Overview
Title
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the City of Hoonah's Cargo Dock Project, Hoonah, Alaska
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The people in charge have given the city of Hoonah in Alaska permission to work on a dock where big ships can park, even if it might make loud noises that bother sea animals like whales and seals. They promised to be careful and stop if any animals are in danger.
Summary AI
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the City of Hoonah in Alaska. This permit allows activities that might accidentally disturb marine mammals during the construction of a cargo dock at the Hoonah Marine Industrial Center. Eight species of marine mammals, like whales and seals, may be affected by the sound from pile driving and drilling. However, no serious harm or death is expected, and various measures will be put in place to minimize disturbance and protect these animals.
Abstract
In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the City of Hoonah (Hoonah) to incidentally harass marine mammals during pile driving and removal activities associated with the Hoonah Cargo Dock project in Hoonah, Alaska. There are no changes from the proposed authorization in this final authorization.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces the granting of an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the City of Hoonah, Alaska. This authorization permits activities that might inadvertently disturb marine mammals during the construction of a cargo dock at the Hoonah Marine Industrial Center. The authorization primarily concerns the potential impact on various marine mammals such as whales and seals due to noise from construction activities like pile driving and drilling. It is noteworthy that the document emphasizes that no serious harm or mortality to marine mammals is anticipated.
General Summary
This document outlines the regulatory framework and conditions under which the City of Hoonah can proceed with its dock construction project, considering the potential interactions with local marine wildlife. It provides detailed information about the term of the authorization, the species potentially affected, the nature of the disturbance, and the mitigation efforts that will be in place to minimize any adverse effects on marine life.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One of the primary concerns addressed in the document is the potential impact of construction noise on marine mammals, particularly the use of pile drivers, which generate significant underwater sound. The document includes complex scientific criteria related to acoustic thresholds and the methodology for determining areas of potential effect, referred to as "ensnified" areas, which might be overwhelming to readers without specific expertise in marine acoustics.
Additionally, the document relies heavily on technical jargon and acronyms such as "IHA," "NMFS," and "DPS," which may reduce readability for the general public. Significant reliance on references to other documents and previous Federal Register notices introduces additional complexity, as readers must seek these sources for full comprehension.
Public Impact
The issuance of this authorization demonstrates a regulatory commitment to balancing developmental activities with environmental conservation. For the broader public, there is reassurance that steps are being taken to mitigate any harmful effects on marine wildlife, which underscores a growing responsibility towards ecosystem preservation.
However, the intricate details and technical terms used in the document may obscure understanding for community members who lack specialized knowledge. This could lead to misinterpretation of the measures being taken to protect marine life or underestimating the importance of them.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Marine Conservationists and Environmental Groups: These stakeholders may positively view the thoroughness and extent of the planned mitigation measures, as they signify acknowledgment and response to environmental concerns associated with dock construction. However, there might be apprehension regarding the enforcement and effectiveness of the specified strategies.
Local Indigenous Communities: For indigenous groups who utilize these marine resources for traditional subsistence, the clarification that the project area does not overlap with current subsistence hunting areas is crucial. By acknowledging the cultural significance of marine mammals, the document seeks to ensure that such activities do not negatively impact traditional practices.
Construction and Development Firms: Entities involved in construction may perceive the detailed procedural requirements as burdensome due to the exhaustive monitoring and reporting obligations. While these measures are essential for compliance and minimizing environmental risks, they might increase operational costs and complexity.
Overall, this authorization reflects an effort to facilitate industrial development while imposing strict guidelines to protect marine ecosystems. The effectiveness of these measures, however, will largely depend on stringent adherence to the outlined procedures and active monitoring by both regulatory bodies and environmental watchdogs.
Issues
• The document contains a large volume of technical and highly specialized language related to marine biology and environmental policy, which might be difficult for a general audience to understand.
• The description of the potential effects of noise on marine mammals involves complex scientific criteria and methodologies that may not be easily comprehensible without specific expertise in acoustics and marine mammal biology.
• The document includes detailed numerical and procedural data (e.g., acoustic thresholds, species group sizes, shutdown zones) that might be overwhelming for non-specialist readers.
• Certain sections rely on references to other documents or sources (such as the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA and NMFS technical guidance) that are not fully included in the text, requiring additional effort for a complete understanding.
• The process and requirements for shutdown zones, monitoring, and mitigation involve intricate procedures that could be perceived as overly burdensome or challenging to implement effectively.
• The document outlines specific quotas for marine mammal takes, but does not explicitly clarify how compliance and enforcement of these limits will be monitored or managed.
• There is a high level of reliance on technical acronyms and abbreviations (e.g., IHA, NMFS, DPS, ESA) that might hinder readability for those unfamiliar with the terminology.
• The statement about the 'unmitigable adverse impact' on subsistence uses, while aligned with regulatory standards, may be difficult for the public to interpret without additional context or examples.