[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34659-34666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12259]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XC065]


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Punta Gorda Lighthouse 
Stabilization Project in Humboldt County, California

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

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization 
(IHA).

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine 
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given 
that NMFS has issued an IHA to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to 
incidentally harass marine mammals during construction activities 
associated with the Punta Gorda Lighthouse (PGL) Stabilization Project 
in Humboldt County, California. There are no changes from the proposed 
authorization in this final authorization.

DATES: This Authorization is effective from June 1, 2022 through 
October 1, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Fowler, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application 
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in 
this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. In case of problems 
accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain 
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to 
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of 
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a 
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified 
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations 
are proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a 
proposed incidental harassment authorization is provided to the public 
for review.
    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or 
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses 
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods 
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying 
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar 
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for 
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as 
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth.

Summary of Request

    On August 30, 2021, NMFS received a request from the BLM for an IHA 
to take marine mammals incidental to the PGL Stabilization Project in 
Humboldt County, California. The application was deemed adequate and 
complete on February 15, 2022. The BLM's request is for take of a small 
number of northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris), Pacific 
harbor seals (Phoca vitulina richardii), California sea lions (Zalophus 
californianus), and Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) by Level B 
harassment only. Neither the BLM nor NMFS expects serious injury or 
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is 
appropriate.
    There are no changes from the proposed IHA to the final IHA.

Description of Planned Activity

Overview

    The PGL was established as an aid to navigation in 1912 along the 
northern California coast. While in use, the lighthouse station 
included the lighthouse, oil house, three residences, and numerous 
other small buildings typical of small military outposts. Although the 
lighthouse is located on the mainland, maintaining the station in the 
remote and rugged location along the coast proved to be too difficult 
and the U.S. Coast Guard decommissioned the lighthouse in 1951. The BLM 
assumed management of the site following the PGL's decommission but was 
unable to keep up with the maintenance and after the windy ocean 
environment took a toll on the site, the BLM intentionally burned down 
the wooden structures of the station. The concrete lighthouse and oil 
house were all that remained when the site was listed in the National 
Registry of Historic Places in 1976.
    The BLM plans to stabilize the lighthouse site, repair the 
remaining structures, and rebuild former structures between June 1, 
2022 and October 1, 2022 on up to 122 days of work. The lighthouse is 
located along the Lost Coast Trail, which extends from the Mattole 
River to Shelter Cove, California, covering approximately 40 kilometers 
(km) (24.8 miles (mi)).The BLM will access the PGL by traveling along 
the coast from the north, originating at either the Windy Point 
Trailhead or the Trailhead at the Mattole Campground.
    A detailed description of the planned construction activities at 
the PGL is provided in the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA 
(87 FR 24517; April 26, 2022). Since that time, no changes have been 
made to the project activities. Therefore, a detailed description is 
not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the 
description of the specified activities. Mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting measures are described in detail later in this document 
(please see Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting sections).

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to the BLM was published 
in the Federal Register on April 26, 2022 (87 FR 24517). That notice 
described, in

[[Page 34660]]

detail, the BLM's activities, the marine mammal species that may be 
affected by the activities, and the anticipated effects on marine 
mammals. In that notice, we requested public input on the request for 
authorization described therein, our analyses, the proposed 
authorization, and any other aspect of the notice of proposed IHA, and 
requested that interested persons submit relevant information, 
suggestions, and comments. This proposed notice was available for a 30-
day public comment period.
    During the public comment period, NMFS received no public comments.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information 
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and 
behavior and life history of the potentially affected species. NMFS 
fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to 
these descriptions, incorporated here by reference, instead of 
reprinting the information. Additional information regarding population 
trends and threats may be found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports 
(SARs; www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these 
species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on 
NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
    Table 1 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and 
authorized for the BLM's activities, and summarizes information related 
to the population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA 
and Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological removal 
(PBR), where known. PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of 
animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a 
marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its 
optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no 
serious injury or mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and 
annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are 
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and 
other threats.
    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document 
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or 
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. 
NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total 
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that 
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend 
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in 
NMFS' U.S. Pacific and Alaska SARs. All values presented in Table 1 are 
the most recent available at the time of publication and are available 
in the 2020 SARs (Carretta et al., 2021; Muto et al., 2021) and draft 
2021 SARs (available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).

                          Table 1--Species Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Stock abundance
                                                                  ESA/ MMPA  (CV, Nmin, most
         Common name           Scientific name       Stock         status;        recent         PBR    Annual M/
                                                                  strategic     abundance                SI \3\
                                                                  (Y/N) \1\    survey) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals
 and sea lions):
    Steller Sea Lion.........  Eumetopias       Eastern U.S....  -, -, N     43,201 (see         2,592       112
                                jubatus.                                      SAR, 43,201,
                                                                              2017).
    California Sea Lion......  Zalophus         U.S............  -, -, N     257,606 (N/A,      14,011      >320
                                californianus.                                233,515, 2014).
Family Phocidae (earless
 seals):
    Northern Elephant Seal...  Mirounga         California       -, -, N     187,386 (N/A,       5,122      13.7
                                angustirostris.  Breeding.                    85,369, 2013).
    Harbor Seal..............  Phoca vitulina.  California.....  -, -, N     30,968 (N/A,        1,641        43
                                                                              27,348, 2012).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-)
  indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the
  MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is
  determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or
  stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
  stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury
  from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined
  precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality
  due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.

    As indicated above, all four species (with four managed stocks) in 
Table 1 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the 
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur.
    A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by the 
BLM's activities, including information regarding population trends and 
threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were provided in 
the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHAs (87 FR 24517; April 
26, 2022). Since that time, we are not aware of any changes in this 
information or the status of these species and stocks; therefore, 
detailed descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to that 
Federal Register notice for those descriptions. Please also refer to 
NMFS's website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for 
generalized species accounts.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    Acoustic and visual stimuli generated by personnel working at the 
PGL and traversing the beach to access the work site, noise from 
construction equipment operating at the PGL, and helicopters hovering 
over the site to transport equipment and supplies may have the 
potential to cause behavioral disturbance (Level B harassment) of 
marine mammals in the vicinity of the project area. The Federal 
Register notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 24517; April 26, 2022) included 
a discussion of the effects of anthropogenic activity on marine mammals 
and their habitat. That information and analysis is incorporated by 
reference into the final determination for the IHA and is not repeated 
here; please refer to the notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 24517; April 
26, 2022).
    The Estimated Take section later in this document includes a 
quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to 
be taken by this activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis

[[Page 34661]]

and Determination section considers the content of this section, the 
Estimated Take section, and the Mitigation section, to draw conclusions 
regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive 
success or survivorship of individuals and whether those impacts are 
reasonably expected to, or reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or 
survival.

Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration 
of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact determinations.
    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these 
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent 
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of 
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a 
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal 
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, 
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
    Authorized takes are by Level B harassment only, in the form of 
disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals 
resulting from exposure to construction personnel and equipment, 
including helicopters used to transport materials. Based on the nature 
of the activity, Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor 
authorized. For the BLM's planned activities, behavioral (Level B) 
harassment is limited to movement and flushing, defined by the 
disturbance scale of pinniped responses to in-air sources to determine 
take.
    The presence of construction personnel may have the potential to 
cause Level B harassment of marine mammals hauled-out at the PGL and 
along the planned access routes. Disturbance includes a variety of 
effects, from subtle to conspicuous changes in behavior, movement, and 
displacement. Disturbance may result in reactions ranging from an 
animal simply becoming alert to the presence of the BLM's construction 
personnel (e.g., turning the head, assuming a more upright posture) to 
flushing from the haulout site into the water. NMFS does not consider 
the lesser reactions to constitute behavioral harassment, or Level B 
harassment takes, but rather assumes that pinnipeds that move greater 
than two body lengths or longer, or if already moving, a change of 
direction of greater than 90 degrees in response to the disturbance, or 
pinnipeds that flush into the water, are behaviorally harassed, and 
thus considered incidentally taken by Level B harassment. NMFS uses a 
3-point scale (Table 2) to determine which disturbance reactions 
constitute take under the MMPA. Levels 2 and 3 (movement and flush) are 
considered take, whereas level 1 (alert) is not. Animals that respond 
to the presence of BLM personnel by becoming alert, but do not move or 
change the nature of locomotion as described, are not considered to 
have been subject to behavioral harassment.

  Table 2--Disturbance Scale of Pinniped Responses to In-Air Sources To
                             Determine Take
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Level          Type of response             Definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...................  Alert............  Seal head orientation or brief
                                          movement in response to
                                          disturbance, which may include
                                          turning head towards the
                                          disturbance, craning head and
                                          neck while holding the body
                                          rigid in a u-shaped position,
                                          changing from a lying to a
                                          sitting position, or brief
                                          movement of less than twice
                                          the animal's body length.
2 *.................  Movement.........  Movements in response to the
                                          source of disturbance, ranging
                                          from short withdrawals at
                                          least twice the animal's body
                                          length to longer retreats over
                                          the beach, or if already
                                          moving a change of direction
                                          of greater than 90 degrees.
3 *.................  Flush............  All retreats (flushes) to the
                                          water.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Only Levels 2 and 3 are considered take under the MMPA, whereas Level
  1 is not.

    As described previously, no serious injury or mortality is 
anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the 
authorized take numbers are calculated.

Marine Mammal Occurrence

    In this section we provide information about the occurrence of 
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information, that 
will inform the take calculations.
    Researchers from Humboldt State University (HSU) regularly conduct 
census counts of pinnipeds at the PGL and surrounding areas along the 
northern California coast (e.g., Goley et al., 2021). Counts of 
northern elephant seals and harbor seals at the PGL during the 
effective dates of the IHA (June 1 through October 1) are presented 
below.

                                  Table 3--Northern Elephant Seal Census Counts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          2019 Counts                                              2020 Counts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Number of seals                                   Number of seals
                    Date                          observed                   Date                   observed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 8.....................................                101  June 4.......................                177
June 15....................................                 74  June 11......................                 83
June 23....................................                 34  June 14......................                 80
July 7.....................................                 40  June 24......................                 37
July 14....................................                 50  June 27......................                 38
July 21....................................                 54  July 4.......................                 36
August 3...................................                 39  July 12......................                 39
August 21..................................                 44  July 16......................                 38
August 31..................................                 62  July 24......................                 36

[[Page 34662]]

 
September 15...............................                162  July 30......................                 38
September 27...............................                244  August 6.....................                 32
                                                                August 9.....................                 28
                                                                August 13....................                 28
                                                                August 20....................                 27
                                                                August 27....................                 33
                                                                August 30....................                 48
                                                                September 5..................                 60
                                                                September 19.................                133
                                                                September 27.................                177
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The average daily count of elephant seals at the PGL during the 
effective dates of the IHA (June 1 through October 1) was 82.2 in 2019 
and 61.5 in 2020. Across both years, the average daily count was 69.1 
elephant seals (Goley et al., 2021). A large portion of the elephant 
seals present at the PGL are uniquely tagged and dye stamped to 
identify individuals, and the same individuals were identified at the 
PGL haulout on multiple days.

                                       Table 4--Harbor Seal Census Counts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          2019 Counts                                              2020 Counts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Number of seals                                   Number of seals
                    Date                          observed                   Date                   observed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 8.....................................                 51  June 14......................                 55
June 15....................................                107  June 27......................                 77
June 23....................................                 81  July 12......................                 90
July 7.....................................                116  July 24......................                123
July 14....................................                180  August 9.....................                 73
July 21....................................                123  August 30....................                 36
August 3...................................                105  September 5..................                 38
August 21..................................                 80  September 19.................                 51
August 31..................................                 22  September 27.................                 53
September 15...............................                 22  .............................  .................
September 27...............................                 28  .............................  .................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The average daily count of harbor seals at the PGL during the 
effective dates of the IHA (June 1 through October 1) was 83.2 in 2019 
and 66.2 in 2020. Across both years, the average daily count was 75.55 
harbor seals (Goley et al., 2021). The harbor seals present at the PGL 
are not tagged or otherwise clearly identifiable, but since harbor 
seals typically show high philopatry (e.g., Waring et al., 2016; Wood 
et al., 2011), researchers from HSU hypothesize that the harbor seal 
colony at the PGL is made up of the same individuals that move between 
Punta Gorda and other nearby haulouts.

Take Estimation

    Here we describe how the information provided above is synthesized 
to produce a quantitative estimate of the take that is reasonably 
likely to occur and has been authorized.
    To estimate the total number of northern elephant seals and harbor 
seals that may be present at the PGL and subject to behavioral 
disturbance from the PGL stabilization project, the BLM multiplied the 
daily count of each species averaged across the two years of census 
data (69.1 elephant seals and 75.55 harbor seals) by the maximum days 
of work at the PGL (122 days), for a total estimate of 8,431 northern 
elephant seals and 9,218 harbor seals taken by Level B harassment. This 
estimation assumes that all animals present would exhibit behavioral 
responses that are considered take (Levels 2 and 3 as described in 
Table 2). As described above, many of the seals present at the PGL are 
suspected or confirmed to be present across multiple days. Therefore, 
the above estimated take numbers are considered to represent instances 
of take, not necessarily the number of individual seals that may be 
taken.
    California sea lions and Steller sea lions have not been observed 
hauled-out at the PGL, but have been observed in the water near the PGL 
and at nearby haulouts along the Lost Coast Trail. The BLM assumes that 
no more than 5 individual California sea lions and Steller sea lions 
may haul-out at the PGL or along the access route and be taken by Level 
B harassment.

         Table 5--Authorized Take by Level B Harassment by Species and Percentage of Each Stock Affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Authorized
                Species                           Stock            take by Level       Stock        Percent of
                                                                   B  harassment     abundance         stock
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern elephant seal................  California breeding.....       \a\ 8,431         187,386             4.5

[[Page 34663]]

 
Pacific harbor seal...................  California..............       \a\ 9,218          30,968            29.8
California sea lion...................  U.S.....................               5         257,606           <0.01
Steller sea lion......................  Eastern U.S.............               5          43,201            0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The authorized take represents the estimated number of instances of take, which does not necessarily equate
  to the number of individuals that may be taken.

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 the 
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to 
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on 
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS 
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to 
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic 
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting the 
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact upon the affected species or stocks, and their habitat (50 CFR 
216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and 
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, NMFS 
considers two primary factors:
    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful 
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to 
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat, as 
well as subsistence uses. This considers the nature of the potential 
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further 
considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if 
implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if 
implemented as planned), the likelihood of effective implementation 
(probability implemented as planned), and;
    (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, and impact on 
operations.
    The following mitigation measures are required:
    The work season has been planned to reduce the level of impact on 
elephant and harbor seals. The effective dates of the IHA (June 1, 2022 
through October 1, 2022) occurs when the elephant seal population is at 
its lowest and any harbor seal pups that may be on site would be old 
enough to be self-sufficient if the colony temporarily flushes into the 
water. No elephant seal pups will be present during the work season.
    Whenever possible, the BLM must utilize the access route that 
begins at the Windy Point Trailhead, rather than the route that begins 
at the Mattole Campground, as that route requires a longer stretch of 
driving on the beach or marine terrace (approximately 5 km (3.1 mi)) 
where harbor seals are more likely to be hauled-out. The preferred 
route from the Windy Point Trailhead requires only 1.25 km (0.78 mi) of 
driving on the beach and marine terrace. Utilizing the access route 
with the shortest amount of driving on the beach and marine terrace is 
expected to reduce the number of marine mammals that may be encountered 
and disturbed along the access route and minimize the impact of the 
vehicles on marine mammal habitat.
    To the extent possible, the BLM must limit the daily number of 
vehicle trips between the project area and the contractor's offshore 
camp where additional tools and supplies would be stored in trailers or 
other storage containers. Additionally, to the extent possible, the BLM 
must utilize helicopters to deliver construction equipment to the PGL 
work site to reduce the number of vehicle trips that would be necessary 
to conduct the planned activities.
    While accessing the project site, at least one trained protected 
species observer (PSO) must monitor ahead of the vehicle(s) path, using 
binoculars if necessary, to detect any marine mammals prior to approach 
to determine if mitigation (e.g., change of course, slow down) is 
required. Vehicles must not approach within 20 m (65.6 ft) of marine 
mammals. If animals remain in the access path with no possible route to 
go around and maintain 20 m (65.6 ft) separation, personnel may exit 
the vehicle(s) to walk toward animals and intentionally flush them into 
the water to allow the vehicle(s) to proceed. To the extent possible, 
if multiple vehicles are traveling to the site, they must travel in a 
convoy such that animals are not potentially harassed more than once 
while the vehicles pass.
    A fence must be erected to keep elephant seals from entering the 
construction area to limit disturbance and prevent accidental injury 
from vehicles and construction debris.
    All helicopters associated with the project must slowly approach 
the work site and allow all marine mammals present to flush into the 
water before setting any hauled materials down on the ground.
    The BLM must cease or delay visits to the project site if a species 
for which the number of takes that have been authorized for a species 
are met, or if a species for which takes were not authorized, is 
observed (e.g., northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) or Guadalupe 
fur seals (Arctocephalus townsendi)).
    The BLM must monitor for offshore predators and must not approach 
hauled-out pinnipeds if great white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) or 
killer whales (Orcinus orca) are observed. If the BLM and/or its 
designees see pinniped predators in the area, they must not disturb the 
pinnipeds until the area is free of predators.
    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, NMFS 
has determined that the required mitigation measures provide the means 
of effecting the least practicable impact on the affected 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

[[Page 34664]]

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the 
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for 
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the 
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased 
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on 
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present while 
conducting the activities. Effective reporting is critical both to 
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the 
required monitoring.
    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should 
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
    <bullet> Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area 
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, 
density);
    <bullet> Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure 
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or 
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) action or environment 
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) 
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or 
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
    <bullet> Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or 
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), 
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
    <bullet> How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) 
long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) 
populations, species, or stocks;
    <bullet> Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey 
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of 
marine mammal habitat); and
    <bullet> Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Visual Monitoring

    At least one NMFS-approved PSO must travel to and from the 
construction site ahead of the work crew each day and serve as a lead 
monitor to record incidental take. PSOs will consist of BLM wildlife 
biologists, biological technicians, and interns, as well as King Range 
National Conservation Area staff. At least one PSO must monitor the 
beach surrounding the PGL during all construction activities.
    PSOs must be approved by NMFS prior to beginning any activity 
subject to the IHA. PSOs must have the following qualifications:
    <bullet> Ability to conduct field observations and collect data 
according to assigned protocols;
    <bullet> Experience or training in the field identification of 
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
    <bullet> Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations;
    <bullet> Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of 
observations including but not limited to the number and species of 
marine mammals observed; dates and times when construction activities 
were conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation of 
mitigation (or why mitigation was not implemented when required); and 
marine mammal behavior; and
    <bullet> Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with 
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals 
observed in the area as necessary.
    PSOs must record the following information for each day of work:
    <bullet> Date, time, and access route of each visit to the work 
site;
    <bullet> Information on the weather, including tidal state and 
estimated horizontal visibility;
    <bullet> Composition of marine mammals observed, such as species, 
sex, and life history stage (e.g., adult, sub-adult, pup);
    <bullet> The numbers (by species) of marine mammals observed during 
the activities;
    <bullet> Estimated number of marine mammals (by species) that may 
have been harassed during the activities;
    <bullet> Marine mammal disturbances according to a three-point 
scale of intensity (see Table 2);
    <bullet> Behavioral responses or modifications of behaviors that 
may be attributed to the specific activities, a description of the 
specific activities occurring during that time (e.g., pedestrian, 
vehicle, or helicopter approach), and any mitigation action taken; and
    <bullet> If applicable, note the presence of any offshore predators 
(date, time, number, and species) and any mitigation action taken.

Reporting

    The BLM must report all observations of marked or tag-bearing 
pinnipeds or carcasses and unusual behaviors, distributions, or numbers 
of pinnipeds to the NMFS West Coast Regional Office.
    A draft marine mammal monitoring report must be submitted to NMFS 
within 90 days after the completion of each work season, or 60 days 
prior to the requested issuance date of any future IHAs for projects at 
the same location, whichever comes first. A final report must be 
prepared and submitted within 30 days following resolution of any 
comments on the draft report from NMFS. If no comments are received 
from NMFS on the draft report, the draft report will be considered the 
final report. All draft and final monitoring reports must be submitted 
to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e4b4b6caadb0b4caa98b8a8d908b968d8a83b681948b969097a48a8b8585ca838b92"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9fcfcdb1d6cbcfb1d2f0f1f6ebf0edf6f1f8cdfaeff0edebecdff1f0fefeb1f8f0e9">[email protected]</span></a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#236a77730d654c544f4651634d4c42420d444c55"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="58110c08761e372f343d2a1836373939763f372e">[email protected]</span></a>.
    In addition to raw sightings data, the report must include:
    <bullet> A summary of the dates, times, site access route, and 
weather during all construction activities;
    <bullet> The numbers (by species) of marine mammals observed during 
the activities, by age and sex, if possible;
    <bullet> The estimated number of marine mammals (by species) that 
may have been harassed during the activities based on the three-point 
disturbance scale (Table 2);
    <bullet> Any behavioral responses or modifications of behaviors 
that may be attributed to the specific activities (e.g., flushing into 
the water, becoming alert and moving, rafting); and
    <bullet> A description of the implementation and effectiveness of 
the monitoring and mitigation measures of the IHA and full 
documentation of methods, results, and interpretation pertaining to all 
monitoring.

Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals

    In the event that the BLM or any other personnel involved in the 
activities discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the BLM must 
report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources (OPR) 
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#95c5c7bbdcc1c5bbd8fafbfce1fae7fcfbf2c7f0e5fae7e1e6d5fbfaf4f4bbf2fae3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="affffd81e6fbff81e2c0c1c6dbc0ddc6c1c8fdcadfc0dddbdcefc1c0cece81c8c0d9">[email protected]</span></a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f4bda0a4dab29b83989186b49a9b9595da939b82"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3f766b6f11795048535a4d7f51505e5e11585049">[email protected]</span></a>), NMFS (301-
427-8401) and to the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator (866-
767-6114) as soon as feasible. If the death or injury was clearly 
caused by the specified activity, the BLM must immediately cease the 
specified activities until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of 
the incident and determine what, if any, additional measures are 
appropriate to ensure compliance with the terms of the IHA. The BLM 
must not resume their activities until notified by NMFS. The report 
must include the following information:

[[Page 34665]]

    <bullet> Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first 
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
    <bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the 
animal(s) involved;
    <bullet> Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if 
the animal is dead);
    <bullet> Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
    <bullet> If available, photographs or video footage of the 
animal(s); and
    <bullet> General circumstances under which the animal was 
discovered.

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the 
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not 
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough 
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to 
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be 
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the 
likely nature of any impacts or responses (e.g., intensity, duration), 
the context of any impacts or responses (e.g., critical reproductive 
time or location, foraging impacts affecting energetics), as well as 
effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We 
also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by 
evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent 
with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; 
September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing 
anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their 
impacts on the baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of 
the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing 
sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).
    To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analysis applies to all 
the species listed in Table 5, given that the anticipated effects of 
this activity on these different marine mammal stocks are expected to 
be similar. There is little information about the nature or severity of 
the impacts, or the size, status, or structure of any of these species 
or stocks that would lead to a different analysis for this activity. 
Activities associated with the PGL stabilization project, as described 
previously, have the potential to disturb or displace marine mammals. 
Specifically, the specified activities may result in take, in the form 
of Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) from in-air sounds and 
visual disturbance. Potential takes could occur if individual marine 
mammals are present nearby when activity is happening.
    No injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of 
the PGL stabilization project and none are authorized. The risk of 
marine mammal injury, serious injury, or mortality associated with the 
planned construction project increases somewhat if disturbances occur 
during pupping season. These situations present increased potential for 
mothers and dependent pups to become separated and, if separated pairs 
do not quickly reunite, the risk of mortality to pups (e.g., through 
starvation) may increase. Separately, adult male elephant seals may 
trample elephant seal pups if disturbed, which could potentially result 
in the injury, serious injury, or mortality of the pups. However, the 
planned activities will occur outside of the elephant seal pupping 
season, therefore no elephant seal pups are expected to be present. 
Although the timing of the planned activities partially overlaps with 
harbor seal pupping season, the PGL is not a harbor seal rookery and 
few pups are anticipated to be encountered during the planned 
activities. Harbor seals are very precocious with only a short period 
of time in which separation of a mother from a pup could occur. The 
planned activities will occur late enough in the pupping season that 
any harbor seal pups present will likely be old enough to keep up with 
their mother in unlikely event of a stampede or other flushing event. 
The required mitigation measures (i.e., minimum separation distance, 
slow approaches, and minimizing vehicle trips to the PGL) generally 
preclude the possibility of behaviors, such as stampeding, that could 
result in extended separation of mothers and dependent pups or 
trampling of pups.
    Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the 
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other 
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as alerts 
or movements away from the lighthouse structure, including flushing 
into the water. Most likely, individuals will simply move away from the 
acoustic or visual stimulus and be temporarily displaced from the 
areas.
    Monitoring reports from similar activities (e.g., Point Blue 
Conservation Science, 2020; University of California Santa Cruz 
Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans, 2021) have 
reported no apparently consequential behavioral reactions or long-term 
effects on marine mammal populations as noted above. Repeated exposures 
of individuals to relatively low levels of sound and visual disturbance 
outside of preferred habitat areas are unlikely to significantly 
disrupt critical behaviors or result in permanent abandonment of the 
haulout site. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small 
subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant 
realized decrease in viability for the affected individuals, and thus 
would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B 
harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable adverse 
impact through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if 
sound and visual disturbance produced by project activities is 
sufficiently disturbing, animals are likely to simply avoid the area 
while the activity is occurring.
    Of the marine mammal species anticipated to occur in the planned 
activity areas, none are listed under the ESA and there are no known 
areas of biological importance in the project area. Taking into account 
the planned mitigation measures, effects to marine mammals are 
generally expected to be restricted to short-term changes in behavior 
or temporary displacement from haulout sites. The Lost Coast area has 
abundant haulout areas for pinnipeds to temporarily relocate, and 
marine mammals are expected to return to the area shortly after 
activities cease. No adverse effects to prey species are anticipated as 
no work would occur in-water, and habitat impacts are limited and 
highly localized, consisting of construction work at the existing 
lighthouse station and the transit of vehicles and equipment along the 
access route. 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 required 
mitigation and monitoring measures, NMFS finds that the total marine 
mammal take from the BLM's PGL stabilization project will not adversely 
affect annual rates of recruitment or survival and, therefore, will 
have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks.
    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily 
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity 
are not

[[Page 34666]]

expected to adversely affect any of the species or stocks through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
    <bullet> No serious injury, mortality, or Level A harassment is 
anticipated or authorized;
    <bullet> Few pups are expected to be disturbed, and would not be 
abandoned or otherwise harmed by other seals flushing from the area;
    <bullet> Effects of the activities would be limited to short-term, 
localized behavioral changes;
    <bullet> Marine mammals are expected to return to normal behavior 
during gaps in construction activity such that any behavioral effects 
of repeated exposures are not expected to negatively affect survival or 
reproductive success of any individuals or stock;
    <bullet> Nominal impacts to pinniped habitat are anticipated;
    <bullet> No biologically important areas have been identified in 
the project area;
    <bullet> There is abundant suitable habitat nearby for marine 
mammals to temporarily relocate; and
    <bullet> Mitigation measures are anticipated to be effective in 
minimizing the number and severity of takes by Level B harassment, 
which are expected to be of short duration.
    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 required monitoring and 
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from 
the BLM's planned activity will have a negligible impact on all 
affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be 
authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for 
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA 
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated 
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to 
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or 
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to 
small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of 
individuals to be taken is fewer than one-third of the species or stock 
abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally, 
other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as 
the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
    The amount of take NMFS has authorized is below one-third of the 
estimated stock abundance of all species (in fact, take of individuals 
is less than 5 percent of the abundance of all of the affected stocks 
except Pacific harbor seals, see Table 5). This is likely a 
conservative estimate because it assumes all takes are of different 
individual animals, which is likely not the case. Using tags and dye 
stamps, researchers from HSU have identified individual northern 
elephant seals across several days of monitoring at the PGL. Although 
harbor seals observed at the PGL are not typically tagged or marked, 
HSU researchers suggest that the harbor seals seen hauled-out at the 
PGL are likely the same individuals that move between Punta Gorda and 
other nearby haulouts. Therefore, many individuals that may be taken by 
Level B harassment are likely to be the same across consecutive days, 
but PSOs would count them as separate takes across days.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity 
(including the required mitigation and monitoring measures) and the 
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of 
marine mammals would be taken relative to the population size of the 
affected species or stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine 
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has 
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would 
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such 
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

Endangered Species Act

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any 
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize 
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or 
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated 
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, 
NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for 
endangered or threatened species, in this case with the West Coast 
Regional Office.
    No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected 
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that 
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this 
action.

National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, 
NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an IHA) 
with respect to potential impacts on the human environment.
    This action is consistent with categories of activities identified 
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or 
mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-
6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for 
significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for 
which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would 
preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined 
that the issuance of the IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded 
from further NEPA review.

Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to the 
BLM for conducting the PGL stabilization project in Humboldt County, 
California (effective from June 1, 2022 through October 1, 2022), with 
the previously discussed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements incorporated.

    Dated: June 2, 2022.
Catherine Marzin,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-12259 Filed 6-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>