Notice2026-07024
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Point Blue Conservation Science's Seabird Research Activities on the South Farallon Islands, Farallon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, California, as Well as at Partner Sites on Año Nuevo Island and the Point Reyes Headlands
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 10, 2026
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
NMFS has received a request from Point Blue Conservation Science (Point Blue) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to seabird research activities on the South Farallon Islands, Farallon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, California, as well as at partner sites on A[ntilde]o Nuevo Island (ANI) and the Point Reyes National Seashore (PRNS). Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine mammals during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting comments on a possible one-time, one-year renewal that could be issued under certain circumstances and if all requirements are met, as described in Request for Public Comments at the end of this notice. NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 69 (Friday, April 10, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 69 (Friday, April 10, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18420-18436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-07024]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XF602]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Point Blue Conservation Science's
Seabird Research Activities on the South Farallon Islands, Farallon
Islands National Wildlife Refuge, California, as Well as at Partner
Sites on A[ntilde]o Nuevo Island and the Point Reyes Headlands
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments on proposed authorization and possible renewal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Point Blue Conservation
Science (Point Blue) for authorization to take marine mammals
incidental to seabird research activities on the South Farallon
Islands, Farallon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, California, as well
as at partner sites on A[ntilde]o Nuevo Island (ANI) and the Point
Reyes National Seashore (PRNS). Pursuant to the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to
issue an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take
marine mammals during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting
comments on a possible one-time, one-year renewal that could be issued
under certain circumstances and if all requirements are met, as
described in Request for Public Comments at the end of this notice.
NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision
on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and agency
responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than May 11,
2026.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to the Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service. Written comments should be submitted via email to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#83cad7d3adc0ece0e8f1e6efefc3edece2e2ade4ecf5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6d24393d432e020e061f0801012d03020c0c430a021b">[email protected]</span></a>.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. Comments, including all attachments, must
not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. All comments received are a part of
the public record and will generally be posted online at
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act</a> without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
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: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-research-and-other-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-research-and-other-activities</a>. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Cockrell, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
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 IHA 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.
The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above
are included in the relevant sections below.
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 NOA 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 preliminarily determined
that the issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically
excluded from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice
prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the
IHA request.
Summary of Request
On February 17, 2026, NMFS received a request from Point Blue for
an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to seabird research activities
on the Southeast Farallon Islands and West End Island (collectively
called ``SEFI''), California, as well as at partner sites on ANI and
PRNS. The application was deemed adequate and complete on April 7,
2026. Point Blue's request is for take of a small number of five
species of marine mammals (consisting of six stocks) by Level B
harassment only. Neither Point Blue nor NMFS expects serious injury or
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
This proposed IHA would cover 1 year of a larger project for which
Point Blue obtained prior incidental take authorizations (ITAs) and
intends to request take authorization for
[[Page 18421]]
subsequent continuation of the ongoing project. The larger project
involves year-round monitoring of seabirds and management activities at
the locations described above. Activities are ongoing and have been for
over 30 years. Point Blue has previously complied with all the
requirements (e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the
previous ITAs and information regarding their monitoring results may be
found in the Estimated Take section.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
Point Blue, along with their research partners Oikonos Ecosystem
Knowledge and PRNS have been conducting seabird research in central
California for over 30 years. This research is conducted under
cooperative agreements with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
in consultation with the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine
Sanctuary. Point Blue conducts research activities on SEFI, ANI, and
PRNS. Research activities include monitoring and censusing seabird
colonies, observing seabird nesting habitat, restoring nesting burrows,
and resupplying a field station at SEFI. Research is conducted
throughout the year at each of the research sites. Researchers
accessing and conducting research activities on the sites may
occasionally cause behavioral disturbance (Level B harassment) of five
pinniped species (six stocks). Point Blue expects that the disturbance
to pinnipeds from the research activities will be limited to Level B
harassment.
Dates and Duration
Point Blue's research is conducted throughout the year. At SEFI,
most intertidal areas of the island (i.e., areas where marine mammals
are present) are rarely visited during seabird research activities. On
SEFI, most visits to locations where pinnipeds are hauled out are
typically brief (approximately 15 minutes in duration). Boat landings
to re-supply the field station, which may occur at either East or North
Landing on SEFI, typically last 1 to 3 hours and are conducted once
every 2 weeks.
On ANI, Point Blue has proposed a scale back of activities compared
to the description in other ITAs that were previously issued. Research
is now typically conducted during three to four brief visits between
April and September, annually. An exception would be for a component of
the seabird research which involves nesting habitat restoration and
monitoring, which would require more sporadic visits from September
through November. This is between the seabird breeding season and the
elephant seal pupping season. Similar to SEFI, the intertidal areas on
the island, which are more dominated by pinnipeds, are not ever visited
for work on ANI. The only exception to this would be the landing beach
and north of the beach to the island's terrace where a small number of
seabird nest boxes are located. Landing activities and visits to the
nest boxes are expected to be brief (approximately 15 minutes).
At PRNS, research activities occur year-round, with a stronger
emphasis during the seabird nesting season. Additional intermittent
visits for the rest of the year are also expected to occur. Point Blue
estimates the maximum number of visits per year to be approximately 20.
Like the work on ANI, a component of the seabird research which
involves nesting habitat restoration and monitoring would require more
sporadic visits from September through November. Additional but
intermittent visits to areas of PRNS where pinnipeds may be present may
also occur for (1) research on other species such as seabirds, sharks,
and subtidal mapping, and (2) resource management activities such as
non-native plant management and intertidal monitoring.
The proposed IHA would be valid for the statutory maximum of 1 year
from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, if finalized.
Specific Geographic Region
In a continuation of their previous research activities, Point Blue
proposes to conduct their research activities in the following
locations:
<bullet> SEFI--located at latitude 37[deg]41' N and longitude
123[deg]00' W, SEFI collectively consists of the Southeast Farallon
Island and West End Island (see figure 1). These two islands are
directly adjacent to each other and separated by only an approximately
30-foot (ft) (9.1-meters (m)) channel. SEFI has a land area of
approximately 120 acres (a) (48.6 hectares (ha)) and are part of the
Farallon Islands National Wildlife Refuge. The islands are located near
the edge of the continental shelf 28 miles (mi) (45.1 kilometers (km))
west of San Francisco, California. The Southeast Farallon Island sits
within the waters of the Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary.
These waters constitute foraging areas for several species of
pinnipeds;
<bullet> ANI--located at latitude (37[deg]06' N and longitude
122[deg]20' W, ANI is found approximately 0.25 mi (0.4 km) offshore of
A[ntilde]o Nuevo Point in San Mateo County, California (see figure 2).
This small 25 a (10.1-ha) island is part of the 4,000-a (1,618.7-ha)
A[ntilde]o Nuevo State Reserve, all of which is owned and operated by
California State Parks. ANI lies within the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary and the A[ntilde]o Nuevo State Marine Conservation
Area. Like the Southeast Farallon Island, the waters adjacent to ANI
serve as foraging areas for pinnipeds and represent EFH for many
groundfish, salmon, and pelagic forage fish species; and,
<bullet> PRNS--located approximately 40 mi (64.4 km) north of San
Francisco Bay (see figure 3). The affected area for the purposes of
this document are the headland coastal areas of this National Seashore.
Waters adjacent to PRNS are foraging areas for pinnipeds. In addition,
PRNS lies within the Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary and
within proximity (approximately 6 mi (9.7 km)) of the Cordell Bank
National Marine Sanctuary.
Point Blue's proposed activities would occur across the locations,
within intertidal and coastal habitat or more in-shore areas (i.e.,
residence locations, trails, pre-designated landing areas). Some site
visits may require researchers to travel through pinniped haul-out
areas.
[[Page 18422]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10AP26.000
[[Page 18423]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10AP26.001
[[Page 18424]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10AP26.002
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
SEFI
Point Blue has conducted year-round wildlife research and
monitoring activities at the South Farallon Islands, part of the
Farallon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, since 1968, where this work
is conducted through a collaborative agreement with the USFWS. Research
focusing on seabirds, and some procedures involved in maintaining the
SEFI field station may involve incidental take of marine mammals.
Seabird research activities primarily involve observational and
hands-on (i.e., netting and banding for capture-mark-recapture) studies
of breeding seabirds. Occasionally, researchers may travel to coastal
areas of the island to conduct observational seabird research where
non-breeding pinnipeds are present. These sorts of tasks include
viewing breeding seabirds from an observation blind or censusing
shorebirds, which typically necessitates one or two observers. Given
the location of SEFI, access to the Refuge involves landing in small
boats (i.e., 14- to 18-ft (4.3- to 5.5- m) open motorboats) which are
hoisted onto the island using a derrick system. The landing, hoisting,
and use of motorboats result in incidental take of pinnipeds.
Research on SEFI is conducted year-round. Most intertidal areas of
the island, where marine mammals are present, are rarely visited in
seabird research. Point Blue believes that the most potential for take
could occur at SEFI's two landings (North Landing and East Landing) and
the marine terrace. Boat landings to re-supply the field station
typically last between 1 to 3 hours and are conducted every 2 weeks at
either the East or North landing sites. Related to the vessel use,
these activities involve launching the boat with one operator, while
two to four other researchers assisting with the operations from land.
As East Landing is the primary research site, all personnel assisting
with the landing stay on the loading platform 30 ft (9.1 m) above the
water. At North Landing, loading operations occur at the water level in
the intertidal zone and boat access.
Researchers typically stay more than 100 ft (30.5 m) away from any
pinnipeds
[[Page 18425]]
while conducting seabird research and other island maintenance
activities or conduct observations from elevated locations greater than
50 ft (15.2 m) above resting pinnipeds. However, Point Blue notes that
the pinnipeds on SEFI may react to human presence over a greater
distance, including basic activities at the residences, trails, or
landings. Pinnipeds may also be spooked by gulls that are responding to
human activities. Generally, most of the visits to the pinniped haul
out areas are brief (approximately 15 minutes in duration).
ANI
Historically, Point Blue has also conducted seabird research,
monitoring, and habitat restoration activities on ANI, part of the
A[ntilde]o Nuevo State Reserve, since 1992. Since 2010, this work has
been led by collaborating researchers from Oikonos Ecosystem Knowledge
whereas all work is conducted through a collaborative agreement with
California State Parks.
Non-breeding pinnipeds may occasionally be present on the small
beach in the center of the island where the boat is landed. California
sea lions may also occasionally be present near a small group of
subterranean seabird nest boxes on the island terrace. There are
usually two to three researchers involved in island visits. Some
procedures, such as accessing the island by boat or conducting seabird
research and habitat restoration may involve incidental take of marine
mammals.
As described above, research on ANI has been scaled back from
previous years and is now conducted via three to four brief visits
between April and September. A primary component of the seabird
research involves nesting habitat restoration and monitoring, which
requires visits from September through November, between the seabird
breeding season and the elephant seal pupping season. Most intertidal
areas of the island where marine mammals are present are not ever
visited during seabird research, except the landing beach, which has
the greatest potential for take, as well as just north of this beach up
on the island's terrace where a small number of seabird nest boxes are
located. In both locations researchers are located greater than 50 ft
(15.2 m) away from any pinnipeds which may be hauled out. Landings and
visits to nest boxes are brief (approximately 15 minutes). It is
necessary that the landing beach be visited upon all arrival and
departure activities.
PRNS
The National Park Service (NPS) conducts research, resource
management and routine maintenance services at PRNS year-round. This
involves seabird research involving maintaining the facilities around
PRNS. Both types of work may involve incidental take of marine mammals.
Additionally, habitat restoration of the seashore includes restoration
and removal of non-native invasive plants, and coastal dune habitat.
Non-native plant removal is timed to avoid the breeding seasons of
pinnipeds; however, on occasion non-breeding animals may be present at
various beaches throughout the year. Additionally, elephant seals are
known to haul out near human structures and block access to facilities
(e.g., they regularly haul out on a boat ramp at the Lifeboat Station
and in car parking lots around the seashore).
Research activities on PRNS include monitoring seabird breeding and
roosting colonies, which usually necessitate one or two observers.
Field surveys are conducted by small boats (i.e., 14 to 22 ft (4.3 to
6.7 m) open motorboats) that survey along the shoreline. The use of
motorboats can result in the incidental take of pinnipeds.
Research at PRNS is conducted year-round (with an estimated maximum
number of visits per year of 20), with an emphasis during the seabird
nesting season with occasional intermittent visits the rest of the
year. As described above in the Dates and Durations section, a
component of the seabird research involves habitat restoration and
monitoring which requires sporadic visits from September-November,
between the seabird breeding season and the elephant seal pupping
season, but intermittent visits to areas of PRNS where pinniped takes
may occur are also conducted for other research, monitoring, and
resource management activities. In all locations researchers are
located greater than 50 ft (15.2 m) away from any hauled-out pinniped.
In addition to research and habitat restoration activities, harassment
may occur at landing beaches along Point Reyes Headland and at boat
ramps or parking lots if elephant seals are hauled out in those areas.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in this document (please see the Proposed
Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring and Reporting sections).
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.
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be
found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's
website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
Table 1 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
proposed to be authorized for this action, 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). For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy. While no serious
injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized here,
PBR and annual serious injury and mortality (M/SI) from anthropogenic
sources are included here as gross indicators of the status of the
species or stocks 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' Pacific and Alaska SARs (90 FR 13344, March 21, 2025). All values
presented in table 1 are the most recent available at the time of
publication (including from the draft 2024 SARs) and are available
online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammalprotection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammalprotection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>.
[[Page 18426]]
Table 1--Species With Estimated Take From the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance
ESA/ MMPA (CV; Nmin; most
Common name \a\ Scientific name Stock status; recent abundance PBR Annual M/SI \d\
Strategic (Y/ survey) \c\
N) \b\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Artiodactyla--Order Carnivora--Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion............ Zalophus U.S............... -, -, N 257,606 (N/A; 14,011............... >=321.
californianus. 233,515; 2014).
Steller sea lion............... Eumetopias jubatus Eastern U.S....... -, -, N 36,308 \e\ (N/A; 2,178 (U.S. only).... 92.3 (U.S. only).
36,308; 2022).
Northern fur seal.............. Callorhinus California........ -/D; Y 19,634 (N/A; 527.................. >=1.2.
ursinus. 8,788; 2022).
.................. Eastern Pacific... -/D; Y 626,618 (0.2, 11,403............... 373.
530,376, 2019)
\f\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal.................... Phoca vitulina.... California........ -, -, N 30,968 (N/A; 1,641................ 43.
27,348; 2012).
Northern elephant seal......... Mirounga California -, -, N 194,907 (N/A; 5,328................ 11.2.
angustirostris. breeding. 88,794; 2023).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy's Committee on Taxonomy
(<a href="https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/">https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/</a>).
\b\ 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 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.
\c\ NMFS marine mammal SARs online at <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>. CV is the
coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, a CV is not applicable. N/A indicates data are unknown. UND
(undetermined) PBR indicates data are available to calculate a PBR level but a determination has been made that calculating a PBR level using those
data is inappropriate (see the SAR for details).
\d\ 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 strikes). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is sometimes presented as a minimum value or range.
\e\ Abundance estimates are currently considered unknown.
\f\ Survey years = Sea Lion Rock--2014; St. Paul and St. George Islands--2014, 2016, 2018; Bogoslof Island.--2015, 2019.
As indicated above, all five species (six stocks) in table 1
temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that
take is reasonably likely to occur. While Guadalupe fur seals
(Arctocephalus townsendi) have been reported in the area, their
occurrence is considered extremely rare in that the temporal and/or
spatial occurrence of these species is such that take is not expected
to occur, and they are not discussed further beyond the explanation
provided here. For the past 8 years Point Blue has not observed any
Guadalupe fur seals during their surveys of the project areas and
therefore NMFS does not anticipate and is not proposing to authorize
take of Guadalupe fur seals. Additionally, California (southern) sea
otters (Enhydra lutris nereis) may be found in the Greater Farallones
National Marine Sanctuary (see <a href="https://farallones.org/sanctuary-wildlife/marinemammals/">https://farallones.org/sanctuary-wildlife/marinemammals/</a>) and possibly nearshore to the South Farallon
Island. However, this species is managed by the USFWS (see <a href="https://www.fws.gov/species/southern-sea-otter-enhydra-lutris-nereis">https://www.fws.gov/species/southern-sea-otter-enhydra-lutris-nereis</a>) and
therefore not discussed further in this document. For more details on
the species that are likely to occur near the project area and may be
taken by Point Blue's proposed activities, see Point Blue's IHA
application, the SARs, and NMFS' website.
California Sea Lions
California sea lion breeding areas are on islands located in
southern California, in western Baja California, Mexico, and the Gulf
of California. Rookery sites in southern California are limited to the
San Miguel Islands and the southerly Channel Islands of San Nicolas,
Santa Barbara, and San Clemente (Carretta et al., 2017). Males
establish breeding territories during May through July on both land and
in the water. Females come ashore in mid-May and June where they give
birth to a single pup approximately 4 to 5 days after arrival and will
nurse pups for about a week before going on their first feeding trip.
Postpartum females will alternate feeding trips with nursing bouts
until the pup is weaned between 4 and 10 months of age (Melin et al.,
2000).
Adult and juvenile males will migrate as far north as British
Columbia, Canada while females and pups remain in southern California
waters in the non-breeding season. In warm water (El Ni[ntilde]o)
years, some females are found as far north as Washington and Oregon,
presumably following prey.
On the Farallon Islands, California sea lions haul out in many
intertidal areas year-round, fluctuating from several hundred to
several thousand animals. California sea lions at PRNS haul out at only
a few locations but will occur on human structures such as boat ramps.
The annual population averages around 300 to 500 during the fall
through spring months, although on occasion, several thousand sea lions
can arrive depending upon local prey resources (S. Allen, unpublished
data). On ANI, California sea lions may haul out at one of eight beach
areas on the perimeter of the island. The island's average population
ranges from 4,000 to 9,500 animals (M. Lowry, unpublished data).
Elevated numbers of strandings of California sea lion pups occurred
in Southern California beginning in January 2013, and NMFS declared an
unusual mortality event (UME). The UME was confined to pup and yearling
California sea lions, many of which were emaciated, dehydrated, and
underweight for their age. A change in the availability of sea lion
prey, especially sardines, a high value food source for nursing
mothers, was a likely contributor to the large number of strandings.
Sardine spawning grounds shifted further offshore in 2012 and 2013,
and, while other prey were available (market squid and rockfish), these
may not have provided adequate nutrition in the milk of sea lion
mothers
[[Page 18427]]
supporting pups, or for newly weaned pups foraging on their own.
Although the pups showed signs of some viruses and infections, findings
indicated that this event was not caused by disease, but rather by the
lack of high quality, close-by food sources for nursing mothers.
Current evidence does not indicate that this UME was caused by a single
infectious agent, though a variety of disease-causing bacteria and
viruses were found in samples from sea lion pups. Investigating and
identifying the cause of this UME was a true public-private effort with
many collaborators. The investigative team examined multiple potential
explanations for the high numbers of malnourished California sea lion
pups observed on the island rookeries and stranded on the mainland in
2013. Per the NMFS website, ``the UME was attributed to malnutrition in
juvenile sea lions due to ecological factors causing prey shifts. These
prey shifts were most likely driven by unusual oceanographic conditions
at the time due to the ``Warm Water Blob'' and El Ni[ntilde]o.'' The
UME was closed in 2016. For more information, see <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2013-2017-california-sealion-unusual-mortality-event-california">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2013-2017-california-sealion-unusual-mortality-event-california</a>.
Steller Sea Lion
Steller sea lions consist of two distinct population segments
(DPSs): the western and eastern DPSs divided at longitude 144[deg] W
(Cape Suckling, Alaska). The western segment of Steller sea lions
inhabits central and western Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian Islands, as well
as coastal waters, and breed in Asia (e.g., Japan and Russia) (Young et
al., 2024). The eastern DPS includes animals born east of Cape
Suckling, AK (144[deg] W), and includes sea lions living in southeast
Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, and California (Young et
al., 2024).
Despite the wide-ranging movements of juveniles and adult males in
particular, exchange between rookeries by breeding adult females and
males (other than between adjoining rookeries) appears low, although
males have a higher tendency to disperse than females (National Marine
Mammal Laboratory, 1995; Trujillo et al., 2004; Hoffman et al., 2006).
While historically breeding at rookeries located in Southeast Alaska,
British Columbia (Canada), Oregon, and California, a new rookery has
been established on the outer Washington coast at the Carroll Island
and Sea Lion Rock complex (Stocking and Wiles, 2021). This northward
shift in the overall breeding distribution has occurred, with a
contraction of the range in southern California and new rookeries
established in southeastern Alaska (Hastings et al., 2017).
An estimated 50 to 150 Steller sea lions are located along the
Farallon Islands while 400-600 may be found on ANI (Point Blue,
unpublished data; Lowry, unpublished data). Steller sea lions are not
typically present at PRNS (NPS, unpublished data). Overall, counts of
non-pups at trend sites in California and Oregon have been relatively
stable or increasing slowly since the 1980s (Muto et al., 2017). The
South Farallon Island is one of two breeding colonies at the southern
end of the Steller sea lion's range.
Northern Fur Seal
The northern fur seal is endemic to the North Pacific Ocean and
Bering Sea. Breeding rookeries extend from the Sakhalin Island in the
Sea of Okhotsk, Commander Islands, Pribilof, and Aleutian Islands in
the Bering Sea, and the Farallon and San Miguel Islands off California
(Gelatt and Gentry, 2018). Two stocks are recognized in U.S. waters:
the Eastern North Pacific and the California stocks. The Eastern North
Pacific stock ranges from southern California during winter to the
Pribilof Islands and Bogoslof Island in the Bering Sea during summer
(Muto et al., 2018). The California stock originated with immigrants
from the Pribilof Islands and Russian populations that recolonized San
Miguel Island during the late 1950s or early 1960s after northern fur
seals were extirpated from California in the 1700s and 1800s (NMFS,
2025). Most northern fur seals at Point Blue research sites are
expected to be from the California stock, though some may be from the
Eastern North Pacific stock, as adult females and pups from the
Pribilof Islands move through the Aleutian Islands into waters off
Oregon and California (Muto et al., 2019).
The northern fur seal spends a significant amount of its time at
sea, typically in areas of upwelling along the continental slopes, in
sea valleys and submarine canyons and over seamounts where it
undertakes opportunistic foraging activities (Kajimura, 1981). The
remainder of its life is spent on or near rookery islands or haul-outs.
While at sea, northern fur seals usually occur singly or in pairs,
although larger groups can form in waters rich with prey (Antonelis and
Fiscus, 1980; Kajimura, 1981). Northern fur seals dive to relatively
shallow depths to feed: 100 to 200 m (328.1 to 656.2 ft) for females,
and <400 m (<1,313.34 ft) for males (Geobel et al., 1991; Sterling and
Ream, 2004). Tagged adult female fur seals were shown to remain within
200 km (124.3 mi) of the shelf break (Pelland et al., 2014).
Northern fur seals likely numbered in excess of 100,000 animals at
the Farallon Islands before being locally extirpated by sealers in the
1800's (Pyle et al., 2001). After more than a 150-year absence,
northern fur seals recolonized the Farallon Islands in the 1970's and
the first confirmed pup was born in 1996 (Pyle et al., 2001). The
Farallon Islands continue to be a breeding site for northern fur seals,
with over 1,000 pups born each season (Point Blue, unpublished data).
Fur seals in the Farallon Islands typically begin pupping in mid-July
with peak population and pup production in late August to early
September. A study by Lee et al. (2018) found that three colonies of
northern fur seals (i.e., South Farallon, San Miguel, and Bogoslof) are
all experiencing population growth at levels of 34, 45, and 59
percents, respectively, but were also all growing at rates determined
to be the fastest for fur seals worldwide. Per Lowery et al. (2021),
Northern fur seals are not typically observed on ANI or PRNS; they are
more often found on San Miguel Island (located in the Channel Islands)
and the Farallon Islands.
Harbor Seal
Pacific harbor seals inhabit near-shore coastal and estuarine areas
from Baja California, Mexico, to the Pribilof Islands in Alaska. They
are divided into two subspecies: P. v. stejnegeri in the western North
Pacific, near Japan, and P. v. richardii in the northeast Pacific
Ocean. The latter subspecies occurs along the California coast. The
California stock of harbor seals ranges from Mexico to the Oregon-
California border. In California, 400 to 600 harbor seal haul-out sites
are widely distributed along the mainland and offshore islands, and
include rocky shores, beaches and intertidal sandbars (Hanan, 1996;
Lowry et al., 2008; Carretta et al., 2024).
Harbor seals mate at sea, and females give birth during the spring
and summer, although the pupping season varies with latitude. Pups are
nursed for an average of 24 days and are ready to swim minutes after
being born. Harbor seal pupping takes place at many locations, and
rookery size varies from a few pups to many hundred pups. Pupping
generally occurs between March and June, and molting occurs between May
and July.
On the Farallon Islands, approximately 40 to 120 Pacific harbor
[[Page 18428]]
seals haul out in the intertidal areas (Point Blue, unpublished data).
Harbor seals at PRNS haul out at nine locations with an annual
population of up to 4,000 animals (M. Lowry, unpublished data). On ANI,
harbor seals may haul out at one of eight beach areas on the perimeter
of the island, and the island's average population ranges from 100 to
150 animals (M. Lowry, unpublished data).
Northern Elephant Seal
Northern elephant seals range in the eastern and central North
Pacific Ocean, from as far north as Alaska to as far south as Mexico.
Northern elephant seals spend much of the year, generally about 9
months, in the ocean. They are usually underwater, diving to depths of
about 1,000 to 2,500 ft (330 to 800 m) for 20- to 30 minute intervals
with only short breaks at the surface. They are rarely seen out at sea
for this reason. While on land, they prefer sandy beaches.
The northern elephant seal breeding population is distributed from
central Baja California, Mexico to the Point Reyes Peninsula in
northern California. Along this coastline, there are 13 major breeding
colonies. Northern elephant seals breed and give birth primarily on
offshore islands (Stewart et al., 1994), from December to March
(Stewart and Huber, 1993). Males feed near the eastern Aleutian Islands
and in the Gulf of Alaska, and females feed farther south, south of
45[deg] N (Stewart and Huber, 1993; Le Boeuf et al., 1993).
In mid-December, adult males begin arriving at rookeries, closely
followed by pregnant females on the verge of giving birth. Females give
birth to a single pup, generally in late December or January (Le Boeuf
and Laws, 1994) and nurse their pups for approximately 4 weeks (Reiter
et al., 1991). Upon pup weaning, females mate with an adult male and
then depart the islands. The last adult breeders depart the islands in
mid-March. The spring peak of elephant seals on the rookery occurs in
April, when females and immature seals (approximately 1 to 4 years old)
arrive at the colony to molt (a 1-month process) (USFWS, 2013). The
year's new pups remain on the island throughout both of these peaks,
generally leaving by the end of April (USFWS, 2013). The lowest numbers
of elephant seals present at rookeries occurs during June, July, and
August, when sub-adult and adult males molt. Another peak number of
young seals returns to the rookery for a haul-out period in October,
and at that time, some individuals undergo partial molt (Le Boeuf and
Laws, 1994).
Northern elephant seals are present on the islands and in the
waters surrounding the South Farallones year-round for either breeding
or molting; however, they are more abundant during breeding and peak
molting seasons (Le Boeuf and Laws, 1994; Sydeman and Allen, 1999).
Northern elephant seals began recolonizing the South Farallon Islands
in the early 1970s (Stewart et al., 1994) at which time the colony grew
rapidly. Point Blue's average monthly counts of elephant seals at the
South Farallon Islands from 2000 to 2009 ranged from 20 individuals in
July to nearly 500 individuals in November (USFWS, 2013). During
breeding season, the population at ANI ranges from 900 to 1,000 adults,
while another ~2,000 adults are found at PRNS (Mark Lowry, unpublished
data; NPS, unpublished data).
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and their
Habitat
This section provides a discussion of the ways in which components
of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat.
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 and
Determination section considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take section, and the Proposed 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.
Presence of Humans
Visual and acoustic stimuli generated by the appearance of field
personnel and motorboat operations may have the potential to cause
Level B harassment of pinnipeds hauled out on SEFI, ANI, and PRNS. This
section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that the types of
stressors associated with the specified activity (e.g., personnel
presence and motorboats) have been observed to impact marine mammals.
This discussion may also include reactions that we consider rising to
the level of a take and those that we do not consider rising to the
level of a take. This section provides background information on
potential effects of these activities. For a discussion of the manner
in which the mitigation measures will be implemented, and how the
mitigation measures will shape the anticipated impacts from this
specific activity, see the Proposed Mitigation section below.
Reactions to human presence, if any, depend on species, state of
maturity, experience, current activity, reproductive state, time of
day, and many other factors (Richardson et al., 1995; Southall et al.,
2007; Weilgart, 2007). These behavioral reactions from marine mammals
are often shown as: changing durations of surfacing and dives, number
of blows per surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; reduced/
increased vocal activities; changing/cessation of certain behavioral
activities (such as socializing or feeding); visible startle responses
or aggressive behavior; avoidance of areas; and/or flight responses
(e.g., pinnipeds flushing into the water from haul-outs or rookeries).
If a marine mammal does react briefly to human presence by changing its
behavior or moving a small distance, the impacts of the change are
unlikely to be significant to the individual, let alone the stock or
population. However, if visual stimuli from human presence displaces
marine mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a
prolonged period, impacts on individuals and populations could be
significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007). Numerous
studies have shown that human activity can flush harbor seals off haul-
out sites (Allen et al., 1985; Suryan and Harvey, 1999; Ruiz-Mar et
al., 2022; Bankhead et al., 2023). The Hawaiian monk seal (Neomonachus
schauinslandi) has been shown to avoid beaches that have been disturbed
often by humans (Kenyon, 1972; Gerrodette and Gilmartin, 1990). In one
case, human disturbance appeared to cause Steller sea lions to desert a
breeding area at Northeast Point on St. Paul Island, Alaska (Kenyon,
1962), a behavior demonstrated at other locations as well (Kucey, 2005;
Chayahara et al., 2024).
The appearance of field personnel may have the potential to cause
Level B harassment of any pinnipeds hauled out at research sites.
Disturbance may result in reactions ranging from an animal simply
becoming alert to the presence of field personnel (e.g., turning the
head, assuming a more upright posture) to flushing from the haul-out
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 flee some distance or change the
speed or direction of their movement in response to the presence of
field personnel are behaviorally harassed, and thus subject to the
taking by Level
[[Page 18429]]
B harassment. Animals that respond to the presence of field 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.
Use of Motorboats
Point Blue has indicated that they may require the use of small
waterborne vessels (i.e., small motorboats) to deliver both personnel
and supplies to and from SEFI, ANI, and PRNS. Previous studies have
been performed where the results demonstrate that pinnipeds generally
return to their sites and do not permanently abandon haul-out sites
after exposure to motorboats (discussed further below for Henry and
Hammil (2001) and Johnson and Acevedo-Gutierrez (2007)).
In 1997, Henry and Hammil (2001) conducted a study to measure the
impacts of small boats (i.e., kayaks, canoes, motorboats and sailboats)
on harbor seal haul-out behavior in Metis Bay, Quebec, Canada. During
that study, the authors noted that the most frequent disturbances
(n=73) were caused by lower speed, lingering kayaks, and canoes (33.3
percent) as opposed to motorboats (27.8 percent) conducting high-speed
passes. The seal's flight reactions could be linked to a surprise
factor by kayaks and canoes, which approach slowly, quietly, and low on
the water making them look like predators. However, the authors note
that, once the animals were disturbed, there did not appear to be any
significant lingering effect on the recovery of numbers to their pre-
disturbance levels. In conclusion, the study showed that boat traffic
at current levels had only a temporary effect on the haul-out behavior
of harbor seals in the Metis Bay area.
In 2004, Acevedo-Gutierrez and Johnson (2007) evaluated the
efficacy of buffer zones for watercraft around harbor seal haul-out
sites on Yellow Island, Washington. The authors estimated the minimum
distance between the vessels and the haul-out sites, categorized the
vessel types, and evaluated seal responses to the disturbances. During
the course of the 7-weekend study, the authors recorded 14 human-
related disturbances that were associated with stopped powerboats and
kayaks. During these events, hauled out seals became noticeably active
and moved into the water. The flushing occurred when stopped kayaks and
powerboats were at distances as far as 453 and 1,217 ft (138 and 371 m)
away, respectively. The authors note that the seals were unaffected by
passing powerboats, even those approaching as close as 128 ft (39 m),
possibly indicating that the animals had become tolerant of the brief
presence of the vessels and ignored them. The authors reported that, on
average, the seals quickly recovered from the disturbances and returned
to the haul-out site in less than or equal to 60 minutes. Seal numbers
did not return to pre-disturbance levels within 180 minutes of the
disturbance, less than one-quarter of the time observed. The study
concluded that the return of seal numbers to pre-disturbance levels and
the relatively regular seasonal cycle in abundance throughout the area
counter the idea that disturbances from powerboats may result in site
abandonment (Johnson and Acevedo-Gutierrez, 2007). As a general
statement from the available information, pinnipeds exposed to intense
(approximately 110 to 120 decibels referenced to 20 microPascals
([mu]Pa)) airborne non-pulsed sounds often leave haul-out areas and
seek refuge temporarily (minutes to a few hours) in the water (Southall
et al., 2007).
The potential for striking marine mammals is a concern with vessel
traffic. Typically, the reasons for vessel strikes are fast transit
speeds, lack of maneuverability, or not seeing the animal because the
boat is so large. Point Blue's staff and field personnel will access
areas at slow transit speeds in small boats that are easily
maneuverable, minimizing any chance of any accidental strikes.
Avoidance
Avoidance is the displacement of an individual from an area or
migration path as a result of the presence of a sound or other
stressors and is one of the most obvious manifestations of disturbance
in marine mammals (Richardson et al., 1995). Avoidance is qualitatively
different from the flight response but also differs in the magnitude of
the response (i.e., directed movement, rate of travel, etc.). Often
avoidance is temporary, and animals return to the area once the noise
has ceased. Acute avoidance responses have been observed in captive
porpoises and pinnipeds exposed to a number of different sound sources
(Kastelein et al., 2001; Finneran et al., 2003; Kastelein et al.,
2006a; Kastelein et al., 2006b; Kastelein et al., 2015a; Kastelein et
al., 2015b; Kastelein et al., 2018). Short-term avoidance of seismic
surveys, low frequency emissions, and acoustic deterrents have also
been noted in wild populations of odontocetes (Bowles et al., 1994;
Goold, 1996; Goold and Fish, 1998; Morton and Symonds, 2002; Hiley et
al., 2021) and to some extent in mysticetes (Malme et al., 1984;
McCauley et al., 2000; Gailey et al., 2007). Longer-term displacement
is possible, however, which may lead to changes in abundance or
distribution patterns of the affected species in the affected region if
habituation to the presence of the sound does not occur (e.g.,
Blackwell et al., 2004; Bejder et al., 2006; Teilmann et al., 2006).
Although NMFS acknowledges that most research and literature cited here
is related to cetaceans, who are not expected to be harassed or taken
by Point Blue's specified activities, we include these to provide
context as pinnipeds behaviorally react in a similar manner when
expected to an external stimulus (e.g., human presence, noise, etc.)
when onshore or in the water.
While NMFS expects that hauled out pinnipeds may avoid the Point
Blue field personnel and/or motorboats, we do not expect that these
effects will be more than temporary. The pinnipeds on SEFI, ANI, and
PRNS have high site fidelity; any external stimuli would be expected to
be fleeting in nature, and easily avoidable, meaning that the
pinnipeds, if performing avoidance behaviors during Point Blue's
specified activities, would be able to resume their original behaviors
once the stimulus has ended.
Flight Response
A flight response is a dramatic change in normal movement to a
directed and rapid movement away from the perceived location of a sound
source. The flight response differs from other avoidance responses in
the intensity of the response (e.g., directed movement, rate of
travel). Relatively little information on flight responses of marine
mammals to anthropogenic signals exists, although observations of
flight responses to the presence of predators have occurred (Connor and
Heithaus, 1996). The result of a flight response could range from
brief, temporary exertion and displacement from the area where the
signal provokes flight to, in extreme cases, marine mammal strandings
(Evans and England, 2001). There are limited data on flight response
for marine mammals in water; however, there are examples of this
response in species on land. For instance, the probability of flight
responses in Dall's sheep (Ovis dalli dalli) (Frid, 2003), hauled out
ringed seals (Phoca hispida) (Born et al., 1999), Pacific brant (Branta
bernicla nigricans), and Canada geese (B. canadensis) increased as a
helicopter or fixed-wing aircraft more directly approached groups of
these animals (Ward et al., 1999). However, it should be noted that
[[Page 18430]]
response to a perceived predator does not necessarily invoke flight
(Ford and Reeves, 2008), and whether individuals are solitary or in
groups may influence the response.
Behavioral disturbance can also impact marine mammals in more
subtle ways. Increased vigilance may result in costs related to
diversion of focus and attention (i.e., when a response consists of
increased vigilance, it may come at the cost of decreased attention to
other critical behaviors such as foraging or resting). These effects
have generally not been observed in marine mammals, but studies
involving fish and terrestrial animals have shown that increased
vigilance may substantially reduce feeding rates and efficiency (e.g.,
Beauchamp and Livoreil, 1997; Fritz et al., 2002; Purser and Radford,
2011). In addition, chronic disturbance can cause population declines
through reduction of fitness (e.g., decline in body condition) and
subsequent reduction in reproductive success, survival, or both (e.g.,
Harrington and Veitch, 1992; Daan et al., 1996; Bradshaw et al., 1998).
Many animals perform vital functions, such as feeding, resting,
traveling, and socializing, on a diel cycle (24-hour cycle). Disruption
of such functions resulting from reactions to stressors such as sound
exposure are more likely to be significant if they last more than one
diel cycle or recur on subsequent days (Southall et al., 2007).
Consequently, a behavioral response lasting less than 1 day and not
recurring on subsequent days is not considered particularly severe
unless it could directly affect reproduction or survival (Southall et
al., 2007). Note that there is a difference between multi-day
substantive behavioral reactions and multi-day anthropogenic
activities. For example, just because an activity lasts for multiple
days does not necessarily mean that individual animals are either
exposed to activity-related stressors for multiple days or, further,
exposed in a manner resulting in sustained multi-day substantive
behavioral responses.
There are other ways in which disturbance, as described previously,
could result in more than Level B harassment of marine mammals. They
are most likely to be consequences of stampeding (which is typically a
response to startle and/or avoidance behaviors), a potentially
dangerous occurrence in which large numbers of animals succumb to mass
panic and rush away from a stimulus. These situations are: (1)
pinnipeds falling when entering the water at high-relief locations; (2)
extended separation of mothers and pups; and (3) crushing of pups by
larger animals during a stampede. However, NMFS does not expect any of
these scenarios to occur at SEFI, ANI, or PRNS. As stated, there is the
risk of injury if animals stampede towards shorelines with precipitous
relief (e.g., cliffs); however, field personnel will take precautions,
such as moving slowly and staying close to the ground, to ensure that
any flushes do not result in a stampede of pinnipeds heading to the
sea. Per previous ITAs issued to Point Blue, reports that stampedes
have been extremely rare at their survey locations in the past.
Furthermore, no research activities would occur at or near pinniped
rookeries. Breeding animals are concentrated in areas where field
personnel would not visit, so NMFS does not expect mother and pup
separation or crushing of pups during flushing. If pups should be
present at any Point Blue research sites, field personnel will avoid
visiting that particular site.
Habituation
Habituation can occur when an animal's response to a stimulus wanes
given repeated exposure, usually in the absence of unpleasant
associated events (Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most likely to
habituate to sounds that are predictable and unvarying. It is important
to note that habituation is appropriately considered as a ``progressive
reduction in response to stimuli that are perceived as neither aversive
nor beneficial,'' rather than as, more generally, moderation in
response to human disturbance (Bejder et al., 2009). The opposite
process is sensitization, when an unpleasant experience leads to
subsequent responses, often in the form of avoidance, at a lower level
of exposure. As noted, behavioral state may affect the type of
response. For example, animals that are resting may show greater
behavioral change in response to disturbing sound levels than animals
that are highly motivated to remain in an area for feeding (Richardson
et al., 1995; National Research Council, 2003; Wartzok et al., 2003).
Controlled experiments with captive marine mammals have shown
pronounced behavioral reactions, including avoidance of loud sound
sources (Ridgway et al., 1997; Finneran et al., 2003). Observed
responses of wild marine mammals to loud impulsive sound sources
(typically seismic airguns or acoustic harassment devices) have been
varied but often consist of avoidance behavior or other behavioral
changes suggesting discomfort (Morton and Symonds, 2002; see also
Richardson et al., 1995; Nowacek et al., 2007).
Stress Response
An animal's perception of a threat may be sufficient to trigger
stress responses consisting of some combination of behavioral
responses, autonomic nervous system responses, neuroendocrine
responses, or immune responses (e.g., Seyle, 1950; Moberg, 2000). In
many cases, an animal's first and sometimes most economical (in terms
of energetic costs) response is behavioral avoidance of the potential
stressor. Autonomic nervous system responses to stress typically
involve changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and gastrointestinal
activity. These responses have a relatively short duration and may or
may not have a significant long-term effect on an animal's fitness.
Neuroendocrine stress responses often involve the hypothalamus-
pituitary-adrenal system. Virtually all neuroendocrine functions that
are affected by stress, including immune competence, reproduction,
metabolism, and behavior, are regulated by pituitary hormones. Stress-
induced changes in the secretion of pituitary hormones have been
implicated in failed reproduction, altered metabolism, reduced immune
competence, and behavioral disturbance (e.g., Moberg, 1987; Blecha,
2000). Increases in the circulation of glucocorticoids are also equated
with stress (Romano et al., 2004).
The primary distinction between stress (which is adaptive and does
not normally place an animal at risk) and ``distress'' is the cost of
the response. During a stress response, an animal uses glycogen stores
that can be quickly replenished once the stress is alleviated. In such
circumstances, the cost of the stress response would not pose serious
fitness consequences. However, when an animal does not have sufficient
energy reserves to satisfy the energetic costs of a stress response,
energy resources must be diverted from other functions. This state of
distress will last until the animal replenishes its energetic reserves
sufficient to restore normal function.
Relationships between these physiological mechanisms, animal
behavior, and the costs of stress responses are well studied through
controlled experiments and for both laboratory and free-ranging animals
(e.g., Holberton et al., 1996; Hood et al., 1998; Jessop et al., 2003;
Krausman et al., 2004; Lankford et al., 2005). Stress responses due to
exposure to anthropogenic sounds or other stressors and their effects
on marine mammals have also been reviewed (Fair and Becker 2000; Romano
et al., 2002b) and,
[[Page 18431]]
more rarely, studied in wild populations (e.g., Romano et al., 2002a).
These and other studies lead to a reasonable expectation that some
marine mammals will experience physiological stress responses upon
exposure to acoustic stressors and that it is possible that some of
these would be classified as ``distress.'' However, distress is an
unlikely result of these projects based on observations of marine
mammals during previous, similar research and monitoring projects.
Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
There are no habitat modifications associated with the proposed
activity other than the presence of Point Blue field personnel to
perform the proposed activities and to monitor animals. No substantial
construction is anticipated to occur for this proposed project, only
activities that rise to the level of maintenance, removal, and
installation, which are all expected to be over a small footprint when
compared to the entire size of the available habitat on the South
Farallon Islands. While field personnel may be somewhat residential in
some areas during the work necessary for the proposed activities, the
field personnel will be traveling to different research sites
indicating that their presence in any one specific area is most likely
temporary. Thus, NMFS does not expect that the proposed activity would
have any effects on marine mammal habitat and NMFS expects that there
will be no long- or short-term physical impacts to pinniped habitat on
SEFI, ANI, or PRNS.
Proposed Activities on Potential Foraging Habitat
Marine mammal prey (e.g., fish) varies by species, season, and
location. However, as all of Point Blue's proposed activities are
occurring onshore and the prey species for pinnipeds are located in the
ocean, NMFS does not expect the proposed activities to affect the
habitat, availability, or presence of prey for pinnipeds.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed for authorization through the IHA, which will inform NMFS'
consideration of ``small numbers,'' the negligible impact
determinations, and impacts on subsistence uses.
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).
Takes proposed for authorization would be by Level B harassment
only, in the form of behavioral reactions for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to field personnel and associated noise. Based
on the nature of the activity, Level A harassment is neither
anticipated nor proposed to be authorized. As described previously, no
serious injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized
for this activity. Below we describe how the proposed take numbers are
estimated.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe the proposed estimate of the take that is
reasonably likely to occur and proposed for authorization.
The occurrence data are based upon Point Blue's unique expertise in
this area and their local, collaborative work with other partners who
work in the Farallon Islands (Point Blue Conservation Science,
unpublished data; G. McChesney, USFWS, personal observation). NMFS
further reviewed other nearby and recent actions by Point Blue and
partners when considering the proposed take numbers (i.e., the Point
Blue Conservation Science's seabird research activities in central
California (80 FR 10066, February 25, 2015; 81 FR 34978, June 1, 2016;
82 FR 31759, July 10, 2017; 83 FR 31372, July 5, 2018; 85 FR 9740,
February 20, 2020; and 86 FR 27991, May 25, 2021) and the USFWS
research, monitoring, and management activities on SEFI (90 FR 42750,
September 4, 2025)). Next, we further reviewed previous monitoring
reports from Point Blue for their previous projects in the specified
geographic area. Point Blue's requested take authorization numbers were
calculated based on the number of each species generally present on the
islands (particularly near haul-outs, survey areas, and near boat
landings) and frequency of the planned activities. Point Blue's
research activities are expected to affect all ages and sexes of
pinnipeds, except very young pups because Point Blue field personnel
will not enter or approach breeding areas close enough to cause a
disturbance to young pups or their mothers.
Upon review of Point Blue's request take, NMFS determined that the
numbers were reasonable and supported by their unique and extensive
expertise in the specified geographic area. For almost all species,
Point Blue requested the same annual take estimates as initially
requested in their most recent ITA (i.e., ITR with subsequent 5-year
LOA (86 FR 27991, May 25, 2021)). However, for two species (California
sea lions and northern fur seals), given increases in the populations
in the project areas, Point Blue has requested increased take for these
species. NMFS agrees with this justification and the values presented
in the ITA application and carries these forward here into this notice
of proposed IHA.
In table 2, NMFS shows the reported take observations from previous
Point Blue ITAs. We also include the previous number of authorized
takes under the ITR/LOA given the same or similar values that have been
requested by Point Blue for this proposed project. In table 3, NMFS
shows the take, by Level B harassment only, that propose to authorize
for Point Blue's 2026-2027 activities.
Table 2--Reported Take Observations From Previous ITAs, and Requested Annual Takes by Level B Harassment
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reported observations and take from previous IHA Reported observations and take from Authorized takes from
--------------------------------------------------------------- previous ITRs and 5-year LOA more recent project ITA
Species --------------------------------------------- (ITRs and 5-year LOA)
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 -------------------------
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Annual 5-year
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion....................................... 10,048 36,417 23,173 22,752 17,487 10,408 ....... 34,510 38,344 33,402 38,516 39,269 40,059 200,295
Northern elephant seal.................................... 145 175 119 202 85 79 ....... 90 67 10 6 26 239 1,195
Harbor seal............................................... 284 292 175 234 229 82 ....... 91 99 94 88 72 321 1,605
[[Page 18432]]
Steller sea lion.......................................... 59 31 32 35 5 50 ....... 15 9 50 36 36 72 360
Northern fur seal......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 1 ....... 0 0 13 25 26 20 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: NMFS was unable to locate monitoring data related to the 2020 survey activities (85 FR 9740, February 20, 2020).
Table 3--Proposed Take, By Level B Harassment Only, and Percentage of MMPA Stock Proposed To Be Taken
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated stock abundance Proposed take for Percent of stock
Species Stock (NMFS SARs) authorization to be taken
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion............................. U.S............................... 257,606 50,000 19.4
Northern elephant seal.......................... California breeding............... 194,907 239 0.1
Harbor seal..................................... California........................ 30,968 321 1.04
Steller sea lion................................ Eastern U.S....................... 36,308 72 0.2
Northern fur seal \a\........................... California........................ 19,634 120 0.61
Eastern Pacific................... 626,618 <0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ As either stock may occur in the project area, for the purposes of calculating the percentage of the stock impacted, the take is being analyzed as
if all proposed takes occurred within each stock.
Proposed 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 mitigation requirements described in the following were
proposed by Point Blue in its adequate and complete application or are
the result of subsequent coordination between NMFS and Point Blue.
Point Blue has agreed that all the mitigation measures are practicable.
NMFS has fully reviewed the specified activities and the mitigation
measures to determine if the mitigation measures would result in the
least practicable adverse impact on marine mammals and their habitat,
as required by the MMPA, and has determined the proposed measures are
appropriate. NMFS describes these below as proposed mitigation
requirements and has included them in the proposed IHA.
In addition to the measures described later in this section, Point
Blue would follow these general mitigation measures:
<bullet> Takes proposed for authorization, by Level B harassment
only, would be limited to the species and numbers listed in table 3.
Research activities would be required to be halted upon observation of
either a species for which incidental take was not authorized or for a
species for which incidental take has been authorized but the number of
takes has been met, entering or is within the harassment zone, if the
IHA is issued;
<bullet> The taking by Level A harassment, serious injury, or death
of any of the species listed in tables 1 or 3 or any taking of any
other species of marine mammal would be prohibited and would result in
the modification, suspension, or revocation of the IHA, if issued. Any
taking exceeding the authorized amounts listed in table 3 would be
prohibited and would result in the modification, suspension, or
revocation of the IHA, if issued;
<bullet> Ensure that relevant Point Blue staff are trained prior to
the start of all research activities, so that responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures are clearly understood. New personnel joining
during the project must be trained prior to commencing work;
<bullet> Point Blue staff must avoid direct physical interaction
with marine mammals during construction activity;
<bullet> Point Blue staff must maintain a safe distance for field
personnel from marine mammals and not approach any marine mammal while
conducting research, unless it is absolutely necessary to flush a
marine mammal in order to continue conducting research (i.e., if a site
cannot be accessed or sampled due to the presence of pinnipeds);s
<bullet> Conduct seabird observations in an observation blind,
shielded from the view of hauled-out pinnipeds where possible;
<bullet> Monitoring for offshore predators and not approach hauled
out pinnipeds if predators are present.
Based on our evaluation of Point Blue's proposed measures, as well
as
[[Page 18433]]
other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the proposed 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.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present while
conducting the activities. Effective reporting is critical to both
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/or
<bullet> Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
The monitoring and reporting requirements described in the
following were proposed by Point Blue in its adequate and complete
application or are the result of subsequent coordination between NMFS
and Point Blue following receipt of the application. Point Blue has
agreed that all of the mitigation measures are appropriate. NMFS
describes these below as proposed requirements and has included them in
the proposed IHA.
Point Blue will contribute to the knowledge of pinnipeds on SEFI,
ANI, and PRNS by noting observations of: (1) unusual behaviors,
numbers, or distributions of pinnipeds, such that any potential follow-
up research can be conducted by the appropriate personnel; (2) tag-
bearing carcasses of pinnipeds, allowing transmittal of the information
to appropriate agencies and personnel; and (3) rare or unusual species
of marine mammals for agency follow-up.
Proposed monitoring requirements in relation to the research
activities will include observations made by Point Blue. Information
recorded will include species counts (with numbers of pups/juveniles)
of animals present before approaching, numbers of observed disturbances
(based on the scale below), and descriptions of the disturbance
behaviors during the project activities, including location, date, and
time of the event. For consistency, any reactions by pinnipeds to field
personnel will be recorded according to a three-point scale, as shown
in table 4. We specifically note that only observations of disturbance
levels 2 and 3 would be recorded as takings. The lead biologist/
project-lead in the field will serve as an observer to record the
incidental take.
Table 4--Levels of Pinniped Behavioral Disturbance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Type of response Definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0............ Observation......... Observation by field personnel from
a distance; no disturbance to
pinniped.
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Only Levels 2 and 3 would be recorded as takes by Level B
harassment.
Furthermore, the following monitoring protocols for Point Blue are
proposed:
(1) Record of date, time, and location (or closest point of
ingress) of each visit to the research site;
(2) Composition of the marine mammals sighted, such as species,
gender, and life history stage (e.g., adult, sub-adult, pup);
(3) Information on the numbers (by species) of marine mammals
observed during the activities;
(4) Estimated number of marine mammals (by species) that may have
been harassed during the activities;
(5) Behavioral responses or modifications of behaviors that may be
attributed to the specific activities and a description of the specific
activities occurring during that time (e.g., human approach, vessel
approach, helicopter take-off/landing/flyover); and
(6) Information on the weather, including the tidal state and
horizontal visibility.
In addition, observations regarding the number and species of any
marine mammals observed (either in the water or hauled out at, or
adjacent to, a research site) are recorded as part of field
observations during research activities. Information regarding physical
and biological conditions pertaining to a site, as well as the date and
time that research was conducted, will also be recorded. This
information will be incorporated into a monitoring report (along with
other information, as required below in the Proposed Reporting section)
for NMFS and all raw data will be provided.
Proposed Reporting
Point Blue would be required to submit an annual draft summary
report on all research activities and marine mammal monitoring results
to NMFS within 90 days following the end of the project activities or
60 calendar days
[[Page 18434]]
prior to the requested issuance of any subsequent IHA for similar
activity at the same location, whichever comes first. The draft summary
report would include an overall description of the research activities
completed, a narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and
associated raw PSO data sheets (in electronic spreadsheet format).
Specifically, the report must include:
<bullet> Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal
monitoring;
<bullet> Observer locations during marine mammal monitoring; and
<bullet> Environmental conditions during monitoring periods (at
beginning and end of observer shift and whenever conditions change
significantly), including Beaufort sea state and any other relevant
weather conditions including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, and overall
visibility to the horizon, and estimated observable distance.
<bullet> Upon observation of a marine mammal, the following
information must be reported:
<bullet> Name of the observer who sighted the animal(s) and
observer location and activity at the time of the sighting;
<bullet> Time of the sighting;
<bullet> Identification of the animal(s) (e.g., genus/species,
lowest possible taxonomic level, or unidentified), observer confidence
in identification, and the composition of the group if there is a mix
of species;
<bullet> Estimated number of animals (min/max/best estimate);
<bullet> Estimated number of animals by cohort (e.g., adults,
juveniles, neonates, group composition, etc.);
<bullet> Animal's closest point of approach;
<bullet> Description of any marine mammal behavioral observations
(e.g., observed behaviors such as feeding or traveling), including an
assessment of behavioral responses thought to have resulted from the
activity (e.g., no response or changes in behavioral state such as
ceasing feeding, changing direction, flushing, etc.);
<bullet> Number of marine mammals detected, by species; and
<bullet> Detailed information about implementation of any
mitigation, a description of specified actions that ensured, and
resulting changes in behavior of the animal(s), if any.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days after the
submission of the draft summary report, the draft report would
constitute the final report. If Point Blue receives comments from NMFS,
a final summary report addressing NMFS' comments must be submitted
within 30 days after receiving comments.
Additionally, Point Blue would be required to undertake some
situational reporting for the NMFS West Coast Regional Office (562-980-
3230) for marked or tag-bearing pinnipeds or carcasses, or any unusual
behaviors, distributions, or numbers of pinnipeds.
Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
If, at any time, the specified activities clearly causes the take
of a marine mammal in a prohibited manner such as an injury (i.e.,
Level A harassment), serious injury, or mortality, Point Blue would
immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to
the NMFS Office of Protected Resources
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f7a7a5d9bea3a7d9ba98999e8398859e9990a5928798858384b799989696d9909881"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0252502c4b56522c4f6d6c6b766d706b6c655067726d707671426c6d63632c656d74">[email protected]</span></a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#86cfd2d6a8c5e9e5edf4e3eaeac6e8e9e7e7a8e1e9f0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="327b66621c715d515940575e5e725c5d53531c555d44">[email protected]</span></a>) and the
NMFS West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator (562-980-3230). The
report must include the following information:
(1) Time and date of the incident;
(2) Description of the incident;
(3) Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
(4) Description of all marine mammal observations in the last 24
hours preceding the incident;
(5) Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
(6) Fate of the animal(s); and
(7) Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if the equipment
is available).
Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with Point Blue to
determine what measures are necessary to minimize the likelihood of
further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Point Blue may not
resume the activities until notified by the NMFS Office of Protected
Resources.
In the event that Point Blue discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown
and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than a moderate state
of decomposition), Point Blue would immediately report the incident to
the Office of Protected Resources (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#87d7d5a9ced3d7a9cae8e9eef3e8f5eee9e0d5e2f7e8f5f3f4c7e9e8e6e6a9e0e8f1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8adad8a4c3dedaa4c7e5e4e3fee5f8e3e4edd8effae5f8fef9cae4e5ebeba4ede5fc">[email protected]</span></a>
and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8bc2dfdba5c8e4e8e0f9eee7e7cbe5e4eaeaa5ece4fd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="08415c58264b676b637a6d64644866676969266f677e">[email protected]</span></a>) and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator (562-980-3230). The report must include the same
information identified in the paragraph above. Activities may continue
while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS will work
with Point Blue to determine whether additional mitigation measures or
modifications to the activities are appropriate.
In the event that an injured or dead marine mammal is discovered
and it is determined that the injury or death is not associated with or
related to the activities authorized in any issued IHA (e.g.,
previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), Point Blue would report the
incident to the NMFS Office of Protected Resources
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f0a0a2deb9a4a0debd9f9e99849f82999e97a295809f828483b09e9f9191de979f86"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7424265a3d20245a391b1a1d001b061d1a132611041b060007341a1b15155a131b02">[email protected]</span></a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b5fce1e59bf6dad6dec7d0d9d9f5dbdad4d49bd2dac3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f5bca1a5dbb69a969e87909999b59b9a9494db929a83">[email protected]</span></a>) and the
West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator ((562) 980-3230) within 24
hours of the discovery. Point Blue would provide photographs, video
footage (if available), or other documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. Activities
may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338, September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analysis applies to all
of the species listed in tables 1 and 3, given that the anticipated
effects of this activity on these different marine mammal stocks are
expected to be similar. There is little
[[Page 18435]]
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.
For reasons stated previously in this document and based on the
following factors, NMFS does not expect Point Blue's proposed specified
activities to cause long-term behavioral disturbance that would be
expected to negatively impact an individual animal's fitness, or result
in injury, serious injury, or mortality. Although Point Blue's
activities may disturb marine mammals, NMFS expects those impacts to
occur to localized groups of animals at or near survey and activity
sites. Behavioral disturbance is expected to be limited to short-term
startle responses and localized behavioral changes due to the short
duration. Minor and brief responses including short-duration startle
reactions, are not likely to constitute disruption of behavioral
patterns, such as migration, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
These short duration disturbances (in many cases animals are expected
to return within a short period of time) will generally allow marine
mammals to reoccupy haul-outs relatively quickly; therefore, these
disturbances would not be anticipated to result in long-term disruption
of important behaviors. Therefore, NMFS does not expect mother and pup
separation or crushing of pups during stampedes.
Regarding effects on animals at SEFI, ANI, and PRNS, field
personnel will delay ingress into the landing areas, where possible,
until after the pinnipeds enter the water and will cautiously operate
vessels at slow speeds. Some limited effects from motorboats have been
known to occur (see the Effects section), but any behavioral effects
are expected to be temporary and fleeting, given the motorboat would be
primarily transiting, landing, or leaving the study sites. Limited
access would be permitted to pinniped pupping areas so mother-pup
separation is not expected to occur.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from
this activity are not expected to adversely affect any of the species
or stocks through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
<bullet> No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
<bullet> No take by Level A harassment is expected, or is proposed
for authorization;
<bullet> The intensity of anticipated takes by Level B harassment
is relatively low for all stocks. Level B harassment would be in the
form of behavioral disturbance, resulting in temporary avoidance of the
project areas and locations where Point Blue staff are working;
<bullet> Given pinnipeds are carnivores, no prey species (i.e.,
fish) would be impacted by the proposed activities or would only be
temporarily impacted for a short duration during in-water activities
(i.e., small motorboat use). Therefore, any associated impacts on
marine mammal foraging is not expected to result in significant or
long-term consequences for individuals, or to accrue to adverse impacts
on their populations;
<bullet> No impacts to pinniped habitat are anticipated; and
<bullet> Only limited behavioral disturbance in the form of short-
duration startle reactions is expected, and mitigation requirements
employed by field personnel (e.g., moving slowly, hushed voices) should
further decrease disturbance levels.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted previously, only the take of small numbers of marine
mammals 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 (see 86 FR 5322, January 19, 2021). Additionally, other
qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the
temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
The instances of take NMFS has proposed to authorize is below one-
third of the estimate stock abundance for all species. The number of
animals proposed for authorization that could be taken from these
stocks would be considered small relative to the relevant stocks'
abundances even if each estimate taking occurred to a new individual.
While there is a potential for some individuals to be taken multiple
times per day, Point Blue staff would count them as separate takes if
they cannot be individually identified.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily 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
No incidental take of ESA-listed species is proposed for
authorization or expected to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS
has determined that formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is
not required for this action.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to Point Blue for conducting seabird research activities
on SEFI, ANI, and PRNS from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027,
provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated. A draft of the proposed IHA can be found
at <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-research-and-other-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-research-and-other-activities</a>.
Request for Public Comments
We request comments on our analyses, the proposed authorization,
and any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed
project. We also request at this time comment on the potential renewal
of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph below. Please
include with your comments any supporting data or literature citations
to help inform decisions on the request for this IHA or a subsequent
renewal IHA.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a 1-time, one-year renewal
IHA following notice to the public providing
[[Page 18436]]
an additional 15 days for public comments when (1) up to another year
of identical or nearly identical activities as described in the
Description of Proposed Activities section of this notice is planned or
(2) the activities as described in the Description of Proposed
Activities section of this notice would not be completed by the time
the IHA expires and a renewal would allow for completion of the
activities beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section of
this notice, provided all of the following conditions are met:
<bullet> A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days
prior to the needed renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the
renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond one year from
expiration of the initial IHA).
<bullet> The request for renewal must include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the
requested renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under
the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so
minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take
estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take).
(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized.
Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the affected
species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines
that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the
mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and
appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.
Dated: April 8, 2026.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2026-07024 Filed 4-9-26; 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>Indexed from Federal Register on April 10, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.