time during the one-year
timeframe (April 21, 2015, through April 20, 2016) of the IHA, although
construction and maintenance of a lagoon outlet channel will occur only
during the lagoon management period. In addition, there are certain
restrictions placed on SCWA during the harbor seal pupping season.
These, as well as periodicity and frequency of the specified
activities, are described in further detail below.

Specific Geographic Region

The estuary is located about 97 km (60 mi) northwest of San
Francisco in Sonoma County, near Jenner, California (see Figure 1 of
SCWA's application). The Russian River watershed encompasses 3,847
km\2\ (1,485 mi\2\) in Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake Counties. The mouth
of the Russian River is located at Goat Rock State Beach (see Figure 2
of SCWA's application); the estuary extends from the mouth upstream
approximately 10 to 11 km (6-7 mi) between Austin Creek and the
community of Duncans Mills (Heckel and McIver, 1994).

Detailed Description of Activities

Within the Russian River watershed, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps), SCWA and the Mendocino County Russian River Flood
Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (District) operate
and maintain federal facilities and conduct activities in addition to
the estuary management, including flood control, water diversion and
storage, instream flow releases, hydroelectric power generation,
channel maintenance, and fish hatchery production. As described in the
notice of proposed IHA, NMFS issued a 2008 Biological Opinion (BiOp)
for Water Supply, Flood Control Operations, and Channel Maintenance
conducted by the Corps, SCWA and the District in the Russian River
watershed (NMFS, 2008). This BiOp found that the activities--including
SCWA's estuary management activities prior to the BiOp--authorized by
the Corps and undertaken by SCWA and the District, if continued in a
manner similar to recent historic practices, were likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of ESA-listed salmonids and were likely to
adversely modify critical habitat. In part, therefore, the BiOp
requires SCWA to collaborate with NMFS and modify their estuary water
level management in order to reduce marine influence (i.e., high
salinity and tidal inflow) and promote a higher water surface elevation
in the estuary in order to enhance the quality of rearing habitat for
juvenile salmonids. SCWA is also required to monitor the response of
water quality, invertebrate production, and salmonids in and near the
estuary to water surface elevation management in the estuary-lagoon
system.
There are three components to SCWA's ongoing estuary management
activities: (1) Lagoon outlet channel management, during the lagoon
management period only, required to accomplish the dual purposes of
flood risk abatement and maintenance of juvenile salmonid habitat; (2)
traditional artificial breaching, with the sole objective of flood risk
abatement; and (3) physical and biological monitoring in and near the
estuary, required under the terms of the BiOp, to understand response
to water surface elevation management in the estuary-lagoon system. The
latter category (physical and biological monitoring) includes all
ancillary beach and/or estuary monitoring activities, including
topographic and geophysical beach surveys and biological and physical
habitat monitoring in the estuary. Please see the previously referenced
Federal Register notice (76 FR 14924; March 18, 2011) for detailed
discussion of lagoon outlet channel management, artificial breaching,
and other physical and biological monitoring activities, as well as our
in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization for this
authorization (80 FR 14073; March 18, 2015) for descriptions of minor
changes

[[Page 24239]]

to physical and biological monitoring activities.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of SCWA's application and proposed
IHA in the Federal Register on March 18, 2015 (80 FR 14073). During the
thirty-day comment period, we received a letter from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission). The Commission recommends that we issue the
requested authorization, subject to inclusion of the proposed
mitigation and monitoring measures as described in our notice of
proposed IHA and the application. All measures proposed in the initial
Federal Register notice are included within the IHA.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

The marine mammal species that may be harassed incidental to
estuary management activities are the harbor seal, California sea lion,
and the northern elephant seal. We presented a detailed discussion of
the status of these stocks and their occurrence in the action area in
the notice of the proposed IHA (80 FR 14073; March 18, 2015).
Ongoing monthly harbor seal counts at the Jenner haul-out were
begun by J. Mortenson in January 1987, with additional nearby haul-outs
added to the counts thereafter. In addition, local resident E. Twohy
began daily observations of seals and people at the Jenner haul-out in
November 1989. These datasets note whether the mouth at the Jenner
haul-out was opened or closed at each observation, as well as various
other daily and annual patterns of haul-out usage (Mortenson and Twohy,
1994). Recently, SCWA began regular baseline monitoring of the haul-out
as a component of its estuary management activity. In the notice of
proposed IHA, we presented average daily numbers of seals observed at
the mouth of the Russian River from 1993-2005 and from 2009-14 (see
Table 1; 80 FR 14073; March 18, 2015).

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

We provided a detailed discussion of the potential effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals in the notice of the proposed IHA
(79 FR 12472, March 5, 2013). A summary of anticipated effects is
provided below.
A significant body of monitoring data exists for pinnipeds at the
mouth of the Russian River. In addition, pinnipeds have co-existed with
regular estuary management activity for decades as well as with regular
human use activity at the beach, and are likely habituated to human
presence and activity. Nevertheless, SCWA's estuary management
activities have the potential to disturb pinnipeds present on the beach
or at peripheral haul-outs in the estuary. During breaching operations,
past monitoring has revealed that some or all of the seals present
typically move or flush from the beach in response to the presence of
crew and equipment, though some may remain hauled-out. No stampeding of
seals--a potentially dangerous occurrence in which large numbers of
animals succumb to mass panic and rush away from a stimulus--has been
documented since SCWA developed protocols to prevent such events in
1999. While it is likely impossible to conduct required estuary
management activities without provoking some response in hauled-out
animals, precautionary mitigation measures, described later in this
document, ensure that animals are gradually apprised of human approach.
Under these conditions, seals typically exhibit a continuum of
responses, beginning with alert movements (e.g., raising the head),
which may then escalate to movement away from the stimulus and possible
flushing into the water. Flushed seals typically re-occupy the haul-out
within minutes to hours of the stimulus. In addition, eight other haul-
outs exist nearby that may accommodate flushed seals. In the absence of
appropriate mitigation measures, it is possible that pinnipeds could be
subject to injury, serious injury, or mortality, likely through
stampeding or abandonment of pups.
California sea lions and northern elephant seals, which have been
noted only infrequently in the action area, have been observed as less
sensitive to stimulus than harbor seals during monitoring at numerous
other sites. For example, monitoring of pinniped disturbance as a
result of abalone research in the Channel Islands showed that while
harbor seals flushed at a rate of 69 percent, California sea lions
flushed at a rate of only 21 percent. The rate for elephant seals
declined to 0.1 percent (VanBlaricom, 2011). In the event that either
of these species is present during management activities, they would be
expected to display a minimal reaction to maintenance activities--less
than that expected of harbor seals.
Although the Jenner haul-out is not known as a primary pupping
beach, harbor seal pups have been observed during the pupping season;
therefore, we have evaluated the potential for injury, serious injury
or mortality to pups. There is a lack of published data regarding
pupping at the mouth of the Russian River, but SCWA monitors have
observed pups on the beach. No births were observed during recent
monitoring, but were inferred based on signs indicating pupping (e.g.,
blood spots on the sand, birds consuming possible placental remains).
Pup injury or mortality would be most likely to occur in the event of
extended separation of a mother and pup, or trampling in a stampede. As
discussed previously, no stampedes have been recorded since development
of appropriate protocols in 1999. Any California sea lions or northern
elephant seals present would be independent juveniles or adults;
therefore, analysis of impacts on pups is not relevant for those
species.
Similarly, the period of mother-pup bonding, critical time needed
to ensure pup survival and maximize pup health, is not expected to be
impacted by estuary management activities. Harbor seal pups are
extremely precocious, swimming and diving immediately after birth and
throughout the lactation period, unlike most other phocids which
normally enter the sea only after weaning (Lawson and Renouf, 1985;
Cottrell et al., 2002; Burns et al., 2005). Lawson and Renouf (1987)
investigated harbor seal mother-pup bonding in response to natural and
anthropogenic disturbance. In summary, they found that the most
critical bonding time is within minutes after birth. Although pupping
season is defined as March 15-June 30, the peak of pupping season is
typically concluded by mid-May, when the lagoon management period
begins. As such, it is expected that most mother-pup bonding would
likely be concluded as well. The number of management events during the
months of March and April has been relatively low in the past, and the
breaching activities occur in a single day over several hours. In
addition, mitigation measures described later in this document further
reduce the likelihood of any impacts to pups, whether through injury or
mortality or interruption of mother-pup bonding.
In summary, and based on extensive monitoring data, we believe that
impacts to hauled-out pinnipeds during estuary management activities
would be behavioral harassment of limited duration (i.e., less than one
day) and limited intensity (i.e., temporary flushing at most).
Stampeding, and therefore injury or mortality, is not expected--nor
been documented--in the years since appropriate protocols were
established (see Mitigation for more details). Further, the continued,
and increasingly heavy (Figure 4; SCWA, 2015), use of the haul-out

[[Page 24240]]

despite decades of breaching events indicates that abandonment of the
haul-out is unlikely.

Anticipated Effects on Habitat

We provided a detailed discussion of the potential effects of this
action on marine mammal habitat in the notice of the proposed IHA (80
FR 14073; March 18, 2015). SCWA's estuary management activities will
result in temporary physical alteration of the Jenner haul-out. With
barrier beach closure, seal usage of the beach haul-out declines, and
the three nearby river haul-outs may not be available for usage due to
rising water surface elevations. Breaching of the barrier beach,
subsequent to the temporary habitat disturbance, will likely increase
suitability and availability of habitat for pinnipeds. Biological and
water quality monitoring will not physically alter pinniped habitat.
In summary, there will be temporary physical alteration of the
beach. However, natural opening and closure of the beach results in the
same impacts to habitat; therefore, seals are likely adapted to this
cycle. In addition, the increase in rearing habitat quality has the
goal of increasing salmonid abundance, ultimately providing more food
for seals present within the action area. Thus, any impacts to marine
mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term
consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations.

Mitigation

In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses.
SCWA will continue the following mitigation measures, as
implemented during the previous IHAs, designed to minimize impact to
affected species and stocks:
SCWA crews will cautiously approach the haul-out ahead of
heavy equipment to minimize the potential for sudden flushes, which may
result in a stampede--a particular concern during pupping season.
SCWA staff will avoid walking or driving equipment through
the seal haul-out.
Crews on foot will make an effort to be seen by seals from
a distance, if possible, rather than appearing suddenly at the top of
the sandbar, again preventing sudden flushes.
During breaching events, all monitoring will be conducted
from the overlook on the bluff along Highway 1 adjacent to the haul-out
in order to minimize potential for harassment.
A water level management event may not occur for more than
two consecutive days unless flooding threats cannot be controlled.
In addition, SCWA will continue mitigation measures specific to
pupping season (March 15-June 30), as implemented in the previous IHA:
SCWA will maintain a one-week no-work period between water
level management events (unless flooding is an immediate threat) to
allow for an adequate disturbance recovery period. During the no-work
period, equipment must be removed from the beach.
If a pup less than one week old is on the beach where
heavy machinery will be used or on the path used to access the work
location, the management action will be delayed until the pup has left
the site or the latest day possible to prevent flooding while still
maintaining suitable fish rearing habitat. In the event that a pup
remains present on the beach in the presence of flood risk, SCWA will
consult with NMFS to determine the appropriate course of action. SCWA
will coordinate with the locally established seal monitoring program
(Stewards' Seal Watch) to determine if pups less than one week old are
on the beach prior to a breaching event.
Physical and biological monitoring (including topographic
and geophysical beach surveys) will not be conducted if a pup less than
one week old is present at the monitoring site or on a path to the
site.
Any jetty study activities in the vicinity of the harbor
seal haul-out will not occur during the pupping season.
Equipment will be driven slowly on the beach and care will be taken
to minimize the number of shutdowns and start-ups when the equipment is
on the beach. All work will be completed as efficiently as possible,
with the smallest amount of heavy equipment possible, to minimize
disturbance of seals at the haul-out. Boats operating near river haul-
outs during monitoring will be kept within posted speed limits and
driven as far from the haul-outs as safely possible to minimize
flushing seals.
We have carefully evaluated SCWA's planned mitigation measures and
considered their effectiveness in past implementation to determine
whether they are likely to effect the least practicable impact on the
affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our
evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the
following factors in relation to one another: (1) The manner in which,
and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure
is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2) the
proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure for
applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of
the general goals listed below:
Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine
mammals wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this
goal).
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).
A reduction in the number (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine
mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental
take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only).
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).
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.
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 SCWA's planned measures and on SCWA's
record of management at the mouth of the Russian River including
information from monitoring of SCWA's implementation of the mitigation
measures as prescribed under the previous IHAs, we have determined that
the planned mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the
least

[[Page 24241]]

practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and
areas of similar significance.

Monitoring and Reporting

In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking''. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
incidental take authorizations must include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result
in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or
impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be
present in the proposed action area.
Any monitoring requirement we prescribe should accomplish one or
more of the following general goals:
1. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, both
within defined zones of effect (thus allowing for more effective
implementation of the mitigation) and in general to generate more data
to contribute to the analyses mentioned below;
2. An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals are
likely to be exposed to stimuli that we associate with specific adverse
effects, such as behavioral harassment or hearing threshold shifts;
3. An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond
to stimuli expected to result in incidental take and how anticipated
adverse effects on individuals may impact the population, stock, or
species (specifically through effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival) through any of the following methods:
Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli
compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to
accurately predict pertinent information, e.g., received level,
distance from source);
Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli
compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to
accurately predict pertinent information, e.g., received level,
distance from source);
Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or
areas with concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli;
4. An increased knowledge of the affected species; or
5. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of certain
mitigation and monitoring measures.
SCWA submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan as part of the IHA
application. It can be found on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. The plan has been successfully
implemented by SCWA under previous IHAs. The purpose of this monitoring
plan, which is carried out collaboratively with the Stewards of the
Coasts and Redwoods (Stewards) organization, is to detect the response
of pinnipeds to estuary management activities at the Russian River
estuary. SCWA has designed the plan both to satisfy the requirements of
the IHA, and to address the following questions of interest:
1. Under what conditions do pinnipeds haul out at the Russian River
estuary mouth at Jenner?
2. How do seals at the Jenner haul-out respond to activities
associated with the construction and maintenance of the lagoon outlet
channel and artificial breaching activities?
3. Does the number of seals at the Jenner haul-out significantly
differ from historic averages with formation of a summer (May 15 to
October 15) lagoon in the Russian River estuary?
4. Are seals at the Jenner haul-out displaced to nearby river and
coastal haul-outs when the mouth remains closed in the summer?

Monitoring Measures

In summary, monitoring includes the following:
Baseline Monitoring--Seals at the Jenner haul-out are counted twice
monthly for the term of the IHA. This baseline information will provide
SCWA with details that may help to plan estuary management activities
in the future to minimize pinniped interaction. This census begins at
local dawn and continues for eight hours. All seals hauled out on the
beach are counted every thirty minutes from the overlook on the bluff
along Highway 1 adjacent to the haul-out using spotting scopes.
Monitoring may conclude for the day if weather conditions affect
visibility (e.g., heavy fog in the afternoon). Counts are scheduled for
two days out of each month, with the intention of capturing a low and
high tide each in the morning and afternoon. Depending on how the
sandbar is formed, seals may haul out in multiple groups at the mouth.
At each thirty-minute count, the observer indicates where groups of
seals are hauled out on the sandbar and provides a total count for each
group. If possible, adults and pups are counted separately.
In addition to the census data, disturbances of the haul-out are
recorded. The method for recording disturbances follows those in
Mortenson (1996). Disturbances will be recorded on a three-point scale
that represents an increasing seal response to the disturbance. The
time, source, and duration of the disturbance, as well as an estimated
distance between the source and haul-out, are recorded. It should be
noted that only responses falling into Mortenson's Levels 2 and 3
(i.e., movement or flight) will be considered as harassment under the
MMPA under the terms of the IHA. Weather conditions are recorded at the
beginning of each census. These include temperature, percent cloud
cover, and wind speed (Beaufort scale). Tide levels and estuary water
surface elevations are correlated to the monitoring start and end
times.
In an effort towards understanding possible relationships between
use of the Jenner haul-out and nearby coastal and river haul-outs,
several other haul-outs on the coast and in the Russian River estuary
are monitored as well (see Figure 4 of SCWA's application). The
peripheral haul-outs are visited for ten-minute counts twice during
each baseline monitoring day. All pinnipeds hauled out were counted
from the same vantage point(s) at each haul-out using a spotting scope
or binoculars.
Estuary Management Event Monitoring--Activities associated with
artificial breaching or initial construction of the outlet channel, as
well as the maintenance of the channel that may be required, will be
monitored for disturbances to the seals at the Jenner haul-out. A one-
day pre-event channel survey will be made within one to three days
prior to constructing the outlet channel. The haul-out will be
monitored on the day the outlet channel is constructed and daily for up
to the maximum two days allowed for channel excavation activities.
Monitoring will also occur on each day that the outlet channel is
maintained using heavy equipment for the duration of the lagoon
management period. Monitoring will correspond with that described under
the ``Baseline'' section previously, with the exception that management
activity monitoring duration is defined by event duration, rather than
being set at eight hours. On the day of the management event, pinniped
monitoring begins at least one hour prior to the crew and equipment
accessing the beach work area and continues through the duration of the
event, until at least one hour after the crew and equipment leave the
beach.
In an attempt to understand whether seals from the Jenner haul-out
are displaced to coastal and river haul-outs

[[Page 24242]]

nearby when management events occur, other nearby haul-outs are
monitored concurrently with monitoring of outlet channel construction
and maintenance activities. This provides an opportunity to
qualitatively assess whether these haul-outs are being used by seals
displaced from the Jenner haul-out. This monitoring will not provide
definitive results regarding displacement to nearby coastal and river
haul-outs, as individual seals are not marked, but is useful in
tracking general trends in haul-out use during disturbance. As
volunteers are required to monitor these peripheral haul-outs, haul-out
locations may need to be prioritized if there are not enough volunteers
available. In that case, priority will be assigned to the nearest haul-
outs (North Jenner and Odin Cove), followed by the Russian River
estuary haul-outs, and finally the more distant coastal haul-outs.
For all counts, the following information will be recorded in
thirty-minute intervals: (1) Pinniped counts, by species; (2) behavior;
(3) time, source and duration of any disturbance; (4) estimated
distances between source of disturbance and pinnipeds; (5) weather
conditions (e.g., temperature, wind); and (5) tide levels and estuary
water surface elevation.
Monitoring During Pupping Season--As described previously, the
pupping season is defined as March 15 to June 30. Baseline, lagoon
outlet channel, and artificial breaching monitoring during the pupping
season will include records of neonate (pups less than one week old)
observations. Characteristics of a neonate pup include: Body weight
less than 15 kg; thin for their body length; an umbilicus or natal
pelage present; wrinkled skin; and awkward or jerky movements on land.
SCWA will coordinate with the Seal Watch monitoring program to
determine if pups less than one week old are on the beach prior to a
water level management event.
If, during monitoring, observers sight any pup that might be
abandoned, SCWA will contact the NMFS stranding response network
immediately and also report the incident to NMFS' West Coast Regional
Office and Office of Protected Resources within 48 hours. Observers
will not approach or move the pup. Potential indications that a pup may
be abandoned are no observed contact with adult seals, no movement of
the pup, and the pup's attempts to nurse are rebuffed.

Reporting

SCWA is required to submit a report on all activities and marine
mammal monitoring results to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the West Coast Regional Administrator, NMFS, 90 days prior to the
expiration of the IHA if a renewal is sought, or within 90 days of the
expiration of the permit otherwise. This annual report will also be
distributed to California State Parks and Stewards, and would be
available to the public on SCWA's Web site. This report will contain
the following information:
The number of pinnipeds taken, by species and age class
(if possible);
Behavior prior to and during water level management
events;
Start and end time of activity;
Estimated distances between source and pinnipeds when
disturbance occurs;
Weather conditions (e.g., temperature, wind);
Haul-out reoccupation time of any pinnipeds based on post-
activity monitoring;
Tide levels and estuary water surface elevation; and
Seal census from bi-monthly and nearby haul-out
monitoring.
The annual report includes descriptions of monitoring methodology,
tabulation of estuary management events, summary of monitoring results,
and discussion of problems noted and proposed remedial measures. SCWA
will report any injured or dead marine mammals to NMFS' West Coast
Regional Office and Office of Protected Resources.

Summary of Previous Monitoring

SCWA complied with the mitigation and monitoring required under all
previous authorizations. In accordance with the 2014 IHA, SCWA
submitted a Report of Activities and Monitoring Results, covering the
period of January 1 through December 31, 2014. Previous monitoring
reports (available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm) provided additional analysis of monitoring results
from 2009-13. A barrier beach was formed eleven times during 2014, but
SCWA was required to implement artificial breaching for only six of
these closure events. The Russian River outlet was closed to the ocean
for a total of 110 days in 2014, including extended closures totaling
29 days during the lagoon management period. However, these closures
all culminated in natural breaches and no outlet channel management
events were required. During 2013, five artificial breaching events
occurred (SCWA, 2014). In January 2012, the barrier beach was
artificially breached after two days of breaching activity. There were
also several periods over the course of the year where the barrier
beach closed or became naturally perched and then subsequently breached
naturally (SCWA, 2013). In 2011, no water level management activities
occurred (SCWA, 2012). In 2010, one lagoon management event and two
artificial breaching events occurred (SCWA, 2011). Pinniped monitoring
occurred no more than 3 days before, the day of, and the day after each
water level management activity. In addition, SCWA conducted biological
and physical monitoring as described previously. During the course of
these activities, SCWA did not exceed the take levels authorized under
the relevant IHAs. We provided a detailed description of previous
monitoring results in the notice of the proposed IHA (80 FR 14073;
March 18, 2015).

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

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].''
We are authorizing SCWA to take harbor seals, California sea lions,
and northern elephant seals, by Level B harassment only, incidental to
estuary management activities. These activities, involving increased
human presence and the use of heavy equipment and support vehicles, are
expected to harass pinnipeds present at the haul-out through behavioral
disturbance only. In addition, monitoring activities prescribed in the
BiOp may result in harassment of additional individuals at the Jenner
haul-out and at the three haul-outs located in the estuary. Estimates
of the number of harbor seals, California sea lions, and northern
elephant seals that may be harassed by the activities is based upon the
number of potential events associated with Russian River estuary
management activities and the average number of individuals of each
species that are present during conditions appropriate to the activity.
As described previously in this document, monitoring effort at the
mouth of the Russian River has shown that the number of seals utilizing
the haul-out declines during bar-closed conditions. Tables 1 and 2
detail the total number of authorized takes.

[[Page 24243]]

Methodology of take estimation was discussed in detail in our notice of
proposed IHA (80 FR 14073; March 18, 2015).

Table 1--Estimated Number of Harbor Seal Takes Resulting From Russian
River Estuary Management Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potential total
number of
Number of animals expected to Number of events b c individual
occur \a\ animals that may
be taken
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation: 117 \d\....... Implementation: 3..... Implementation:
351.
Maintenance and Monitoring: Maintenance: Maintenance:
1,160.
May: 80................... May: 1................
June: 97.................. June-Sept: 4/month....
July: 117................. Oct: 1................
Aug: 17................... Monitoring: Monitoring: 552.
Sept: 33.................. June-Sept: 2/month....
Oct: 24................... Oct: 1................ Total: 2,063.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Artificial Breaching
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oct: 24....................... Oct: 2................ Oct: 48.
Nov: 36....................... Nov: 2................ Nov: 72.
Dec: 51....................... Dec: 2................ Dec: 102.
Jan: 41....................... Jan: 1................ Jan: 41.
Feb: 90....................... Feb: 1................ Feb: 90.
Mar: 130...................... Mar: 1................ Mar: 130.
Apr: 80....................... Apr: 1................ Apr: 80.
May: 80....................... May: 2................ May: 160.
12 events maximum..... Total: 723.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan: 89....................... 1 topographic survey/ Jan: 89.
month; 100 percent of
animals present Jun-
Feb; 10 percent of
animals present Mar-
May.
Feb: 131...................... Feb: 131.
Mar: 173...................... Mar: 17.
Apr: 137...................... Apr: 14.
May: 157...................... May: 16.
Jun: 154...................... Jun: 154.
Jul: 158...................... Jul: 158.
Aug: 146...................... Aug: 146.
Sep: 78....................... Sep: 78.
Oct: 50....................... Oct: 50.
Nov: 66....................... Nov: 66.
Dec: 106...................... Dec: 106.
...................... Total: 1,025.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 \e\......................... 165................... 165
-----------------------------------------
Total..................... ...................... 3,976
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ For Lagoon Outlet Channel Management and Artificial Breaching,
average daily number of animals corresponds with data from Table 2.
For Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys, average daily number of
animals corresponds with 2012-14 data from Table 1.
\b\ For implementation of the lagoon outlet channel, an event is defined
as a single, two-day episode. It is assumed that the same individual
seals would be hauled out during a single event. For the remaining
activities, an event is defined as a single day on which an activity
occurs. Some events may include multiple activities.
\c\ Number of events for artificial breaching derived from historical
data. The average number of events for each month was rounded up to
the nearest whole number; estimated number of events for December was
increased from one to two because multiple closures resulting from
storm events have occurred in recent years during that month. These
numbers likely represent an overestimate, as the average annual number
of events is six.
\d\ Although implementation could occur at any time during the lagoon
management period, the highest daily average per month from the lagoon
management period was used.
\e\ Based on past experience, SCWA expects that no more than one seal
may be present, and thus have the potential to be disturbed, at each
of the three river haul-outs. Number of events includes addition of
acoustic telemetry surveys.

[[Page 24244]]

Table 2--Estimated Number of California Sea Lion and Elephant Seal Takes Resulting From Russian River Estuary
Management Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potential
Number of total number
Species animals Number of of individual
expected to events \a\ animals that
occur \a\ may be taken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per event)..... 1 6 6
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per event).. 1 6 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Artificial Breaching
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per month, Oct- 1 8 8
May)...........................................................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per month, 1 8 8
Oct-May).......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per month year- 1 12 12
round for topographical surveys)...............................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per month 1 12 12
year-round for topographical surveys)..........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion (potential to encounter once per month, Jul- 1 8 8
Feb)...........................................................
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per month, 1 8 8
Jul-Feb).......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion............................................. .............. .............. 34
Elephant seal................................................... .............. .............. 34
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ SCWA expects that California sea lions and/or northern elephant seals could occur during any month of the
year, but that any such occurrence would be infrequent and unlikely to occur more than once per month.

Analyses and Determinations

Negligible Impact Analysis

NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . .
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.'' A negligible impact finding is based on the
lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of
Level B harassment takes alone is not enough information on which to
base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of
the number of marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral
harassment, we consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as
the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number
of estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
Although SCWA's estuary management activities may disturb pinnipeds
hauled out at the mouth of the Russian River, as well as those hauled
out at several locations in the estuary during recurring monitoring
activities, impacts are occurring to a small, localized group of
animals. While these impacts can occur year-round, they occur
sporadically and for limited duration (e.g., a maximum of two
consecutive days for water level management events). Seals will likely
become alert or, at most, flush into the water in reaction to the
presence of crews and equipment on the beach. While disturbance may
occur during a sensitive time (during the March 15-June 30 pupping
season), mitigation measures have been specifically designed to further
minimize harm during this period and eliminate the possibility of pup
injury or mother-pup separation.
No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated, nor is the
proposed action likely to result in long-term impacts such as permanent
abandonment of the haul-out. Injury, serious injury, or mortality to
pinnipeds would likely result from startling animals inhabiting the
haul-out into a stampede reaction, or from extended mother-pup
separation as a result of such a stampede. Long-term impacts to
pinniped usage of the haul-out could result from significantly
increased presence of humans and equipment on the beach. To avoid these
possibilities, we have worked with SCWA to develop the previously
described mitigation measures. These are designed to reduce the
possibility of startling pinnipeds, by gradually apprising them of the
presence of humans and equipment on the beach, and to reduce the
possibility of impacts to pups by eliminating or altering management
activities on the beach when pups are present and by setting limits on
the frequency and duration of events during pupping season. During the
past fifteen years of flood control management, implementation of
similar mitigation measures has resulted in no known stampede events
and no known injury, serious injury, or mortality. Over the course of
that time period, management events have generally been infrequent and
of limited duration.
No pinniped stocks for which incidental take is authorized are
listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA or determined to be
strategic or depleted under the MMPA. Recent data suggests that harbor
seal populations have reached carrying capacity; populations of
California sea lions and northern elephant seals in California are

[[Page 24245]]

also considered healthy. In summary, and based on extensive monitoring
data, we believe that impacts to hauled-out pinnipeds during estuary
management activities would be behavioral harassment of limited
duration (i.e., less than one day) and limited intensity (i.e.,
temporary flushing at most). Stampeding, and therefore injury or
mortality, is not expected--nor been documented--in the years since
appropriate protocols were established (see Mitigation for more
details). Further, the continued, and increasingly heavy (Figure 4;
SCWA, 2015), use of the haul-out despite decades of breaching events
indicates that abandonment of the haul-out is unlikely. 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 monitoring and
mitigation measures, we find that the total marine mammal take from
SCWA's estuary management activities will have a negligible impact on
the affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers Analysis

The authorized number of animals taken for each species of pinniped
can be considered small relative to the population size. There are an
estimated 30,968 harbor seals in the California stock, 296,750
California sea lions, and 179,000 northern elephant seals in the
California breeding population. Based on extensive monitoring effort
specific to the affected haul-out and historical data on the frequency
of the specified activity, we are proposing to authorize take, by Level
B harassment only, of 3,976 harbor seals, 34 California sea lions, and
34 northern elephant seals, representing 12.8, 0.01, and 0.02 percent
of the populations, respectively. However, this represents an
overestimate of the number of individuals harassed over the duration of
the IHA, because these totals represent much smaller numbers of
individuals that may be harassed multiple times. Based on the analysis
contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on
marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the
implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures, we find that
small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the
populations of the affected species or stocks.

Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses

There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action. Therefore, 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)

No species listed under the ESA are expected to be affected by
these activities. Therefore, we have determined that a section 7
consultation under the ESA is not required. As described elsewhere in
this document, SCWA and the Corps consulted with NMFS under section 7
of the ESA regarding the potential effects of their operations and
maintenance activities, including SCWA's estuary management program, on
ESA-listed salmonids. As a result of this consultation, NMFS issued the
Russian River Biological Opinion (NMFS, 2008), including Reasonable and
Prudent Alternatives, which prescribes modifications to SCWA's estuary
management activities. The effects of the proposed activities and
authorized take would not cause additional effects for which section 7
consultation would be required.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published
by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6, we prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) to consider the direct, indirect and cumulative effects
to the human environment resulting from issuance of the original IHA to
SCWA for the specified activities and found that it would not result in
any significant impacts to the human environment. We signed a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on March 30, 2010. We have reviewed
SWCA's application for a renewed IHA for ongoing estuary management
activities for 2015 and the 2014 monitoring report. Based on that
review, we have determined that the proposed action follows closely the
IHAs issued and implemented in 2010-13 and does not present any
substantial changes, or significant new circumstances or information
relevant to environmental concerns which would require a supplement to
the 2010 EA or preparation of a new NEPA document. Therefore, we have
determined that a new or supplemental EA or Environmental Impact
Statement is unnecessary, and reaffirm the existing FONSI for this
action. The 2010 EA and FONSI for this action are available for review
at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.

Authorization

As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to SCWA
to conduct estuary management activities in the Russian River from the
period of April 21, 2015, through April 20, 2016, provided the
previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements
are implemented.

Dated: April 27, 2015.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-10115 Filed 4-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

24238 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 83 / Thursday, April 30, 2015 / Notices

Sonoma County, California. SCWA flooding while preventing adverse including flood control, water diversion
plans to continue ongoing actions modification to critical habitat for ESA- and storage, instream flow releases,
necessary to manage the naturally- listed salmonids. Requirements related hydroelectric power generation, channel
formed barrier beach at the mouth of the to the ESA are described in further maintenance, and fish hatchery
Russian River in order to minimize detail below. During the lagoon production. As described in the notice
potential for flooding adjacent to the management period, this involves of proposed IHA, NMFS issued a 2008
estuary and to enhance habitat for construction and maintenance of a Biological Opinion (BiOp) for Water
juvenile salmonids, as well as to lagoon outlet channel that would Supply, Flood Control Operations, and
conduct biological and physical facilitate formation of a perched lagoon. Channel Maintenance conducted by the
monitoring of the barrier beach and A perched lagoon, which is an estuary Corps, SCWA and the District in the
estuary. Flood control-related breaching closed to tidal influence in which water Russian River watershed (NMFS, 2008).
of barrier beach at the mouth of the river surface elevation is above mean high This BiOp found that the activities—
may include artificial breaches, as well tide, reduces flooding while including SCWA’s estuary management
as construction and maintenance of a maintaining beneficial conditions for activities prior to the BiOp—authorized
lagoon outlet channel. The latter juvenile salmonids. Additional breaches by the Corps and undertaken by SCWA
activity, an alternative management of barrier beach may be conducted for and the District, if continued in a
technique conducted to mitigate the sole purpose of reducing flood risk.
manner similar to recent historic
impacts of flood control on rearing SCWA’s planned activity was described
practices, were likely to jeopardize the
habitat for Endangered Species Act in detail in our notice of proposed
continued existence of ESA-listed
(ESA)-listed salmonids, occurs only authorization prior to the 2011 IHA (76
from May 15 through October 15 FR 14924; March 18, 2011); please see salmonids and were likely to adversely
(hereafter, the ‘‘lagoon management that document for a detailed description modify critical habitat. In part,
period’’). Artificial breaching and of SCWA’s estuary management therefore, the BiOp requires SCWA to
monitoring activities may occur at any activities. Aside from minor additions to collaborate with NMFS and modify their
time during the one-year period of SCWA’s biological and physical estuary estuary water level management in
validity of the IHA. monitoring measures, the specified order to reduce marine influence (i.e.,
Breaching of naturally-formed barrier activity remains the same as that high salinity and tidal inflow) and
beach at the mouth of the Russian River described in the 2011 document. promote a higher water surface
requires the use of heavy equipment elevation in the estuary in order to
(e.g., bulldozer, excavator) and Dates and Duration enhance the quality of rearing habitat
increased human presence, and The specified activity may occur at for juvenile salmonids. SCWA is also
monitoring in the estuary requires the any time during the one-year timeframe required to monitor the response of
use of small boats. As a result, (April 21, 2015, through April 20, 2016) water quality, invertebrate production,
pinnipeds hauled out on the beach or at of the IHA, although construction and and salmonids in and near the estuary
peripheral haul-outs in the estuary may maintenance of a lagoon outlet channel to water surface elevation management
exhibit behavioral responses that will occur only during the lagoon in the estuary-lagoon system.
indicate incidental take by Level B management period. In addition, there There are three components to
harassment under the MMPA. Species are certain restrictions placed on SCWA SCWA’s ongoing estuary management
known from the haul-out at the mouth during the harbor seal pupping season. activities: (1) Lagoon outlet channel
of the Russian River or from peripheral These, as well as periodicity and management, during the lagoon
haul-outs, and therefore anticipated to frequency of the specified activities, are management period only, required to
be taken incidental to the specified described in further detail below. accomplish the dual purposes of flood
activity, include the harbor seal (Phoca Specific Geographic Region risk abatement and maintenance of
vitulina richardii), California sea lion juvenile salmonid habitat; (2) traditional
(Zalophus californianus), and northern The estuary is located about 97 km
(60 mi) northwest of San Francisco in artificial breaching, with the sole
elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris). objective of flood risk abatement; and
This is the sixth such IHA issued to Sonoma County, near Jenner, California
(see Figure 1 of SCWA’s application). (3) physical and biological monitoring
SCWA. SCWA was first issued an IHA, in and near the estuary, required under
valid for a period of one year, effective The Russian River watershed
encompasses 3,847 km2 (1,485 mi2) in the terms of the BiOp, to understand
on April 1, 2010 (75 FR 17382), and was response to water surface elevation
subsequently issued one-year IHAs for Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake
Counties. The mouth of the Russian management in the estuary-lagoon
incidental take associated with the same system. The latter category (physical
activities, effective on April 21, 2011 (76 River is located at Goat Rock State
Beach (see Figure 2 of SCWA’s and biological monitoring) includes all
FR 23306), April 21, 2012 (77 FR ancillary beach and/or estuary
24471), April 21, 2013 (78 FR 23746), application); the estuary extends from
the mouth upstream approximately 10 monitoring activities, including
and April 21, 2014 (79 FR 20180).
to 11 km (6–7 mi) between Austin Creek topographic and geophysical beach
Description of the Specified Activity and the community of Duncans Mills surveys and biological and physical
Additional detail regarding the (Heckel and McIver, 1994). habitat monitoring in the estuary. Please
specified activity was provided in our see the previously referenced Federal
Detailed Description of Activities Register notice (76 FR 14924; March 18,
Federal Register notice of proposed
2011) for detailed discussion of lagoon
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

authorization (80 FR 14073; March 18, Within the Russian River watershed,
2015) and in past notices cited herein; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers outlet channel management, artificial
please see those documents or SCWA’s (Corps), SCWA and the Mendocino breaching, and other physical and
application for more information. County Russian River Flood Control and biological monitoring activities, as well
Water Conservation Improvement as our in our Federal Register notice of
Overview District (District) operate and maintain proposed authorization for this
The planned action involves federal facilities and conduct activities authorization (80 FR 14073; March 18,
management of the estuary to prevent in addition to the estuary management, 2015) for descriptions of minor changes

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 83 / Thursday, April 30, 2015 / Notices 24239

to physical and biological monitoring human presence and activity. Russian River, but SCWA monitors have
activities. Nevertheless, SCWA’s estuary observed pups on the beach. No births
management activities have the were observed during recent
Comments and Responses
potential to disturb pinnipeds present monitoring, but were inferred based on
We published a notice of receipt of on the beach or at peripheral haul-outs signs indicating pupping (e.g., blood
SCWA’s application and proposed IHA in the estuary. During breaching spots on the sand, birds consuming
in the Federal Register on March 18, operations, past monitoring has revealed possible placental remains). Pup injury
2015 (80 FR 14073). During the thirty- that some or all of the seals present or mortality would be most likely to
day comment period, we received a typically move or flush from the beach occur in the event of extended
letter from the Marine Mammal in response to the presence of crew and separation of a mother and pup, or
Commission (Commission). The equipment, though some may remain trampling in a stampede. As discussed
Commission recommends that we issue hauled-out. No stampeding of seals—a previously, no stampedes have been
the requested authorization, subject to potentially dangerous occurrence in recorded since development of
inclusion of the proposed mitigation which large numbers of animals appropriate protocols in 1999. Any
and monitoring measures as described succumb to mass panic and rush away California sea lions or northern elephant
in our notice of proposed IHA and the from a stimulus—has been documented seals present would be independent
application. All measures proposed in since SCWA developed protocols to juveniles or adults; therefore, analysis of
the initial Federal Register notice are prevent such events in 1999. While it is impacts on pups is not relevant for
included within the IHA. likely impossible to conduct required those species.
estuary management activities without Similarly, the period of mother-pup
Description of Marine Mammals in the
provoking some response in hauled-out bonding, critical time needed to ensure
Area of the Specified Activity
animals, precautionary mitigation pup survival and maximize pup health,
The marine mammal species that may measures, described later in this is not expected to be impacted by
be harassed incidental to estuary document, ensure that animals are estuary management activities. Harbor
management activities are the harbor gradually apprised of human approach. seal pups are extremely precocious,
seal, California sea lion, and the Under these conditions, seals typically swimming and diving immediately after
northern elephant seal. We presented a exhibit a continuum of responses, birth and throughout the lactation
detailed discussion of the status of these beginning with alert movements (e.g., period, unlike most other phocids
stocks and their occurrence in the action raising the head), which may then which normally enter the sea only after
area in the notice of the proposed IHA escalate to movement away from the weaning (Lawson and Renouf, 1985;
(80 FR 14073; March 18, 2015). stimulus and possible flushing into the Cottrell et al., 2002; Burns et al., 2005).
Ongoing monthly harbor seal counts water. Flushed seals typically re-occupy Lawson and Renouf (1987) investigated
at the Jenner haul-out were begun by J. the haul-out within minutes to hours of harbor seal mother-pup bonding in
Mortenson in January 1987, with the stimulus. In addition, eight other response to natural and anthropogenic
additional nearby haul-outs added to haul-outs exist nearby that may disturbance. In summary, they found
the counts thereafter. In addition, local accommodate flushed seals. In the that the most critical bonding time is
resident E. Twohy began daily absence of appropriate mitigation within minutes after birth. Although
observations of seals and people at the measures, it is possible that pinnipeds pupping season is defined as March 15-
Jenner haul-out in November 1989. could be subject to injury, serious June 30, the peak of pupping season is
These datasets note whether the mouth injury, or mortality, likely through typically concluded by mid-May, when
at the Jenner haul-out was opened or stampeding or abandonment of pups. the lagoon management period begins.
closed at each observation, as well as California sea lions and northern As such, it is expected that most
various other daily and annual patterns elephant seals, which have been noted mother-pup bonding would likely be
of haul-out usage (Mortenson and only infrequently in the action area, concluded as well. The number of
Twohy, 1994). Recently, SCWA began have been observed as less sensitive to management events during the months
regular baseline monitoring of the haul- stimulus than harbor seals during of March and April has been relatively
out as a component of its estuary monitoring at numerous other sites. For low in the past, and the breaching
management activity. In the notice of example, monitoring of pinniped activities occur in a single day over
proposed IHA, we presented average disturbance as a result of abalone several hours. In addition, mitigation
daily numbers of seals observed at the research in the Channel Islands showed measures described later in this
mouth of the Russian River from 1993– that while harbor seals flushed at a rate document further reduce the likelihood
2005 and from 2009–14 (see Table 1; 80 of 69 percent, California sea lions of any impacts to pups, whether through
FR 14073; March 18, 2015). flushed at a rate of only 21 percent. The injury or mortality or interruption of
rate for elephant seals declined to 0.1 mother-pup bonding.
Potential Effects of the Specified percent (VanBlaricom, 2011). In the In summary, and based on extensive
Activity on Marine Mammals event that either of these species is monitoring data, we believe that
We provided a detailed discussion of present during management activities, impacts to hauled-out pinnipeds during
the potential effects of the specified they would be expected to display a estuary management activities would be
activity on marine mammals in the minimal reaction to maintenance behavioral harassment of limited
notice of the proposed IHA (79 FR activities—less than that expected of duration (i.e., less than one day) and
12472, March 5, 2013). A summary of harbor seals. limited intensity (i.e., temporary
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

anticipated effects is provided below. Although the Jenner haul-out is not flushing at most). Stampeding, and
A significant body of monitoring data known as a primary pupping beach, therefore injury or mortality, is not
exists for pinnipeds at the mouth of the harbor seal pups have been observed expected—nor been documented—in
Russian River. In addition, pinnipeds during the pupping season; therefore, the years since appropriate protocols
have co-existed with regular estuary we have evaluated the potential for were established (see Mitigation for
management activity for decades as well injury, serious injury or mortality to more details). Further, the continued,
as with regular human use activity at pups. There is a lack of published data and increasingly heavy (Figure 4;
the beach, and are likely habituated to regarding pupping at the mouth of the SCWA, 2015), use of the haul-out

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

24240 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 83 / Thursday, April 30, 2015 / Notices

despite decades of breaching events suddenly at the top of the sandbar, again their habitat. Our evaluation of potential
indicates that abandonment of the haul- preventing sudden flushes. measures included consideration of the
out is unlikely. • During breaching events, all following factors in relation to one
monitoring will be conducted from the another: (1) The manner in which, and
Anticipated Effects on Habitat overlook on the bluff along Highway 1 the degree to which, the successful
We provided a detailed discussion of adjacent to the haul-out in order to implementation of the measure is
the potential effects of this action on minimize potential for harassment. expected to minimize adverse impacts
marine mammal habitat in the notice of • A water level management event to marine mammals, (2) the proven or
the proposed IHA (80 FR 14073; March may not occur for more than two likely efficacy of the specific measure to
18, 2015). SCWA’s estuary management consecutive days unless flooding threats minimize adverse impacts as planned;
activities will result in temporary cannot be controlled. and (3) the practicability of the measure
physical alteration of the Jenner haul- In addition, SCWA will continue for applicant implementation.
out. With barrier beach closure, seal mitigation measures specific to pupping Any mitigation measure(s) we
usage of the beach haul-out declines, season (March 15–June 30), as prescribe should be able to accomplish,
and the three nearby river haul-outs implemented in the previous IHA: have a reasonable likelihood of
may not be available for usage due to • SCWA will maintain a one-week accomplishing (based on current
rising water surface elevations. no-work period between water level science), or contribute to the
Breaching of the barrier beach, management events (unless flooding is accomplishment of one or more of the
subsequent to the temporary habitat an immediate threat) to allow for an general goals listed below:
disturbance, will likely increase adequate disturbance recovery period. • Avoidance or minimization of
suitability and availability of habitat for During the no-work period, equipment injury or death of marine mammals
pinnipeds. Biological and water quality must be removed from the beach. wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may
monitoring will not physically alter • If a pup less than one week old is contribute to this goal).
pinniped habitat. on the beach where heavy machinery • A reduction in the number (total
In summary, there will be temporary will be used or on the path used to number or number at biologically
physical alteration of the beach. access the work location, the important time or location) of
However, natural opening and closure management action will be delayed individual marine mammals exposed to
of the beach results in the same impacts until the pup has left the site or the stimuli expected to result in incidental
to habitat; therefore, seals are likely latest day possible to prevent flooding take (this goal may contribute to 1,
adapted to this cycle. In addition, the while still maintaining suitable fish above, or to reducing takes by
increase in rearing habitat quality has rearing habitat. In the event that a pup behavioral harassment only).
the goal of increasing salmonid remains present on the beach in the • A reduction in the number (total
abundance, ultimately providing more presence of flood risk, SCWA will number or number at biologically
food for seals present within the action consult with NMFS to determine the important time or location) of times any
area. Thus, any impacts to marine appropriate course of action. SCWA will individual marine mammal would be
mammal habitat are not expected to coordinate with the locally established exposed to stimuli expected to result in
cause significant or long-term seal monitoring program (Stewards’ Seal incidental take (this goal may contribute
consequences for individual marine Watch) to determine if pups less than to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
mammals or their populations. one week old are on the beach prior to behavioral harassment only).
a breaching event. • A reduction in the intensity of
Mitigation • Physical and biological monitoring exposure to stimuli expected to result in
In order to issue an IHA under section (including topographic and geophysical incidental take (this goal may contribute
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must beach surveys) will not be conducted if to 1, above, or to reducing the severity
set forth the permissible methods of a pup less than one week old is present of behavioral harassment only).
taking pursuant to such activity, and at the monitoring site or on a path to the • Avoidance or minimization of
other means of effecting the least site. adverse effects to marine mammal
practicable impact on such species or • Any jetty study activities in the habitat, paying particular attention to
stock and its habitat, paying particular vicinity of the harbor seal haul-out will the prey base, blockage or limitation of
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, not occur during the pupping season. passage to or from biologically
and areas of similar significance, and on Equipment will be driven slowly on important areas, permanent destruction
the availability of such species or stock the beach and care will be taken to of habitat, or temporary disturbance of
for taking for certain subsistence uses. minimize the number of shutdowns and habitat during a biologically important
SCWA will continue the following start-ups when the equipment is on the time.
mitigation measures, as implemented beach. All work will be completed as • For monitoring directly related to
during the previous IHAs, designed to efficiently as possible, with the smallest mitigation, an increase in the
minimize impact to affected species and amount of heavy equipment possible, to probability of detecting marine
stocks: minimize disturbance of seals at the mammals, thus allowing for more
• SCWA crews will cautiously haul-out. Boats operating near river effective implementation of the
approach the haul-out ahead of heavy haul-outs during monitoring will be mitigation.
equipment to minimize the potential for kept within posted speed limits and Based on our evaluation of SCWA’s
sudden flushes, which may result in a driven as far from the haul-outs as safely planned measures and on SCWA’s
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

stampede—a particular concern during possible to minimize flushing seals. record of management at the mouth of
pupping season. We have carefully evaluated SCWA’s the Russian River including information
• SCWA staff will avoid walking or planned mitigation measures and from monitoring of SCWA’s
driving equipment through the seal considered their effectiveness in past implementation of the mitigation
haul-out. implementation to determine whether measures as prescribed under the
• Crews on foot will make an effort to they are likely to effect the least previous IHAs, we have determined that
be seen by seals from a distance, if practicable impact on the affected the planned mitigation measures
possible, rather than appearing marine mammal species and stocks and provide the means of effecting the least

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 83 / Thursday, April 30, 2015 / Notices 24241

practicable impact on marine mammal SCWA submitted a marine mammal recorded. The method for recording
species or stocks and their habitat, monitoring plan as part of the IHA disturbances follows those in Mortenson
paying particular attention to rookeries, application. It can be found on the (1996). Disturbances will be recorded on
mating grounds, and areas of similar Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ a three-point scale that represents an
significance. permits/incidental/construction.htm. increasing seal response to the
The plan has been successfully disturbance. The time, source, and
Monitoring and Reporting implemented by SCWA under previous duration of the disturbance, as well as
In order to issue an IHA for an IHAs. The purpose of this monitoring an estimated distance between the
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the plan, which is carried out source and haul-out, are recorded. It
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth collaboratively with the Stewards of the should be noted that only responses
‘‘requirements pertaining to the Coasts and Redwoods (Stewards) falling into Mortenson’s Levels 2 and 3
monitoring and reporting of such organization, is to detect the response of (i.e., movement or flight) will be
taking’’. The MMPA implementing pinnipeds to estuary management considered as harassment under the
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) activities at the Russian River estuary. MMPA under the terms of the IHA.
indicate that requests for incidental take SCWA has designed the plan both to Weather conditions are recorded at the
authorizations must include the satisfy the requirements of the IHA, and beginning of each census. These include
suggested means of accomplishing the to address the following questions of temperature, percent cloud cover, and
necessary monitoring and reporting that interest: wind speed (Beaufort scale). Tide levels
will result in increased knowledge of 1. Under what conditions do and estuary water surface elevations are
the species and of the level of taking or pinnipeds haul out at the Russian River correlated to the monitoring start and
impacts on populations of marine estuary mouth at Jenner? end times.
mammals that are expected to be 2. How do seals at the Jenner haul-out In an effort towards understanding
present in the proposed action area. respond to activities associated with the possible relationships between use of
Any monitoring requirement we construction and maintenance of the the Jenner haul-out and nearby coastal
prescribe should accomplish one or lagoon outlet channel and artificial and river haul-outs, several other haul-
more of the following general goals: breaching activities? outs on the coast and in the Russian
1. An increase in the probability of 3. Does the number of seals at the River estuary are monitored as well (see
detecting marine mammals, both within Jenner haul-out significantly differ from Figure 4 of SCWA’s application). The
defined zones of effect (thus allowing historic averages with formation of a peripheral haul-outs are visited for ten-
for more effective implementation of the summer (May 15 to October 15) lagoon minute counts twice during each
mitigation) and in general to generate in the Russian River estuary? baseline monitoring day. All pinnipeds
more data to contribute to the analyses 4. Are seals at the Jenner haul-out hauled out were counted from the same
mentioned below; displaced to nearby river and coastal vantage point(s) at each haul-out using
2. An increase in our understanding haul-outs when the mouth remains a spotting scope or binoculars.
of how many marine mammals are closed in the summer? Estuary Management Event
likely to be exposed to stimuli that we Monitoring—Activities associated with
Monitoring Measures
associate with specific adverse effects, artificial breaching or initial
such as behavioral harassment or In summary, monitoring includes the construction of the outlet channel, as
hearing threshold shifts; following: well as the maintenance of the channel
3. An increase in our understanding Baseline Monitoring—Seals at the that may be required, will be monitored
of how marine mammals respond to Jenner haul-out are counted twice for disturbances to the seals at the
stimuli expected to result in incidental monthly for the term of the IHA. This Jenner haul-out. A one-day pre-event
take and how anticipated adverse effects baseline information will provide channel survey will be made within one
on individuals may impact the SCWA with details that may help to to three days prior to constructing the
population, stock, or species plan estuary management activities in outlet channel. The haul-out will be
(specifically through effects on annual the future to minimize pinniped monitored on the day the outlet channel
rates of recruitment or survival) through interaction. This census begins at local is constructed and daily for up to the
any of the following methods: dawn and continues for eight hours. All maximum two days allowed for channel
• Behavioral observations in the seals hauled out on the beach are excavation activities. Monitoring will
presence of stimuli compared to counted every thirty minutes from the also occur on each day that the outlet
observations in the absence of stimuli overlook on the bluff along Highway 1 channel is maintained using heavy
(need to be able to accurately predict adjacent to the haul-out using spotting equipment for the duration of the lagoon
pertinent information, e.g., received scopes. Monitoring may conclude for management period. Monitoring will
level, distance from source); the day if weather conditions affect correspond with that described under
• Physiological measurements in the visibility (e.g., heavy fog in the the ‘‘Baseline’’ section previously, with
presence of stimuli compared to afternoon). Counts are scheduled for the exception that management activity
observations in the absence of stimuli two days out of each month, with the monitoring duration is defined by event
(need to be able to accurately predict intention of capturing a low and high duration, rather than being set at eight
pertinent information, e.g., received tide each in the morning and afternoon. hours. On the day of the management
level, distance from source); Depending on how the sandbar is event, pinniped monitoring begins at
• Distribution and/or abundance formed, seals may haul out in multiple least one hour prior to the crew and
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

comparisons in times or areas with groups at the mouth. At each thirty- equipment accessing the beach work
concentrated stimuli versus times or minute count, the observer indicates area and continues through the duration
areas without stimuli; where groups of seals are hauled out on of the event, until at least one hour after
4. An increased knowledge of the the sandbar and provides a total count the crew and equipment leave the
affected species; or for each group. If possible, adults and beach.
5. An increase in our understanding pups are counted separately. In an attempt to understand whether
of the effectiveness of certain mitigation In addition to the census data, seals from the Jenner haul-out are
and monitoring measures. disturbances of the haul-out are displaced to coastal and river haul-outs

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

24242 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 83 / Thursday, April 30, 2015 / Notices

nearby when management events occur, Protected Resources, NMFS, and the year where the barrier beach closed or
other nearby haul-outs are monitored West Coast Regional Administrator, became naturally perched and then
concurrently with monitoring of outlet NMFS, 90 days prior to the expiration subsequently breached naturally
channel construction and maintenance of the IHA if a renewal is sought, or (SCWA, 2013). In 2011, no water level
activities. This provides an opportunity within 90 days of the expiration of the management activities occurred (SCWA,
to qualitatively assess whether these permit otherwise. This annual report 2012). In 2010, one lagoon management
haul-outs are being used by seals will also be distributed to California event and two artificial breaching events
displaced from the Jenner haul-out. This State Parks and Stewards, and would be occurred (SCWA, 2011). Pinniped
monitoring will not provide definitive available to the public on SCWA’s Web monitoring occurred no more than 3
results regarding displacement to nearby site. This report will contain the days before, the day of, and the day after
coastal and river haul-outs, as following information: each water level management activity.
individual seals are not marked, but is • The number of pinnipeds taken, by In addition, SCWA conducted biological
useful in tracking general trends in species and age class (if possible); and physical monitoring as described
haul-out use during disturbance. As • Behavior prior to and during water previously. During the course of these
volunteers are required to monitor these level management events; activities, SCWA did not exceed the
peripheral haul-outs, haul-out locations • Start and end time of activity; take levels authorized under the
may need to be prioritized if there are • Estimated distances between source relevant IHAs. We provided a detailed
not enough volunteers available. In that and pinnipeds when disturbance description of previous monitoring
case, priority will be assigned to the occurs; results in the notice of the proposed
nearest haul-outs (North Jenner and • Weather conditions (e.g., IHA (80 FR 14073; March 18, 2015).
Odin Cove), followed by the Russian temperature, wind);
• Haul-out reoccupation time of any Estimated Take by Incidental
River estuary haul-outs, and finally the
pinnipeds based on post-activity Harassment
more distant coastal haul-outs.
For all counts, the following monitoring; Except with respect to certain
information will be recorded in thirty- • Tide levels and estuary water activities not pertinent here, section
minute intervals: (1) Pinniped counts, surface elevation; and 3(18) of the MMPA defines
by species; (2) behavior; (3) time, source • Seal census from bi-monthly and ‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘. . . any act of
and duration of any disturbance; (4) nearby haul-out monitoring. pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
estimated distances between source of The annual report includes has the potential to injure a marine
disturbance and pinnipeds; (5) weather descriptions of monitoring mammal or marine mammal stock in the
conditions (e.g., temperature, wind); methodology, tabulation of estuary wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has
and (5) tide levels and estuary water management events, summary of the potential to disturb a marine
surface elevation. monitoring results, and discussion of mammal or marine mammal stock in the
Monitoring During Pupping Season— problems noted and proposed remedial wild by causing disruption of behavioral
As described previously, the pupping measures. SCWA will report any injured patterns, including, but not limited to,
season is defined as March 15 to June or dead marine mammals to NMFS’ migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
30. Baseline, lagoon outlet channel, and West Coast Regional Office and Office of feeding, or sheltering [Level B
artificial breaching monitoring during Protected Resources. harassment].’’
the pupping season will include records We are authorizing SCWA to take
Summary of Previous Monitoring
of neonate (pups less than one week harbor seals, California sea lions, and
old) observations. Characteristics of a SCWA complied with the mitigation northern elephant seals, by Level B
neonate pup include: Body weight less and monitoring required under all harassment only, incidental to estuary
than 15 kg; thin for their body length; previous authorizations. In accordance management activities. These activities,
an umbilicus or natal pelage present; with the 2014 IHA, SCWA submitted a involving increased human presence
wrinkled skin; and awkward or jerky Report of Activities and Monitoring and the use of heavy equipment and
movements on land. SCWA will Results, covering the period of January support vehicles, are expected to harass
coordinate with the Seal Watch 1 through December 31, 2014. Previous pinnipeds present at the haul-out
monitoring program to determine if monitoring reports (available at through behavioral disturbance only. In
pups less than one week old are on the www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ addition, monitoring activities
beach prior to a water level management incidental/construction.htm) provided prescribed in the BiOp may result in
event. additional analysis of monitoring results harassment of additional individuals at
If, during monitoring, observers sight from 2009–13. A barrier beach was the Jenner haul-out and at the three
any pup that might be abandoned, formed eleven times during 2014, but haul-outs located in the estuary.
SCWA will contact the NMFS stranding SCWA was required to implement Estimates of the number of harbor seals,
response network immediately and also artificial breaching for only six of these California sea lions, and northern
report the incident to NMFS’ West Coast closure events. The Russian River outlet elephant seals that may be harassed by
Regional Office and Office of Protected was closed to the ocean for a total of 110 the activities is based upon the number
Resources within 48 hours. Observers days in 2014, including extended of potential events associated with
will not approach or move the pup. closures totaling 29 days during the Russian River estuary management
Potential indications that a pup may be lagoon management period. However, activities and the average number of
abandoned are no observed contact with these closures all culminated in natural individuals of each species that are
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

adult seals, no movement of the pup, breaches and no outlet channel present during conditions appropriate to
and the pup’s attempts to nurse are management events were required. the activity. As described previously in
rebuffed. During 2013, five artificial breaching this document, monitoring effort at the
events occurred (SCWA, 2014). In mouth of the Russian River has shown
Reporting January 2012, the barrier beach was that the number of seals utilizing the
SCWA is required to submit a report artificially breached after two days of haul-out declines during bar-closed
on all activities and marine mammal breaching activity. There were also conditions. Tables 1 and 2 detail the
monitoring results to the Office of several periods over the course of the total number of authorized takes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 83 / Thursday, April 30, 2015 / Notices 24243

Methodology of take estimation was proposed IHA (80 FR 14073; March 18,
discussed in detail in our notice of 2015).

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HARBOR SEAL TAKES RESULTING FROM RUSSIAN RIVER ESTUARY MANAGEMENT
ACTIVITIES
Number of animals expected to Potential total number of individual
Number of events b c
occur a animals that may be taken

Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)

Implementation: 117 d ..................... Implementation: 3 .................................................................................. Implementation: 351.
Maintenance and Monitoring: Maintenance: Maintenance: 1,160.
May: 80 .................................... May: 1.
June: 97 ................................... June–Sept: 4/month.
July: 117 ................................... Oct: 1.
Aug: 17 ..................................... Monitoring: Monitoring: 552.
Sept: 33 .................................... June–Sept: 2/month.
Oct: 24 ..................................... Oct: 1 ..................................................................................................... Total: 2,063.

Artificial Breaching

Oct: 24 ............................................. Oct: 2 ..................................................................................................... Oct: 48.
Nov: 36 ............................................ Nov: 2 .................................................................................................... Nov: 72.
Dec: 51 ............................................ Dec: 2 .................................................................................................... Dec: 102.
Jan: 41 ............................................ Jan: 1 ..................................................................................................... Jan: 41.
Feb: 90 ............................................ Feb: 1 ..................................................................................................... Feb: 90.
Mar: 130 .......................................... Mar: 1 ..................................................................................................... Mar: 130.
Apr: 80 ............................................. Apr: 1 ..................................................................................................... Apr: 80.
May: 80 ........................................... May: 2 .................................................................................................... May: 160.
12 events maximum .............................................................................. Total: 723.

Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys

Jan: 89 ............................................ 1 topographic survey/month; 100 percent of animals present Jun– Jan: 89.
Feb; 10 percent of animals present Mar–May.
Feb: 131 .......................................... Feb: 131.
Mar: 173 .......................................... Mar: 17.
Apr: 137 ........................................... Apr: 14.
May: 157 ......................................... May: 16.
Jun: 154 .......................................... Jun: 154.
Jul: 158 ............................................ Jul: 158.
Aug: 146 .......................................... Aug: 146.
Sep: 78 ............................................ Sep: 78.
Oct: 50 ............................................. Oct: 50.
Nov: 66 ............................................ Nov: 66.
Dec: 106 .......................................... Dec: 106.
........................................................................................................... Total: 1,025.

Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary

1 e .................................................... 165 ......................................................................................................... 165

Total ......................................... ................................................................................................................ 3,976
a For Lagoon Outlet Channel Management and Artificial Breaching, average daily number of animals corresponds with data from Table 2. For
Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys, average daily number of animals corresponds with 2012–14 data from Table 1.
b For implementation of the lagoon outlet channel, an event is defined as a single, two-day episode. It is assumed that the same individual
seals would be hauled out during a single event. For the remaining activities, an event is defined as a single day on which an activity occurs.
Some events may include multiple activities.
c Number of events for artificial breaching derived from historical data. The average number of events for each month was rounded up to the
nearest whole number; estimated number of events for December was increased from one to two because multiple closures resulting from storm
events have occurred in recent years during that month. These numbers likely represent an overestimate, as the average annual number of
events is six.
d Although implementation could occur at any time during the lagoon management period, the highest daily average per month from the lagoon
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

management period was used.
e Based on past experience, SCWA expects that no more than one seal may be present, and thus have the potential to be disturbed, at each
of the three river haul-outs. Number of events includes addition of acoustic telemetry surveys.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

24244 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 83 / Thursday, April 30, 2015 / Notices

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF CALIFORNIA SEA LION AND ELEPHANT SEAL TAKES RESULTING FROM RUSSIAN RIVER
ESTUARY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Potential total
Number of number of
animals Number of
Species events a individual
expected animals that
to occur a may be taken

Lagoon Outlet Channel Management (May 15 to October 15)

California sea lion (potential to encounter once per event) ........................................................ 1 6 6
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per event) ................................................ 1 6 6

Artificial Breaching

California sea lion (potential to encounter once per month, Oct–May) ...................................... 1 8 8
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per month, Oct–May) .............................. 1 8 8

Topographic and Geophysical Beach Surveys

California sea lion (potential to encounter once per month year-round for topographical sur-
veys) ......................................................................................................................................... 1 12 12
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per month year-round for topographical
surveys) .................................................................................................................................... 1 12 12

Biological and Physical Habitat Monitoring in the Estuary

California sea lion (potential to encounter once per month, Jul–Feb) ........................................ 1 8 8
Northern elephant seal (potential to encounter once per month, Jul–Feb) ................................ 1 8 8

Total

California sea lion ........................................................................................................................ 34
Elephant seal ............................................................................................................................... 34
a SCWA expects that California sea lions and/or northern elephant seals could occur during any month of the year, but that any such occur-
rence would be infrequent and unlikely to occur more than once per month.

Analyses and Determinations the Russian River, as well as those result from significantly increased
hauled out at several locations in the presence of humans and equipment on
Negligible Impact Analysis
estuary during recurring monitoring the beach. To avoid these possibilities,
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible activities, impacts are occurring to a we have worked with SCWA to develop
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘. . . an small, localized group of animals. While the previously described mitigation
impact resulting from the specified these impacts can occur year-round, measures. These are designed to reduce
activity that cannot be reasonably they occur sporadically and for limited the possibility of startling pinnipeds, by
expected to, and is not reasonably likely duration (e.g., a maximum of two gradually apprising them of the
to, adversely affect the species or stock consecutive days for water level presence of humans and equipment on
through effects on annual rates of management events). Seals will likely the beach, and to reduce the possibility
recruitment or survival.’’ A negligible become alert or, at most, flush into the of impacts to pups by eliminating or
impact finding is based on the lack of water in reaction to the presence of altering management activities on the
likely adverse effects on annual rates of crews and equipment on the beach. beach when pups are present and by
recruitment or survival (i.e., population- While disturbance may occur during a setting limits on the frequency and
level effects). An estimate of the number sensitive time (during the March 15– duration of events during pupping
of Level B harassment takes alone is not June 30 pupping season), mitigation season. During the past fifteen years of
enough information on which to base an measures have been specifically flood control management,
impact determination. In addition to designed to further minimize harm implementation of similar mitigation
considering estimates of the number of during this period and eliminate the measures has resulted in no known
marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ possibility of pup injury or mother-pup stampede events and no known injury,
through behavioral harassment, we separation. serious injury, or mortality. Over the
consider other factors, such as the likely No injury, serious injury, or mortality course of that time period, management
nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, is anticipated, nor is the proposed events have generally been infrequent
duration), the context of any responses action likely to result in long-term and of limited duration.
(e.g., critical reproductive time or impacts such as permanent No pinniped stocks for which
location, migration), as well as the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

abandonment of the haul-out. Injury, incidental take is authorized are listed
number and nature of estimated Level A serious injury, or mortality to pinnipeds as threatened or endangered under the
harassment takes, the number of would likely result from startling ESA or determined to be strategic or
estimated mortalities, and effects on animals inhabiting the haul-out into a depleted under the MMPA. Recent data
habitat. stampede reaction, or from extended suggests that harbor seal populations
Although SCWA’s estuary mother-pup separation as a result of have reached carrying capacity;
management activities may disturb such a stampede. Long-term impacts to populations of California sea lions and
pinnipeds hauled out at the mouth of pinniped usage of the haul-out could northern elephant seals in California are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

Document Created: 2018-02-21 10:15:08
Document Modified: 2018-02-21 10:15:08

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
Dates		This IHA is effective for the period of one year, from April 21, 2015, through April 20, 2016.
Contact		Ben Laws, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
FR Citation		80 FR 24237
RIN Number		0648-XD81

80 FR 24237 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Russian River Estuary Management Activities

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 83 (April 30, 2015)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration