I. Monitoring and Adaptive Management Approach. Potential Effects, Monitoring Studies & Mitigation

Similar documents
Admiralty Inlet Pilot Tidal Project FERC No Appendix C. Derelict Gear Monitoring Plan

BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AUTHORITY JOINT STATEMENT OF EXPERTS IN THE FIELD OF MARINE MAMMALS

Does Depth Matter? Examining Factors that could Influence the Acoustic Identification of Odontocete Species on Bottom-Moored Recorders

Environmental Considerations

Fish Conservation and Management

Remote Monitoring of Dolphins and Whales in the High Naval Activity Areas in Hawaiian Waters

DO NOT PRINT THIS PAGE

Fish Conservation and Management

Evidence of Anton van Helden in the matter of the applications by Trans Tasman Resources Limited for marine and discharge consents to recover iron

Benefit of ESTCP/SERDP Research Program on Underwater Explosive Safety

Marine Mammal Mitigation Systems

Marine Mammal Acoustic Tracking from Adapting HARP Technologies

~ A Behavioral Response Study in 2007 &2008 (BRS 07/08) was conducted in the Bahamas to

Sound production in mysticetes. Background. Cetacean vocal frequency ranges Dolphins

NWEI. Fred.Olsen. Columbia Power

15 May 2016: The 14 th International Day of the Baltic Harbour Porpoise. Finland

Marine Mammals. James M. Price. Division of Environmental Sciences. from NOAA photograph library

Trip Report, Marine Mammal Monitoring Mine Neutralization Exercise Events, September 2012 VACAPES Range Complex

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Lecture 2: Sampling gear. Ichthyology 3

Fine-scale Focal DTAG Behavioral Study in the Gulf of Maine

Species and Area Protection with Regards to Offshore Wind Farms. Dr. Folchert R. van Dijken

U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act Import Provisions:

Scottish Hydro Electric Power Distribution Operation, Inspection, Maintenance and Decommissioning Strategy Bute Cumbrae Cable Replacement

Annual Report Ecology and management of feral hogs on Fort Benning, Georgia.

Oregon Hatchery Research Center January 2014 David L. G. Noakes, Professor & Director

SAMBAH

Underwater noise and offshore windfarms

Pioneer Array Micro-siting Public Input Process Frequently Asked Questions

Co-Principal Investigators Stephen C. Jewett, Ph.D. Paul C. Rusanowski, Ph.D.

Essential Fish Habitat OCNMS Advisory Council July 13, 2013

Can we be as clever as a sperm whale?

Rapid assessment of SSF gear impact on bycatch and habitat

APPLICANT: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Attention: Mr. Charles Brandt 1529 West Sequim Bay Road Sequim, Washington 98382

N. Tay Evans Marine Fisheries Biologist & Technical Review Coordinator

Fine-scale Focal Dtag Behavioral Study of Diel Trends in Activity Budgets and Sound Production of Endangered Baleen Whales in the Gulf of Maine

Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake s pelagic fish community,

Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission Group on Ecosystem-based Sustainable Fisheries Gothenburg, Sweden, May 2016

Focus on New Sites for Caves and Reefs Issues Identified. Dr. Leyla Knittweis-Mifsud Department of Biology, Faculty of Science University of Malta

Lecture Benthic Ecology

Freshwater Mussel Tagging, Release, and Monitoring Date Prepared: 11/20/2017

WODA Technical Guidance on Underwater Sound in Relation to Dredging

Fisheries. The State of The Ocean Another way for our growing population to get protein is by eating fish. The four most popular fish are

STOPPING THE UNDERWATER DIVER THREAT

from ocean to cloud PARAMETRIC SUB-BOTTOM PROFILER, A NEW APPROACH FOR AN OLD PROBLEM

Fine Scale Baleen Whale Behavior Observed Via Tagging Over Daily Time Scales

Rope-less Fishing: A vision for how it can work

Best Practice Guidance for Assessing the Financial Performance of Fishing Gear: Industry-led gear trials

SEISMIC SURVEY GREENLAND 2014 Underwater sound propagation for North East Greenland offshore seismic survey

U.S. National Observer Program, Southeast Regional Fishery Observer Programs & Regional Electronic Technology Implementation Plans Jane DiCosimo

REVISED SILT CURTAIN DEPLOYMENT PLAN

[***] = both land and marine [***] = Marine only [***] = Land only + ([***] = Shallow Water) if needed

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands;

Marine Mammal Scientific Support Research Programme MMSS/001/11

MEASUREMENT OF LONG-TERM AMBIENT NOISE AND TIDAL TURBINE LEVELS IN THE BAY OF FUNDY

canada s in-depth guide to Sustainable Seafood .org SeaChoice is a sustainable seafood program of the following four conservation groups:

A PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE MID-REACH MITIGATION REEF SET NUMBER 1

ISSF GUIDE. FOR NON-ENTANGLING FADs

Marine Environment Plans

Petroleum Exploration Licence 39 Exploration Programme. Executive Summary. Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world

Keywords: marine habitat recovery, derelict fishing gear

Commercial fishing: the wider ecological impacts

Oceans Humans both depend on it and threaten it with their activities

Passive Acoustics: An Effective Monitoring Technique for the Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena)

Ocean and Plume Science Management Uncertainties, Questions and Potential Actions (Work Group draft 11/27/13)

Objectives, Design Evolution, Standardization, Research platform piggybacks Proposed modifications

Final Report Alaska Department of Fish and Game State Wildlife Grant T July 1, 2003 June 30, 2006:

Guidance document. October 2014

High seas: conservation and management measures to prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems

Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) Species Verification and Satellite Tagging Test: January Post-Test Report

Commercial fishing: the wider ecological impacts

Acoustic Focusing in Shallow Water and Bubble Radiation Effects

Lake Tahoe Shoreline Plan. 05 Policy Topic: Piers- Fish Habitat, Design, and Scenic Issues

and found that there exist a significant overlap between the billfish resources and the exploitation activities targeting tunas and mahi mahi.

Marine Ecosystems. Aquatic Ecosystems Section 2

Issues Affecting the Southern Resident Orcas

What are the threats to the oceans? Consequences. Four examples. Tuna

SARASOTA BAY ESTUARY PROGRAM OYSTER HABITAT MONITORING RESULTS: YEAR 1. Jay R. Leverone

Atlantic Sturgeon Update NER Protected Resources

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals

Mesoscale modeling of the productive capacity of fish habitats in the littoral zone of reservoirs

Description of Underwater Noise Attenuation System Design Unit 2. New NY Bridge Project

Level MEASUREMENT 1/2016

Janek LAANEARU and Aleksander KLAUSON Department of Mechanics, Tallinn University of Technology

Restoration of Eelgrass to Upper Casco Bay: Feasibility Tests in Hilary A. Neckles US Geological Survey Augusta, ME

HABITAT AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN (HAPC) PROPOSAL

The Impact of Offshore Wind Turbines on Underwater Ambient Noise Levels. Stewart Glegg Center for Acoustics and Vibration Florida Atlantic University

SEISMIC EXPLORATION POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON FINFISH AND INVERTEBRATE SPECIES

What hull material types will the system work on? Do I still need an antifoul paint?

Towards Ecosystem-Based Management Modelling Techniques 2. Whole Ecosystem Models

Protection for Vessels Engaged in Servicing Submarine Cables

Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Operation of

Project Update: July Expedition period

Biological & Behavioral Response Studies of. Marine Mammals in Southern California, BRS.org. Photos taken under NMFS permit #

Potential effects of noise on fish

Observations of Near-Bottom Currents with Low-Cost SeaHorse Tilt Current Meters

Protect Our Reefs Grant Interim Report (October 1, 2008 March 31, 2009) Principal investigators: Donald C. Behringer and Mark J.

2006 Grand Prize Winner ($25,000)

NSF's Ocean Observatories Initiative: Building Research Infrastructure for the Pacific Northwest and the Broader Community

Reducing Risk of Whale Entanglements in Oregon Dungeness Crab Gear

Transcription:

I. Monitoring and Adaptive Management Approach Define the problem or management objective. Determine potential effects of the project on indicator species. Emphasis on examining potentially negative, rather than neutral or positive, effects. Emphasis on examining objectives that are measurable. Design and Implement Monitoring plans to address objectives based on the potential effect on indicator species, or at a minimum, exposure of the indicator species to the potential effect. Mitigation measures to reduce potential effects. Determine threshold values that, if surpassed, would likely cause negative or unacceptable effects on indicator species. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements Establish triggers for additional measures (i.e., surpasses known threshold values). Evaluate results of monitoring, and success of mitigation measures, through periodic reporting to decision-making group. Adaptive Management Revise or extend monitoring studies based on evaluation of reported results Develop additional mitigation measures if known threshold values surpassed. Modify project if necessary to avoid significant adverse impacts Decisions should be by consensus. II. Potential Effects, Monitoring Studies & Mitigation Noise Potential effects: Noise emitted from WEC devices could mask communication signals and environmental cues, disturbing navigation, foraging, and detection of predators for marine mammals. At higher intensities, noise could cause temporary threshold shifts and avoidance of area for marine mammals. Monitoring Approach: Measure ambient (pre-project) and project-associated noise under a range of sea states and model propagation with autonomous recorders, boat based recordings, and hydrophones connected to shore cable data lines. Compare device noise to known marine mammal hearing sensitivities and vocalizations to estimate injury and masking effects. Determine need for further study (i.e., improve knowledge of vocal behavior of local species, improve propagation models, modification of equipment to reduce noise). monitoring of marine mammals and direct observations (boat surveys). Adaptive Management: Modify equipment to reduce noise (i.e., cable strumming). 1

Autonomous fixed recorders deployed individually or as vertical arrays suspended in water column to evaluate ambient and device noise, and occurrence of cetacean species to assess exposure risk. Small boat based recordings using dangling hydrophones to evaluate ambient and device noise, and vocalizations of cetaceans in area. Hydrophones connected to cable to shore to evaluate ambient and device noise, and occurrence of cetacean species to assess exposure risk. Passive acoustic detection of ultrasonic odontocete echolocation pulses using autonomous devices to assess exposure risk (i.e., T-Pods for harbor porpoise) Direct observations (boat surveys) of marine mammals to assess exposure risk Relatively inexpensive battery powered digital recorders, continuous data collection, can be configured to record any range of frequencies, continuously or sample on a duty cycle. Deployment duration potentially long term, limited by sampling rate and data storage capacity. Boat time expensive, good for short-term data collection to extend range, density of data, fill in data gaps Relatively inexpensive, can record wide range of frequencies, be configured as an array to estimate distance to vocalizing species, limited to locations along cable. Analyzes echolocation pulses and stores detection time and characteristics, can be programmed for one or several species and any duty cycle, cover the ultrasonic spectrum allowing other devices to sample at a lower rate. Relatively expensive and time consuming (need year-round data), need several years of data for distribution data, some data already available Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF) Potential effects: EMF emitted from WEC devices and associated power transmission cables could affect navigation, behavior, and/or orientation of elasmobranchs, salmon, sturgeon, Dungeness crab, sea turtles, cetaceans and other marine organisms. EMF could disrupt migration of salmonids and sturgeon. Measure ambient and project-induced EMF, EMF generated by other projects, power cables, etc. Compare to extensive literature review of sensitivity thresholds. Based on results, determine if additional information is warranted. If necessary, examine neurophysiological/behavioral effects on key species. Adaptive Management: Shielding and burial of cables, Faraday Cages around devices. Entanglement Potential effects: Marine mammals could become entangled in lost fishing gear hung up on WEC devices. Monitor WEC devices, moorings and anchors periodically using ROV or SCUBA to detect and remove accumulated lost gear and/or entangled marine mammals. Determine how frequently monitoring should occur and potential monitoring triggers (e.g., after large storms). Characterize types of lost gear, determine source(s) when possible, duration in sea. monitoring of marine mammals and direct observations (boat surveys). Adaptive Management: Install pingers to repel marine mammals from area if entanglement occurs. 2

ROV observations at WEC devices to detect lost gear or entangled marine mammals SCUBA observations at WEC devices to detect lost gear or entangled marine mammals Passive acoustic monitoring of marine mammals to assess exposure risk using autonomous recording devices (i.e., click detectors such as T- Pods for harbor porpoise) Direct observations (boat surveys) of marine mammals to assess exposure risk Relatively expensive, could be combined with regular O&M Relatively expensive, could be combined with regular O&M Analyzes sounds real time and records time and type of click, can be programmed for one or several species and any duty cycle Relatively expensive and time consuming (need year-round data), need several years of data for distribution data, some data already available Collisions with Vessels Potential effects: Vessels involved with construction, maintenance, and decommissioning could collide with marine mammals, causing injury and/or mortality. Monitoring Approach: monitoring and/or direct observations. Combine with entanglement and O&M monitoring. Adaptive Management: Establish vessel speed limits, obtain take permits, vessel observers to monitor exposure and take. Avoid areas or times (seasonal, diurnal, etc.) where collision risks are highest. Artificial reef, FAD effects, and Biofouling Potential effects: The WEC devices could attract fish and invertebrate species and marine mammals near the surface (FAD effect) and on the seabed (reef effect), causing changes to local community composition. The structures could also act as a marine reserve due to exclusion of fishing. Biofouling of structures could occur, and result in changes to benthic habitat (shell mounds). The structures could attract and facilitate the spread of invasive species. Attraction to the structures could result in increased predation on listed fish species by marine mammals or fish predators. Evaluate if project is attracting fish as FAD or artificial reef. could include visual observations (ROV or SCUBA), hook and line, trapping, trawling, grab samples, settlement plates, and gillnets. Adaptive Management: Modify structures to prevent pinniped haul-outs. Unknown if other mitigation measures needed. ROV observations at WEC devices (evaluates reef and FAD effects, and biofouling/shell mounds) SCUBA observations at WEC devices (evaluates reef and FAD effects, and biofouling/shell mounds) Relatively expensive, visibility could be an issue, good for observations of fish associated with structures at surface, moorings and anchors Relatively expensive, visibility could be an issue, good for observations of fish associated with structures at surface, moorings and anchors, good for collecting biofouling organisms 3

Trapping (evaluates reef effects) Bottom trawling (evaluates reef effects) Grab samples (evaluates effects to benthic infauna) Purse seine (evaluates FAD effects) Gill nets (evaluates FAD effects) Hook and line (evaluates FAD effects, and if listed fish or fish predators attracted to devices) Settlement plates (evaluates biofouling and invasive species) Relatively inexpensive, probably works only for certain species especially Dungeness crab and some rockfishes Relatively expensive, surveys for demersal fishes and invertebrates, may not be feasible in project footprint once project deployed. Can obtain specimens to examine food habits Relatively expensive especially identification, provides information on benthic infauna. Relatively expensive, samples pelagic fishes, and likely not possible to use once project deployed. Relatively inexpensive, samples pelagic fishes (not likely to be usable at depth due to moorings). Likely to result in mortality of fishes captured. Can obtain specimens to evaluate food habits. Relatively inexpensive. Can obtain specimens to evaluate food habits. Plates relatively inexpensive but analysis could be expensive. Attraction to WEC devices for foraging, haul-outs, roosting Potential effects: Attraction to the devices because of increased forage, or to haul out on structures, could expose marine mammals and seabirds to other impacts (i.e., entanglement). It could also contribute to an increase in predation by marine mammals on listed fish species (i.e., salmon). monitoring and/or direct observations. Install cameras on WEC devices to detect hauling out or roosting on structures. Adaptive Management: Modify structures to prevent pinniped haul-outs and/or roosting. Install pingers to repel marine mammals from area. III. Additional Potential Issues Considered 1. Effects on benthic fauna from smothering/anchors, alteration and loss of benthic habitat/community. Study not proposed because effects short-term and highly localized. 2. Cable laying disturbance depending on if left on surface or buried. Study not proposed because project currently proposes to bury cables, and effects would be very localized and short-term. 3. Shading. Study not proposed because effects highly localized and negligible (no shade effect below 20 m due to scatter and low visibility). 4. Entrainment/impingement. Study not proposed because effects unlikely with device design. 5. Collisions between marine mammals and WEC devices. Study not proposed because effects unlikely with device design and with marine mammal s ability to detect and avoid solid structures. 6. Lighting above and below water. Study not proposed because lights on WEC devices not very bright, limited to navigation lights. 4

7. Physical effects such as changes to wave energy, littoral transport, alteration of bottom substrates, sediment transport, and sediment deposition. HSU will be studying effects on substrate and transport. 8. Effects on Dungeness crab. Study proposed for EMF effects (see above). Reedsport study will provide information on effects of WEC structures on distribution and abundance that will be applicable to WaveConnect. 9. Effects of contaminants (paints, coatings, fluids) on water quality, sediment. Study not proposed because effects can be minimized through proper handling of chemicals, etc. 10. Degradation of water quality (turbidity, chemical toxicity, temperature, ph, DO, salinity). Study not proposed because identifying the root cause of the degradation as the WEC project is highly unlikely except in the case of an unusual source of pollution unique to the project 11. Heat generated by the cables, especially the buried ones. Measurable heat generation not expected; it is preferred to bury cables for improved heat dissipation versus in water. 5