90-day Monitoring Report - National Marine Fisheries Service - NOAA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................1 2. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................2 2.1. PROJECT OVERVIEW AND LOCATION ............................................................ 2 2.1.1. Energy Source ........................................................................................ 3 3. MITIGATION AND MONITORING METHODS ..........................................5 3.1. VISUAL MONITORING SURVEY METHODOLOGY ........................................... 5 3.1.1. FLIR (Forward Looking InfraRed) Camera .............................................. 8 3.2. ACOUSTIC MONITORING SURVEY METHODOLOGY ...................................... 8 3.2.1. Passive Acoustic <strong>Monitoring</strong> Parameters ................................................ 9 3.2.2. Hydrophone Deployment ...................................................................... 10 4. MONITORING EFFORT SUMMARY ...................................................... 11 4.1. SURVEY OPERATIONS SUMMARY ................................................................. 11 4.2. VISUAL MONITORING SURVEY SUMMARY ................................................... 14 4.3. ACOUSTIC MONITORING SURVEY SUMMARY .............................................. 16 4.4. SIMULTANEOUS VISUAL AND ACOUSTIC MONITORING SUMMARY ......... 16 4.5. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ..................................................................... 17 5. MONITORING AND DETECTION RESULTS ......................................... 20 5.1. VISUAL DETECTIONS ...................................................................................... 20 5.1.1. Cetacean Detections ............................................................................ 22 5.1.2. Pinniped Detections .............................................................................. 24 6. MITIGATION ACTION SUMMARY ......................................................... 26 6.1. MARINE MAMMALS KNOWN TO HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO 160 DB OF RECEIVED SOUND LEVELS ..................................................................................... 29 6.1.1. Spotted seal ......................................................................................... 31 6.1.2. Ringed seal .......................................................................................... 31 6.1.3. Bearded seal ........................................................................................ 31 6.1.4. Pacific walrus ....................................................................................... 31 6.2. IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE BIOLOGICAL OPINIONS’S ITS AND IHA .............................................................................................................. 31 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................... 32 8. LITERATURE CITED .............................................................................. 32
UME04085 R.V Marcus G. Langseth L-DEO/NMFS 05 January 2012 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location of the Coakley marine geophysical survey in the Arctic Ocean (LGL EA, 2011). .................................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2. The R/V Marcus G. Langseth showing location of bridge (12.8m asl) and MMO tower (18.9m asl), where observations were conducted. .......................................................... 6 Figure 3. Location of the hydrophone deployment. ...............................................................10 Figure 4. Breakdown of acoustic source operations. .............................................................13 Figure 5. Duration of visual and acoustic monitoring effort while the acoustic source was active vs. silent. ...................................................................................................................15 Figure 6. Total visual effort from observation locations on board the R/V Langseth. ................16 Figure 7. Total PAM and visual monitoring effort. .................................................................17 Figure 8. Visibility during visual monitoring over the Coakley marine geophysical survey. ........17 Figure 9. Wind force each week visual monitoring was conducted. ........................................18 Figure 10. Duration of snow and fog while visual monitoring was conducted. .........................19 Figure 11. Number of protected species detections each <strong>day</strong> of the Coakley marine geophysical survey. ......................................................................................................................21 Figure 12. Number of individual animals observed. ..............................................................22 Figure 13. Cetacean spatial distribution of detections during the Coakley two-dimensional (2D) marine geophysical survey. .........................................................................................23 Figure 14. Pinniped spatial distribution of detections during the Coakley two-dimensional (2D) marine geophysical survey. .........................................................................................24 Figure 15. Number of power down procedures implemented for observed protected species. ..26 Figure 16. Percentage of overall downtime attributed to each protected species group. ..........27 Figure D.17: Diagram of Linear Hydrophone Array ...............................................................46 Figure D.18: PAM Laptops and data processing unit setup ....................................................47 Figure D.19: Hydrophone cable on winch ............................................................................47 Figure D.20: Hydrophone cable secured by a yale grip to the port sponson ............................48 Figure D.21: Rope drogue and first chain weight secured near hydrophone elements. ............48 Figure D.22: One of the four lengths of chain used to weigh down the cable..........................49 2
Page 1: Protected Species Mitigation and Mo
Page 5 and 6: 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The National S
Page 7 and 8: Figure 1. Location of the Coakley m
Page 9 and 10: 3. MITIGATION AND MONITORING METHOD
Page 11 and 12: day for a total of five to seven ho
Page 13 and 14: Acoustic monitoring for marine mamm
Page 15 and 16: 4. MONITORING EFFORT SUMMARY 4.1. S
Page 17 and 18: Survey Line UME04085 R.V Marcus G.
Page 19 and 20: UME04085 R.V Marcus G. Langseth L-D
Page 21 and 22: minutes of simultaneous visual and
Page 23 and 24: 50 40 30 20 10 0 UME04085 R.V Marcu
Page 25 and 26: Number of Detections 12 10 8 6 4 2
Page 27 and 28: Figure 13. Cetacean spatial distrib
Page 29 and 30: September. Each sighting involved o
Page 33 and 34: 6.1. MARINE MAMMALS KNOWN TO HAVE B
Page 35 and 36: 6.1.1. Spotted seal There were thre
Page 37: UME04085 R.V Marcus G. Langseth L-D
Page 41 and 42: (iii). The data listed under Condit
Page 43 and 44: (iii). Monitor radio frequencies an
Page 46 and 47: Attachments Table 1. Exclusion Zone
Page 52 and 53:
Figure D.20: Hydrophone cable secur
Page 54 and 55:
Record No. Date Time (UTC) 1 8-Sep
Page 56 and 57:
Record No. Date Time (UTC) UME04085
Page 58:
UME04085 R.V Marcus G. Langseth L-D
show all

90-day Monitoring Report - National Marine Fisheries Service - NOAA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?