DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase III HSTT Biological Opinion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase III HSTT Biological Opinion NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SECTION 7 BIOLOGICAL OPINION Title: Biological Opinion on U.S. Navy Hawaii-Southern California Training and Testing and the National Marine Fisheries Service's Promulgation of Regulations Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act for the Navy to "Take" Marine Mammals Incidental to Hawaii-Southern California Training and Testing Consultation Conducted By: Endangered Species Act Interagency Cooperation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce Action Agency: United States Department of the Navy Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce Publisher: Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic, and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce Approved: Donna S. Wieting Director, Office of Protected Resom: s DEC 1 0 2018 Date: Consultation Tracking number: FPR-2018-9275 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): Biological Opinion on Navy Hawaii-Southern California Training and Testing Activities PCTS # FPR-2018-9275 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 17 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 18 1.2 Consultation History ...................................................................................................... 20 2 The Assessment Framework .............................................................................................. 22 2.1 Evidence Available for this Consultation ....................................................................... 25 2.2 The Navy’s Acoustic Effects Analysis for Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles ............. 26 2.2.1 Criteria and Thresholds to Predict Impacts to Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles 27 2.2.2 Density Estimates – Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles ......................................... 44 2.2.3 Navy Acoustic Effects Model................................................................................. 45 2.3 Criteria and Thresholds to Predict Impacts to Fishes ..................................................... 47 2.3.1 Air Guns and Pile Driving – Fishes ........................................................................ 48 2.3.2 Sonar – Fishes......................................................................................................... 51 2.3.3 Explosives – Fishes................................................................................................. 52 3 Description of the Proposed Action ................................................................................... 53 3.1 Location.......................................................................................................................... 56 3.1.1 Hawaii Range Complex .......................................................................................... 57 3.1.2 Southern California Portion of the Action Area ..................................................... 63 3.1.3 Transit Corridor ...................................................................................................... 70 3.1.4 Pierside Locations and San Diego Bay................................................................... 70 3.2 Primary Mission Areas ................................................................................................... 70 3.2.1 Air Warfare ............................................................................................................. 71 3.2.2 Amphibious Warfare ............................................................................................... 71 3.2.3 Anti-Submarine Warfare ......................................................................................... 72 3.2.4 Electronic Warfare.................................................................................................. 73 3.2.5 Expeditionary Warfare ............................................................................................ 73 3.2.6 Mine Warfare .......................................................................................................... 73 3.2.7 Surface Warfare ...................................................................................................... 74 3.3 Proposed Training and Testing Activities ...................................................................... 75 3.3.1 Training Activities .................................................................................................. 75 3.3.2 Testing Activities.................................................................................................... 85 3.4 Standard Operating Procedures and Mitigation Measures ............................................. 96 3.4.1 Standard Operating Procedures............................................................................... 96 3.4.2 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................... 98 4 Action Area........................................................................................................................ 139 5 Interrelated and Interdependent Actions ....................................................................... 140 i Biological Opinion on Navy Hawaii-Southern California Training and Testing Activities PCTS # FPR-2018-9275 6 Potential Stressors............................................................................................................. 140 6.1 Acoustic Stressors ........................................................................................................ 140 6.1.1 Vessel Noise.......................................................................................................... 140 6.1.2 Aircraft Noise........................................................................................................ 142 6.1.3 Sonar and other Transducers................................................................................. 145 6.1.4 Noise from Weapons ............................................................................................. 153 6.1.5 Air Guns................................................................................................................ 155 6.1.6 Pile Driving........................................................................................................... 156 6.2 Explosive Stressors ...................................................................................................... 158 6.2.1 Explosions in Water .............................................................................................. 158 6.2.2 Explosions in Air .................................................................................................. 160 6.3 Energy Stressors........................................................................................................... 160 6.3.1 In-Water Electromagnetic Devices ....................................................................... 160 6.3.2 In-Air Electromagnetic Devices ........................................................................... 161 6.3.3 Lasers .................................................................................................................... 162 6.4 Physical Disturbance and Strike Stressors ................................................................... 162 6.4.1 Vessels .................................................................................................................. 162 6.4.2 In-Water Devices .................................................................................................. 164 6.4.3 Military Expended Materials ................................................................................ 165 6.4.4 Seafloor Devices ................................................................................................... 165 6.5 Entanglement Stressors ................................................................................................ 165 6.5.1 Wires and Cables .................................................................................................. 166 6.5.2 Decelerators and Parachutes ................................................................................. 167 6.5.3 Biodegradable Polymer ......................................................................................... 168 6.6 Ingestion Stressors........................................................................................................ 168 6.6.1 Non-Explosive Practice Munitions ....................................................................... 169 6.6.2 Fragments from High Explosive Munitions ......................................................... 169 6.6.3 Target Related Materials....................................................................................... 169 6.6.4 Chaff ..................................................................................................................... 169 6.6.5 Flares..................................................................................................................... 170 6.7 Potential Effects on Endangered Species Act (ESA) Protected Resources ................. 170 7 Species and Designated Critical Habitat that May be Affected ..................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Offshore Bank
    Our Ocean Backyard –– Santa Cruz Sentinel columns by Gary Griggs, Distinguished Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences, UC Santa Cruz. #271 September 16, 2018 An Offshore Bank Mountainous waves, crazy adventurers and sunken ships can all capture our interest and imagination, and there is a place off the coast of Southern California with a long history that includes all three of these. One-hundred and eleven miles due west of San Diego is an undersea mountain that rises a mile from the seafloor to within three feet of the ocean surface at low tides. Passing ships and small boats have even seen a few feet of rock exposed at the top of the mountain in the troughs of large waves from time to time. Cortes Bank appears to have been first sighted in 1846 by the frigate USS Constitution while transiting along the west coast from Monterey heading for engagement in the Mexican American War. Communication was somewhat limited in those days, however, and it was the captain of the steamship Cortes seven years later that believed he was the first to observe the waves breaking far out to sea over a shallow submarine feature in 1853. The shallow bank was named after his ship and the name stuck. It was that same year when the first U.S. Coast Survey map showed the presence of a navigational hazard in the area. The Stillwell S. Bishop, a clipper ship apparently hit the top of the seamount in 1855, but was able to continue on to San Francisco, leaving its name on the rock at the top of the bank, which it still carries today – Bishop Rock.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 83, No. 123/Tuesday, June 26, 2018
    29872 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Fax: (301) 713–0376; Attn: Jolie NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible Harrison. impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact National Oceanic and Atmospheric Instructions: Comments sent by any resulting from the specified activity that Administration other method, to any other address or cannot be reasonably expected to, and is individual, or received after the end of not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 50 CFR Part 218 the comment period, may not be the species or stock through effects on [Docket No. 170918908–8501–01] considered by NMFS. All comments annual rates of recruitment or survival. received are a part of the public record NMFS has defined ‘‘unmitigable RIN 0648–BH29 and will generally be posted for public adverse impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as viewing on www.regulations.gov an impact resulting from the specified Taking and Importing Marine without change. All personal identifying activity: Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals information (e.g., name, address, etc.), (1) That is likely to reduce the Incidental to the U.S. Navy Training confidential business information, or availability of the species to a level and Testing Activities in the Hawaii- otherwise sensitive information insufficient for a harvest to meet Southern California Training and submitted voluntarily by the sender may subsistence needs by: (i) Causing the Testing Study Area be publicly accessible. Do not submit marine mammals to abandon or avoid AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Confidential Business Information or hunting areas; (ii) directly displacing Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and otherwise sensitive or protected subsistence users; or (iii) placing Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), information.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual PBC Fundraiser Returns with Big Wave Surf Movie - San Jose Mer
    Annual PBC fundraiser returns with big wave surf movie - San Jose Mer... http://www.mercurynews.com/pacifica-entertainment/ci_27545920/annu... By Jean Bartlett Features Correspondent POSTED: 02/17/2015 05:08:10 PM PST 0 COMMENTS Each year the multi-award winning Pacifica Beach Click photo to enlarge Coalition (PBC) hosts and organizes an Earth Day of Action. A sampling of statistics reveals that in 2009, 3,744 PBC Earth Day volunteers collected 8,364 pounds of total trash and recycle from our coast, streets, hills and byways. In 2011, 7,200 volunteers recovered 15,000 pounds of trash and Submitted photo From the film, "Step recycle. In 2014, 7,500 volunteers removed over Into Liquid," Big Wave World Tour Champion... ( submitted ) three tons of trash, recycle and green waste. This year PBC will hold its 11th Annual Pacifica Earth Day of Action and EcoFest, "Bee the Change, Bee an Earth Hero," on the 18th of April. How do they do it? How do they get the word out to bring so many people together? How do they supply volunteers with cleanup and planting tools and the information needed to tackle the various projects? How do they bring so many world-renowned speakers not only to the stages of the event's EcoFest but into local classrooms in the weeks leading up to event? A huge part of getting it all off the ground is the Beach Coalition's annual and extremely popular Surf Movie event, a benefit that allows the local nonprofit to benefit our city. The Surf Movie event not only presents extraordinary films, it also brings in phenomenal speakers and an audience that is one of the greatest mixes of the residents of our town — City officials, surfers, teachers, students, environmentalists, business owners, and the list goes on.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological and Geological Reconnaissance and Characterization Survey of the Tanner and Cortes Banks
    88073746 OCEANIC ENGINEERING Volume II SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS I «=v. ?: BIOLOGICAL AND GEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE AND CHARACTERIZATION SURVEY OF THE TANNER AND CORTES BANKS Prepared for UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT under contract AA551-CT8-43 TD 195 . P4 T36 1979 v. 2 j * ezbtfyi:* INTERSTATE 1001 East Ball Road ELECTRONICS Post Office Box 3117 CORPORATION Anaheim, California 92803 SUBSIDIARY OF Telephone (714) 635-7210 or (714) 772-2811 TWX U.S.A. 910-591-1197 TELEX 655443 i<m A%IO Volume II v. 2. Oceanic SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS Engineering / BIOLOGICAL AND GEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE AND CHARACTERIZATION SURVEY OF THE TANNER AND CORTES BANKS This study was supported by the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior under contract AA551-CT8-43 SEPTEMBER 1979 This report has been reviewed by the Bureau of Land Man¬ agement and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Bureau, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement nr ro^nmmon. dations for use. Prepared by - OCEANIC ENGINEERING OPERATIONS INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION VOLUME II PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS The following personnel participated in the conduct of the survey work and the writing and preparation of the final report and other deliverables under this contract to the Bureau of Land Management. Name Responsibility Discipline G.L. Bane General Manager M.S. Mechanical Eng W.B. Merselis Program Manager, Phase II M.S. Geology Party Chief, Principal Author N.B. Plutchak Chief Scientist, Data M.S. Oceanography Analysis, Author P.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Surf Breaks and Surfing Areas in California
    Protecting Surf Breaks and Surfing Areas in California by Michael L. Blum Date: Approved: Dr. Michael K. Orbach, Adviser Masters project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Environmental Management degree in the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University May 2015 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................... viii LIST OF DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................ x EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... xiii 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 2. STUDY APPROACH: A TOTAL ECOLOGY OF SURFING ................................................. 5 2.1 The Biophysical Ecology ...................................................................................................... 5 2.2 The Human Ecology ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Southern California Offshore Banks
    Southern California Offshore Banks National Marine Sanctuary Proposal August 2016 Section I – Basics Nomination Title: Southern California Offshore Banks National Marine Sanctuary Proposal Nominator Name: Daniel J. Pondella, II, MA, Ph.D., Director of the Southern California Marine Institute and the Vantuna Research Group Nominator Point of Contact: Daniel J. Pondella II, MA, Ph.D., [email protected], (310) 519- 3172 x983 c (323) 533-3869, 820 South Seaside Avenue, Terminal Island, CA 90731 or (323) 259-2955, Moore Laboratory of Zoology, Occidental College, 1600 Campus Road, Los Angeles, CA 90041 Section II – Introduction Narrative Description Southern California offshore banks and seamounts (Cortes, Tanner, Northeast, and Cherry Banks and Garrett Ridge) comprise a critical set of relatively shallow, offshore habitats that are under threat and would greatly benefit from increased coordination of management efforts as well as protection from potential oil and gas extraction. During the last glacial maximum, the largest of these habitats, Tanner and Cortes Banks, were islands and were likely visited by Native Americans, as such there may be unknown archaeological sites on these banks. The region including these banks is uniquely located at the confluence of the California Current and Southern California Counter Current in an extremely productive environment whose habitats are likely linked to the overall biological production of the Southern California Bight (SCB). Thus, these offshore banks are preferred feeding areas for protected marine mammals, birds and support unique populations of corals. They also maintain the largest known remaining populations of the federally endangered white abalone (Haliotis sorenseni). Two former fisheries species that are now listed as protected species of concern, Cowcod (Sebastes levis) and Bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis), also utilize these areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Fish and Game Marine Resources Operations
    Report for the month of May 1966 Item Type monograph Publisher California Department of Fish and Game, Marine Resources Operations Download date 03/10/2021 16:35:02 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/18921 THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME MARINE RESOURCES OPERATIONS REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MAY 1966 May jack mackerel landings (4,700 tons) were the largest in the history of the fishery for thi~ month. Landings for the year this far are still 3,500 tons behind the 10-year average. The Fisheries Resources 'Sea Survey' Project (Bartlett M63R) was approved effective March 8, 1966. First personnel were assigned effective· April 1, 1966. Over 3,150 elephant 'seals were counted on two Southern California islands during May: 3,090 on San Miguel Island, May 3, and 80 on Santa Barbara Island, May 24. A ,tagged California halibut was recovered 258 days and 115" miles from its release date and locality. Very few of our tagged halibut have shown move­ ments of such magnitude in the past. - 2 - Pelagic Fish .................... ~ ~ , 3 Tuna 4 Sportfish II ••••••••••••••••••• ! • eo ••• 5 Special Prbjects '......................... 7 Biostatistics 8 Miscellaneous 9 - 3 - 1. PELAGIC FISH A. Fishery May January 1 -May 31 10--yr. --mean Landings in tons 1966* 1965 1966* 1965 -1955..:.1964 Species Anchovy 16 174 17,094 588 5,269 Mackerel, jack 4,700 1,979 8,615 5,843 12,153 Mackerel, Pacific 150 21 524 139 5,238 Sardines 30 54 103 393 1,523 Squid 1 352 2,312 2,997 -2;624 4,897 2,580 28,648 9,960 26,807 *Estimated.
    [Show full text]
  • A Southern California Surfer's Perspective on Marine Spatial Planning
    Volume 31 Issue 2 Article 1 5-13-2020 A Southern California Surfer's Perspective On Marine Spatial Planning Edwin C. Kisiel III Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/elj Part of the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation Edwin C. Kisiel III, A Southern California Surfer's Perspective On Marine Spatial Planning, 31 Vill. Envtl. L.J. 225 (2020). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/elj/vol31/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Villanova Environmental Law Journal by an authorized editor of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. Kisiel: A Southern California Surfer's Perspective On Marine Spatial Plan 2020] A SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SURFER’S PERSPECTIVE ON MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING EDWIN C. KISIEL III* ABSTRACT Increasing intensity in the use of ocean spaces and coastal development presents a threat to recreational uses of the ocean, such as surfing, diving, and snorkeling. Ocean recreational use brings an immense economic benefit to coastal communities. Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning provides a way to protect ocean recreational uses that cannot be replicated elsewhere. There are current legal authorities that permit state and federal agencies to conduct Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning. However, there are im- provements that could be made. This Article makes several recommendations of ways to implement Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning to protect ocean recreational resources from destruction and degradation from competing ocean uses and coastal development.
    [Show full text]
  • Surfing History Project of Dana Point
    ____________________________________ Oceanic Heritage Outline Surfing & Oceanic Heritage Projects of Dana Point The Dana Point Historical Society Produced & Written by Bruce Beal with an assist from Marlene Beal Revision Date: September 21, 2016 ____________________________________ Surfing & Oceanic Heritage Projects of Dana Point ~ Page 1 of 66 Copyright 2003~2016 Bruce Beal, Marlene Beal & the Dana Point Historical Society See Copyright Notice and Restrictions on Final Page ____________________________________ Oceanic Heritage Outline Surfing & Oceanic Heritage Projects of Dana Point The Dana Point Historical Society Produced & Written by Bruce Beal with an assist from Marlene Beal Revision Date: September 21, 2016 ____________________________________ Objective: Preserve Dana Point’s unique and legendary surfing, sailing and other oceanic histories, including the persons, cultures and industries associated therewith (“Oceanic Heritage Projects”). Commencing in the 1930’s, the area now known as Dana Point increasingly became populated by persons, originally known as “Watermen,” defined as those who were “comfortable in a wide variety of ocean conditions and had a broad store of oceanic knowledge; more specifically applied to those who are accomplished at a particular set of surfing-related activities, including diving, swimming, sailing, bodysurfing, fishing, spearfishing, surf canoeing, and oceangoing rescue work.”1 This Oceanic Heritage Outline of the Surfing and Oceanic Heritage Projects of the Dana Point Historical Society commemorates
    [Show full text]
  • The Emerging Law of Ocean Space
    WILLIAM L. GRIFFIN * The Emerging Law of Ocean Space For centuries man's predominant activities in the ocean space have been fishing and navigation where water has facilitated the move- ment of trade and military power. Major scientific and technological advances, both conceptual and practical, of the past two decades have produced a new picture of ocean space activity. Man now has the ability and the political and economic incentives to occupy ocean space, and he is embarked upon intensive research, development, application, and evaluation of ocean space activities as an extension of his dry-land activities. The addi- tional environment of the water of ocean space must be reckoned with and requires new perspective on disparate political, social, economic and legal interests and attitudes. Total ocean space-water surface, water column, seabed, and subsoil-has a broad spectrum of diverse and often conflicting uses: expansion of navigation and fishing, extraction of oil and gas, harvest- ing of both fixed and migratory underseas "crops" at various levels and temperatures of submarine strata, extraction of chemicals from seawater, mining of ores from the seabed and subsoil, human habita- tion on the seabed, waste disposal, scientific research, and military testing. The simultaneous existence of a traditional water instrumentality orientation and the newer water environment orientation heightens disparate interests and conflicting uses of ocean space. In the per- * Member of the Michigan and District of Columbia Bars. LL.B, LL.M, Michigan Law School. Presently attorney at law in Washington, D.C., special- izing in maritime law, international law, and law of ocean space, and consultant to U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Survey of Rockfishes in the Southern California Bight Using the Collaborative Optical-Acoustic Survey Technique
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS T O F C E N O M M T M R E A R P C E E D U A OCTOBER 2012 N I C T I E R D E M ST A AT E S OF 2004 SURVEY OF ROCKFISHES IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BIGHT USING THE COLLABORATIVE OPTICAL-ACOUSTIC SURVEY TECHNIQUE Edited by David A. Demer NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-497 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Fisheries Science Center The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), organized in 1970, has evolved into an agency that establishes national policies and manages and conserves our oceanic, coastal, and atmospheric resources. An organizational element within NOAA, the Office of Fisheries is responsible for fisheries policy and the direction of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). In addition to its formal publications, the NMFS uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum series to issue informal scientific and technical publications when complete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible. Documents within this series, however, reflect sound professional work and may be referenced in the formal scientific and technical literature. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS ATMO SP This TM series is used for documentation and timely communication of preliminary results, interim reports, or special ND HE A RI C C purpose information. The TMs have not received complete formal review, editorial control, or detailed editing. I A N D A E M I C N O I S L T A R N A T O I I O T A N N U .
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisdictional Problems Created by Artificial Islands
    JURISDICTIONAL PROBLEMS CREATED BY ARTIFICIAL ISLANDS I. GROWInG INTMEEST nT ARTIFICIAL ISLANDS Man, by his ever increasing technological skills, has created both the need for and the ability to make artificial islands. An artificial island is simply a fabricated island, constructed either of dirt and rock dredged fro mthe sea bottom, or of steel such as the common off-shore oil platforms. It is a non-naturally formed object, per- manently attached to the seabed, completely surrounded by water with its surface above the water at all times.1 There have been several attempts to create independent nations off the coast of the United States on artificial islands.2 Two com- peting concerns tried to establish a gambling resort on a sunken coral reef four-and-one-half miles off the Elliot Key of Florida. Another enterprise tried, also unsuccessfully, to establish a tax- free nation 120 miles off the cost of California for the purpose of harvesting and processing abalone and lobster.8 Off the coast of Bimini in the Bahamas lies the derelict hulk of a ship which was supposed to be grounded on a reef to create an artificial island.4 These plans went awry but as fate would have it the ship later grounded unintentionally during a storm. It was used by liquor smugglers during prohibition, then later it was the subject of plans to create a night club with an aquarium below.; There have 1. In contrast, Article 10 of the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone states that: "An island is a naturally-formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high-tide." Con- vention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone; [1964] pt.
    [Show full text]