c. &£* &^° £ 34 K^ 0FC 0. c ^ / ^TES O* r V. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ON THE PROPOSED CHANNEL ISLANDS MARINE SANCTUARY "\ r .^WMOSB,,. "went of Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation http://www.archive.org/details/draftenviroOOnati DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Prepared on the Proposed Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, NW ' Washington, DC 20235 a & o O A. B. C. D. E. TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Note to the Reader Summary Purpose and Need for Action Description of the Affected Environment 1. General Overview of the Nominated Area a. Location b. Environmental Setting 2. Natural Resources of Exceptional Value a. Marine Mammals b . Marine Birds c. Fish and Plant Resources d. Intertidal Organisms e. Cultural and Historical Resources 3. Human Activities a. Introduction b. Oil and Gas Activities c. Commercial and Recreational Fishing and Plant Harvesting d. Commercial Shipping e. Mil itary Operations f. Research g. Recreation F. Alternatives 1. Status Quo Alternative a. Introduction b. Existing Management Authorities c. Environmental Consequences 2. Alternative 2--the preferred alternative a. Introduction b. Regulated Activities 1. Hydrocarbon operations 2. Discharges of polluting substances 3. Alteration of or construction on the seabed 4. Operations of vessels and aircraft 5. Removing or damaging historical or cultural resources c. Other Activities d. Management Page B-l C-l D-l E-l E-l E-l E-3 E-ll E-l 1 E-29 E-45 E-52 E-55 E-59 E-59 E-59 E-69 E-81 E-86 E-89 E-89 F-l F-l F-l F-6 F-49 F-57 F-57 F-60 F-60 F-100 F-l 02 F-103 F-l 08 F-l 09 F-112 Page 3. Alternative 3 F-119 4. Alternative 4 F-130 5. Alternative 5 F-138 6. Alternative 6 F-142 G. Literature and Personal Communications Cited G-l a. References G-l b. Personal Communications G-12 H. List of Preparers H-l I. Appendices Appendix 1. Draft designation document and draft proposed regulations Appendix 2. Fish and shellfish species of commercial and recreational interest in the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island Appendix 3. Brief review of the outer continental shelf (OCS) oil and gas development process Appendix 4. BLM special stipulations for Sale #48 Appendix 5. Summary of USGS Pacific OCS orders and notices to lessees n ng colonies on San Miguel Island ng colonies on Santa Cruz Island ng colonies on Santa Rosa Island ng colonies on Anacapa Island LIST OF FIGURES C-l Preferred marine sanctuary E-l Location of Southern California Bight E-2 Generalized water current patterns during upwel lings E-3 Generalized water current patterns for oceanic period E-4 Generalized water current patterns for Davidson period E-5 Santa Barbara Channel region physiographic features E-6 Pinniped breeding and haulout areas on San Miguel Island a. Callorhinus ursinus b. Zalophus " cFli form" anus c. Phoca vitulina d. Mirounga angustirostris E-7 Migration routes of the gray whale in the nominated area E-8 Distribution of bird nesti E-9 Distribution of bird nesti E-10 Distribution of bird nesti E-ll Distribution of bird nesti E-12 Distribution of bird nesting colonies on Santa Barbara Island E-13 Diversity of fish species along the Pacific coast E-14 Distribution of kelp beds in the nominated area E-15 Underwater diagram of a kelp bed E-16 Known marine cultural resources E-17 Tracts withdrawn from OCS Sale #48 by the Secretary of the Interior E-18 Existing leases and operators and tracts subject to Sale #48 In the northern Channel Islands area E-18.a Tracts leased in OCS Sale # 48 E-19 Existing lease numbers and all tract numbers proposed for Sale #48 E-20 Mean annual fish landings (1970 to 1974) around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island E-21 Cumulative density of partyboat fishing landings bet- ween 1973 and 1975 E-22 Cumulative density of anglers fishing from partyboats in the southern California partyboat fleet E-23 Traffic separation scheme for shipping in the Santa Barbara Channel and vicinity E-24 Recreational boating concentrations and access routes around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island E-25 Popular skin and SCUBA diving sites F-l Existing federal and state management authorities as they relate to resources and activities F-2 Ecological reserves F-3 San Miguel Island ecological reserve iii F-4 Anacapa Island ecological reserve F-5 Santa Barbara Island ecological reserve F-6 Boundaries for alternative 2— the preferred marine sanctuary F-7 Existing leases and operators, and tracts subject to Sale #48, in the northern Channel Island area F-7. a Tracts leased in OCS Sale # 48 F-8 Existing leases and tracts subject to Sale #48 F-9 Potential oil spill trajectories F-10 Hypothetical spill locations from proposed Sale #48 leases F-ll Hypothetical spill locations from existing leases F-12 Hypothetical spill locations which correlate with tracts withdrawn from Sale #48 F-13 Locations of Clean Seas, Inc.— the oil spill coopera- tive for the northern Channel Islands area F-14 Santa Barbara Channel traffic separation scheme (TSS) and the 1 nmi (1.8km) prohibition zone iv LIST OF TABLES E-l Marine mammals inhabiting the nominated region E-2 Pinniped rookery and haul out areas E-3 Summary of ecological information for seals, sea lions, and sea otters E-4 Approximate times of pinniped activity in the study area E-5 Historical species counts and ecological information for cetaceans E-6 Marine avifauna of the Southern California Bight E-7 Marine birds sighted or reported near the nominated area E-8 Known marine bird colonies in the nominated area E-9 Numbers of seabird pairs on the California Channel Islands in 1975 E-10 Frequency of bird sightings for all species E-ll Intertidal species of the nominated area E-12 Shipwrecks recorded in the nominated area E-13 Milestones in Santa Barbara Channel and the northern Channel Islands area oil and gas development E-14 Estimated recoverable reserves in the northern Channel Islands vicinity E-15 Platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel area E-16 Number of wells drilled on existing leases in the vicinity of the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island E-17 Commercial fish landings for selected species caught off the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island between 1971 and 1975 E-18 1975 Commercial fish landings by species around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island E-19 Kelp harvests off the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island between 1974 and 1978 E-20 Commercial passenger fishing vessel catch in numbers of fish for the northern Channel Islands between 1970 and 1974 E-21 Commercial passenger fishing vessel catch in numbers of fish for Santa Barbara Island between 1970 to 1974 E-22 Major research organizations which have or are likely to conduct marine related scientific investigations on the coastal ocean environment in southern California E-23 Research funding entities with potential or demonstrated relevance to the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island waters F-l Summary of boundary, activity regulation, and management alternatives for a marine sanctuary designation, exclusive of the status quo alternative F-l. a Abbreviations of authorities and agencies F-2 Catch restrictions for species of commercial fish in the northern Channel Islands area F-3 EPA effluent guidelines and standards for far offshore oil and gas extraction facilities F-4 Summary of potential hazards to marine mammals, seabirds, and marine organisms resulting from offshore oil resource development and production F-5 Potential oil and gas development impacts mitigated by NOAA's preferred marine sanctuary F-6 Seabird species most vulnerable to impacts related to OCS oil resource exploitation F-7 Probability of contact by one or more 1000 bbl . spills between 1979 and 2000 F-8 Probabilities (in percent) that an oil spill starting at a particular location will reach in three days: (1) major haulout and breeding areas and (2) seabird breeding areas F-9 Oil spill recovery equipment in the vicinity of the northern Channel Islands vi B. Note to the Reader The two major segments of this DEIS are Section E, the Description of the Affected Environment, which presents a review of the resources and activities in the Channel Islands area and Section F, Alternatives, which discusses the preferred alternative of designating a marine sanctuary and regulating certain activities, and five other alternatives including a status quo or no action alternative. Certain additional documentation is appended. Particular attention should be paid to the draft Designation Document and the draft proposed regulations presented in Appendix 1. Citations are referenced in the text by the name of the author or source in parentheses. Section G, Literature and Personal Com- munications Cited, contains detailed information on both documen- tary references and personal communications. B-l C. Summary Introduction The Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1431-1434) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce, after consultation with appropriate Federal agencies, concurrence of the affected State, and Presidential approval, to designate ocean areas having distinctive conservation, recreational, ecological, or aesthetic values as marine sanctuaries. In 1977, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the Department of Commerce sent out a nationwide letter asking for recommendations of sites appropriate for consideration as marine sanctuaries. The response included several different recommendations for the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. The Resources Agency of the State of California recommended the waters extending 12 nmi (22km) around each of the eight Channel Islands, the National Park Service proposed the waters extending 8 nmi (14.8km) around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, and the County of Santa Barbara proposed the entire Santa Barbara Channel and the waters around the northern Channel Islands and over the Santa Rosa Plateau, but excluding State waters. In June 1978, the County of Santa Barbara followed up its recommenda- tion with a formal nomination. This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) proposes the creation of a marine sanctuary in the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island extending 6 nmi (11.1km) seaward from the mean high tide line. The waters immediately around the islands support an extraordinary assemblage of marine mammals, numerous seabirds including the endangered brown pelican, and important fishery resources including kelp and shellfish (see C-l Section E for a discussion of the natural resources). Until recently, the waters around the islands have been left relatively untouched by human activity because of their distance from the populous mainland. Use of the Santa Barbara Channel is increas- ing, however, and additional pressures are being placed on these natural resources. Although some of the islands have been declar- ed a National Monument, there has been no formal recognition of the national significance of the area's marine resources. Final- ly, although numerous State and Federal agencies have authority over some of the area's resources and activities, no coordinated management regime exists to insure the maximum protection and enjoyment of the area's resources. To determine the desirability and feasibility of proceeding with the designation, NOAA has gathered and analyzed information and consulted with other Federal agencies, State agencies, particular- ly the California Coastal Commission (CCC), the Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council, and local interest groups. In April 1978, NOAA held a public workshop in Santa Barbara to discuss the sanctuary proposal. An Issue Paper on possible California marine sanctuary sites, including the Channel Islands, was circulated for review and discussion in December 1978. In February and March 1979, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) held regional and State hearings to solicit reaction to the possibility of a marine sanctuary near the Channel Islands. Based on public response and a recommendation by the CCC to develop a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), NOAA prepared this DEIS which describes the proposed action to designate the sanctuary, including draft regulations on activities and uses. NOAA distributed copies of and solicited comments on a preliminary draft of the Description of the Affected Environment (Section E.) and an outline of five designation options and the status quo option in June, 1979. NOAA held public meetings in Santa Barbara and Ventura to discuss these C-2 documents and answer questions about the program. The proposed designation and regulations do not represent a final decision; they are presented and evaluated in this DEIS for public review. NOAA has analyzed alternatives to this proposal including that of taking no action, all of which are discussed in section F. NOAA will receive comments on this DEIS, hold public hearings in Santa Barbara County and Ventura County, California, and respond to all comments received in a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). After review of comments and final consultation with Federal agencies, if a decision is made to proceed with the designation, NOAA must seek Presidential approval of the proposed marine sanctuary designation. A draft Designation Document and a set of draft proposed regula- tions appear in Appendix 1. These documents describe the prefer- red alternative and will be published as a proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register concurrently with the distribution of this DEIS. Following publication, comments will be received for 60 (sixty) days after which, if a sanctuary is to be designated, final regulations will be published in the Federal Register to be effective upon designation, and an FEIS will be issued. C-3 PROPOSAL TO DESIGNATE THE CHANNEL ISLANDS MARINE SANCTUARY The Office of Coastal Zone Management, which is reponsible for the marine sanctuary program within NOAA, proposes the designation as a marine sanctuary of the waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, extending from the mean high tide water line on the four northern Channel Islands (San Miguel Island and adjacent rocks, Santa Cruz Island, Santa Rosa Island, and Anacapa Island) and Santa Barbara Island seaward 6 nmi (11.1km) (see Figure C-l). The exact boundary by coordinates is presented in an appendix to the proposed regulations. Designation The Designation Document (the draft Designation for the proposed Channel Islands marine sanctuary is presented in Appendix 1) serves as a constitution for the sanctuary. It establishes the boundary and purposes of the sanctuary, identifies the types of activities that may be subject to regulations, and specifies the extent to which other regulatory programs will continue to be effective within the sanctuary. The Designation requires the approval of the President. Its content can be altered only after repeating the entire designation process and securing Presidential approval . If the designation is adopted, the following activities will be subject to necessary and reasonable regulation: C-4 C-5 -oil and gas operations -discharging or depositing any substance -alteration of or construction on the seabed -navigation and operation of vessels (other than fishing and kelp harvesting vessels) and aircraft overflights below 1000 ft (305m) -removing or otherwise deliberately harming cultural or historical resources The proposed restrictions on these activities are set forth in the draft regulations. NOAA may legally promulgate regulations only in relation to the specific activities listed in the designation document. Article 5 of the draft Designation specifically exempts fishing activities from sanctuary regulation, except that fishing vessels may be regulated with respect to discharges. Proposed Regulations The proposed sanctuary, presented in detail in Section F.2 and summarized here, would subject the above listed activities to sanctuary regulations. Specific regulations are proposed as reasonable and necessary for the protection of the natural resources. They are not intended to duplicate existing regulations. To the extent possible, the sanctuary managers will coordinate with existing authorities in both the administration and enforcement of the regulations. These regulations will apply only within the sanctuary boundaries. The full text of the proposed regulations as they will appear in the Federal Register is presented Appendix 1. C-6 The proposed regulations would impose the following controls: --Hydrocarbon operations The proposed regulation prohibits any activity for the exploration or exploitation of hydrocarbons (oil and gas) anywhere in the sanctuary pursuant to leases executed on or after the effective date of these regulations. Exploration and development pursuant to leases predating the effective date of the regulations and the construction of pipelines are allowed subject to all proposed sanctuary regulations and all regulations and conditions imposed by the following entities: the Department of the Interior, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, the State of California under the Federal consistency provisions of the Coastal Zone Managemant Act, and any other State or Federal authority. This activity is permitted subject further to the requirement that certain oil spill contin- gency equipment is present for such operations (see Section F.2.b.l). This regulation is designed to reduce the risk of contamination of the nearshore resources by spilled oil, and to protect the island shores from visual and acoustic disturbances. --Discharges The proposed regulation prohibits discharges into the sanctuary. Indigenous fish waste and chumming materials, effluents from marine sanitation devices, nonpol luted cooling waters from ocean- going vessels, and effluents incidental to allowed hydrocarbon operations regulated by the standards imposed in an NPDES permit are exempted from this regulation. Discharges from foreign flag C-7 vessels are also prohibited to the extent consistent with interna- tional law. The prohibition on discharges and littering will help maintain the water quality in the sanctuary and prevent aesthetic degradation. The exemptions insure that this regulation will not prevent activities consistent with the goals of the sanctuary. --Alteration of, or construction on, the seabed The proposed regulation prohibits dredging, drilling, constructing on, or altering the seabed within 2 nmi (3.7km) of the islands. This prohibition offers a buffer for sensitive nearshore re- sources, particularly marine mammals and seabirds but also benthic organisms, from the visual, acoustic, and pollution/sedimentation disturbances associated with seabed alteration. --Vessel traffic and overflights The proposed regulation prohibits the passage of U.S. flag and, to the extent consistent with international law, foreign vessels within 1 nmi (1.8km) of the islands to protect sensitive nearshore resources from disturbance and possible oil spills or discharges resulting from groundings, collision, or normal operation. This restriction also serves to decrease congestion in nearshore zones. Fishing, kelp harvesting, recreational, research, military, and enforcement vessels are exempted from this prohibition. To insure that sensitive nearshore resources, particularly marine mammals and seabirds, are not unnecessarily disturbed, overflights of less than 1000 ft (305m) are prohibited within 1 nmi (1.8km) of the islands. Military search and rescue, and enforcement opera- C-8 tions, kelp harvesting surveys, and access to the islands are exempted from this regulation. --Historical or cultural resources Removing or damaging historical or cultural resources is prohibit- ed. Environmental and Socioeconomic Consequences of the Proposed Action These regulations will provide increased protection for the special resources around the islands, particularly marine birds and mammals, and will also insure the long-term continuation of existing safeguards, as described below. At the same time, the regulations attempt to minimize potentially adverse economic impacts. The prohibition of petroleum operations on leases acquired on or after the effective date of the sanctuary regulations will allow the sanctuary to act as a partial buffer between the effects of petroleum development and the nearshore resources. Sanctuary resources that are particularly vulnerable to spilled oil and to human activity associated with normal petroleum operations and oil spill cleanup attempts will thereby be protected from increased activity levels in the future. C-9 The 6 nmi (11.1km) buffer provides increased time and distance for natural forces to weather and volatilize oil spills and other discharges before they reach nearshore communities. The buffer also increases the available response time for at-sea cleanup and oil spill containment, and if nearshore cleanup becomes necessary, allows a longer planning period; nearshore cleanup activities may otherwise be even more damaging than the oil itself. The buffer reduces the visual and acoustic disturbances of petroleum develop- ment which may affect marine mammals, seabirds, and the aesthetic qualities of the islands. Finally, the buffer will insure the continued integrity of California's oil and gas sanctuaries and prevent the potential need for a drainage sale with associated disruption and potential damage to nearshore resources. This provision does not affect activities pursuant to leases within the sanctuary which predate the effective date of the regulations and are partially or wholly within the proposed sanctuary. While the majority of tracts wholly or partially inside the proposed sanctuary were withdrawn from Lease Sale #48 (which occurred June 29, 1979), the regulation facilitates the long-term protection of the area from activities occurring else- where. NOAA will seek the cooperation of the Department of the Interior to insure that the tracts affected by the prohibition are not offered for lease. If petroleum reserves exist in these areas which cannot be tapped from outside the sanctuary, these reserves will be foregone. In February 1979 the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated that there were 5.7 million barrels of oil and 8.9 billion cubic feet of gas underlying 24 tracts in the proposed sanctuary which the Secretary of Interior withdrew from Lease Sale 48. USGS later drastically reduced its lease estimates for the sale area, but newer estimates are not available for those 24 tracts. No reliable data are available on the amount of petroleum underlying the entire proposed sanctuary. Past exploration in the C-10 area has proven negative, but that does not preclude the possibi- lity of recoverable reserves. The 6 nmi (11.1km) buffer created by the prohibition on oil and gas activities does not provide complete protection from the adverse effects of petroleum operations: first, in a marine environment the transport of substances from one location to another is inevitable; and secondly, operations on existing leases are allowed in the sanctuary in order to minimize the economic impact of the sanctuary and the burden on the lessees. The proposed regulations allow development of existing leases in accordance with other sanctuary regulations and all conditions imposed by existing authorities. The requirement for certain additional onsite oil spill containment equipment will probably not place large additional cost on the industry, particularly since in many cases similar equipment may also be required by the State of California under the consistency provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act. The prohibition of discharges will enhance the area's aesthetic features by lessening levels of litter thrown overboard and will reduce the threat that the living marine resources in the sanc- tuary will swallow potentially harmful trash. The economic impact of this regulation on sanctuary users is minor, although they will be required to retain their trash for proper disposal on land. The regulation supplements existing and anticipated prohibitions of discharges of oil and hazardous substances within 50 miles of the nearest land. C-ll The impacts of prohibiting seabed alteration and construction are expected to be minor since all current dredging occurs outside the sanctuary and there are no dredge spoil disposal sites within the sanctuary. The regulation prohibiting most commercial vessels from the waters within 1 nmi (1.8km) of the islands will probably have minimal economic impacts because the affected vessels generally remain in the vessel traffic lanes and thus well away from near- shore areas. Since military and enforcement operations, kelp surveys, and landings on the islands are exempted from the overflight prohibi- tion (and commercial aircraft fly much higher), the prohibition on flying below 1000 ft (305m) within 1 nmi (1.8km) of the islands will primarily affect recreationists observing area resources, especially whales. Whales can, however, be viewed from altitudes greater than 1000 feet (305m). The environmental and economic consequences of prohibiting the removal or damage of historical or cultural resources should be minimal. More precise estimates of the consequences will be possible after all identified resources are mapped. NOAA's preferred marine sanctuary and the proposed regulations will not prohibit operations because of emergency or military operations necessary to the national defense. C-12 Management of the marine sanctuary will be designed to preserve the resources of the waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Islands in their present relatively undisturbed state. By integrating education, environmental monitoring, and compatible use regulations into a coordinated management strategy, NOAA will try to insure that the public can derive maximum benefit from the marine sanctuary with a minimum of environmental damage. A detailed management plan will be develop- ed following designation of the sanctuary. Enforcement and surveillance will be an integral part of the management and protection of the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary. NOAA is exploring various means of providing enforcement and surveillance; the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Park Service, and the California Depart- ment of Fish and Game (DFG) have experience in such operations so NOAA will further explore the possibility of cooperative manage- ment with each of these agencies. The participation of any enforcement agent will, of course, be subject to continuing discussions and will be affected by the precise scope and content of the final regulations, as well as by other demands and priori- ties facing NOAA and the other agencies involved. If a sanctuary is established, NOAA will emphasize the national importance of the sanctuary's resources. NOAA will establish a Sanctuary Information Center and will promote the public's aware- ness of sanctuary resources through brochures and other techni- ques. NOAA will encourage and seek to coordinate research within the sanctuary. Such coordination will not only help to improve the data base on area resources and stimulate information ex- change, but also may help to eliminate inefficient duplication of research and close data gaps. Sanctuary management may also C-13 improve public access to research information. Researchers will be encouraged to notify the Sanctuary Information Center of intended activities and to file reports and results with the Information Center. Finally, both resource quality and effects of human activities in the sanctuary will be monitored. These results should aid in further upgrading the management system whenever necessary. Marine Sanctuary Permits Marine sanctuary permits, issued by NOAA, will be required for any activity which would otherwise violate the regulations and may be granted only if the activity will serve research or educational purposes. The permit procedure is specified in the regulations {Appendix 1). Certification of Other Permits The regulations propose to certify in advance any permit, license, or other authorization issued pursuant to any other authority within the sanctuary as long as the activity does not violate marine sanctuary regulations. This notice of validity avoids duplicating permit delays and costs where there is no violation. C-14 D. Purpose and Need for Action NOAA proposes that, as an area of exceptional value threatened by mounting development and use pressures, the waters offshore of San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands deserve special recognition, protection, and management as a marine sanctuary. Located at the confluence of two major biogeographic coastal provinces in an area of exceptionally high biologic productivity on a submarine ridge possessing a wide variety of open water marine habitat, the Santa Barbara Channel and vicinity, the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island support a large and varied array of significant natural resources. Among the resources found at the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island is one of the largest and most varied assem- blages of pinnipeds in the world. The waters surrounding the islands serve as feeding grounds for six species of seals and sea lions including one species (the Guadalupe fur seal) which has been proposed for listing as an endangered species. In addition, numerous species of whales and dolphins migrate through the area, including several endangered species. A large number of marine birds also depend on the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. The islands serve as rookery areas for 9 of the 12 species of nesting marine birds found in the Southern California Bight, and the surrounding waters provide an essential foraging and rafting area for resident and transient species. Marine fish, algae (particularly kelp beds), and inter- tidal habitats also comprise a major component of the ecosystem in the northern Channel Islands Finfish, shellfish, and D-l kelp found in the area have exceptional ecological, recreational, and commercial value. With this concentration of highly productive, diverse, and rich living resources in a relatively small geographic area, the waters around the Channel Islands are also of high research value. Extensive studies of these marine areas have been conducted. The recreational opportunities in the waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island include pleasure boating, skin diving, sportfishing, and nature studies such as bird and mammal watching. Until recently, the island waters maintained relative isolation from activities which could affect them, primarily because of their distance from the mainland. Therefore, formal recognition of the particular value of these waters to marine mammal, marine bird, fish, kelp, and intertidal communities, and to recreational and research activities was not needed. Various agencies regulated specific uses of the waters, but the establishment of a comprehen- sive management system to protect these waters was not required. More recent and ever-increasing development and use, however, have made the reliance on geographic remoteness insufficient to avoid increased pressure upon and potential harm to the components of this rich ecosystem. Although the Secretary of the Interior withdrew 24 tracts within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the islands from Lease Sale 48, pressure for expanded offshore oil and gas development in the Santa Barbara Channel and around the Channel Islands is likely to increase. Several tracts within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the islands were leased in D-2 Sale 35, and unless the area is given special status, future lease sales (Sale #68 in 1982 and Sale #73 in 1983) are likely to Include nearshore areas. New drilling and redrilling for oil and gas is being planned on several existing leases near the islands. The Channel also have become an Important commercial shipping area with use levels expected to increase as additional tankers bring oil and liquid natural gas (LNG) into southern California ports. Specifically, the movement of oil from the Elk Hills Petroleum Reserve and from drilling platforms in the Channel, as well as the potential development of an LNG terminal in the Channel region, may significantly increase tanker transport of oil and hazardous substances through the Santa Barbara Channel. The shipment of rocket boosters and external tanks to Vandenberg Air Force Base for the Space Shuttle Vehicle System will increase the number of barges transitting the Channel. Commercial fishing activity, already firmly established around the northern Channel Islands, will continue and possibly increase in intensity as market demands for fish expand. With a growing southern California population, the area has also become more frequently sought out as a recreational resource. Because of the area's varied recreational potential and the paucity of undisturb- ed natural marine settings elsewhere in the region, the demand for recreational opportunities will grow. Finally, the Department of Defense, particularly the U.S. Navy, uses much of the Channel and Channel Islands area for various training and testing activities. In summary, increasing development within the Channel and in the waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands is gradually eroding the buffer of isolation that previously protected the area's outstanding natural resources, and pressures are likely to D-3 continue growing in the future. Therefore, some form of special protection is desireable in order to ensure that the extraordinary wealth of natural resources in the area is not jeopardized, Although many agencies currently regulate or have authority over specific activities and particular natural resources of the island waters, no single authority has responsibility for monitoring the entire system and acting to protect that system. Consequently, the impacts of each activity which might affect the resources are evaluated separately, and cumulative impacts may be overlooked. In addition, the existing authorities have limited resources for enforcement, and marine sanctuary designation may supplement the administration of current safeguards. Furthermore, the waters around the islands have no formal recogni- tion of their special environmental value. In some cases, it may be in the general public's interest to allow activities which may pose threats to the environment, such as the siting of an LNG terminal. Such decisions, however, must be balanced against the region's important resources. In the absence of formal recogni- tion of the importance of the waters around the Channel Islands, there is no assurance that the existing authorities will adequate- ly consider the particular value and vulnerability of this vital habitat. Currently, there is no provision for comprehensively monitoring the effects of human activities in the area. Without some provi- sion for study and monitoring, it is impossible to act in a manner Insuring the long-term protection and preservation of the marine resources of the waters near the islands. D-4 The designation of a marine sanctuary in these waters would create a system responsible for assessing the overall impacts of activi- ties in the area. More formal acknowledgement of the special value of the area would insure that it is given special protection, consideration in an overall planning sense, and would encourage particularly careful review of any proposals for future siting of potentially harmful activities nearby. Finally, monitoring and study of the sanctuary would provide the basis for a greater understanding of the area's needs and ecological balance and would provide the foundation for better management. In light of the identified needs, the proposed sanctuary would have the following objectives: 1. To ensure that human uses and activities within the proposed sanctuary boundaries do not: (a) degrade intertidal habitats or foraging, resting, migratory, or other open water habitat areas of value to marine birds and mammals; or (b) otherwise threaten the continued health, stability, diversity, or numbers of seabird or marine mammal populations using sanctuary waters. 2. To encourage scientific research consistent with objective 1 on the significant resources of the area which will contribute to the understanding of ecologic relationships and to the re- solution of management and regulatory Issues. 3. To encourage low intensity recreational use consistent with objective 1 and with the island-based recreational objec- tives established by the National Park Service and other Island landowners. D-5 E. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT E.l. General Overview of the Nominated Area E.l.a. Location The ocean area currently under investigation lies within the northern portion of a regional coastal ocean area commonly refer- red to as the Southern California Bight (see Figure E-l). This area (also referred to below as the study area) includes the Santa Barbara Channel and the waters surrounding the four northern Channel Islands of San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and Anacapa as well as Santa Barbara Island. The shoreward boundary of the area under consideration extends to the upper limit of high tide. A set seaward boundary was not established for purposes of assess- ing environmental resources, but specific boundary alternatives are developed in Section F based upon this assessment of the affected environment. This area was selected in large part because of the extraordinary concentration of the following resources: 1) marine mammals; 2) seabirds; 3) fish, shellfish, and kelp resources; 4) intertidal organisms; and, to a lesser extent, 5) archaeologic/historic resources. Accordingly, each of these resource categories is addressed separately in Section E.2. Human activities in areas near these resources are discussed in Section E.3. E-l t m Miguel Is. Jw San rug Santa Rosa Is. Santa Cruz Is. Anacapa Is. San Nicolas Is. Santa Barbara Is. Santa Catalina Is* San Clemente Is. FIGURE E-l. Location of the Southern California Bight E-2 E.l.b. Environmental Setting Prior to reviewing each of the above-listed resource categories, it is necessary to recognize the significance of the broader ecologic system which supports and influences the localized resource assemblage. This entails a basic understanding of the role and importance of intricate physical and biological processes which link resources to the regional environment. A basic premise to this or any sanctuary area is that a sanctuary cannot be a self-contained environmental unit whose living natural resources are independent of broader environmental conditions. The sanctuary can, however, describe an area whose natural condi- tions, as influenced by surrounding environmental processes, permit the site to serve as a focal point for biologic activity or resources of special significance. The following discussion briefly highlights some of the most important region-wide pro- cesses, conditions, and pathways which serve to influence the significant resources concentrating within the Channel Island shelf marine environment. Perhaps the most significant aspect of the northern Channel Islands is their location at a major transition point between two biogeographic coastal provinces. Stretching along the coast to the north from Point Conception to Alaska is a biologically rich cold- temper ate province referred to by Hedgpeth (1975) as the boreal-antiboreal littoral province. To the south from Point Conception to the lower third of Baja California in Mexico is a warm- temperate area referred to by Briggs (1974) as the San Diego biogeographic province. The biota of this transition zone includes a large number of cold temperate species from the north and tropical species from the south, as well as a large number of E-3 endemic (or regionally limited) species. The importance of Point Conception as a major marine biogeographic boundary is well documented. Briggs (1974) cites several investi- gators who note that this California point lies at a significant biogeographic boundary for many species of fish, and invertebrates such as bryozoans* and mollusks. In addition, the point is also a significant boundary area for several species of marine mammals and seabirds. The area marks a northern breeding limit for some warm- temperate species and a southern breeding limit for certain northern cold- temper ate organisms. Located directly in this transition area, the northern Channel Islands area possesses a unique and extraordinarily rich species assemblage. Two of the major factors contributing to the creation of this biologic transition area are the area's geomorphology and current patterns (see Figure E-3). At Point Conception the coastline turns sharply to the east while the edge of the outer continental slope offshore continues in a generally south-southeasterly direction. The California Current, which carries cold water down from the north, sweeps along the shoreline in a meandering south- easterly direction. When the current reaches the Point Conception promontory, this direction of flow carries the current away from the shoreline and thus induces a large eddy (gyre) effect in the Southern California Bight area. The return flow, carrying waters through the Channel Islands toward the shore in a northeast to northwesterly direction, is called the Southern California Coun- tercurrent. Both the California Current and the Countercurrent are surface currents extending about 328 ft (100m) deep. The current gyres in the Southern California Bight circulate both *Bryozoans include many of the small marine organisms commonly seen encrusting submerged rocks, pilings and other solid substrates. E-4 nutrients and pollutants throughout the areas and thus provide a major force tying the conditions in the northern Channel Island area to those of the broader region. During the course of a year, surface currents in the Southern California Bight undergo three distinct changes: an oceanic period from July to November; a Davidson Current period from November to mid-February*; and an upwelling period from mid- February through August during which nutrient rich deep waters are drawn to the surface. The current patterns characterizing these periods have been reviewed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (1979) and are graphically presented in Figures E-2, E-3, and E-4. During the spring, when day length and light intensity are in- creasing, the high nutrient levels in surface waters foster exceptionally high primary production (phy to plank ton and other plant growth). High primary production increases the food supply for other marine animals and thereby supports greater numbers of fish, shellfish, and other marine life than would otherwise be possible. Patches of upwelling occur in a sporadic fashion during this late winter-early summer period; the waters off Point Concep- tion are particularly prominent as an upwelling center (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Water current gyres throughout the Southern California Bight as well as species movement serve to distribute the high productivity benefits of this phenomenon beyond the localized upwelling patches and throughout the southern California coastal area. *The Davidson Current is a northwesterly flowing mid-water current which rises to the surface along the southern California coast during this time of the year. E-5 E-6 E-7 T3 C ea Q S- o M- to +-> e O) S- a ro 4- s- I/O c S- o (T3 O c s_ 0) • .c *-* +j 3 r*» o cr> to T— I -a * a) -t-> N E •i- 0) •— E fO (U s- en a> ~inq 1975-76 study, not populations. E-12 Islands, the area is especially significant for seals and sea lions which require the island shelves and shoreline habitat for haulout and feeding purposes. The national significance of the area is illustrated by the fact that San Miguel Island, particu- larly the west end around Point Bennett, is the only location in the U.S. and one of the yery few places in the world where breed- ing populations of 5 species of pinnipeds can be found virtually side by side, with transient individuals of a sixth, the Guadalupe fur seal, also being occasionally sighted. The islands and surrounding waters are made even more important since the southern California mainland coast does not have major rookeries. The pinnipeds, along with cetaceans, seabirds, and humans, represent one of the top carnivore groups in the Southern California Bight (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). Approximately 75,000 seals and sea lions have been estimated to live in the Bight where they consume some 185,625 metric tons (168,750,000 kg) of food annually (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). This makes pinnipeds a major link in the Bight's food chain and ecological balance. Although information on the role of pinnipeds in the ecology of the Bight is limited, their large food require- ments indicate that they could provide important functions with regard to maintaining species abundance levels through the food chain. The unusually large population levels of pinnipeds (as well as whales, dolphins, and seabirds) is indicative of the region's high productivity rate which can be traced back to the aforementioned upwelling phenomenon. In general, the two most important pinniped concentration areas in the Bight are on the western tip of San Miguel Island around Point Bennett (see Figures E-6a-d) and on the southwestern side of San Nicolas Island (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). As E-13 E-14 s~ "\ T3 4-> 10 CI O i. U 10 -i- -i- 13 z to tO C '-"* o -J (O to "D (DC- .c •M .Q <4- CD ro O M- t- N S- X- tO CD d> to Q CD -C X) > r— Z LlI .c E •■- «o 2 CO 3 +-> E CNJ •— C 03 -r- fl o 10 C «4- *-i 3 CO -M •i — s- > o -Q A3 s- U fO O "o a> CO.. D) c m s. oo C -r- — O — •<— Q- CO Q. fQ r— "D •— i s- or i > 0) 3 i— ro s- o air-s: -Q ro . •;- o a> a) i— *-> •<- O I CO s_ un <■> 3 CU 3 r«s -o OroaoaiCMflj — I-C OOCOr— fO *— < q; E-16 r i— to CD S- 00 -l-> +J o e s- re •!- sz +J Q. 00 CD 3 r— CD CD E fD E S- fO CD CD x: +-> s- o ■D O aft '• "D CD E D- • 1> f# fO -i- XJ C E +-> CD «f> o /:•:•:• CD e (O S- 00 F to E -r- ■— O r^ 3 s- •i- D. 00 CI. fO i — o ■D I — i CD F O 4-> CD s- cc F > TO OJ 3 r— fD CD S- o CD ■— ;- •r- J3 **- 3 (O • -M CD E CD >> I/) i. 14- •r- »r" C CD CD O O H IJ- •r— > > •"-J S_ S_ E ta to C "P m 75 i— i in BjS fO 4- CO (T3 — to T3 -i 4- -r- 5- T3 CD o* O i/) E Q • S_ Q. O CO °i — •r— ft E +-> r~- -O E O 3 to •• CD 03 E • •r- o CD CD i — CD •r" +-> +J •r- O | CO Q. S- X fO r— U S- LO o o O =3 CD 3 r-- -o i — i D. « O (13 Q- O CD E i— i CD 8 _1 -E 00 oo s— n3 1— 1 d: tat m -1 o I ■D CO 1 § J E-17 shown on Table E-2 however, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands also pinniped haulout and rookery areas. Some of the more significant ecological information on pinnipeds is summarized in Table E-3. This information indicates that the island shelf waters probably provide important feeding areas for the pinnipeds 1n the area. Surrounding island waters also provide 1) island-bred pups with their first aquatic habitat and feeding areas; 2) a source of refuge for hauled-out animals startled by aircraft, nearshore boats, or land-based disturbance; and 3) a buffer area against the impacts of ocean development and use occurring greater distances from shore. Table E-4 shows the seasons for different pinniped activities. Although none of the six pinniped species are currently listed as endangered or threatened under provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the National Marine Fisheries Service has expressed an intent to consider the Guadalupe fur seal for listing as an endangered species (Loughlin, 1979, personal communication). Also, two species of pinnipeds, the Guadalupe fur seal and north- ern elephant seal, are listed in the "Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna" and in the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) "Red Book" list of endangered and threatened wildlife. The Guadalupe fur seal is shy, secretive, and rare; San Miguel Island is one of the few areas in Southern California where it has been sighted in recent years. As mentioned above, whales and dolphins tend to be more transient Inhabitants of surrounding island waters. Because cetaceans cannot haul out on island shores, they tend to be less dependent than pinnipeds on habitats adjacent to the islands. Although present information is inconclusive, available data has led some E-18 TABLE E-2 Pinniped rookery area (University Resources, 1978). and of i haul out areas of the study California, Santa Cruz, 1976; Nameplace Species Present Activity Richardson Rock (San Miguel Is.) California sea lion Northern fur seal Breeding-pupping * Breeding-pupping Castle Rock (San Miguel Is.) California sea lion Northern fur seal Steller sea lion Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping Point Bennett Rock (San Miguel Is.) Guadalupe fur seal Haulout only Point Bennet-Adams Cove (San Miguel 1 s.) Northern fur seal California sea lion Northern elephant seal Steller sea lion Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping Simonton Cove (San Miguel Is.) Harbor seal Northern elephant seal Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping Cuyler Harbor Area (San Miguel Is.) Harbor seal Breeding-pupping Sandy Point-Blockhouse Beach (Santa Rosa Is. ) Harbor seal Breeding-pupping Beechers Bay (Santa Rosa Is.) California sea lion Breeding-pupping* Fraser Point (Santa Cruz Is.) California sea lion Breeding-pupping* Arch Rock East (Sant Cruz Is.) Harbor seal Breeding-pupping Scorpion Anchorage (Santa Cruz Is.) Harbor seal Breeding-pupping Kinton Point South/Morse Point (Santa Cruz Is. ) Harbor seal Breeding-pupping Gull Island (Santa Cruz Is.) California sea lion Harbor seal Breeding-pupping* Breeding-pupping Anacapa Island California sea lion Harbor seal Breeding-pupping* Breeding-pupping Santa Barbara Island California sea lion Northern elephant seal Harbor seal Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping Breeding-pupping *The use of these areas as rookeries by California sea lions is only speculative; however, all are definitely used as haul out areas. E-19 TABLE E-3. Summary of ecological information for seals, sea lions, and sea otters found in waters around San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands. (National Marine Fisheries Ser- vice, 1978; Woodhouse et al_. , 1977; Daugherty, 1965; University of CaTTfornia, Santa Cruz, 1976.) California sea lion ( Zalophus cal ifornianus ) Northern elephant seal ( Hirounga angustirostris ) Most abundant pinniped in Southern Cali- fornia Bight; range from British Columbia into Mexico; northernmost established rookery on San Miguel Island; breed in June and July and disperse in Fall and Winter; adult males migrate north after breeding season while female and pups move southward into Mexican waters; ma- jor sites of activity in Southern Cali- fornia Bight on San Miguel, San Nicolas, Santa Barbara, and San Clemente Islands; generally opportunistic feeders prefer- ring squid, hake, anchovy, other small fish, and mollusks; feed in waters re- latively near hauling grounds over island shelves. Largest and second most abundant pinniped in Southern California Bight; range from Alaska to Mexico; numbers increasing; breeding season from December through March with breeding range from Point Reyes to Baja California; 9 breeding colonies including one on San Miguel (the second largest) and one on Santa Barbara; spend most of the year in the water but haulout once to breed in Winter and once to molt in Spring; feed both near shore and in deep water on squid, hake, sharks, skates, rays and ratfish. Northern fur seal (Cal lorhinus ursinus) Range from the Bering Sea to Mexico; abundant in the northern part of their range but scarce to the south; small breeding population on San Miguel repre- sents the southern breeding limit; San Miguel population increasing; breeding season begins in early Summer; pups tended on shore through early Fall; from Fall to Spring maintain an oceanic existence rarely touching land; during Winter found over the Santa Rosa Ridge and San Nicolas Basin near Tanner Banks and beyond the continental shelf; feed on anchovy, saury, hake, squid, and other small fish; particularly sus- ceptible to oil pollution, E-20 TABLE E-3 Cont. Harbor seal ( Phoca vitulina) Northern (Steller) sea lion ( Eumetopias jubatus ) GuadaluDe fur seal ( Arctocephalus townsendi Eastern Pacific range from Bering Sea to Mexico; also in western Pacific and Atlan- tic; breeding season from April to early July; pups usually born on land but may be born in water; pups nursed 4 to 6 weeks; pups have been observed on San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Santa Barbara, San Nicolas and Santa Catalina; adults probably remain in Southern Cali- fornia Bight area after breeding; greatest Bight population density around northern Channel Islands and in the Santa Barbara Channel near Santa Rosa Island; feed principally on fish, crustaceans, and mollusks; apparently prefer relatively shallow warmer coastal waters; extremely shy and secretive. Range from Bering Sea to California Channel Islands in the eastern Pacific, also in western Pacific; abundant in Alaskan waters but rare in South Cali- fornia; numbers have decreased precipi- tously for unknown reasons (possibly due to temperature fluctuations) since 1930 ' s in Channel Island area while increasing in Alaska; breeding season from late May to early July; feed on clans, rockfish, squid, octopus, flounder, and other fish and crusta- ceans; indications that feeding may be near land and in shallow (less than 600 ft. or 182m) water, Range from northern Channel Islands to Mexico; once abundant, hunting reduced numbers to near extinction in early 1900' s; now one of rarest pinnipeds in Southern California; numbers appear to be increasing; breeding season from flay to July or August; most sightings of this species in the Southern Cali- fornia Bight have been made on San Miguel in May. Sea otter ( Enhydra lutris ) Range from Alaska to Southern California; few individuals believed to be transients sighted off Anacapa and San Miguel; Cali- fornia population almost decimated by hunting in 18th and 19th centuries but populations now expanding from central California; not migratory although long distance wandering by young males_ re- ported; in California it is believed (not well documented) pups are born in water; rarely haulout of water; feed primarily on benthic mollusks, crabs and sea urchins but occasionally take fish; diving for food limited to about 120 ft. (36m) thus habitat is primarily limited to areas within 120 ft. (36m) depths; prefer rocky bottom and kelp habitat but also found in sandy bottom areas. E-21 S- 03 S_ CD cd x o >> X) u +j • >> ,_ • E s~ ,LO S- S- 03 r— i- r— O sz O cr> 03 r— QJ o CD E 03 O CD 03 CD 1 4-> c T~ jQ +-> X -t-> X Q T3 4-> E E 5 CD E s •r— x: o to CD 3 CD CD CD CD W S_ CD CD CD CD E u 03 s_ 4-> O > c > 4- S_ 03 C > 4- ■»-> S- >> CD 3 03 X O 3 O 3 CD 3 O 03 O 03 03 s- Z _l 03 Z *~S 2= «=C C >> i-3 2 «r -J -M SI ^r- 03 >> ■o O 4-> 3 +-> to O -M 3 -l-> X CO CD c >> CD 03 3 O CD s «=c -l-> S- 03 X "O 03 ^ n— +J cd CD CD CD 4-> -t-> CD C CD C >> 3 1 C T3 >^ c i_ 03 03 3 3 3 03 •!- CL 03 CO _l i— T> -- ■"3 ■"3 -3 E > S_ +J CD •r- O X > 4-> +J E •p" to CD +-> >> 3 O >> O 03 t£> CD c •r— 03 CD T2 3 8& to 03 3 X _ "O r-^ Q. CD 1 CD CD CD «— S- o •r- CD cx> CL +-> "O C C -t-> X s_ s. Q. r— 3 03 i- 3 3 03 O CD 03 CL •r— CL —i E ■"3 -D _J +J U_ S > •r= CL) C > 3 S- x E 9 CD M- 3 O CD en CD E O LO -O X 303 x r— •r - 03 E O S- J- S- 2 J- r— 4-> CO r— -o CD S- CD 03 03 CD 03 03 O) fO c O > X X CD CD 4-> c CD >> E o 03 +-> O ■M E >> >5 CL •r" >^ s C •r- ■ 1— _J ^^ CD CD T3 CD S- 03 +-> cd >> >> > ^~ i— O CD r— 4- 03 o c OS to «i O r— <— X CD r™ CD 4-> CD i— o SI r— 2T < et CD <+ «=c < >> 03 +J o (tJ CD -o . E C c c 03 X o o i- - r** o to r— c •r— +J 03 j- 03 o r— C CD C Q. CD •1— 03 to o ClZD to ^— 03 x: ■=c **"^ 3 03 CD CD to CL CD S- 3 <*- CD X • • 4- to 03 CD 03 >> ^r E c •r- C C CD to CD CL 03 E LU LO CD S- QJ J- CD o CD >— S- 3 2 CD x x 4- X 03 o 03 CD u +J +J •r— 4-> CD X -o M- XI CD s- s- r— s_ to i- 03 03 a. o o 03 O 03 3 «a: 1— to ■z. O zc C3 03 E-22 marine mammal experts to think that dolphins might cluster over submerged areas of high topographic relief such as ridges, banks, plateaus, or island/mainland shelves (Evans, 1975). At least one team of marine scientists has suggested the hypothesis that the biota of the entire Southern California Bight ecosystem (including pinnipeds, cetaceans, seabirds, benthic organisms and others) might tend to concentrate over such high relief areas rather than the relatively flat and deeper plains and basin areas (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). At least 27 species of cetaceans have been seen in the waters of the study area. These waters may function as the home range of the common dolphin, Pacific white-sided dolphin, and the Pacific bottlenose dolphin. Pilot whales also use the area as a feeding ground; large concentrations of pilot whales have been sighted feeding on squid (Patterson, 1979, personal communica- tion). The Pacific right whale, one of the rarest of the great whales, has occasionally been viewed in the Channel Islands area. The study site may be of considerable importance to the right whale both as habitat and foraging area but further research appears necessary to substantiate this assertion (Patterson, 1979, personal communication). Migrating gray whales pass through the area twice each winter with estimated populations ranging as high as 10,000 to 12,000 (Patter- son, 1979, personal communication). Furthermore, observations of gray whales with calves close to the islands indicate that the study site is one of the prime focuses of returning calf migra- tions. Scientists have also observed cows and calves "hanging out" in the kelp beds (Patterson, 1979, personal communication). One possible explanation for this behavior may be that nearshore kelp beds offer protection from strong seas and provide a resting E-23 spot for calves (Leatherwood, 1979, personal communication). The area is also important for several endangered species, includ- ing the blue, fin, and humpback whale. Both blue and fin whales have been observed over long periods of time in waters just seaward of the study area (Patterson, 1979, personal communica- tion). Local fishermen have reported sighting "stationary" blue whales during the early summer, which suggests that whales feed nearby (Patterson, 1979, personal communication). Table E-5 lists 10 of the more common cetaceans observed in the study area, details information on historical sightings, and provides brief ecological notes. In general, the large size, high mobility, and wide pelagic range of these whales have discouraged compilation of more complete ecological species accounts. It is clear, however, that toothed whales and dolphins, like most pinnipeds, represent a major link in the overall food chain within the study area and, due to their apparent attraction to high relief areas, frequent island shelves. Furthermore, it is probable that cetaceans play a significant role in influencing relative species abundance levels of other marine biota. Another marine mammal in the waters around the northern Channel Islands is the sea otter. Currently, this species is known to the area only by occasional sightings of a few individuals (probably transient males) off the islands of San Miguel and Anacapa (Re- sources, 1978). As noted in Table E-3, the sea otter rarely hauls out, is limited to shallow (less than about 120 ft (37m)) coastal waters, and is a voracious feeder on mollusks and shellfish. E-24 B J •h C v> c a IH J jl-rt i jqcJ S *<« c o C 2 U C C 0) 01 C 0) 23 j5 fi -h 4-> 1) tj O 10 3 . 10 C VI Li c " 8 Sljjj 2 2 2! en cm x: j a. in w yj c m 3 ih *t3 cr 1 lOflfixiaiq-HH-i M u in a m j n o M Si a J: iH ffl >. x: oi Jin x si 23 m cj <« m .. c c B> • ft C4J ■u 2 3 >» M x; i4 vi Bi I 09 01 ■h c £ a ^ • ii 3 13 •- vi g4-> d) 10 u - 1 rt n % ** - H -9 73 VI E ~H 1J rH 4J 0) 3 _ .2 ih vi 3 *? 8 c 5 S ■H C rH 10 rH -H •H C V) C • tvi -3 Tj 5J H "3 vi 8 "5 S nj 3 jj uh *J j] mo •H ffl •« Si JJ 5>4J o n £ q io O — i -h • T3 tT 1 (0 V) S x »i Stj 5 a -h a) fi u P ^h 10 'JH g S g j vi c 3 uh io oi o o m 'H vj i V) >,rH > «JT) u 0) J M Jfi vi in o > c oi a oi «H -H ffl 4J c rp Bi oi e c g £ h iJ iJ C VI rH c S 3 8 -5 H S r 3 q a> x 0) T 4J o) uwBi '-H57 01 73 -H 3 o ( c a u v n ■a o Jo j ■H r-H CM fi 3 0- — td a vi . *j rH OJ rn x: IH Ih C r> 01 SO OOih 2 14J s H vi UH 10 OJ 0$ Bi 3 i gi 5 fi 01 OlrJ 0) VI -J ON 0) c| a a gs 1] n] Is I Oi MO (N JJ 10 — I JC o o - O 1 >. Q 11 -H 13 c 3 -h m —i 0) VI 3 rH 'O mn JJ -h £ x: vi • I i | e % u Oi M J- 1 x .5 <3 jj C in c fill V) 1H rH JJ O in (J l/l C rH X) ^fe! E-25 18 H) Q 6- u-i in J jj i*j '3 o jj s 3 s i» c 3 o c 8 jii (/l 1j U -H la m c.'-t x ro ^ Ul <0 0) > MH «J in 21 .c in in oi c -q ■HOC oi w io o ri> oi 3 3 3 T3 .c •H ^ in Q *~1 O C -H S -8 "5 in u o*-i-> ix a in £ o X 5 c n 43 -P — I 3 6 J5 £ o jj in rj> a. (0 -h ro 0) im in in 4J y^ o a i-i 3 >i rri ro .. 3 £ .p . iu i^ £ a $ ° s .2^ '.5 i in in 4J 3 -u « u B h mo oi- Si cn in •H ---I 1-1 >J £ 0) c - 1 ■- —i M £ ■O -3 o .= in in oi a ■5c^E o b o 23 as IT) IB UK »'j >, a? — i C -I — I 4J 01 i— ! (J ro .c" 3 .5 &3 3 S i £ D 3 .a|L § K Q C f- ■H ifi >i-H io o c cr. g a u o c > — i o 5 5 IB JS it! C i-i G 01 3 < o Br g -h cn r ^ rq w m jJ -h io KUUOOw v 3 § 5 0) >*J 5 _ lOH(J OJ — j£ | 'I r§ 01, S = E-26 Because of its consumption of sea urchins, abalone, and other shellfish, the sea otter is an important factor in determining the abundance of other marine species and possibly even the type of habitat (Woodhouse e_t al_. , 1977; Yell in, 1977). At least some scientists have suggested that the otter's consumption of sea urchins, which graze on the attachment points of kelp, may indi- rectly lead to an expansion of kelp beds (Yellin, 1977). (Kelp beds, as discussed in Section E.2.c, provide a special habitat for many organisms in much the same manner as coral reefs.) Ranging throughout the Southern California Bight and beyond, the marine mammals in the waters around the islands affect the food chain and natural ecosystem stability in a broad region. Mainland- based coastal pollution and intensive littoral development have (both directly and indirectly) reduced certain mainland haulout areas for seals and sea lions here. Therefore, the remaining populations on shorelines and in adjacent waters provide an important indicator of broad environmental health and conditions as well as an extremely valuable vestige of marine wilderness and species distribution. Seals, sea lions, and possibly whales and porpoise also provide an invaluable research and public education- al potential. Finally, marine mammals, particularly the migratory gray whale (see Figure E-7), support recreational benefits of considerable economic importance. As these whales travel along the shore, charter boats carry paying customers in increasing numbers out for closer observation. In some cases, whale watchers even charter planes. E-27 E-28 E.2.b. Marine Birds The northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island are a focal point for one of the richest resource areas for marine birds in the United States. This richness is based on both numbers and species diversity. Seablrd concentrations occur not only on the islands themselves (which provide nesting habitat for m ore than 60 of southern California's breeding seabirds) but also on the productive waters around the islands over which many species forage for food. A recent study of Southern California Bight marine avifauna (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976) collected baseline data on 64 species of seabirds including nesting species, year-round visitors, summer visitors, winter visitors, transients, and strays (see Table E-6). Because of their highly mobile and migratory habits, probably all of these seabird species appear at least occasionally around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. The brown pelican is the only breeding seabird species found on the Channel Islands which is listed as endangered due to low population levels. Among the other endangered terrestrial species found on the Islands are the light-footed clapper rail, Bel dings' s savannah sparrow, the peregrine falcon, and the southern bald eagle. Of greatest significance to the proposed sanctuary are the large number of marine bird species which use the relatively shallow marine waters around these islands (see Table E-7). For example, seabirds nesting on the northern Channel Islands tend to forage near their rookeries and close to island shores. Limited tracking E-29 TABLE E-6. The marine avifauna of the Southern California Bight (developed from University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). 1. Nesting Species Ashy storm-petrel (on Channel Islands) Brown pelican (on Channel Islands) Double-crested cormorant (on Channel Islands) Brandt's cormorant (on Channel Islands) Pelagic cormorant (on Channel Islands) Western gull (on Channel Islands) Pigeon guillemot (on Channel Islands) Xantus' murrelet (on Channel Islands) Cassin's auklet (on Channel Islands) Least terns (on mainland only) Caspian terns (on mainland only) Elegant terns (on mainland only) Year-round Visitors (do not breed on the Islands but can be expected any time of the year) California gull Ring-billed gull 3. Summer Visitors Least storm-petrel Red-billed tropicbird 4. Winter Visitors Forster's tern Black storm-petrel Craveri 's murrelet Leach's storm petrel Royal tern Black-footed albatross Pink-footed shearwater Sooty shearwater Heermann's gul 1 Northern fulmar Common loon Arctic loon Red-throated Horned grebe Eared grebe Western grebe loon Short-tailed shearwater Manx shearwater Fork-tailed storm petrel White-winged scoter Surf scoter Red-breasted merganser Red phalarope Pomarine jaegar Glaucous-winged gull Herring gull Common murre Thayer's gull Mew gul 1 Bonaparte's gull Black-legged kittiwake Rhinoceros auklet 5. Transients (pass through Southern California waters while migrating) New Zealand shearwater Skuas Brant Sabine's gull Parasitic jaeger Common tern Long-tailed jaeger Horned puffins 6. Strays (occur in small numbers but not considered part of Bight's avifauna) Red-necked grebe Ancient murrelet Laysan albatross Cape petrel E-30 \A B 3*~ O W r- 3 q rd 2 g 3 4J in 01 o 3 ve a i >>.3 » Si -8 2 £> •S 3 oi 1 = 3 C jj G - c -3 II 01 c §- H 'J rt 3 3 ^ 2 S 5 c 5 °3 JJ Hi -C il - u 23 > u o u > V c C >i — „ H *J « U 3 - i , 01 3 in u j ,. W "51 d Q) -5 S3 Ifll III 0) 01 i- a 9$ £ a. g S C 3 J I ■a ° 4J Ul 52 §3 d i-< ■si £2 U 31 "J l) 01 — 3 u JJ — 2. jJ - * fi O L u 3 43 u-j H Pi 01 T, 1 5 3-e £7; 01 f\ oi 01 V i i SI .* a Li q Pi E-31 §1 in — i 5! 3 4-J M '£ .5 s a I to "5 W 0) c ?.2 -8 s J a) ■u S ll err fl Is •P 51 3U 33 c S-l ■* c a in — i H fT3 o i U 4J is C IJ ■- 1 g c c » 4J O - 1 cum £ JJ IH Bi i- o O ^ u I 5. X! -J) -rt oi c u S c a en o V) T3 a 3 .» m § « ^3 l-i <0 c c y a £ o 11 U Ifi en & -5 9 ?5 3 C h 3 c tn 31 3 O fld 1 a ^ fi s a 4J 0) 3 0) s j*3 E !' !fl _ 7 3 q o S3i £ i ; 3 .5 5 u-i 1-1 3 •-• a o "8 -31 SS 1 E-32 Q 7) l-i ro to O M 4J 1-1 j) it c ■u cr JJ T3 s ^ •Si ■H XJ U 1) jj u. •H h-) I 7) 13 Si a. fi|' $ o o §-.5 » q V 3i 3 - < & 1 3 W Hi g eg in a ■a oi 3? * 9 »S -I Q 1) £ 5 8 "8 g5 5 7) ■H Ih JJ O n; jj io 3 *J jj 1-| 1 3 c 11 1» in T75 "3 £ 0) d 5 w jj Ci c 3 0! < -3 §- 8. o S 8 H 3 d g C p 8^ u J_l (\J ££; 3 h\ u si a — o a -a "3 HJ §-| -a l-i U o o E jj jfl 8 u\ ~> ■iii 71 71 | 10 7) U 3 -2 ^ 1 l-i H J) U-i S3! Hi - 31 III C 711 C jj, 2 = & CJi 71 D 3 (0 —l •n Ij <0 3* •H O IJ - Sij a — E-33 and observation data, described more fully below, indicate that during the breeding season some species prefer to forage over the island shelves which may vary from 3 to 6 nmi (4.8 to 9.6km) in width. The birds found in island breeding colonies may, there- fore, be among those most dependent on the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. If nesting birds must use more distant feeding areas, the energy (food) expended in travel to and from these more remote waters could decrease the amount of regurgitated food available for chicks and potentially reduce the number of successfully reared young. The islands surrounded by the waters under consideration provide rookery areas for 9 of the 12 species of nesting marine birds in the Bight (see Table E-8 and Figures E-8, 9, 10, 11, and 12); the remaining 3 species breed only on the mainland. The approximately 15,700 to 19,800 nesting pairs of seabirds on the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island include the Bight's most impor- tant rookeries. Table E-9 shows that both in numbers and species diversity, the San Miguel-Prince Island complex is the single most important rookery in the Bight; the area is also the largest marine bird rookery in southern California (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Anacapa Island supports the second largest number of seabirds Including a rookery for the endangered brown pelican. Colonies found on Santa Barbara Island are the third largest in the Bight and support rookeries for the Xantus' murre- lets. Although most of the 9 species found nesting on these islands are known to have once bred on the mainland, intensive development along most mainland coasts now restricts breeding habitat to offshore islands. Reduction of habitat, along with other factors, has reduced present populations of pelican, cormorant, and auklet E-34 Table E-8. Known marine i bird colonies located on the no rthern Channel Isl ands and Santa Barbara Island. (Modified from: Univer- sity of Cali fornia Santa Cruz, 1976; Resources, 1978). ESTIMATED POPULATION LOCATION BREEDING SPECIES 1975-1976 Castle Rock Pigeon guillemot 80 (San Miguel Is.) Brandt's cormorant 432 Cassin's auklet NC* Pelagic cormorant 30 Xantus' murrelet 50 San Miguel Island Pigeon guillemot 280 Pelagic cormorant 62 Brandt's cormorant 84 Prince Island Western gull 1,200 (San Miguel Is.) Cassin's auklet 20,000 Brandt's cormorant 1,720 Pigeon guillemot 400 Double crested cormorant 40-80 Ashy storm petrel NC* Pelagic cormorant 100 Santa Rosa Island Pigeon guillemot 100 Pelagic cormorant 10 Brandt's cormorant 400 Gull Island Cassin's auklet 138 (Santa Cruz Is.) Western gull 62 Brandt's cormorant 46 Pelagic cormorant 34 Scorpion Rock Western gull 200 (Santa Cruz Is.) Brown pelican 80 Anacapa Isl and Western gull 200-6,000 Brown pelican 424 Pigeon guillemot 8 Pelagic cormorant 2 Brandt's cormorant 2 Xantus' murrelet 2 Santa Barbara Island Double crested cormorant 24 (including Sutil Brandt's cormorant 240 Rock) Pelagic cormorant 2 Western gull 2,324 Xantus' murrelet 2,000 Pigeon guillemot 160 *NC = No Count Avai Table E-35 CO N s~ <_> ra +j e rC CO CO E S- o 03 CJ> 4- O >> +-> •r" > E 3 C"> CO O) E o 'o u CD E •r— -t-> CO (U E 4- O E O -O i- 4-> CO 00 I LU E-3G +-> 4-> c c fD fO s- S- c o o TO E E U S- s- • i— o o r— o C_3 CD D_ o 00 •p* — C en -M ^ 00 CD 00 00 CD | (1J fO •r— o O- Vtf -■ -> Ik* %*l o«s L;V*,I goo r— -Q 3 O T5 "O . E - (T3 X) ■x 00 cr, i — i +-> -a ** c N fD rs S- s_ co c_> <+- TO o -M c 00 TO c oo o • ^ Ci -M TO 3 •1 — -Q c •r - - s- s- o +J <+- oo *l — (f* p— . Q IT) <_> . 4- -D o c rO >•> ^— +J CO • 1 — 1— 1 00 S- N QJ 3 > S- •1 — C_J c =D (T3 *. ' +J c f0 • 00 C s +J o f0 c J*i 00 O) >> •r— r~ c OJ o +-> 1 — OJ o *— u D. F cr o c o "5 — c ■p °l — to (1) OO C +-> c t- TO o 5- O c: F o L •1 — o +-> o 3 jD -a •< — O) S- 4-> +J 00 00 CD °i — S- Q U • o> UJ UJ c; ZD CD E-37 LEGEND Brant's Cormorant Pelagic Cormorant HH Pigeon Guillemot CARRINGTON PT BROCKli SANDY POINT BEECHERS BAY SKUNK PT, EAST PT, FIGURE E-10. Distribution of nesting colonies on Santa Rosa Island. Dis- tributions of Brandt's cormorant and pigeon guillemot incom- pletely known. (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976), E-38 O -, o Ma 9 fi < I I < \\ D- I \ °- *»•— < \ i < Vdoo O V \ hU H<=C E |S?^SX\ fO s- o «=C E < r 1 Q- f'J £1 1 s_ Q. V < \Ll fi.'*A 1 4-> o < > O jl V : 1 1 e o O f < C% \'\ I fD < / / Z n fcf / J- -a ^ 1 1 ■< o ai e «c 1 1 Ivy/ i— E +-> 03 UJ r— S- oo u UJ | | _J 3 o ai •<- — >i 1 Q cc C_3 Q c 00 1 Cl. 1—* # 1 *g* Q s_ — 0) y \ I ^ 0) 4-» i— c UJ +-> e -O 2 (S. 00 fO =5 O UJ -92 S- o s- i CG o CD ■jj ^ ; f Til : -"V.' L. /yr V «»•••* < // / a. . < 1 / ° t- 5 / /^ < I /• *'.' ' 1 ^ / TfX O < 1 L-v-'-'.l O \ ro tv J ro / "^ 1— 1 B "/ °^ I « OO 1 fA' •/ < M UJ I ■ i ■ j • D. B "^ 1 < ^ ^/Tf ^ v^. / \^ \s ^^ \ ^^. \> s^y 4-> e 03 S- o E s- o u +-> E n3 S- CQ M- ^— . O . o a-i 13 * 'Z £ -M O Q +J — c T3 CO C 03 •> "- 03 GO .p. | -' E S- 03 o Q. <4_ 03 -r- O r— 03 ro § ° oo +j QJ -r- •i— 00 O CD o > u c E oo *--^ O) E E 2 O 4- E O -^ E >, o >— •i- ai +-> +-> 3 CD JD ■— •i- a_ s- E +-> o oo u •r- E Q -r- C3 E-39 LEGEND Jestern Gull P%33J Xantus Murrelet kvftfl Pigeon Guillemot t=i Double-crested Cormorant ^$$^ Brant's Cormorant b^| Pelagic Cormorant ARCH ROCK ^VJ-ANDING COVE ROOKERY SUTIL IS. CAT CANYON FIGURE E-12. Distribution of nesting colonies of seabirds on Santa Bar- bara Island (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). E-40 TABI£ E-9. Numbers of seabird pairs nesting on the California Channel Islands in 1975 (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). Island Species ASP BP DC BC PC WG PG XM CA 1. San Miguel 7 - - 42 31 + 140 7 7 Castle Rk. 7 - - 216 15 + 40 7 + Prince Is. + - 20-40 860 1 600 200 + 10, 0( Richardson Rk. 7 - - - - 7 - - 7 2. Santa Rosa Is. ■p - - 200 + + + 7 7 3. Santa Cruz Is. 7 - - -> 7 7 + 7 7 Gull Is. 7 - - 23 4 31 - 7 30 Scorpion Rk. 7 80 - 7 - 50 1 7 7 4. West Anacapa Is. 7 212 + 1 1 + 7 7 7 Middle Anacapa Is. 7 - - - - 1000 - 7 7 East Anacapa Is. 7 - - - - 3000 - 7 7 5. Santa Barbara Is. 7 - 2 27 1 1162 60 ca .1000 7 Sutil Is. 7 - 8 93 - 7 20 7 7 Shag Rk. 7 - - - - 7 7 7 7 6. Santa Catalina Is. 7 - - - - 7 - 7 7 Bird Rk. 7 - - - - 25-30 - 7 - Ship Rk. 7 - - - - - - 7 - "7 San Nicolas Is. 7 - - 365 - 720 - 7 7 3. San Clemente Is. 7 - - 12 - 7 - 7 7 Castle Rk. 7 - - 1 - 7 - 7 7 Bird Rk. (NW Harbor) - - - _ _ 31 - - _ Symbols: - = not present; ? = possibly present, but not found; + = present, but no estimate of numbers obtained. ASP = Ashy stomy petrel BP = Brown pelican DC = Double-crested cormorant BC = Brandt's cormorant IG = Western gull PG = Pigeon guillemot XM = Xantus' nurrelet CA = Cassin's auklet PC = Pelagic cormorant E-41 to only a fraction of their former numbers. Two other marine species which nested in the Channel Islands 75 years ago (the tufted puffin and common murrelet) no longer nest there. As noted above, the brown pelican is listed as endangered on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Endangered Species List. In addition to seabirds, two land-oriented species also designated as endangered (the bald eagle and the peregrine falcon) once nested on the northern Channel Islands but have not been observed in the area for several years. These two species, although known to feed along beaches and over waters very close to the coast, are not true seabirds. Although distribution and movement vary between species and time of year, seabirds, like marine mammals, tend to concentrate over areas of high bottom relief including ridges, island shelves, and plateaus, During summer, for example, the brown pelican, western gulls, and Cassin's auklets in the Bight are found in greatest numbers northwest of San Miguel Island, in the eastern end of Santa Barbara Channel, close inshore around all eight islands, and in waters overlying the northern Santa Rosa-Cortes Ridge and Santa Cruz Basin (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). As mentioned above, nesting birds have been observed to forage in waters close to their rookeries, usually within several miles of shore. For example, the three species of cormorants, pelican, Xantus' murrelet, and pigeon guillemot were predominantly within 6 nmi (10km) of their colonies while Cassin's auklets concentrated between 6 to 15 nmi (10 to 25km) offshore (University of Califor- nia, Santa Cruz, 1976). Radio telemetry studies on the movements of radio-banded Xantus' murrelets and western gulls at Santa Barbara Island and transects for Cassin's auklet at San Miguel Island and Xantus 1 murrelet at Santa Barbara Island also demon- E-42 strate patterns of movement close to island shores. The relative importance of the waters near the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island for all species of marine birds is indicated by the large number of individuals sighted there as compared to the other more southern Channel Islands (see Table E-10). Seabirds also tend to feed in the kelp bed canopy. Kelp, as discussed below in Section E.2.c, grows principally on rocky bottom areas shallower than 100 ft (30m). The kelp canopy pro- vides a resting and foraging ground to many seabirds (California Department of Fish and Game, 1979). For instance, the great blue heron uses the surface kelp as a platform from which it hunts. The pigeon guillemot swims within the forests for its prey. The brown pelican plunges after fish in clear water between the canopy growth. Cormorants also feed about the kelp. Gulls of many species and sea ducks use the kelp canopy and clear water between as resting areas. Some examples are: Larus occidental is Western gull Larus californicus California gull Larus philadephis Bonaparte's gull Melanitta deglandi White-wing scoter Melanitta perspicillata Surf scoter Aythza af fines Lesser scaup Marine birds as a predatory group are one of the most important food chain consumers in the Bight along with pinnipeds, cetaceans, and man. Although their principal food sources are poorly known and vary by species, squid and small schooling fish such as anchovies, sardines, and saury probably predominate. Estimates of annual consumption are not available, but as a major predator at the top of the food chain, their importance in maintaining a E-43 Table E-10 Sightings of all species combined (total individuals) en and near Channel Islands and beaches, April 1975 through March 1976. Dash indicates area not surveyed car survey incomplete (University of California, Santa Cruz, 1976). Location Apr-Jun 75 Jul-Sep 75 Oct-Dec 75 Jan-Mar 75 SAN MIGUEL ISLAND Richardson Rock 102 233 179 93 West 1427 1313 1365 810 South 304 194 372 216 East 1846 894 1616 755 North 130 272 245 281 SANTA ROSA ISLAND West 289 188 1563 633 South 80 116 613 2756 East 437 653 626 1136 North 691 822 734 546 SANTA CRUZ ISLAND West 163 247 749 186 South 230 442 783 1454 East 375 356 928 173 North 582 448 632 502 ANACAPA ISLAND 1865 — — 7482 SAN NICOLAS ISLAND Northwest 140 587 1756 1513 Southwest 69 25 78 95 Southeast 37 1608 944 Northeast 127 477 302 416 SANTA BARBARA ISLAND 1187 597 2141 813 SANTA CATALINA ISLAND Northwest 11 63 103 852 Southwest 84 40 120 1171 South 48 13 24 94 East 43 54 34 1620 Isthmus 56 65 41 1096 SAN CLEMENTE ISLAND Northwest 303 571 790 2141 West Central 66 130 611 579 Southwest 18 42 161 107 Pyramid Cove 10 29 40 East 30 16 E-44 balance in the Bight's species diversity and abundance is undoubt- edly significant. The shallow island shelf waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island provide significant feeding areas for the largest concentrations of seabirds in the Southern Cali- fornia Bight. From an ecologic point of view, this concentration of top predators represents a significant factor determining the Bight's trophic (food) pathways. The breeding colonies of seabirds on the islands represent remnants of former ranges that once included mainland areas. Now, however, most mainland breeding colonies south of Point Conception have been destroyed (California Department of Fish and Game, 1979). The marine feeding areas in waters surrounding these remaining rookeries provide significant food sources to support these breeding colonies. The large concentrations of marine birds also afford exceptional research opportunities, particularly for the study of ecologic pathways related to the birds, as well as an important resource for ornithologists and nature lovers. E.2.c. Fish and Plant Resources Marine fish resources, finfish, invertebrates, and plants, are discussed below under two groupings: nearshore species (found in waters shallower than 180 ft (55m) and offshore species (found in water of greater depths). The outer margin of the nearshore zone approximates the depth at which the island shelf plunges down a steeper slope to the deeper offshore basins, plateaus, and sub- merged ridges. In most cases, the division between the two zones is 3 to 6 nmi (4.8 to 9.7km) from shore. E-45 California's nearshore fish assemblage (i.e., fish favoring the island and mainland shelves) has been found by Horn (1974) to include some 213 species, or about 44 percent of all species reported by Miller and Lea (1972) to occur in all southern Cali- fornia waters (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). This diversity (Figure E-13) is at least partly due to the convergence near the northern Channel Islands of two major biogeographic regions. A detailed list of all fish in the island shelf area of the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island has not been compiled. The California Department of Fish and Game (1979) has identified fish species of recreational and commercial interest that occur off each of the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island (see Appendix 2). Among the more notable finfish are the rock- fishes and surf perches. Among the invertebrate and plant species are the abalones (red, black, white, pink), rock scallops, Cali- fornia sea mussels, piddocks, sea urchins, lobster, bay mussels and kelp. The most frequently occurring shellfish on the island shelves are the bivalves Parvilucina tenui scul pta and Tellina carpenteri (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Two of the most prominent nearshore marine habitats are the kelp bed/rocky bottom areas and the sand flat areas. Of these, kelp beds are the most important island shelf habitat in terms of diversity and abundance of fish species. Kelp beds only grow on rocky bottom areas with depths between 9 to 284 ft (3 to 86m). Greatest abundances occur between about 25 to 100 ft (8 to 30m). E-46 OCEANIC ZONE ZONAL SUBDIVISION NUMBER OF SPECIES SHARED WITH NORTHERN TEMPERATE ZONE BOREAL "^ BtlTISH COLUMBIAN OIEGONIAN CENTRAL CALIFORNIAN TEMPERATE -i§r J/iCAPf fiAnetv PUNT* EUGENIA ICABO SAN IUCAS FIGURE E-13. Diversity of fish species along the Pacific coast (North and Hubbs, 1968). E-47 The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (1979) identifies the abundant kelp beds off the island's shores (Figure E-14) as a major reason behind its (BLM's) conclusion that island waters represent one of the most important of southern California's marine habitats. They describe this vital resource as follows (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979): "About 40 percent of all the kelp beds in the Southern California Bight occur around the Channel Islands. These kelp beds are some of the most highly developed submarine forests in the world. Over 800 plant and animal species are known to be associated with these kelp beds including many valuable sport and commercial species." Kelp beds (see Figure E-15) offer sessile, resident, and transient marine life protection, food, and special benthic (in holdfasts) and pelagic (stipes, fronds, and canopy) niches. Southern Cali- fornia kelp beds harbor some 125 fish species although perhaps only 20 or 30 are common (Quast, 1968). Ebeling et al_. (In process) reports that most fish species prefer either the bottom or canopy zones, bypassing the intermediate depths. Particularly important to repopulation rates, many kelp bed fishes such as the kelp bass and some rockfish show little seasonal movement. Ebeling e_t al_. (In process) cite sources which state that adults of kelp bed fish may spend most of their lives within an area of but a few hundred square yards. Ebeling et al_. (In process) also suggest that northern Channel Island kelp bed fishes tend to have a higher fish density and diversity than do mainland E-48 E-49 Sea Surface , ?$&- V' v?V 5 L ~ \vWv ><4 ; it ■•■'■I >■ ' j . Stipe Bundle \ ,i ; i i V V ».V ! v\, FIGURE E-15. Underwater diagram of a kelp bed (North and Hubbs, 1968). E-50 beds. They attribute this "island effect" to habitat differences such as clearer water, more continuous high-relief rocky bottom, and perhaps more fish food on the island shelves. Many of the fish species found in more open waters over island sand flats and in offshore pelagic areas beyond the island shelves are presented in Appendix 2. In these areas, the small schooling species such as the northern anchovy, Pacific saury, sardine, mackerel, and squid are particularly important because of their vital role in the marine food chain. The nutrient rich waters fed by regional upwellings support exceptionally abundant populations of these species which in turn are fed upon by other fish, the seabirds, marine mammals, and humans. The abundance of these fish is undoubtedly a significant factor supporting the large concentrations of marine mammals and seabirds in the area. The northern Channel Islands' surrounding marine waters are also important habitat for the hydrocoral Allopora californica . With an incomplete sampling record, it is difficult to call this a rare or endangered species; however, the species is presently known in only 9 locations nationwide, 6 of which are around the northern Channel Islands. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (1979) cites this finding as a principal reason for identifying these southern California offshore islands as one of Southern California's most important marine habitats. In general, the fish resources around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island include a species array representative of the high diversity of fish found throughout the Southern California Bight. As indicated in commercial and recreational catch statistics maintained by the California Department of Fish and Game (discussed more completely under fishing and plant E-51 harvesting in Section E.3.C.), many of these species are found in abundance. E.2.d. Intertidal Organisms The intertidal habitats on the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island include primarily rocky shorelines with some scattered sandy beaches. This is in contrast to the mainland shoreline which is only 20 percent rocky (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Rocky intertidal shorelines are an important marine habitat zone in southern California. Describing these areas, the Southern California Ocean Sciences Studies Consortium (1974) states that "...the intertidal area of a rocky coast is considered to have the greatest diversity of plant and animal life of any ecological area. Few major habitats so clearly show richness and variety of life." A variety of marine organisms characterize this habitat, including encrusting abalone, barnacles, and limpets, several species of attached marine algae, starfish, sea urchins, tidepool fish, foraging shorebirds, and marine mammals (see Table E-ll). Sandy beaches extend over a much smaller stretch of the island shorelines and provide habitat to fewer marine oganisms; nevertheless, quite a few species occur in this habitat, including burrowing clams, amphipods, isopods, and other invertebrates. The area provides an important feeding habitat for several species of shore birds. Marine mammals using the upper beach for haulout purposes must pass through the area when moving from the water to shore. E-52 TABLE E-ll. Examples of intertidal species of the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island (California Department of Fish and Game, 1979). ROCKY INTERTIDAL HABITAT Chlorophyta - green algae Enteromorpha spp. Urospora wormskioldii Chaetomorpha spiralis Coduim curreatum Phaeophyta - brown algae Pachydictyon conaceum Taonia lennebackariae Eisenia arborea Hesperophycus harveyanus Dictyoneuropsis reticulata Pelvetia fastigiata Rhodophyta - red algae Porphyrella calxfornica Acrochaetium barbadense Acrochaetium pacificum Helminthora stricta Gelidium robustum Bossiella califormca Gloriopeltis furcata Iridaea flaccida Iridaea lineara Botryocladia neushulii Callithamnion rupicolum Endocladia muricata Porifera - sponges Esperiopsis onginalis Isociona lithophoeru-x Leuconia heathi Rhabdodermella nuttingi Coelenterata - hydro ids, sea anemones, Abietinaria amphora Aglaophenia struthiomdes Anthopleura elegantissina etc. Plumularia alica Synthecium cyclindricun Epiactis prolifera Annelida - worms Arabella iricolor Nereis pelagica Sabellaria califormca Salmacina tribrancniata Echinodermata - starfish, sea urchins, Astrometis sertulifera Pisaster giqanteus Strongylocentrotus franciscanus Strongylocentrotus purpuratus Amarouciur.i aequali siphon is Archidistora psarrmion sea cucumbers, brittle stars, etc. Patiria miniata Pisaster ochraceus Cucumaria lubrica Amphipholis squamata Euherdmania claviformis Mollusca - limpets, snails, octopus, etc. Littorina scutulata Nuttallina califormca Acanthina spirata Acmaea digitalis Tegula funebralis Aonaea scabra Cypraea spadicea Fussurella volcana Mytilus califomianus Haliotis cracherodii Haliotis uilgeiJ Littorina planaxis Chama pellucida Octoous bimaculatus E-53 TABLE E-ll Cent. Arthropoda - barnacles, crabs, isopods, amphipeds, shrimps, etc. Hyale frequens Alplieus clama-faor Cirolana harfordi Cancer jordaru Ligia oedden talis Pachygrapsus crass ipes Crago mgricauc?! Paguru s hirsutiusculus Balanus glandula Mitella polymerus Balanus tintinnabulum Osteichthyes - boney fishes Cebidichthys violaceus (monkeyface eel) Mi crane trus aurora (reef surfperch) Oligccattus snyderi (fluffy sculpin) Xiphister atropurpureus (black prickleback) Gibbonsia elegans (spotted kelpfish) Gibbons la metzi (striped kelpfish) Girella nigricans (opaleye) Clinccottus recalvus (bald sculpin) Xererpes fucorum (rockweed gunnel) Aves - shore birds Haematopus pallia tus frazari (American oystercatcher) Haematopus bachmani (black oystercatcher) Aphriza virgata (surfbird) Arenaria melanocephala (black turnstone) Heteroscelus lncanus (wandering tattler) Pinnipeds - seals and sea lions Zalophus californianus (California sea lion) Phoca vitulina (harbor seal) Mirounga angustirostris (northern elephant seal) SANDY INTERTIDAL HABITAT Mollusca - clar.s Tivela stultorum Olivella biplicata Arthropods - crabs, amphipods, isopods, etc. Alloniscus pereonvexus Orchestoidea californiana Lepidopa califomica Lophopanopeus heathii Emerita analoga Aves - shore birds Squatarola squatarola (black-bellied plover) Limosa fedoa (marbled godwit) Numenius phaeopus (whimbrel) Ca toptrophorus semi polma tus (willet) Crocethia alba (sanderling) E-54 Because the northern Channel Islands are remote and thus, until recently, subject to little human disturbances, the island intertidal areas include some of the best representative areas in southern California. Mainland intertidal areas, which are more easily accessible to the public and used intensively as areas for specimen collecting, are typically in poorer condition than comparable island areas. E.2.e. Cultural and Historic Resources Cultural and historic resources located in the marine waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island include underwater archaeological sites and artifacts and ship and aircraft wrecks. No extensive onsite "inventory of the cultural and historic resources of the study area has yet been conducted, although Science Applications, Inc. (1978) conducted a thorough survey of the relevant literature for the Southern California Bight for BLM. Numerous archaeological and paleontological resources exist on the land areas of the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1978c). It has been determined with an acceptable degree of accuracy that sea levels were as much as 180 ft (55m) lower during previous eras of geolo- gic time (Science Applications, 1978). Since known prehistoric sites on land document the presence of man in the Channel Islands area during these eras, it is generally thought that the exposed areas of the continental shelf were extensively inhabited (Science Applications, 1978). The potential exists, therefore, that undiscovered archaeological sites ^re present in the submerged lands of the study areas. The BLM literature survey (U.S. Bureau E-55 of Land Management, 1978c) mapped three zones of different prob- ability levels for the presence of cultural resources. The zone of highest probability was the area from to 330 ft. (0 to 100m) in depth, where all known sites have been discovered. Medium and low probability zones 330 to 485 ft (100 to 150m) and deeper than 485 ft (150m) respectively are less likely to contain significant resources. The discipline of underwater archaeology is relatively new and has not yet been extensively applied in the study area. As a result, most of the information which is currently available concerning underwater sites identified within the study area is based on the reports of amateur collectors and sport divers. The location and value of identified sites are depicted on Table E-12 and Figure E- 16. Due to natural hazards and prevailing current and weather pat- terns, the seas around the northern Channel Islands have been highly prone to shipwrecks throughout history. Such wrecks are of interest to historians as time capsules representing the period in which they sank and of interest to sport divers as marine habitat and curiosities. Science Applications, Inc. (1978) identifies 573 shipwrecks and 9 aircraft wrecks covering a period from approxi- mately 1540 to the beginning of World War II in the Southern California Bight. E-56 Table E- -12. Shipwrecks recorded around the i lorthern Ch annel Islands and Santa Barbara Island (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979c). ID NO. NAME VESSEL TYPE CAUSE DATE OF SINKING San Miguel Island 167 1 Comet Schooner stranded 8/30/11 Simonton 194 1 Cuba St. Scr. stranded 9/8/23 415 1 J. M. Colman Schooner stranded 9/3/05 411 a J. F. West Schooner sunk 1898 444 a Kate & Annie sunk 1902 661 a Pectan 1029 1 Unk. Galleon sunk 1801 1068 a Watson A. West Schooner stranded 2/23/23 Santa Re sa Island 17 1 Aggi Steel 4-mast sunk 5/2/15 199 1 Dora Bluhm Schooner stranded 5/25/10 192 1 Crown of England St. Scr. sunk 11/7/1894 101 a Blue Fin Oil Scr. stranded 9/3/44 68 a Aristocrat!' s sunk 1949 335 a Golden horn Barkentine stranded 9/12/1892 1026 1 Unk. Wreck Santa Cruz Isl and 99 1 Black Dolphin Barkentine stranded ? dynamited 154 1 City of Sausalito Oil Scr. burned 12/11/41 82 a Babina Gas Scr. burned 3/3/23 393 a International No. 1 Barge stranded 9/13/18 571 a Nancy Lee sunk 1946 888 a Thornton sunk 1910 1113 a Yukon Barge sunk 1/6/38 Anacapa Isl and 671 1 Pinnacle 760 1 San Francisco Oil Scr. burned 10/31/49 86 a Balboa Oil Scr. burned 1/18/49 260 a Equator Oil Scr. sunk 7/2/49 467 a Labor Gas Scr. sunk 10/2/24 1008 1 Diesel sunk ? 1098 1 Winfield Scott St. side wheel stranded 12/2/1853 Santa Barbara Island 13 a Adriatic Oil Scr. sunk 12/28/30 Fed. 207 1 Dante Aleghieri II Gas Scr. sunk 11/30/38 253 a Emperor Oil Scr. sunk 7/15/32 E-57 E-58 E.3. Human Activities E.3.a. Introduction The northern Channel Island's proximity to one of the most heavily urbanized areas along the United States' west coast exposes the surrounding waters to many different (and often competitive) types of human activities. The following section describes the scale and intensity of the major area uses including oil and gas explo- ration and production, commercial and sport fishing, kelp harvest- ing, commercial shipping, military operations, scientific re- search, and recreation. Wherever possible, uses are identified on a site-specific basis and discussions of both current patterns and future trends are incorporated. E.3.b. Oil and Gas Activities Offshore oil and gas development began in the United States in the State tidelands of the Santa Barbara Channel in 1896. The first leases in State tidelands were sold in 1950. Development of the Federal OCS lands within the Channel began in 1966 with the sale of one drainage tract to allow development of a known field (Carpinteria) in Federal waters. In 1968, the first Federal lease sale was held in the Channel. Federal development in the Channel continued with OCS Lease Sale #35 in 1975 and Lease Sale #48 in June 1979. BLM plans to hold two additional sales in the Southern California Bight (which includes the Santa Barbara Channel) in the next five years; Sale 68 in 1982 and Sale 73 in 1983. Significant milestones in the history of oil and gas development in the Santa Barbara Channel and in the vicinity of the northern Channel Islands are summarized on Table E-13. Appendix 3 briefly reviews stages in the OCS oil and gas development process. E-59 E-60 Table E-14 shows estimates of the magnitude of recoverable re- serves near the northern Channel Islands. These estimates are an important factor in determining areas likely to be developed, as well as the amount and types of facilities to be used in the area. Figure E-18 shows existing leases around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, the operators of these leases, and tracts subject to Sale #48; relevant tract numbers are shown on Figure E-19. Until now, most of the oil and gas activity in the area has occurred in the State tidelands and on those OCS leases closest to the mainland. Production platforms in the Channel area are shown on Table E-15; all of these are on tracts either in State waters or on OCS leases on the mainland side of the Channel. Platform Grace, once installed, will be the furthest platform offshore (approximately 10 nmi or 18.5km) and the closest to the northern Channel Islands (approximately 8 nmi or 14.8km from the tip of Santa Cruz Island). Several exploratory wells have been drilled close to the northern Channel Islands. Tracts on which wells have been drilled and the number of wells drilled per tract are shown on Table E-16. Two plans for exploration on leases near the northern Channel Islands have recently been approved by the USGS and certified as consistent with California's coastal plan by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). The CCC found Chevron's exploration plan to drill four wells on tracts 204, 208, 209, and 215 (in the Santa Clara Unit) to be consistent with California's Coastal Plan on December 12, 1978 (California Coastal Commission, 1978). The most southerly of Chevron's proposed wells lies approximately 8 nmi (14.8km) north of the Anacapa Islands (Chevron, 1978). On March 23, 1979, the CCC also found Exxon's exploration plan to E-61 t art.e E-14. Estimated Recoverable Reserves in the Northern Channel Islands Vicinity (Fran OCS Sales in 1966, 1968, Lease Sale #35, and Proposed Sale #48) . (a) For the 63 leases sold in 1966 and 1968 (leases #166-241), BLM (1979) estimates the economically recoverable resources to be 610 million barrels of oil and 580 billion cubic feet of gas. (b) Far the 56 leases sold in OCS Sale No. 35 (243-311) BLM (1979) estimates the economically recoverable resources to be 719 million barrels of oil and 997 billion cubic feet of gas. (c) The most probable undiscovered recoverable oil and gas resources* for all tracts (in the vicinity of the northern Channel Islands) originally subject to OCS Sale #48** are: OIL GAS AREA (Million Barrels) (Ei: ulion Cubic Feet) Total Sale 48 area** 715 860 Santa Barbara Channel 300 300 Santa Rosa Cortes North 15 23 Santa Barbara Island 10 3 24 tracts within the proposed narine sanc- tuary (later withdrawn from' Sale 48) 5.7 8.9 In addition, Appendix 4 provides annual information (from 1979-2000) on the most probable oil and gas resources; the number of exploratory and development wells to be drilled; the number of platforms needed; and the amount of drill cuttings, muds, and formation water released, likely to result from proposed Sale #48 (as proposed in the FES (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). ♦Undiscovered recoverable resources are defined as those quantities of oil and gas v/hich are reasonably expected to occur in existing favorable geographic settings but are completely undiscovered, and which after discovery can be expected to be produced under present technology and economic conditions (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). '♦Sale #48 - Revised USGS Estimates: The USGS substantially lowered its previous estirate to 104 million barrels of oil and 498 billion cubic feet of gas from Sale #48 (U.S. Department of Interior, 1979b) . It should also be noted that the Secretary of Interior deleted 69 tracts fron proposed Sale #43 (see Figure E-17) and that 24 of these tracts (88-103 and 117-119 shown on Figure E-18 and E-19) are located in the vicinity of the northern Channel Islands (U.S. Department of Interior, 1979a) . Because of these deletions, the resource estimates for Sale #48 would be reduced accordingly. E-62 Q Z UJ O UJ -j fO j= co o s- s- M- o c «4- ■o o CO -1- ■o 4-> 4-> O) (O to +J C S- u •r- CU CD E -O ^— •i- "r- cu i — CO CO UJ c o to to o +■> +-> a o a> fO ro i— S- S- E-65 QJ CTt >> C71 O i— i s- r>. qj c •■- r— CVJ 3 o^ > «r- s_ re o co i— i s- c a> O 3 C +-> "O ° (/) IO c C IS) *> i — •— i i — Q. «* • E «0 **- «—"»=«! DiO Ol- O -o •>- O er> o> «C ct> 4-» C\J i— fT3 O OJ C fO QJ •»!■— O QJ t£> CO S- *-» O t- E 00 o oo 3 CLr— - .x^- C O QJ E •!- • S_ C CT> Or-D •t- ro cn +-> tj "o «4- >>-C r-t (O C •r- i — C_3 (J ••> -r- *— » ra c «3- •• a. c s- c 3 r»» r^ i- aj a) e ^ n oo a>.c e E i cr> l_> "i— +■> QJ o •— I i— I O S. S- OlO O O fO D. •» C71 C C r— (D -C cm ro us s: U • •r- S- QJ S C^-'S- — 4-> QJ SZ O HI « CO .Q +-> "O IrtLD QJ CT> ••- E C i-N WN X3CfOQJ010JCr> C •>- I Q-i— l CC i— I E-66 • *> 00 «p»- ■»-> en c «-< a> -o E «/> c 33 0J re Cn O o_ irt to «o i_ cn c c c c aac id Mar Resoi annir r- E288 O O c C ^Ecc QC > > > > O ro ro O O 1— I— > UJ a> a> a> S_ C c C33x:x:x:xc __ j— fO • * Q- 0000 < 1— \- < ra rD d lOfAllflN ^■ON VO CO *•-■ * iHOOHOONNN "3- ^-t i-H HO«J(O^N00N ro •— (O rH (O r-t rr> cvj cj .—• ■>* <«d- «t«tO«)^OHCOO co r-~ c Cn J- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CJ csi C\JCMCAJt-tt-tC\J'-HOJ o. OOOO 000 o_ cc cj. O a: 9 O 1 cp ? cp 9 9 cp = rH .! e l— a. a. o- a. 0. 0. 0. Q_ rx o_ Q_O_O.O_Q-O-C1.O_ " >>£ i« O) 10 I- s- fl 3-0 00 c f— ro 0) f— c 10 •» •X3 cue ro ro S c to w to to ro ro ro ro •O *p- 1- "O *r- "O ro ro ro ro 1- t- ••- S- N SZ CJ> •!— +■» r— *0 «o i- C 1- c 1— S- t i_ J_ i- i- s_ ro a> r- 4-> r- UJ +J ro ro ro fl4J+J+>0>- Q) O O 1— Q. E Q. E 4-> J- O a. Q. Q-+-> +-> C ■e .1 1— c ••> «o fO -— C WH to ,__. O . 1_ • "O ■M 2 cxr-. c ro r»- 1 C |— « cn to •i— ro cn ""■ • 1— 1 3 r-~. to to cn #1 "to atfo 179 ( lams, <0 ai CO UJ __: to •1— CO s- ro c c c re ro C 4-> < S > C ro O S. c c c jz: >>_c c III cc c £££££&£» X- ro 1— E-67 TABLE E-16. Number of well s dri' lied on existing leases, all or partially within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the northern Channel Island s and Santa Barbara Island (also see Figure E-22). (Adams, 1979, personal communication; U.S. 3ureau of Land Management, 1979 (Visual No. 1); U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1978a). Closest Number Tract 167 Island of Wells San Miguel 1 Operator Future Status Expired cr Terminated 168 San Miguel — Expired or Terminated 169 San Miguel 1 — Expired or Terminated 170 San Miguel 1 — Expired or Terminated 172 San Miguel — Expired or Terminated 174 San Miguel — Expired or Terminated 175 San Miguel — Expired or Terminated 176 San Miguel 2 — Expired or Terminated 177 San Miguel — Expired or Terminated 178 San Miguel — Expired or Terminated 179 San Miguel 1 — Expired or Terminated 243 Santa Rosa Oxoco p 244 Santa Rosa Chevron ■> 245 Santa Rosa Chevron p 246 Santa Rosa Chevron j 247 Santa Rosa Oxoco p 200 Santa Cruz __ Expired or Terminated 201 Santa Cruz — Expired or Terminated 206 Santa Cruz — Expired or Terminated 210 Santa Cruz Chevron -> 211 Santa Cruz — Expired or Terminated 212 Santa Cruz 1 — Expired or Terminated 213 Santa Cruz — Expired or Terminated 198 Anacapa Expired or Terminated 199 Anacapa 2 — Expired or Terminated 202 Anacapa 4 Union Development 203 Anacapa 4 Uniton Exploratory Drilling 204 Anacapa 1* Chevron Exploratory Drilling 205 Anacapa 2 Chevron Exploratory Drilling 208 Anacapa 1* Chevron Exploratory Drilling 209 Anacapa 1* Chevron Exploratory Drilling 215 Anacapa 1* Chevron Exploratory Drilling 289 Santa Barbara 1 Mobil ~> 290 Santa Barbara Mobil ■p 291 Santa Barbara Mobil -> * Chevron's exploration plan for exploratory wells P-0204-1, P-0208-2, P-0209-2 and P-0215-2 was recently approved by USGS. The plan was certified as consistent with California' s coastal plan by the California Coastal Commission on December 12, 1978. ? As yet undetemined E-68 drill up to 15 exploratory wells from tracts 222, 223, 230,231,- 232, and 238 in the Santa Rosa Unit to be consistent with the coastal plan (California Coastal Commission, 1979). The southern tip of tracts 222 and 223 are approximately 6 nmi (11.1km) from Santa Cruz Island. E.3.c. Commericial and Recreational Fishing and Plant Harvesting Harvesting of living marine resources (see also Section E.2.c.) by commercial and recreational fishermen and kelp harvesters current- ly represents the most intensive human use occurring over the shelves adjacent to the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. Depending on the species sought, commercial fishermen use gill nets, purse seines, traps, trawls, and other assorted gear while recreational fishermen typically use their hands, hook and line or sometimes spear guns. Commercial fishermen may seek any of a large variety of species which are of little interest to recreational fishermen. However, commercial and recreational fishermen may compete with each other for a few species such as rockfish and abalone. Catch statistics maintained by the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) indicate that for the study area, the greatest commercial fishing catch by weight occurs north of Anacapa Island in the Santa Barbara Channel (see Figure E-20). The tonnage of fish taken from these waters is typical of nearshore southern California coastal waters. The weights are well below the most productive commercial fishing area in the Bight off San Pedro, California; however, due to the extensive shallow water island E-69 «3- 1 1^ &. • CTi 03 rs i — I CO • r. O 03 LD +-> +J 03 l^» E CD cr> o 03 S- <— 1 1^ OO 03 CTi n l-H •a t — CD ^-* c 03 E 03 O 03 co •r— O en CO +-> e T3 00 "D •r— E •I — E • "O 03 +-> 03 *— « E I— • 03 O^ ro (/) 4-> .e r^ l— ►— I 00 CO CTi •I— 1— 1 .e 1 CD u_ CO CD +-> «% •i* - E 3 c>- 4-> «+- E c O E 03 •1 — CD r— .e J= +-> E 03 o E CD •f— o > cu -o o o JD a e c 03 r— "O 03 —J 03 CD e 'i — 3 .e 03 E 4- E +-> i — S- O C CO O ITS T3 HH <<- 3 e •i- 03 E rs 03 r— O) 03 o S- 03 S- aj S- 03 O 3 2: 03 -Q <-^CQ o CM UJ UJ c£ rs O i— i L±_ E-70 shelf areas, the Island waters are major southern California producers of species such as abalone, sea urchin, rockfish, and kelp. In addition to the fish and shellfish fisheries, the northern Channel Island waters and those off Santa Barbara Island support southern California's most productive kelp harvests, In 1978, the kelp beds around the northern Channel Islands produced over 24,000 wet tons (22,000 metric tons) of kelp while the beds around Santa Barbara Island produced 1,867 wet tons (1,600 metric tons) (Cali- fornia Department of Fish and Game, 1979). Kelp is harvested by specially designed ships, kelp cutters, which cut off and scoop up the top 4 ft. (1.3m) (depth of cut is limited by law) of the kelp while leaving the remainder of the plant alive and intact. Rapid growth of up to a foot or more per day under extremely favorable conditions permits several annual kelp harvests (California Department of Fish and Game, 1971; North and Hubs, 1968). Kelp harvesting has occurred for almost 30 years around the northern Channel Islands although harvesting around Santa Barbara Island has only been started recently (Trabert, 1979, personal communication). The industry uses almost all of the well- developed kelp bed areas. Table E-19 illustrates fluctuations in landings between 1971 and 1975. One of the major kelp harvesters, Kelco, uses small, single engine aircraft to survey the condition and size of kelp canopy so that kelp harvests can be scheduled after optimum regrowth of kelp vegetation. These craft operate at altitudes of approximately 500 ft. (152m) and move to within a quarter nmi (0.5km) of the Channel Islands (Trabert, 1979, personal communiction) . E-71 The species and total catch of fish landed by commercial fishermen may vary significantly from year to year (see Table E-17). For example, between 1971 and 1975, annual sea urchin harvests rapidly expanded from zero to several million pounds as this new regional fishery developed. Conversely, lobster catches declined steadily over the same period. Comparable trends in the landings of other species such as abalone and rockfish are less clear. Table E-18 lists the species caught most abundantly around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island during 1975 (the most recent year for which comprehensive statistics were compiled). Among the species taken from the area in the greatest amounts were the jack mackerel, northern anchovy, market squid, bocaccio, sea urchin, abalone, and rockfish, the latter three being mainly limited to the island shelves. Although commercial fishing occurs throughout the year around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, individual fisheries may vary seasonally. For example, 1975 DFG data show that squid were taken most frequently in spring while the northern anchovy was fished primarily during the fall and winter. Sea urchin, rockfish, and abalone* were taken throughout the entire year. Compared to the northern Channel Islands, fisheries around Santa Barbara Island were generally less productive and dominated more by open water pelagic fish species. Commercial abalone divers, through the Abalone Association and the Abalone Seeding Association, sponsor an abalone mariculture hatchery in Santa Barbara. Abalones are cultivated for future restocking; the seeding association has a monthly planting at San Miguel Island, near Cuyler Harbor (Pirog, 1979, personal communi- *The commercial taking of abalone is prohibited during the months of February and August. E-72 CO &' •s 2 | r~ MS -i cn r-H » r- \£3 rH I— > r-» g"B T o <-t T rH T o i i T r. o Tf 1 o 5 lTI in m (N o rH T o r~ l-i r- 00 T T3 ■v o> m rH CO ^O T 1 r~ g u CO 00 C-) o o cn CM © ko o «a" O 1 o IN 5 5 r-l k£> T r» t-H U3 T m T CO IN CO fB rH r» IN r^ w r-< <-\ 00 r-< rH £ 01 rH IN r-l CO O H (B rH -> r^K 1 13 § rr cn CO rH r~ KD I— rH rH i i 1 in T cm 1 i | T T M3 c j5 00 IN rH n m r~ r~ IB >H r~ cn w a in ^H r-H cn 0) Tj co co m rH r-i ^O c *£> i— 1 r~ o 1 IN o o O IN •*r 1 CN CM 2 IB CO CO cn ro "3" in O CN *T o x> fB rH r» co co (N (N v£> r~ .c tn IN r-l in U H (B rB in cn vo cn o in d T O \D 1 1 1 1 cm IN o 00 1 1 U3 o o ^ IN f-^ ^T r-t T cn ifl H r* <-^ CO CO 8 r4 r-K rH ON rH rH cn J2 tn in in ^O CO CM X> CO co IN o 1 I co «T "T 1 1 T \D 1 ^r f~* m CO O IN rH r~ ro (N •T r~- *r r-l co (N "» ^ a-^ (N U H tn fl £ £ TJ a 2 u c Uh 5 a m < 2 £ V. ^ c c r. 'j c c^ £ tc c tn a d) C -0 IS s -gj -H u U s a HJ K UH 5 ■H O H In - — -H r-' _l U-J 5 i) s T3 c J 1 co rH H) as U CL, 1 < CO -J ±t Jl -j S -Q a CO r Q 55 IB 1 " 1h 1 1 1 s S * I — 1 < 1 ^ E-73 Table E-18. 1975 commercial fish landings by species (in 10 x 10 minute blocks) around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. Note: Block numbers refer to numbered areas shown on Figure E-24. Only species with landings in excess of 10,000 lbs. (4,500kg) are 1 i sted . (Based on statistics from the California Department of Fish and Game.) Month of Isl and/ Weight Greatest Block Species (in lbs.) Catch ANACAPA ISLAND 684 Northern anchovy 5,932,650 Dec. Sea urchin 209,624 Jan. Bluefin Tuna 198,850 Aug. Bocaccio 168,969 Oct. Rockfish 147,045 May English sole 81,765 Mar. Petrale sole 16,490 Sep. California hal ibut 11,284 Jul . Sablefish 10,321 Oct. 20 other species 24,272 — Total for Block 6,801,270 707 Sea urchin 406,704 Jun. Northern anchovy 194,300 Oct. Swordfish 20,733 Aug. 3 other species 4,207 — Total for Block 625,944 SANTA CRUZ ISLAND 685 Market squid 1,080,648 May Northern anchovy 718,600 Jan. Jack mackerel 123,500 Sep. Sea urchin 67,513 May Rockfish 22,585 Jun. 18 other species 41,997 — Total for Block 2,054.843 686 Sea urchin 372,605 Dec. Market squid 356,200 May Bocaccio 32,742 Dec. 21 other species 32,871 — Total for Block 794,418 E-74 Table E-18 Cont. 687 Market squid 936,525 May Sea urchin 78,639 Jan. Pink ab alone 10,542 Oct. 18 other species 28,799 — Total for Block 1,054,505 708 Sea urchin 134,265 Dec. Pink ab alone 40,808 Oct. Red abalone 26,732 Mar. Swordfish 26,603 Sep. Black abalone 10,452 Oct. 10 other species 4,977 — Total for Block 243,837 709 Sea urchin 224,206 May Jack mackerel 173,455 Sep. Bluefin tuna 96,035 Jul. Market squid 71,829 Jun. Pink abalone 46,181 Apr. Red abalone 25,318 Jul. Swordfish 18,620 Aug. 13 other species 13,722 — Total for Block 669,166 SAN MIGUEL ISLAND 690 Black abalone 319,959 Jul. Sea urchin 225,423 Jan. Red abalone 116,336 Jan. Rockfish 71,576 Nov. Yelloweye rockfish 47,520 May Bocaccio 31,713 Nov. 26 other species 56,336 — Total for Block 868,863 713 Jack mackerel 48,000 Jan. 7 other species 12,571 — Total for Block 60,571 SANTA ROSA ISLAND 688 Northern anchovy 584,300 Oct. Spot prawn 23,713 Jul. Rockfish 16,194 Apr. Market squid 14,844 Jun. 16 other species 36,481 — Total for Block 675,532 E-75 Table E-18 Cont. 711 Sea urchin 970,038 Apr. Black ab alone 62,119 Sep. Bluefin tuna 57,391 Jan. Rockfish 49,595 Jul. Red ab alone 35,305 Jun. 13 other species 30,506 — Total for Block 1,204,954 712 No species over 10,000 lbs. 12 species reported 31,037 — SANTA BARBARA ISLAND 744 Swordfish 11,832 Nov. 3 other species 11,852 — Total for Block 23,684 745 Swordfish No other species 2,386 Jul. reported 764 Jack mackerel 66,500 Nov. Bluefin tuna 22,165 Aug. 4 other species 3,422 — Total for Block 92,087 765 Swordfish 13,739 Oct. Rockfish 12,599 Jul . 8 other species 20,841 — Total for Block 47,179 E-76 cation). Recreational fishing is \& major use of the fish resources around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. Although some fishermen seek tuna, albacore, marl in, or swordfish in the deeper waters seaward of the island's slope, most recreational fishermen, particularly those on commercial partyboats, are attracted to the nearshore island shelf waters, especially the areas over kelp beds. According to partyboat fishing statistics compiled by the California Department of Fish and Game (1979), rockfish, kelp, and sand bass are the species caught in greatest abundance, supplemented by regular takings of a variety of other species (see Tables E-20 and 21, and Figure E-21). Sportdivers collect lobster, abalone, and other invertebrates. Recreational fishermen visit offshore waters either as passengers on commercial partyboats or on private pleasure craft. Waters toward the center of the northern Channel Islands chain, primarily off Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands, are most heavily frequented by partyboats (see Figure E-22). Although statistics on the concentrations of private fishing boats are not available, most private boats probably fish the north side of Anacapa and Santa Cruz Islands (Ono, 1979, personal communication). Most visitors to northern Channel Island waters leave from harbors on the mainland side of the Santa Barbara Channel, including Oxnard, Yentura, Port Hueneme, Santa Barbara, and Gaviota, some 14 to 42 nmi (25 to 75km) from the northern Channel Island waters. Visitors to Santa Barbara Island waters come primarily from more southerly ports 1n the Los Angeles area or from Santa Catalina Island. Based on California Department of Fish and Game partyboat statistics for 1975, most recreational anglers fish during the E-77 TABLE E-19. Kelp harvests off the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island bets^en 1974 and 1973 (California Department of Fish and Game, 1979). Area (Weight in Wet Tons) 1974 1/176 1977 1978 Northern Channel Islands 19 ,858 11 538 5,535 15,304 1 24,588 (San Miguel, Santa Rosa Santa Cru2, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands) Santa Barbara Islanc 1 — ~ 1,867 Total 19 , 858 11 ,538 5,535 15,304 26,455 TABLE E-20. Ccmmercial passenger fishing vessel catch in number of fish for the northern Channel Islands between L970 and 1974 (California Department of Fish and Game, 1979). Species 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 Rockfish 337,820 215,906 358,641 436,486 303,425 Kelp and Sand bass 67,061 109,679 84,875 74,352 58,925 Halfmoon 319 93,305 32,782 34,012 3,613 California sheephead 7,474 9,755 9,626 14,369 7,051 Ocean ^hitef ish 5,972 4,933 7,373 7,171 4,092 Lingcod 5,387 4,569 5,940 6,248 5,872 Cabezon 1,217 1,754 1,526 1,037 490 Bonito 11,529 40 3,539 5,543 582 Flatfish, misc. 1,132 488 976 1,816 737 California halibut 1,622 643 859 1,228 303 All Others 2,220 5,856 5,071 3,048 4,408 Total 441,743 466,928 511,208 585,310 389,498 TABLE E-21. Coimercial passenger fishing vessel catch in number of fish j for Santa Barbara Island between 1970 and 1974 (California Department of Fish and Game, 1979) 1 Species 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 Rockfish 65,674 39,809 48,729 68,858 66,026 Kelp and Sand bass 2,614 191 10,774 6,098 250 Ocean whitefish 2,408 1,431 729 1,890 358 Halfmoon 939 27 1,374 3,352 50 Sheephead 1,657 593 2,417 2,239 309 Flatfish, misc.* 317 185 91 1,275 354 Bonito 1,704 27 64 40 Sculpin 102 178 243 19 113 Lingcod 93 75 79 122 66 Cabezon 16 12 87 66 10 All Others 291 6 343 1,506 + 35 Total 75,815 42,505 64,893 85,489 67,611 * includes halibut + predominately Pacific mackerel :-78 ai 1 F at +J en s- ro ro E Q. rd Qi s: Q ■a fO c "r— to C _1 '*- o M- 4- o •f— 1 — 13 re fO O QJ 1 S- 3 lo CQ r*> CT) • i — 1 oo "O . c: rD ro c m •i — r^ en ■o i—i aj +-> c: c t/i SZ CO -C •f— (J 4- +-> ro +J <_J fO O +-> dQ i- >» O 4-> CL S_ CO ro Q. aj c 4- •i — O S_ ro >>s: +-> •( — QJ CO F c ro 0) O ■a • ■o-— • QJ C CTi > ro r^ •i — en -l-> .c .-h ta co r— •i— »> ZS Li_ +J F c 13 C|_ QJ O O E CNJ ex. rj E-79 E-30 warmer months of June through September, but year-round activities persist at a lower use level. E.3.d. Commercial Shipping Due to the study area's location near a major shipping route and the presence of active oil and gas leases, commercial vessels regularly navigate the Santa Barbara Channel region. Furthermore, numerous proposed projects, some of which are imminent, will add to the overall level of shipping. A Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) established by the Coast Guard runs just north of, and roughly parallel to, the northern Channel Islands. It approaches to within 2 nmi (3.7km) of Anacapa in the east end of the Channel and is about 20 nmi (35km) from San Miguel Island in the west end of the Channel (Figure E-23). The TSS is used by many commercial vessels travelling between northern Pacific ports (e.g., Alaska, San Francisco, and Seattle) and those situated in southern California, as well as by traffic using the Panama Canal or heading to and from Indonesia and other western Pacific ports. Large vessel traffic (i.e., vessels larger than 100 gross tons) has been estimated to pass through the Channel at a rate of 6.5 vessels per day in a northbound direction and 5.5 vessels per day in southbound direction (McMullen, 1977). Another Channel area survey, conducted by the Coast Guard at Port Hueneme and assisted by radar data collection procedures, reported a daily average traffic load of nine large vessels (300 feet or longer) heading north within, or closely paralleling the TSS (Cherney et a]_. , 1978). This study also recorded a daily combined average of seven medium (100-299 feet long), small (less than 100 E-81 E-82 feet long), and tug-in- tow vessels en route along the TSS in a northerly direction. In addition, an averge daily load of 32 vessels (incuding vessels of all sizes) were observed crossing the lanes from one side of the Channel to the other. The majority of these were probably linked to service/supply boat activity between Port Hueneme and offshore oil and gas platforms and associated facilities. The most common cargo aboard ships transitting the study area appears to be petroleum products, both crude and refined. In 1976, these products accounted for approximately two-thirds (66 percent) of the total cargo (by weight) received at or shipped from Long Beach Harbor, Los Angeles Harbor, and Port Hueneme -- the three major ports closest to the study area (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1976). In order of decreasing tonnage, the predomi- nant petroleum products handled at these ports were crude petro- leum, residual fuel oil, and distillate fuel. Commodities such as fresh fruits and nuts, limestone, basic chemicals, coke, iron, steel, nonmetallic minerals, and lumber made up much of the remaining non petroleum related cargo passing through these ports. Although precise traffic log counts are not kept, it is reported that the majority of vessels passing within or close to the study area are of foreign registry (Bannon, 1979, personal communica- tion) . The waters around the northern Channel Islands are also used by ships servicing offshore oil and gas lease tracts in the immediate Channel region. Because there is currently limited onshore pipeline capacity from the Channel area to Los Angeles Basin refineries, most offshore production must be transported either by tanker or barge or both. E-83 In the future, vessel traffic in the Channel is likely to increase both as a result of new southern California offshore oil produc- tion and the realization of a number of external projects now in the planning stages. As many as 40 new round trips per month can be expected as a result of offshore Santa Barbara Channel oil production if platform- to -shore pipelines are not constructed (California Office of Planning and Research, 1977). Specifically, this increase would consist of new production from the South Ellwood, Summerland, and Carpinteria State offshore fields, and the Santa Ynez, Santa Clara, and Hueneme Units. However, the recent approval of an oil and gas pipeline system by the South Central Coast Regional Commission should significantly lower the number of projected tanker and barge vessels transitting the Channel (California Coastal Commission, 1979b). Tanker traffic can still be expected to increase as a result of exploration and development of other OCS Sales #35 and #48 leases. Projects not originating in the Santa Barbara area also may lead to increased vessel traffic in the Channel. However, there is a possibility that current levels of vessel traffic in the Santa Barbara Channel due to the transport of Alaskan oil will decrease. Congressman Lagomarsino (R., Calif.) has introduced a bill in the House of Representatives which would prohibit vessels transporting Alaskan oil from using routes through waters lying shoreward of the Channel Islands (HR 1056, 96th Congr. 1st Sess., 1979). This legislation is currently pending before the Coast Guard subcommittee of the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee. Tankers carrying Alaskan crude now pass through the Channel at a rate of about 183 per year (Stark, 1979, personal communication). E-84 A project which might increase Santa Barbara Channel tanker traffic involves shipment of Naval Petroleum Reserve oil . Pursu- ant to the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976, facilities will be acquired or constructed to ship not less than 350,000 barrels per day of crude oil from Elk Hills, California to unspecified marketing terminals. One transportation option being considered would involve piping this oil to Port Hueneme and then transferring it by tanker to market. Tankers bound for Pacific coast destinations north of Port Hueneme such as San Francisco would have to enter the Channel shipping lanes. If this option were put into operations, an estimated 207 additional northbound vessel trips per year could be expected through the Channel (U. S. Bureau of Land Mangement, 1979). Another proposed project which might add to the present level of commercial shipping in the Santa Barbara Channel is the construc- tion of a liquified natural gas (LNG) terminal and gasification plant in southern California. To date, a variety of sites have been proposed and considered by the California Coastal Commission (CCC), the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). A final decision has not as yet been made. The site at Point Conception, preliminarily approved by the PUC, would result in little if any additional traffic 1n the study area -- LNG tankers would approach no closer than 20 nmi (37km) from San Miguel Island. A site further south at Oxnard, which is currently favored by FERC (which has permit- ting authority along with PUC) would result in a steady flow of tankers through the Channel. The CCC has suggested alternative offshore siting options near the northern Channel Islands; how- E-85 ever, neither the PUC, FERC, nor the applicant have seriously considered them (Reese, 1979, personal communication). Finally, the Space Shuttle Vehicle System at Vandenberg Air Force Base, when in operation, will also lead to increased vessel traffic. Barges transporting expendable external tanks will be moved from Port Hueneme through the Channel to Vandenberg. Ten round trips per year by barge are expected (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Also, boosters recovered after launch in an impact zone southwest of Point Arguello are likely to be towed across the Channel, thus adding to the region's traffic. E.3.e. Military Operations The United States Navy and Air Force conduct a wide range of military operations in the general southern California Bight area. All of these operations are strictly controlled whether on sea or in the air, and all require that extensive danger zones be free of non-participants in order that the conduct of an operation may safely proceed. Current operations include air to air, air to surface, surface to air, and surface to surface missile launch, bomb drop exercises (inert bombs with spotting charges), aerial mining exercises, and some submarine activities in the hydrophone array area south of Santa Cruz Island. Additional military operations planned for the near future are those in conjunction with the Air Force Space Shuttle Vehicle Flight System. The Navy maintains a weather station on San Miguel Island. No permanent personnel stay on the island in connection with the station, but occasionally personnel visit the station by helicopter to check equipment. E-86 Bomb drop exercises in the area at San Miguel Island are conducted against a target buoy in ocean waters approximately 1 nmi (1.8km) south of the eastern tip of the island. Light attack aircraft from the Naval Air Station, Lemoore, California are the primary users of this facility. The present rate of these operations is approximately 200 times a year, with an average of five aircraft per flight--a total of 1,000 individual sorties per year. Planes making the bombing runs cruise at an altitude of 12,000 ft (3063m) and descend to an altitude of approximately 2,000 ft (606m) when dropping practice bombs. A surface danger zone extends 3 nmi (5.6km) from the shoreline of the eastern half of San Miguel Island. Prior to the conduct of bomb drop exercises, boaters are advised to remain clear of this area (U.S. Department of Navy, 1979, personal communication). San Miguel Island has not been intentionally struck by ordnance items for many years. Occassionally, however, missile danger zones may overlie the island, forcing evacuation of personnel for the duration of such activities. A practice aerial mine range is maintained by the Navy in Beech- er's Bay on the northeast side of Santa Rosa Island and in the channel area between Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz Islands. The mines used are inert and consist of a mine casing filled with sand and concrete. The altitude of aircraft involved in mine laying operations is often as low as 200 ft (61m). Mine recovery by divers occurs approximately once each month. This activity requires the presence of recovery craft for a period of approxi- mately three days. E-87 The Navy maintains an undersea hydrophone array extending south from the east end of Santa Cruz Island for a distance of approxi- mately 10 nmi (18.5km). The facility is operated by the General Motors Corporation, Delco Division, and is used for acoustic measurement purposes approximately 50 times a year (Scruggs, 1979, personal communication). As noted, a future Air Force use of the area involves the develop- ment and operation of the Space Shuttle Vehicle System. Approxi- mately 20 operation flights are planned for the system and will be launched for Vandenberg Air Force Base on Point Conception (beginning in December, 1982, and extending over an 8-year period), although only seven or eight polar orbit flights will pass directly over the Island shortly after takeoff. Flight profiles indicate that the launch vehicle would be between 160,000 and 180,000 feet (48,480 to 54,500m) as it passes over the study area (Pfeiffer, 1979, personal communication). Overpressures felt on the islands will vary widely, however, depending on the angle of inclination chosen upon launching. As part of the space shuttle system a splashdown area to the west and southwest of San Miguel Island is planned for the recovery of space shuttle booster rockets. Most returning shuttles will approach the study area at altitudes ranging from 80,000 to 100,000 feet (24,200 to 30,300m) along a reentry path passing near, and for one return orbit directly over, San Miguel Island. Overpressures of variable intensity (1 1/2-2 pounds per square foot) are projected to resemble aircraft sonic booms in these cases (Pfeiffer, 1979, personal communication). The towing of spent booster rockets by barge from Port Hueneme to Vandenberg AFB is also envisioned and is addressed in Section E.3.d. above. E-88 E.3.f. Research Because of the exceptional abundance and condition of marine birds, marine mammals, fish and intertidal populations (see Section E-2), the marine ecosystem surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island provides an especially valuable natural laboratory for investigating species interactions with other marine life and with their environment. These natural attributes have encouraged extensive scientific oceanographic research by government and university groups. Many research institutions located throughout the southern California area have conducted (see Table E-22) or funded (see Table E-23) scientific investigations in the area. E.3.g. Recreation Water-based recreational activities in the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island region are pursued by three often interrelated user groups: pleasure boaters (sail and power); SCUBA divers and spearfishermen; and those interested in photography and nature study (e.g., marine bird and mammal observers). Although the dominant means of recreational access is by boat, charter aircraft overflights also provide a form of access which appears to be increasing in popularity (Coffin, 1979, personal communica- tion). For a discussion of sport fishing see Section E.3.c. The attractiveness of the northern Channel Islands as a destina- tion for recreationists is generally on the upsurge; still there is currently no indication that congestion among recreational users is a problem. Natural controls upon public accessibility -- most notably lengthy boat travel distances from the mainland and E-89 Table E-22 Major research organizations which have or are likely to conduct marine related scientific investigations on the coastal ocean environment in southern California University of California at Santa Cruz* Irvine* Berkeley* San Diego* Los Angeles* Santa Barbara* Scripps Institute (part of the University of California and San Diego) Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History California State Colleges (at Long Beach and Fullerton) California Institute of Technology Los Angeles County Museum Planning Research Corporation Point Reyes Bird Observatory San Diego State College University of Southern California* Allan Hancock Foundation Hubbs Seaworld in San Diego California Department of Fish and Game U.S. Bureau of Land Management National Marine Fisheries Service * Sea Grant Universities E-90 TABLE E- 23. Examples of research funding entities with potential or demonstrated relevance to the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island v/aters. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 1. Department of Interior a) U.S. Bureau of Land Management supports environmental baseline studies as well as special studies on hydrocarbon/heavy metal pollution: supported sea and air surveys of marine mammals and seabirds in the southern California Bight. b) U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service supports research on sea otters in southern California as well as migratory birds and endangered species. c) National Park Service supports research concerning living resources found within the Channel Island National Monument. 2. Department of Commerce a) National Marine Fisheries Service supports research concerning marine mammals (including seals and sea lions on San Miguel) , fishery resources, and endangered marine species . b) Office of Sea Grant supports a full range of marine related research through its system of Sea Grant colleges. c) Office of Coastal Zone Management supports research and monitoring at marine sanct- uaries as well as coastal management concerns d) Office of Environ- mental Data Service supports a full range of cceanographic and climatological data collection, analysis and archiving functions. 3. Environmental Protection Agency supports studies and monitoring of pollutant levels in coastal and pelagic marine organisms and environments. 4. National Aeronautics and Space Administration supports cceanographic research utilizing tele- metric and remote sensing capabilities of air- craft and satellites. 5. Marine Mammal Commission supports research pertaining to conservation and protection of marine mammals including abundance and distribution studies, ecological studies, and biological studies. 6. National Science Found- ation supports a variety of pure and applied marine science and engineering projects. 7. Department of Energy supports research and monitoring of marine pollution levels in coastal and pelagic marine organisms and environments. 8. Department of Defense a) U.S. Air Force supporting research on the effects of the space shuttle's supersonic booms on marine mammal and seabird life in the northern Channel Islands. b) Office of Naval Research supports bioacoustic and biomedical research on marine mammals as well as other marine studies. c) Naval Undersea Center adn Other Units supports bioacoustic research on marine mammals. STATE GOVERNMENT 1. California Department of Fish and Game supports research concerning state fisheries as game species maintains sport and commercial fishing statistics, conducts monitoring research. 2. California Coastal Commission supports research related to coastal water resource and use management. E-91 occasionally adverse weather conditions -- are matched by as yet fairly strict landing permit controls. Together these controls favor rather sparse activity densities. This is not to say, however, that future recreational trends in southern California might not alter the activity patterns around the northern Channel Islands over the long run. Regional water- oriented leisure demands already appear to be exceeding supplies available along the mainland coast and Santa Catalina Island to the south (California Department of Parks and Recreation, 1979). Consequently, it is possible that the Islands will increasingly function as an "overflow" destination for the greater southern California region. Another potential stimulant to the growth of water-based recrea- tional activities is the rising popularity of the Channel Island National Monument (i.e., Santa Barbara and Anacapa Islands) for public visitations. The National Park Service's (NPS) current policy encourages tightly monitored visitations, while at the same time cautioning the publie (in preventative fashion) against overuse. Most private boaters frequenting waters surrounding the Channel Islands are either en route to activities on the islands or engaged in activities such as diving, fishing, or nature observation. A small percentage of users is comprised of "through" boating parties destined for other points along the California coast. Many of these transients often use pas- sages separating Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa and Anacapa Islands (Figure E-24) (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). While extensive data on vessel types and seasonal use densities are unavailable, it also it probable that these parties occasionally E-92 o UJ E-93 make island stopovers, if only to seek shelter within approved overnight mooring areas (e.g., San Miguel's Tyler Bight and Cuyler Harbor). Although the National Park Service discourages private craft from travelling to the Channel Islands National Monument for the sole purpose of visiting, many recreationists do exactly this. En route, they often partake in nature observation and occasional diving. Yet another class of boaters travels to nearshore zones merely to enjoy the islands' scenery (from on board) or the exhileration of a day's relaxation at sea. In the absence of detailed boater surveys, however, there is no way of differentiat- ing between levels of private passive boaters, multi- activity boaters (i.e., divers/nature observers) , and those solely concern- ed with reaching the monument islands for other land-based pur- suits. The most popular staging points for private vessels with destinations on or around the northern Channel Islands are situat- ed along the coast between Point Conception and Point Mugu. They include Santa Barbara, Ventura, Oxnard, Gaviota, Goleta, and Port Hueneme (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Whereas private recreational boaters are apt to cruise throughout the northern Channel Islands region and can partake of diving and/or nature watching in innumerable nearshore locales, the majority of visitors to the Channel Monument Islands of Anacapa .and Santa Barbara arrive on commercial pay-as-you-go charters. For example, one publicly licensed common carrier operating out of Ventura to Anacapa (and a few other island destinations nearby) carries most of the total visitor traffic to the monument. Day- long, as well as overnight, camping drop-off/pick-up arrangements, are provided throughout the year, reaching their peak activity season (6 trips per day) between June and September (Duthie, 1979, E-94 personal communication). Although aimed at conducting visitors on guided tours of the monument islands of Anacapa and, to a lesser extent, San Miguel and Santa Cruz, this service also facilitates en route nature observation. Boat captains regularly seek out gray whale pods during their northward (Jan. -March) migrations in the Santa Barbara Channel to observe and photograph (Connelly, 1979, personal communication). In the course of approaching Anacapa (west end) and Santa Cruz (north side), moreover, boats regularly pass at a safe distance from sea lion rookeries for similar purposes. Until recently, when they were restricted by California Department of Fish and Game's Ecological Reserve regulations for West Anacapa, such observational forays reportedly also included observations of brown pelican nesting grounds (Connelly, 1979, personal communication). While the brunt of commercial boat visits by recreationists to the northern Channel Islands are centered upon Anacapa Island, more recently a special permit process has also been initiated for restricted tours (i.e., small ranger-accompanied) of San Miguel Island (which the NPS manages in league with the Department of the Navy). On Santa Cruz Island, having assumed majority ownership in late 1978, the California Nature Conservancy hopes to expand public visits as well, relying mostly upon commercial charter services such as the one currently in operation (Grumbine, 1979, personal communication). Along the passive pleasure boating and nature observation, near- shore water zones around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island are frequented by divers and spearfishing enthusi- asts. Despite rather cold year-round water temperatures (normally necessitating wet suits), visual clarity is of such good quality, and protected cove shallows and kelp beds so numerous, that both E-95 scuba and limited snorkel ing activities thrive here. The presence of substantial stocks of lobsters and abalone also serves to attract many participants to this recreational use sector (Duthie, 1979, personal communication). As inventoried by the California Governor's Office Task Force on the Offshore Continental Shelf, some 25 skin and scuba diving sites are evident in the northern Channel Islands, including 7 off Santa Cruz, 3 off Santa Barbara and 5 off each of Anacapa, Santa Rosa, and San Miguel (California Office of Planning and Research, 1977) (see Figure E-25). Both party boaters and commercial charter operators engage in or facilitate diving activities, but there is as yet little informa- tion on their proportional contributions to total user demand or quantified areal concentrations. One "open" charter boat operator from Santa Barbara, for example, regularly transports paying SCUBA divers to San Miguel (Wilson Rock, Richardson Rock and Prince Island), Santa Rosa (Talcott Shoals), and Santa Cruz (Gull Island and Smuggler's Cove) (Duthie, 1979, personal communication). In these areas, most dives occur well within one-quarter mile of shore, and frequently in kelp beds. An estimated 50 percent of these recreationists carry spear guns on board and take both lobster and abalone. This particular operator indicated few, if any, concerns about user congestion, again highlighting the abundance of both open water space available in general and quality diving sites. Local diving clubs from communities along the mainland coast and elsewhere generate most of this operator's business (Duthie, 1979, personal communication). E-96 irgqr o o G _l Z CT1 HI > (3 Q LU S- -J 03 3 Q. O 00 OJ +J •i" 00 CD • C *— ** • i— C^ > r». •r- CT> •u i— i so •s -O .c - 3 o a s- V! to aj ■o 00 c OJ fO a c -a •( — c j*: (C (/) CD s_ C fO •i — 1 — - c 3 E Cl fO O ! Q_ a. 9 LO CM LU LU en ZD CD E-97 Although not strictly marine-based, recreational flying is also a growing leisure pastime in the Santa Barbara Channel (Coffin, 1979, personal communication). Airports such as a county facility situated in Santa Barbara function as the primary staging points for this activity. Presently, two charter firms in the nearby mainland coastal region offer offshore overflights. Nature- watching during the gray whale's north and southward migration season is reportedly the most popular motive (90 percent) behind the demand for plane trips; a much smaller proportion of users charter aircraft purely to enjoy the unique scenic vistas provided by the offshore area's marine/island environment (Coffin, 1979, personal communication). One of the charter companies, Santa Barbara Aviation, reports that they receive approximately six or eight requests per month for flights in and around the channel for nature observation (Glendinning. 1979, person?.! communication) . The peak season for recreate jnal overflights lasts from April through September; and given the evidence of widening public interest in this activity, the frequency of charter services is likely to increase (Coffin, 1979, personal communication). E-98 F. ALTERNATIVES F.a. INTRODUCTION Section F discusses six alternative actions for NOAA to take regarding the area under consideration. The first alternative presented is the possibility of not designating a sanctuary but instead relying on the existing system of controls. Alternative 2 is NOAA's preferred alternative, namely the designation of a marine sanctuary with the controls set forth in the draft designa- tion document and proposed regulations in Appendix 1. Alterna- tives 3 through 6 include several different boundary, regulatory, and management options. These alternatives are discussed in comparison to the preferred alternative. Table F-l summarizes the boundaries and controls considered for designation alternatives 2 through 6. F.l STATUS QUO ALTERNATIVE F.l.a. INTRODUCTION An alternative to designating a marine sanctuary is to rely solely on the State and Federal authorities currently in effect. This section sets forth the existing controls in the area under con- sideration which constitute this "status quo" alternative. Figure F-l and Table F-l. a. summarize the various State and Federal controls discussed in this section. F-l re re re O i- 01 W o X) 4-1 Ol — E 1— Ol <— « = a. 5 -C 4-> c • -* £ 13 0> Ol .ID 2 m 01 I C x: u m a. c O — * -D -C >) f— i iB *-> X — - r— s» <— c 4*J o> «— 0) 01 01 Ol c « > 01 2 4/) c Ol -- 4-1 ja •>- r- c i. A 't— "O •<- ■ » x: MM ■C VI o 2 jz c >, 4-1 >■, 4-> •— ui 4-1 1_ O "O Ol rg c > l/l J3 J HI c O XI 2 l/l Ol 3 o s. 13 i- A (0 4-" X- —l .c *j w — - x: 4-1 (J ■o 1/1 Ol o o> ■o o 01 Ol O C c B u a*. o c i_ o> -c o *- o 4J (/> (0 Q. <*- 4-J u-> m 4-J CO Ol *— 4-> 1/1 cn o > 0) c «>N •a c 4-> •f— m Ol c 4-> c *> i/i *» j= C ■O £ t/1 • ro •<- a. 0) x j-> in i/i c J5 Ol > o> •i" -C Ol •— ■ • Ol w s_ *J OJ o 2 4J MM <4- l/l CO 4-> 2 +-> 0) c £ 4- 1 2 0) s. Ol Ol r— — — 4-> c -C o > > re 4_> 14_ « -C Ol 2 4-> -J !+- p •«- O l/l in o J-> ro »f— m 01 c l/l X» T3 •^ 4J l/l f»»* X) <4- *-> p— w •f— 13 -- •«- C u- o Q. a, .- je E 01 •w re > Q. —> — <*» o> u •*- O. c 0) > a: i/> co ro Ol c o 4-1 4-> l/l 10 . -" l/» X • 01 • in 1 l/l in c c a; 0) h- o — > > 4J oi-«- 01 c c s- i. •-■ i- o >ix: 3 >, 1— 4J O" ro Ol 3 01 *-> OS c a. m S- p— to 4-> c a> en "F= •o +J c re «3 c s- A (U c ■M o r~ •p- re +J (0 o f— 3 3 cr Ol a> tn S- 3 4-> >> •r— c >> s- -o (0 3 •o p— c U 3 X o >» re s- c re cn | •r— 2 CM 4J . -iJ in "8E X) c — s- •<- E i/> LO IC c 2 c — Ol ■ JC >. 4-> 4-1 i. •r- (U X) C 3 £ .= U O 4-> c i. •<- « > 2 •— » *■» S- 4J •-- O on in «J X) <*- c IO c s- x: 4-I-- • 01 Ol o c o u E ■" U Ol o 4-> ro (— • a. u ^ •!- m C 2 c 01 > •— - ■ 4-1 ■a c c 5- o in o T> U ro in ■a CJ Ol 4-> «r-4> (O ■— c TJ 4-> s. CZLS c •r- Ol 13 > a. t- Irt Q. «— o 3) •»- ^^ 4-> or- 3 •t" U o o»t- ex o 13 SE ae o a* c -o -. c 01 ro m j= Ol 4-» m r— t- -o •"■ O C fO s i— <0 m Ol m _3 Ol (0 x: i— i s~ •— ■ u 4-> ro u r— Q3 >— _, — o E = r— 01 • ro — U 4-1 « -O 3 C IB 3 C O s_ VC ro T3 C ro ro r— i- r— CO Ol ■« C ro C C -^ ro X: ro m O CO — C Ol 13 ro C U co e •— (O 4J oi x: 3 1- <_> ro •<- c 4-> ro C S- CM 01 lO -- XI Ol S- "O x: fO c HO 10 Ol <— 4-> x gj c ■ 4-> C iO "O C CO c "O ro ro C J= T3 r— 3 (_) c m ro ■— ' s. c ro — . in ro 1113 - in jC C ro 01 4-1 ro X) -"!-■—!_ ■i- C m ro = C~Q 01 -. 3 >— S- O •<- Ol S- E 4-> ro e m i— 0) io "O ro x: 01 C U 4^ in ro 4J -o i— m 3 C ro — ro O •— C >, S_ 0) 4i or ro xi 4J 4-i m ro t. 0) -- 4-1 oi r— x: oi c • I 4J ro 4J C <0 "O 3 ro O C CO c f— 2 •<- "O ro ro u *-> c x: "o >— 01XOI33UC m i_ Ol 4-1 ro O "3 •— < •<- ro C i- C 4J i— 4-1 ro -. m ro C 01 CO CM 01 "O t- Ol C •— i in JT C re C C- Ol 4-1 ro ^2 Oira C"Or— s.-- _. JC x: -» c •<- O m ro r— <_) -O ro E C--CO —I co F-2 1 B 1 4-J i CD C •i- 1 ro '— l O S- i t c o ui CD •r— JH '- S- 1 1 c ro CD r— > 3 C 1 CD .c u u o o » 03 CD Ul >,j= Ul CD g CJ • CD 03 Cn-^- o <_l 4-1 c ID c E • -m xi s: CD -O Ul •<- 4-> E in -C CL 4) . * E 41 i. ,— OJ L-J 5 Ul Ul S- r— e •i- > — 0) cn • Ul S> c: Ul CD Cn CD C o •— 2 oo C s- CD •<- 03 r— r— o 4-> f— T3 03 E C Z3 •r- r— ro CD CN/ = C .C ••- >,«*- 1- CL 0J -p- CL V JZ 3 (0 •<- M C -Q «£ •r- LL ro >i (J •- 1— s- — C 3 10 UJ 4-> jr IO Ul S. Cfl C 3 CD 03 Ul -<; "C CD C 1- 4) i_ CD l«: -c 4-1 03 CD t- JZ CD O OJ r— 3 > 4 '- e: — < 2 3 o o ro 4-) •.- CJ Ul C 1 CD Ul C CD ro h- C ■•" 3 — o 41 ro • U) r— < s- c on CD -C ui E Ul 4J Ll_ C s- Ol CD CD CD Ul cn •»- 4-1 4-1 CL U) 4-1 ui cn cd i — in . — O c a> C .0 # '•"5 u CD 03 03 Cj O 03 re E E CD S- 03 <-) E 41 03 CD 4-J to o — z jr o 10 i. o 1_ !_ ID O Z <_) -i- CD C TO O' 03 •o i. . ro Z C C S. c ■CJ J- 03 c CL 2 >1 4-J u 4-1 aj U <•□ e C_> 4-J Ul 03 C Ol Ul c CD s: cl OJ >) fO « "O OS CD E 03 03 ro Ol 4-J >i Ul i — Ol io rui- XI - • c XJ UJ c Ul s_ • CD C i— S- e cd C 03 — — r— 4-1 «z 4>J c: 4^ C CD Ul -LJ • » «=• c CD -C a> ro >>CO u id D CD Ul 03 ul OJ 03 JO 41 O u CD -i- CD 03 UJ D C c Ul T3 u u s- 3 i- . •!- Ol JE *J CD ZZ -r- 4J T3 C ■!- u c ■f— 03 4-j xj -c z: •-- O 0J 01 41 S. 4-> O 3 > • CD Ul ro ■>- 3 C 4-J J^ C 03 E O Ul L- (. ro C 4-J « > •!- > > Ul w c OJ u (J 4J i. CD S~ •t— C 03 CD •»• Ul O I— o Ul C <0 4) i- 4-J c i. ■r- - s- CD -f— 4-1 -C 4-J O 14- •— 4-J rO •I- 4-J JZ. XJ cj a 03 ■>— 3 4J u ■i— ■f— Ul 14- t: ai . oo •.- >, JD ■d i. or ■a Ul 4-J 03 C3- C •<- Ul XI Ul 4-J i- ■I- 00 ■— C 0J S- j-> 4-> Ul > 1- 03 S_ O 3 4-> i. L. ■z. OJ 3 4 i. S- ■<- 10 > 3 c ui c 3 -r- fl s. 4-1 e CD -* t- 03 4-J O -C 4-1 O o Ol j= TJ .re — O 4' 3 3 J * o- o: 4 L. o V. E C 14- ■•- U S- CD 3 Ul O 4-> U o ■O 4-J • c — «t 03 ox; cj CD S- 41 — a; on o s_ 1*. 0) O t ro Ul 4J CD U 3 C u c ■>- •O 03 — -, OO 03 L. 01 4J 4-J OJ -C O o e 3 C_ u 03 03 • 3 3 i- — o 03 3 U 4J Cl c L. 4-J >4- o Ul ID O Ul c 4-J r— UO CD • 1 — 03 3 z £ QJ f— C Ul Ul >, •r- 10 ro o> 3 c s- ui Ul Ul r— CD 03 3 l— Ol CD CNJ r— M- >l 3 « Ul r— 14- 4) 03 4 — J- 5. CJ E s_- IQ 0) CD 01 CD 03 "— Ul j2 ■— C "— 4-> O !_> CJ 4) 41 L. •>- O •*-> O •r- ro ro ul CD o 4-J CD C i— i. C S- 3 ■.- CD 4-J CD 3 C U <_> . O 2 3 ui c_> t. C 3 5 L. 03 cn 4J S_ >^ ui c- CD •<- O CD CD » 4-> C ••- > 03 4) 4-1 •>- ■r- ul S. 03 "1- Ol O 4-J u C ro Ol s_ rc <_ a. <— ■>- j= i_i CD S C £ •<- s: ■O 4-1 Ul > > C >1 01 E XJ ui -C ••- o 4-J 4J c c -C m cn S- ra = 03 4-J ul i- E rvi .f- 03 E **- J rsl e ui 03 S- 1- o s. ~ rv; c c uo Ul 4-J C 4-J Ul cz OO UO 4-J 4-1 o O S- U =3 U_ z Ul c jC Ul >> O) s- Ul c£ U! CD (0 C < c-. CD > ul O) o x: <+- c •r— • •— Ul M- zr 4J O H- 4-1 4-J Ol 4 ■t— c 'r— 03 5>3 U ■o 3 4J J- > rz S- 01 C CD i- 03 g; F" >l4-> CD l_> 4-1 CD 4-J IB U i — E C o 4-J in ui c c 3 4-> o ra 41 -— 01 o OJ Ul s- o 03 >, c- C 03 u s_ 4-J 4-1 1- O a. cd Ul 03 • i— ■F- ID Cj u & s <4- 03 4-J > 3 > e — •'— o OJ 01 ID CD CD CD a ^ *-> r— 4-1 i_ 1— CD "4- CD E = E E U o s_ 3 u c •<— s. CD ul s. s. o 4-1 a. 4J Ul o fa ■•— o ^ ■>», c 1—4 14- CD 4-) TJ CD 03 .c o ui ■a Ul CNI o Ul OJ u 4-1 Ul s_ 4-J e 4-1 S. 3 u 2 • 03 CD 03 03 3 •i— -o 3 i- -o > CD u O — E *-> — E E 01 xj 4 5 s. O 4-J ■!- 03 03 03 03 rrj tx LU CI 4-i c a. us c i- Ul <*- O 4-1 C 0) -5 o ai E U <_) 4- U Q- 01 o -o 1 CD Cn • 03 I — C -i- 03 !_> ^ c 3 >i O Ll. Q <_> ■ O IjO CJ Li. Q LO u CL c oo CJ LL ILL c c o O fc x: s_ o O u- O Li. o o M- s- 4J CD Q. CL -c >, •<— 03 -C -C 4-) >i >! >) >, on Cl Ul -o Ul C •— -o i— T3 •r- 0) 03 3 •t— e •^ 4) 0) c CD C CD CD LU or. <_> U- fB U. E ce 03 CH ro a cz . > o E 01 £4 41 Ol uo s- QJ XJ fD i s_ CD Ul CD S_ i— S_ 0) C C Q- 4-J •^ i. s- jd to e 03 '- c O 3 •r- -o ■«— S o o +-> O .rc 4-> 4-> •r- 0) 0) Ul Ul o -o Ul O) Ul 4-> E E Ol S- c -C 03 ro OJ 1 • X s. c_ a: 1 4-1 re > I/O m 1 4-> c 4-J • o CL O Ul c u ul E 4-> (_> •t- X >, o S- -i- A -O CD 03 4-> *3 4-> ro I— 1 1 j= « O 01 k •i- S_ r— CD Ll_ i- Ul o •^- Cl U. a. 3 >4- E O Ul —1 i 01 CO S- > C\J fO «*■ 1— < ro F-3 F-4 tart .re F-la. Abbreviations of Authorities and Agencies Abbreviations of Authorities Federal AA CAA CWA ESA FCMA MBTA M5PA NHPA OCSLA OPA PMR PWSA SSV5 State AQCA ASBS CCA ER FGC HCRPA OGS WQCA Antiquities Act; 16 USC §§461-469 i Clean Air Act; 42 USC §§7401-7642 Clean Water Act; 33 USC §§1251-1376 Endangered Species Act; 16 USC §§1531-1543 Fishery Conservation and Management Act; 16 USC §§1801-1882 Migratory Bird Treaty Act; 16 USC §§703-711 Marine Mammal Protection Act; 16 USC §§1361-1407 National Historic Preservation Act; 16 USC §§470-470n Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act; 43 USC §§1331-1343 Oil Pollution Act of 1961; 33 USC §§1001-1016 Pacific Missile Range; U.S. Navy Ports and Waterways Safety Act; 33 USC §§1221-1227 Space Shuttle Vehicle System; U.S. Air Force Air Quality Control Act; California Health and Safety Code, §§39000-42708 Areas of Special Biological Significance; California Water Code §13260 California Coastal Act; California Public Resources Code §27000 Ecological Reserves; California Fish and Game Code §1580 Fish and Game Code; California Fish and Game Code, California Administrative Code, Title 14 Historical and Cultural Resources Protection Act; California Public Resources Code §5000 Oil and Gas Sanctuaries; California Public Resources Code §6870 Water Quality Control Act; California Water Code §13000 Abbreviations of Agencies Federal BLM - COE EPA - FWS HCRS - MMC NMFS - NPS PMFC - USCG - USGS - State ARB - CCC DFG HRC PFMC - SIC WRCB - Bureau of Land Management - Department of the Interior Army Corps of Engineers - Department of Defense Environmental Protection Agency Fish and Wildlife Service - Department of the Interior Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service - Department of the Interior Marine Mammal Commission National Marine Fisheries Service - Department of Commerce National Park Service - Department of the Interior Pacific Fisheries Management Council; Joint Federal-State United States Coast Guard - Department of Transportation United States Geological Survey - Department of the Interior Air Resources Board California Coastal Commission Department of Fish and Game Historic Resources Commission Pacific Fisheries Management Council- State Lands Commission Water Resources Control Board (Joint Federal-State-Private Body) F-5 F.l.b EXISTING MANAGEMENT AUTHORITIES F.l.b.i. STATE AUTHORITIES The State's jurisdiction in the area under consideration extends three nmi (5.6km) miles offshore from the mean low tide line. State authorities range in approach and scope from broad regional management programs such as the California Coastal Act to laws intended to control specific threats or protect specific re- sources. The authorities with broad jurisdiction are described first, followed by those addressing a specific threat or resource, respectively. The California Coastal Act of 1976 (CCA) (Cal. Pub. Res. Code 30000 et seq. (the CCA) The California Coastal Act of 1976, Cal. Pub. Res. Code 30000 et_ seq. (the CCA), the foundation of the California Coastal Manage- ment Program, establishes a comprehensive set of specific policies for the protection of coastal resources and the management of orderly economic development thoughout the coastal zone. The Act defines the coastal zone as the land and water area of the State extending seaward to the outer limit of the State's jurisdiction, Including all offshore islands, and extending inland generally 1,000 yards from the mean high tide line. In significant coastal estuarine, habitat and recreational areas it extends inland to the first major ridgeline or five miles from mean high tide, whichever is less. F-6 Activities in State waters must comply with the policies estab- lished by the CCA. In addition, seaward of State jurisdiction, Federal activities directly affecting the coastal zone and activi- ties which require a Federal license or permit must be conducted in a manner consistent with these policies to the maximum extent practicable. Provisions of the CCA which address activities or concerns rele- vant to the consideration of a marine sanctuary include: • Article 4, Section 30230, granting "special protection to" areas and species of special biological or economic significance and requiring uses of the marine environment to be carried out so as to maintain biological productivity. •Article 4, Section 30233, limiting dredging and filling in coastal waters to situations where "there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative and it is related to specific listed purposes." • Article 5, Section 30240, protecting sensitive habitat areas against "any significant disruption of habitat values" and against impacts from adjacent development which would "significantly degrade" the area. • Article 7, Section 30262, regulating oil and gas development, The CCA establishes the California Coastal Commission (CCC) and six temporary commissions to implement the Act granting the CCC permit authority until such times as local governments adopt local coastal plans (LCP) approved by the Commission. The Southern Central Coastal Commission is currently supervising the prepara- tion of local coastal programs which will include the study area. F-7 A draft local coastal plan for Ventura County is expected to be completed by December, 1979. Anacapa Island is the only portion of the study area located within Ventura County. Due to the protection provided by the Channel Islands National Monument, it is expected that Anacapa Island will be minimally affected by the regulatory provisions of the LCP (Stanley, 1979, personal communi- cation). Santa Barbara County, which includes all of the northern Channel Islands except Anacapa, will be releasing a hearing draft of its local coastal program to the Regional Commission in the fall of 1979. The program is expected to include extensive inventories of the Channel Islands. As with Anacapa Island above, the regulatory provisions of the LCP will only minimally affect Santa Barbara Island, because it is part of the Channel Islands National Monument, and San Miguel Island, because it is managed for the Navy by the National Park Service (Berry, 1979, personal communication). In ocean areas, the California Coastal Commission will continue (after approval of local coastal programs) to be the permitting agency and will be responsible for certifying consistency for Federal activities. Local governments, with jurisdiction over areas affected by OCS activity, are invited by the CCC to partici- pate in the public hearing(s), CCC deliberations, and to present determinations of whether OCS activity is consistent with the local coastal plan. To facilitate early containment of an oil spill, the Commission has required one lease holder (Exxon on Tracts 222, 223, 230, 231, 232, and 238) to have certain oil spill containment and cleanup equipment, beyond that required by the USGS's OCS Order #7, on drill ships or at the site at all times: F-8 1) 1500 feet (424m) of open ocean containment boom and a boat capable of deploying the boom, 2) one oil skimming device capable of open ocean use, and 3) fifteen bales of oil sorbent material. Coastal Commission policy, for reasons of navigation safety and environmental protection, holds the placement of drill ships in or within 500 meters of sea lanes established by the U. S. Coast Guard to be inconsistent with the Coastal Act. Finally, the California Coastal Act requires the Commission to designate "Sensitive Coastal Resource Areas" which must then be acted upon by the Legislature within two years. The Commission, however, has preliminarily determined such designation may be unnecessary in view of the existing mechanisms available through the local coastal planning process. Ecological Reserves (California Fish and Game Code §1580 et seq. , Cal. 14 Admin. Code §630 et seq .) The California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) has established ecological reserves in the ocean waters and tide and submerged lands surrounding San Miguel, Santa Barbara, and Anacapa Islands from the mean high tide line seaward 1 nmi (1.8km) (see Figure F- 2). Within these reserves, the California Department of Fish and Game has the authority to prohibit any activity which may harm the resources including specifically fishing, collecting, swimming, boating, aircraft, and public entry (California 14 Administrative Code §630(a)). General regulations provide that "no person shall disturb geological formations or archaeological artifacts or take F-9 m i ggTSZgg F-10 or disturb any bird or nest, or eggs thereof, or any plant, mammal, fish, mollusk, crustacean... or any other form of plant or animal life in an ecological reserve" (California 14 Administra- tive Code §630 (a) (1)). These activities are, however, permitted by the Department of Fish and Game in particular reserves or in certain areas of particular reserves pursuant to specific regula- tions. Boating is permitted in the San Miguel Island Reserve, except between Judith Rock and Castle Rock (Figure F-3) where all boat entry is prohibited within 300 yards (270m) offshore. Recently passed amendments ( June 29, 1979), to take effect during the first week of August) permit boats to approach the Island between Judith Rock and Castle Rock to a distance of 100 yards (91m) from shore during the periods from March 15 through April 30 and October 1 through December 15. Persons who have been issued permits by the DFG to take sea urchins within the Point Bennett area or to dive for abalone may enter the 300 yard (270m) area between Judith Rock and Castle Rock for the purpose of fishing for abalone and sea urchins during the same periods. The DFG may rescind permission for boats to enter within 300 yards between Judith Rock and Castle Rock if it finds that impairment to the marine mammals of the Island is imminent. Boats traveling within 300 yards (270m) of the shoreline of the Island must operate with a minimum of noise and not exceed speeds of five miles per hour (14 California Administrative Code §630(b)(28)(O) (Edgerton, 1979, personal communication). Overnight anchoring of boats, however, is permitted only at Tyler Bight and Cuyler Harbor. Furthermore, landing is allowed only by permit and only at the designated landing beach in Cuyler Harbor. Access to offshore rocks and islands within the reserve is allowed only by permit (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(28)(C) ). F-ll CD > CD CO CD u _o o o LU ■o c 10 0) c CO CO I en V F-12 In the San Miguel Island Ecological Reserve, swimming and diving are permitted in areas where boating is authorized (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(28)B)) . Fishing from shore or in areas closed to boating is prohibited. Recreational fishing from boats is permitted in other areas of the reserve. Commercial fishing, except using hook and line gear or pursuant to abalone, lobster or sea urchin permits, is only allowed pursuant to a special permit (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(28)(A)). The most direct resource protection in the Anacapa Island Ecologi- cal Reserve is a brown pelican fledging area established off the north shore of West Anacapa Island (see Figure F-4). Entry is prohibited during breeding season, March 1 to May 31 (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(31)(E)). Boating, swimming and diving are otherwise allowed within the Anacapa Island Reserve (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(31)(A)). No nets or traps may be used anywhere within 450 ft (135m) of the island. Harvesting of kelp is prohibited within the reserve except by special permit. A "natural area" has been established off the north shore of East Anacapa Island from which it is unlawful to take any native plant, fish, wildlife, aquatic organism or disturb any natural geological feature (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(31)(B) ). Zones have been established off the southeast shore of the West Anacapa Island and the north shore of Middle Anacapa Island where taking of invertebrates from the mean high tide line to a depth of 20 ft (6.1m) is prohibited (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(31)(O) (see Figure F-4). Commercial and sportfishing are allowed elsewhere in the reserve. F-13 F-14 Boating, swimming, sport and commercial fishing, and diving are generally permitted within the Santa Barbara Ecological Reserve (California 14 Administrative Code §630(b)(32)(A)). Within an area off the east shore of the Island, extending from the mean high tide line to a depth of 20 ft (6.1m) no invertebrates may be taken and no nets or traps may be used (California 14 Administra- tive Code §630(b)(32)(B) and (C) (see Figure F-5). DFG personnel and facilities for enforcement of ecological reserve regulations consist of ten wardens and four boats. In addition to the ecological reserves, these personnel and facilities are responsible for enforcement of all of the Fish and Game Code and regulations for San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties. The four boats are: a 50-foot patrol boat with a small skiff on board, a 20-foot skiff, and a 17-foot skiff. The level of enforcement effort is dependent to a large extent on unpre- dictable weather conditions. Trips are made daily, weather conditions permitting, to Anacapa Island with the 50-foot patrol boat, the only boat large enough to cross the Santa Barbara Channel, manned by two wardens. Whenever possible, the patrol boat will then move on to other islands. Occasionally, stakeouts will be made for specific targets when violations are suspected (Martin, 1979, personal communication). A cooperative agreement has been established between the Depart- ment of Fish and Game and the National Park Service (NPS) for the enforcement of California Fish and Game regulations in these reserves. The agreement was initiated to fully utilize the on- site enforcement capabilities of the Park Service, in terms of both personnel and facilities. Pursuant to this agreement, the F-15 figure f-5. Santa Barbara Island Ecological Reserve F-16 seven Park Service rangers associated with the Channel Islands National Monument are deputized as Department of Fish and Game wardens and conduct patrol operations within the reserves. Regular joint training meetings are conducted by the DFG to keep NPS personnel abreast of changes in DFG regulations and policy (Cooperative Agreement between California Department of Fish and Game and U. S. National Park Service, 10/78; Johnson, 1979, personal communication; and Martin, 1979, personal communication). Fish and Game Code (Chapter 14, Administrative Code) The California Department of Fish and Game, under the Fish and Game Code (and Chapter 14 of the Administrative Code), regulates and manages a wide variety of activities affecting the fish and game resources found in the land and water areas under State jurisdiction. Specific Department of Fish and Game programs, other than ecological reserves (discussed above), of relevance to the study area include management of sport and commercial fishing, and plant harvesting, protection of endangered species, protection of migratory birds, coordination of the oil spill contigency plans, and restriction of overflights. —Sport and commercial fishing and kelp harvesting management (California Fish and Game Code §7100 et seq .) The Department of Fish and Game regulates sport fishing through license and bag limit systems. A sport fishing license is requir- ed for the taking and possession of fish for any no n- commercial purpose (California Fish and Game Code §7100). Sport fishing of spiny lobster is restricted to collection by hoop nets or hand, and clam, mollusk, and crustacean collection are limited to the F-17 period between one-half hour before sunrise to one-half hour after sunset (California Fish and Game Code §7256, 7290, and 7332). The Code does not specify bag limits for these resources. Commercial fishing is also governed by a licensing system. Every person who operates or assists in using any boat or gear to take fish for profit must procure a license (California Fish and Game Code §7580); party boat operators must get special licenses (California Fish and Game Code §7920 et seq .). Vessels used in commercial fishing operations must also carry a Department of Fish and Game registration number (California Fish and Game Code §7880). Fishing reports, described in Sections 8010 et seq. , must be supplied by buyers, processors, and anyone else who receives fish from fishermen. These reports form the basis of Department of Fish and Game statistics used in formulating fishery management policies. Species near the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara are subject to the seasonal, size, and catch restrictions listed in Table F-2. Under the Submerged Lands Act of 1953 (43 USC §130(c)), California has jurisdiction over kelp within state waters as a seabed re- source. Generally, a license is required to harvest kelp for profit (California Fish and Game Code §6650). As with other commercial fisheries, a record book must be maintained (California Fish and Game Code §6652). Through a cooperative agreement recently reached between the Department of Fish and Game and the National Marine Fisheries Service, officials of both agencies may enforce each other's laws (see discussion below). F-18 TABLE F-2. Catch 1 in the are to restrictions for species of commercial fish northern Channel Islands area (references the California Fish and Game Code). Catch restrictions for species of commercial fish in the northern Channel Islands area (references are to the California Fish and Game Code) . Sardines Catch limited to 20,000 tons (or other DFG allowance) of the spawning population (Section 8150.7). Anchovies Restricted according to the PFMC plan. Lobster Fishery open between the first Wednesday in October and the first Wednesday after March 15 (Section 8251). Lobster permit required (Section 8254.7). Size restrictions exist (Section 8252). Crab Fishery open between the second Tuesday in November and June 30th (Section 8276). Abalones Fishery open each month but February and August (Section 8300). Abalone permit re- quired (Section 8306). Size limits exist (Section 8304). Abalone diving permits exist and are limited in number (Sections 8306.1 and 8306.4). Black abalone taking within one mile of Santa Cruz and Anacapa Islands prohibited with some exceptions (Sections 8307.5, 8307.6). Clams, Molluscs Fishery open year round (Sections 8340 and 8341). Scallops Illegal to sell or purchase (Section 8345). Saltwater and Anadromous fish Kelp bass, sand bass, and spotted bass may be sold (Section 8372); yellowfin and blue- fin tuna may be taken at any time (Section 8374); bluefin tuna must exceed 7 1/2 lbs to be marketed (Section 8375); albacore and skipjack may be taken any time (Section 8376 and 8378); white seabass, barracuda, and yellowtail not less than 28 in. in length may be taken by hook and line any time (Section 8382). Mackerel Catch limited as stock is enhanced (Section 8388.3). California halibut May be taken any time (Section 8391). Swordfish May be taken any time (Section 8394). F-19 --Endangered species (California Fish and Game Code §2050 et seq .) The California Department of Fish and Game maintains a list of rare and endangered species. It is unlawful within the state to take or possess any listed species. "Taking" is defined (Califor- nia Fish and Game Code §2050 et seq .) in a manner analogous to the interpetation under the Federal act (see below). Listed species found in the study area are the Guadalupe fur seal, the California brown pelican, the California least tern, the light-footed clapper rail, and the Belding's savannah sparrow. —Protection of Migratory Birds (California Fish and Game Code §355 et seq . and 3500 e_t seq. In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, California has provided protection for migratory birds, their nests and eggs by fixing areas, seasons, and hours plus bag and possession limits by species for migratory game birds (California Fish and Game Code §356). The peregrine falcon, brown pelican, California black rail and clapper rail, California least tern, light-footed clapper rail and southern bald eagle (California Fish and Game Code §3511) have all been accorded "fully protected" status, which protects these birds from taking except as authorized for scientific research. F-20 --Oil Spill Contingency Plans (California Fish and Game Code §5650 et seg .) It is unlawful to "deposit or permit any petroleum to pass into the waters of the State" (California Fish and Game Code §5650). The California Department of Fish and Game together with an Interagency Committee coordinates the State's oil spill contingency plan. Because Federal law preempts State regulation of oil spill cleanup operations, the State's role is that of observer, assistant, and advisor--with the important exception that the State has veto power over the use of chemical agents in State waters. In practice, State Department of Fish and Game personnel: 1) investigate all spills in State waters and many spills in Federal waters; 2) monitor, assist, and advise Federal and industry cleanup operations; and 3) maintain liaison between various government agencies and industry. --Overflights (California Fish and Game Code §10501.5) The California Department of Fish and Game prohibits overflights below 1000 ft (305m) over San Miguel, Santa Barbara, and Anacapa Islands . Water Quality Cont-rol Act (California Water Code §13300 et seg . ) The Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act is designed to enhanced and maintain water quality in the waters, including ocean waters, under the jurisdiction of the State. The State Water Resources 'Control Board and the nine regional water quality control boards have primary authority for regulating water quality in California. F-21 The Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California (1978), which sets standards for water quality characteristics for ocean waters within State Jurisdiction, places particular emphasis on maintaining water quality in Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBSs). The State Water Resources Control Board has designated ASBSs in the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island to a distance of 1 nmi (1.8km) offshore or to the 300 ft (90m) isobath, whichever is greater. To be classified as an ASBS, an area of ocean water must be considered to contain biological communities of such extraordinary value that no risk of change in their environments resulting from human activities can be considered acceptable (California Water Resources Control Board, 1976). Dischargers must ensure that their wastes are discharged a sufficient distance from designated ASBSs to assure that the natural water quality conditions within the area are not affected. This is accomplished (i.e., adminis- tered) by Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) which, via a permit procedure, set waste discharge restrictions upon: a) elevated temperature wastes; b) discrete, point source sewage or industrial process wastes; and c) non-point source wastes such as, but not limited to, storm water runoff, silt, and urban runoff. ASBS designations have no impact on vessel wastes, dredging control, or dredge spoil deposition because the California Ocean Plan, of which ASBS's are a part is not applicable to those activities. F-22 RWQCBs are responsible for integrating ASBS designations into their area-wide basin plans which outline waste discharge prohibi- tions and restriction. A routine ASBS reconaissance survey conducted by the SWRCB provides RWQBs with detailed resource information as well as data on existing or future activities apt to threaten their environmental quality. ASBS surveillance and monitoring is the responsibility of RWQCBs which ensure compliance with discharge regulations in the broader context of basin-wide enforcement. Should either an actual discharge violation or a threat therefore become apparent, the regional board is empowered with specific administrative procedures and remedies to enforce compliance (see California Water Code, Section 13300). Though the primary intent of the designation is to protect marine life from waste water discharges, petroleum discharges into an ASBS are also covered (California Water Resources Control Board, 1976). Several study stations for the worldwide Mussel Watch Program, coordinated domestically by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, have been established within these ASBSs. Mussel watch stations are located in the shallow waters off Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, and Anacapa Islands and two stations each have been established off San Miguel and Santa Rosa Island (Cali- fornia Water Resources Control Board, Annual Report, 1978). This program involves periodic tissue analysis of collected mussels as indicators of pollution levels. The establishment of these stations provides no special management of or protection for the research value of these sites, but does provide some information for monitoring purposes. F-23 Regulation of Offshore Oil and Gas Development Activities, Cunningham-Shell Tidelands Act, as Amended (California Public Resources Code §6850 et seq. ) Leasing of state submerged lands (extending from the mean high tide line seaward 3 nmi (5.5km) for oil and gas development activities and regulation of these activities is the responsi- bility of the State Lands Commission. Both the State Lands Commission and the Coastal Commission regulate these activities to ensure that they proceed safely and that marine resources are adequately protected. In this regard, the State Lands Commission enforces requirements similar to those of the United States Geological Survey concerning blowout prevention, drilling prac- tices, production procedures, pollution control, and oil spill prevention, containment and cleanup (see below). In order to protect sensitive resource areas, the California State Legislature may designate Oil and Gas Sanctuaries in which petro- leum development is prohibited within submerged lands. Oil and gas sanctuaries have been established in the waters around the northern Channel Islands. The sanctuaries extend from the mean high tide line seaward three nautical miles (California Public Resources Code §6871). Although leasing is normally excluded from the sanctuaries, if underlying oil and gas deposits might be drained by wells located on adjacent Federal lands thereby threat- ening the State's proprietary Interest in the resource, the State Lands Commission may open up the affected sanctuary areas for a drainage sale. The waters around Santa Barbara Island have not been declared an oil and gas sanctuary. F-24 Control of Oil Discharges from Vessels (California Harbors and Naviga- tion Code §133) The California Harbors and Navigation Code generally applies to the activities of vessels operating in State waters. One of its purposes is to prevent the activities of vessels from adversely affecting the marine environment. To achieve this purpose, the discharge of oil from any vessel in the State's navigable waters is prohibited except in cases of "unavoidable accident, collision, or stranding" (California Harbors and Navigation Code §133). Any person who intentionally or negligently causes or permits any oil to be deposited in the waters of the State is liable for cleanup costs and subject to a $6,000 civil penalty (California Harbors and Navigation Code §151). Air Resources (California Health and Safety Code §3900 et seq .) . The California Air Resources Board (ARB) is charged with the maintenance and enhancement of the ambient air quality of the State. The ARB has set air quality standards designed to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards and delegated their imple- mentation to local Air Pollution Control Districts (APCDs). The northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island are located partly within the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District and partly within the Ventura County Air Pollution District. F-25 Generally, offshore oil and gas development facilities located within state waters must both obtain a permit from the appropriate APCD and meet ARB emission standards. ARB emission standards are also applicable to sources of emissions located beyond state waters that are related to an onshore facility . In essence, the permit for the onshore facility covers both. Emissions from offshore sources are considered together with those of the related onshore facility. The total emissions level must meet standards set by ARB as implemented by the appropriate APCD (Stamey, 1979, personal communication). Emissions from tankers which dock at onshore facilities located in California are also considered together with those of the related onshore facility. As with onshore oil and gas development facili- ties, the total emissions level of the tanker and the related onshore facility must meet standards set by the ARB as implemented by the appropriate APCD. Unlike other offshore facilities, however, neither the ARB nor an APCD has authority to issue permits solely for tanker emissions (Stamey, 1979, personal communication) . Preservation of Historic Resources (California Public Resources Code §5020.4) Preservation of representative and unique archaeological, paleon- tological, and historical sites in the land and water areas of the State is the responsibility of the California Historical Resources Commission. The Commission evaluates and makes recommendations to the State Historic Preservation Officer on nominations to the National Register pursuant to the National Historic Preservation F-26 Act (see below). The Commission also recommends state registra- tion of sites as landmarks and points of interest to the Public Resources Department which is responsible for maintenance of registered sites (California Public Resources Code §5020.4). Registration as a point of interest qualifies a site only for the placement of informational signs. Landmarks, along with proper- ties listed on the National Register and city or county registers or inventories, become eligible for "qualified historic property" status for which special protection may be afforded by the Commis- sion (California Public Resources Code §5031). At present, no sites within the study area have been registered as either land- marks or points of interest (Berry, 1979, personal communication). Underwater State Parks In order to protect special marine resources and water-based recreational values in ocean waters within State jurisdiction and to expand coastal park units beyond the water's edge, the Califor- nia Department of Parks and Recreation has established an Under- water Parks Program (California Department of Parks and Recrea- tion, 1979). As a result of a recently initiated underwater park study, underwater parks are being considered near San Miguel, Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands (Kelly, 1979, personal communi- cation), but at present, there are no underwater parks in the study area. F-27 F.l.b.ii FEDERAL AUTHORITIES Except where specified otherwise, Federal authorities apply throughout the entire area under consideration. The major excep- tions are management of petroleum and fishery resources, which fall under State jurisdiction within three nautical miles (5.6km) of the shore. Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA) (16 USC §1801 et seq.) The FCMA provides for the conservation and management of all fishery resources in the zone between three and two hundred nautical miles (5.6-370km) offshore. In the Channel Islands area, this authority is vested in the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC). The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is charged with establishing guidelines for and approving those fishery management plans (FMPs) prepared by the PFMC for selected fish- eries within its jurisdiction. These plans will determine the levels of commercial and sport fishing consistent with achieving and maintaining the optimum yield of each fishery. The PFMC has already completed a management plan for anchovy and is currently preparing plans for groundfish and jack mackerel --all of which are found in the study area. The final anchovy FMP (Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1978a) proposes several fishing area closures, but none in the study area. Four different fishing seasons were proposed in the plan, some of which would prohibit fishing during important times of the life cycle of marine mammals and birds. A final decision on the preferred season is pending. The draft FMPs for groundfish (PFMC, 1978b) and jack mackerel (PFMC, 1979) address limitations on catch but do not consider closures. Although the FMP for groundfish is only in a draft stage, it does appear possible that the final FMP may aim F-28 to protect Intertidal spawning grounds and kelp bed habitats such as those found in the study area, which are vital to the survival of lingcod, bocaccio, and numerous rockfish. The FCMA also applies to marine plant life. Therefore, the harvesting of kelp beds in Federal waters, such as Osborn Bank, south of Santa Barbara Island, could be regulated. No such plan is now being developed. Benthic continental shelf fishery resources located outside State waters, such as abalone, lobster, crabs, sea urchins, and corals, are within the jurisdiction of the PFMC, the NMFS and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (see below) . Endangered Species Act (16 UCS §§1531-1543) The Federal endangered species program provides protection for listed species of marine mammals, birds, and fish in both State and Federal waters. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FVIS) and NMFS determines which species need protection; FWS maintains a list of endangered and threatened species. The most significant protection provided by the Endangered Species Act is the prohibi- tion on taking. The term "take" is defined quite broadly to mean "harrass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in such conduct" (16 USC §1532(14)). Fish and Wildlife Service regulations interpret the term harm to include significant environmental modification or degradation and acts which annoy listed species to such an extent as to significantly disrupt essential behavior patterns (50 CFR 17.3). F-29 The Endangered Species Act also provides for the protection of endangered species and their habitat by establishing a consulta- tion process designed to insure that projects authorized, funded or carried out by Federal agencies do not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered of threatened species, or "result in the destruction or modification of habitat of such species which is determined by the Secretary (of the Interior or Commerce) to be critical" (16 USC §1536). Critical habitat areas for endangered species are designated by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. The 1978 amendments to the Act establish a Cabinet level committee authorized to exempt Federal agencies from compliance with a determination by the Secretary of the Interior through an elaborate review process should an irreconcilable conflict occur. No critical habitat has been designated in the study area at this time. Several species of marine mammals found in the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island are listed as endangered or threatened species. These include: 1) sea otter, 2) gray whale, 3) fin whale, and 4) humpback whale. The blue whale, sei whale, and sperm whale, all of which have been sighted elsewhere in the Southern California Bight, but not in the north- ern Channel Island vicinity, are also listed as endangered spe- cies. Species of birds listed under the Endangered Species Act are found in the waters around the northern Channel Islands including: 1) California brown pelican, 2) light-footed clapper rail, and 3) California black rail, (44 CRF 3636, 1/17/79). F-30 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) (16 USC §1361 et seq.) The MMPA applies to any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States in both State and International waters. It is designed to protect all species of marine mammals. While the MMPA allows States to petition for the return of management responsi- bility over marine mammals, California has done so only with regard to the sea otter and that petition was later withdrawn. Provisions of the Act are implemented by the Department of Com- merce, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which is re- sponsible for whales, porpoises, and pinnipeds other than the walrus, the Department of Interior, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), which is responsible for all other marine mammals. An independent Federal body, the Marine Mammal Commission, advises these implementing agencies and sponsors relevant scientific research. The primary management features of the Act include: (1) a moratorium on the "taking" of marine mammals; (2) the develop- ment of a management approach designed to achieve an "optimum sustainable population" (OSP) for all species or population stocks of marine mammals; and (3) protection of populations determined to be "depleted". The MMPA defines "take" quite broadly to include " harass , hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal" (16 USC §1362(13), emphasis added). The term harass has been interpreted to encompass acts unintentionally affecting marine mammals such as operation of motor boats in waters in which these animals are found (Bean, 1977). However, this interpretation has not yet been tested in court. The MMPA allows four exceptions to the moratorium. The F-31 two exceptions which have been applied in the Channel Islands are taking for scientific or display purposes and incidental to commercial fishing operations. The Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce may also waive the moratorium on taking for particular species or populations of marine mammals under their jurisdiction provided that the species or population being considered is at or above its determined optimum sustainable population. No such waiver, however, has been granted concerning any marine mammal found in the area under consideration. Secondly, the Act directs officials to seek "an optimum sustain- able population (of marine mammals)" (16 USC §1361(6)). Optimum sustainable population (OSP) is defined to mean "the number of animals which will result in the maximum productivity of the population or species keeping in mind the carrying capacity of the habitat and health of the ecosystem of which they form a consti- tuent element" (16 USC §1352(9)). Marine mammal species whose population is determined to be deplet- ed receive additional protection (16 USC §1362). During the monatorium no permit may be issued for the taking of a marine mammal determined to be depleted unless the taking is for scienti- fic research purposes. Three species of marine mammals sighted within the study area (the fin whale, the humpback whale and the gray whale), and four species or populations which are possible transients (the blue whale, the southern population of sea otter, the sperm whale, and the sei whale), are treated as "depleted" based on their listing as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. F-32 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC §§703 et seq.) In the northern Channel Islands area, hunting for migratory birds other than species of ducks, geese, coots, gallinules, and doves is generally prohibited throughout the year, pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act which implements international conven- tions with Great Britain and Japan. Each convention establishes a "close season" during which no hunting is permitted, which for migratory birds other than game birds is year round. The essen- tial provision of the Act makes it unlawful except as permitted by regulations "to hunt, take, capture... any migratory bird, any part, nest or egg" of any bird protected by the Convention (16 USC §703). The California Department of Fish and Game has supplement- ed this authority with its own regulations (see Fish and Game Code discussion, above). Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC §1751 et seq.) . It is the goal of the CWA to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. Waters in the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, and in the ocean beyond are subject to varying requirements under the CWA. The CWA's chief mechanism for preventing and reducing water pollution is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Under the NPDES program, a permit is required for the discharge of any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters (which include State waters, the contiguous zone, and the ocean). Within California State waters, EPA has delegated NPDES F-33 permitting authority to the State government. Since oil and gas development resulting from Federal lease sales will occur outside State waters, an NPDES permit from EPA will be required for discharges associated with this activity. EPA's decision to grant a NPDES permit for offshore oil and gas develop- ments is based primarily on the effluent guidelines shown in Table F-3 (40 CFR §435). Other conditions beyond these guidelines can, however, be imposed by the Regional Administrator on a case-by- case basis. For instance, to conform with BLM stipulations special conditions for NPDES permits have been applied to several leases from OCS Sale No. 35 in the vicinity of Tanner and Cortes Banks, a hard bank community southwest of the northern Channel Islands. To protect the bank resources, discharges of drilling mud are not allowed over the banks. The CWA prohibits the discharge of oil and hazardous substances in such quantities as may be harmful (33 USC 51321(b) (3)), except discharges outside the territorial sea permitted by the Interna- tional Convention for the Prevention of the Sea by Oil, 1954 (see Oil Pollution Act below). When such discharges do take place, the National Contingency Plan (NCP) for the removal of oil and hazard- ous substance discharges (33 USC §1321(c); Executive Order 11735, Aug. 3, 1973), which is designed to minimize the impacts on marine resources, will take effect. The Coast Guard, in cooperation with EPA, administers the Plan, which applies to all discharges of oil in the contiguous zone and to activities under the OCSLA. As a result of a memorandum of understanding between the Secretaries of Transportation and the Interior, however, the USGS has exclusive authority to institute measures to abate the source of pollution (United States Departments of the Interior and Transportation, Memorandum of Understanding, (8/16/71)). The NCP establishes the F-34 TABLE F-3. EPA Effluent Guidelines and Standards for Far Offshore* Oil and Gas Extraction Facilities (40 CFR Pt 435). Effluent limitations Oil and Grease Pollutant Maximum for Average of Residual parameter any 1 d, daily values chlorine, mini- waste source milligram for 30 consecu- mum for any 1 per liter tive days shall d, milligram not exceed, per liter milligram per liter Produced Wacer 72 48 NA Deck Drainage 72 48 NA Drilling muds (1) (1) NA Drill cuttings — (1) (1) NA Well treatment— — (1) (1) NA Sanitary: i 2 M10 NA NA M9IM 3 NA NA NA Domestic NA NA NA Produced sand — (1) (1) NA No discharge of free oil. 2 Minimum of 1 mg/1 and maintained as close to this concentration as possible. 3 There shall be no floating solids as a result of the discharge of these wastes. NOTE: M10 means facilities continously manned by ten (10) of more persons. M9IM means facili ties continously manned by nine (9) or less persons or intermittently manned by any number of per- sons. * beyond 3 nmi. F-35 organizational framework whereby oil spills are to be cleaned up. To carry out the national plan, regional plans have been estab- lished; the Coast Guard has issued such a plan for Federal Region 9 which encompasses the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. Under the plan, Coast Guard personnel are to investigate all reported offshore spills, notify the party responsible (if known) of his obligation to clean up the spill, and supervise the cleanup operation. The Coast Guard retains final authority over the procedures and equipment used in the cleanup. If the party responsible for the spill does not promptly begin cleanup opera- tions, the Coast Guard can hire private organizations. Permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, which are based on EPA- developed guidelines, are required prior to discharging dredged materials within three miles of shore (33 USC §1344), or the transportation of dredged material for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters (33 USC §1413) (see discussion of the Ocean Dumping Act below.) Finally, the CWA requires noncommercial craft to comply with marine sanitation regulations issued by EPA and enforced by the Coast Guard (33 USC §1322). Ports and Waterways Safety Act, as amended (PWSA) (33 USC §1221) The Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA), as amended by the Port and Tanker Safety Act of 1978, is designed to promote navigation and vessel safety and the protection of the marine environment. The PWSA applies both in State waters and in high seas out to 200 nmi (370km) F-36 The PWSA authorizes the U. S. Coast Guard to establish vessel traffic services and systems for ports, harbors and other waters subject to congested vessel traffic. In the Santa Barbara Chan- nel, the U. S. Coast Guard has established a Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) consisting of two one-mile wide vessel traffic lanes, with a two-mile separation zone. The lanes are designed to prevent vessel collisions by separating vessels going in opposite directions. The TSS has been officially recognized by the Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organi- zation (IMCO), and appears as recommended traffic routes on all navigation charts of the area. The TSS, which applies to commercial ships other than fishing vessels, is violated when a vessel is in a designated lane but moving in the wrong direction. Violators are subject to flag state enforcement if their violation occurs outside the three mile territorial sea. If a violation occurs within the territorial sea, the U. S. may take enforcement action. Outside the traffic lanes, vessels may proceed in any direction consistent with good seamanship. In addition to vessel traffic control, the Coast Guard regulates other navigation and shipping activities related to vessel design, construction, and operation designed to minimize the likelihood of an accident and reduce vessel source pollution. F-37 The 1978 Amendments establish a comprehensive program for regulat- ing the design, construction, operation, equipping, and manning of all tankers using U. S. ports to transfer oil and hazardous materials. These requirements are, for the most part, in agree- ment with protocols passed in 1978 to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, and the Inter- national Convention on Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (33 USC §1221). The USCG is also vested with the primary responsibility for maintaining boater safety, including the tasks of conducting routine vessel inspections and coordinating rescue operations. Oil Pollution Act of 1961 (33 USC §§1001-1016) The Oil Pollution Act of 1961 (which implements the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil of 1954) regulates discharges of oil or oily mixtures from vessels with the exception of tankers of less than 150 gross tons and other vessels of less than 500 gross tons. With the exception of discharges from machinery space bilges, tankers subject to the act may not discharge oil or oily mixtures unless they are 50 nmi (93km) from the nearest land and the total quantity of oil dis- charged does not exceed 1/15,000 of the total cargo capacity. Discharges from other vessels regulated by the act, and discharges from the machinery bilges of tankers, must be made as far as practicable from land and may not have an oil content of more than 100 parts per million. In addition to the above requirements, a discharge by any vessel regulated by the act must be made while the vessel is en route and the instantaneous discharge rate must not exceed sixty liters per mile. F-38 Clean Air Act (42 USC §7401 et seq.) The Clean Air Act (CAA) sets general guidelines and minimal air quality standards on a nationwide basis in order to protect and enhance the quality of the nation's air resources. States are responsible for developing comprehensive plans for all regions within their boundaries. Thus, as noted above, discharges of air pollutants within California State waters are subject to the control of the California Air Resources Board. Beyond State waters, EPA Region IX, relying on an EPA Office of General Counsel's opinion, has asserted that the new source and prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) provisions of the CAA apply to new sources on the OCS that can adversely affect air quality over the United States (EPA Office of General Counsel Opinion (4/18/78)). These regulations would supplement DOI OCS air quality regulations. The new source and PSD provisions apply only to stationary sources which emit, or could emit, at least 100 tons per year of any air pollutant. Exxon's platform Hondo in the Santa Ynez Unit north of the northern Channel Islands (which includes an oil processing plant) is an example of such a major facility near the sanctuary study area. Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 USC §1331 et seq.) The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended in 1978 (OCSLA), establishes Federal jurisdiction over the mineral resources of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) beyond three nmi (5.6km) and gives the Secretary of Interior prime responsibility for managing OCS mineral exploration and development. The Secretary's responsi- F-39 bility has been delegated to two bureaus within the Department: the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS). BLM has overall responsibility for leasing OCS lands. In the Santa Barbara Channel, lease sales have been held in 1966, 1968, and 1975 (Sale #35), and June, 1979 (Sale #48). In unique or special areas, the BLM may impose special lease stipulations designed to protect the specific geological and biological resources found in those areas. These stipulations may vary from lease tract to lease tract and sale to sale. In the FEIS on Sale #48 (U. S. BLM, 1979), BLM has recommended seven lease stipulations (see Appendix 5), three of which are of particular importance to resource protection. Stipulation Number 3 concerns the protection of cultural re- sources. If surveys indicate the possibility of a cultural resource, the lessee shall: (1) locate all structures so that they will not adversely affect the resource or (2) establish to the satisfaction of the U. S. Geological Survey Area Supervisor either that no adverse effects will result from the operation or that the potential cultural resource suggested by the survey does not exist. Stipulation No. 5 requires prevention, to the maximum extent possible, of harm to newly discovered areas of special biological interest including: (1) areas containing rare ecosys- tems; (2) areas of abundant numbers and/or high diversity of species; (3) areas containing species of limited regional distri- bution; (4) areas critical to the life cycle of species; and (5) areas which are protected by fishery management plans as singu- F-40 larly important to a species (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Stipulation No. 4, which only applies to tracts 001-108* (see Figures E-19 and E-20), in the Santa Barbara Channel, con- cerns protection of commercial trawl grounds from subsea comple- tion systems and pipelines. The USGS is charged with approving plans for exploratory drilling and development and supervising OCS operations. Several types of regulatory authority are used by USGS in carrying out the latter responsibility. These include enforcement of regulations pursuant to the OCSLA (30 CFR Part 250) and the stipulations applicable to particular leases discussed above. In addition, OCS Orders have been issued by the USGS to supplement regulations in particular regions. Twelve such Orders have been issued for the Pacific region and three more are under review (see Appendix 6). These Orders apply to various aspects of the day-to-day drilling and production operation, including: (1) marking of platforms and structures; (2) general drilling well procedures; (3) testing of blowout preventers; (4) characteristics and use of drilling muds; (5) plugging and abandonment of wells; (6) contingency plans; (7) oil spill pollution equipment; (8) oil spill reports; (9) subsur- face safety devices; (10) pollution and waste disposal; and (11) design and maintenance of oil and gas pipelines. The USGS also issues Notices to Lessees and Operators when clari- fications, corrections, or additions to OCS Orders and Regulations are necessary. These notices have the same status as OCS Orders and Regulations and are used to keep lessees and operators inform- ed of USGS's requirements (see Appendix 6). *Note that tracts 088-108 have been withdrawn by the Secretary of the Interior from Sale #48 (U.S. Department of Interior, 1979) F-41 Certain provisions of the 1978 OCSLA Amendments are of importance. If the Secretary of the Interior determines that continued OCS operation threatens "serious, irreparable, or immediate harm or damage to life, including fish and other marine life" or the "the marine, coastal or human environment, such operations may be suspended (16 USC §1334 (c)(1)). In addition, if it is found that regulations, lease provisions, or exploration and development plans, are violated by the lessee, the lease may be cancelled and forfeited (16 USC §1334 (d)). Finally, the DOI, through the USGS, is developing regulations to control air emissions occurring on the OCS that significantly affect a State's air quality. According to Proposed Rule 30 CFR Part 250 (43 Fed. Reg. 27449 (5/10/79)), activities on the OCS will not be approved if they prevent any State from achieving or maintaining national ambient air quality standards (NAAQSs). The DOI proposes to require lessees to include in their exploration, development, and production plans specific information concerning emissions and their effects on coastal areas. It is presently unclear whether standards designed to prevent significant dete- rioration will also be applied. Other agencies within DOI--including the FWS, NPS, and HCRS--are consulted on various potential impacts from OCS development including necessary stipulations pursuant to Secretarial Order No. 2974 of August, 1978. In addition to DOI, both the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and the U. S. Coast Guard (USCG) have some responsibility over OCS mineral development. COE is responsible for ensuring, through a permit system, that OCS structures including pipelines, platforms, drill ships, and semi-submersibles do not obstruct navigation (43 USC F-42 §1333 (f)). USCG ensures that structures on the OCS are properly marked (43 USC §1333 (e)). Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (33 USC §§1401-1444) Title I of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), also known as the Ocean Dumping Act, regulates the dumping of materials into the territorial sea (i.e., State wa- ters), the contiguous zone and the ocean beyond. EPA regulates, through the issuance of permits, the dumping of all materials except dredged materials; COE exercises authority over the dumping of dredged materials. Five dredge material disposal sites have been established in the Southern California Bight, with the closest one to the Channel Islands being near Port Hueneme, about 16.6km (9 nmi) from Anacapa Island. No ocean dumping of nondredged materials has occurred in the Bight since 1972. Prior to 1972, munitions, toxic wastes, and radioactive materials were dumped in the vicinity of the Channel Islands, but more than 18.5km (10 nmi) from the Islands. National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC §470) The National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC §470) authorized the Secretary of the Interior to maintain a national register of "districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture n Sites have been listed on the National Register which include or are composed entirely of ocean waters and submerged lands within F-43 state waters or on the Outer Continental Shelf (Lebovich, 1979), personal communication). No sites on the northern Channel Island are listed on the National Register at the present time; two have been nominated, the Anacapa Lighthouse and the Channel Islands Archeological District (44 FR 52893 (September 11, 1979)). Should these or any other sites on the shores or in the waters around the Islands be listed on the National Register, any Federal agency conducting, licensing, or assisting an undertaking which may affect a listed site must provide the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on the action (16 USC §470f). The criterion applied by the Council is whether the undertaking will change the quality of the site's historic architectural, archaeological or cultural character (36 CFR §800). Antiquities Act (16 USC §431) Channel Islands National Monument and National Park Service Man- agement of San Miguel Island The Antiquities Act authorized the President to reserve by Procla- mation lands "owned or controlled by the Government of the United States" for use as national monuments. National monuments so proclaimed become part of the National Park System and are admin- istered by the National Park Service. The Channel Islands Na- tional Monument was established pursuant to this Act by Presi- dental Proclamation No. 2281 in 1938 (52 Stat. 1541). Several bills to create a National Park on the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island are now before the Congress (see Section F.2.d.). F-44 The National Park Service (NPS) has responsibility for managing the Channel Islands National Monument which includes Anacapa and Santa Barbara Islands. Until May of 1978, the National Monument also included the waters surrounding the two islands out to one mile (63 Stat. 1258 (2/9/49)). Authority over these submerged lands was returned to the State in United States v. California (11 ERC 1651 (1978)). The jurisdictional authority of the NPS, therefore extends only to the mean high tide line of each Island. The NPS, however, through an agreement with California DFG, does have joint authority for enforcing DFG regulations in the waters out to one mile. (Cooperative Agreement between California Depart- ment of Fish and Game and the U.S. National Park Service, 10/78). The NPS also acts as joint administrator of San Miguel Island through a 1963 Memorandum of Agreement with the Navy. In a 1976 Amendment to that Agreement, the Navy declared that if it no longer required use of the island, it would seek authorization for it to become part of the National Park System. However, both the Amendment and the NPS Statement for Management issued for the Island reiterated that the continuing priority use of the Island will be for Naval operations (NPS, 1978). NPS management policies for the Monument and San Miguel Island are designed to protect the natural and cultural resources of the Islands while providing an appropriate level of opportunity for public enjoyment of those resources. F-45 The NPS Statement for Management for the National Monument des- cribes a land classification scheme that creates Natural Zones which are to remain largely unaltered by human activity. Most importantly, West Anacapa Island is designated an "Environmental Protection Subzone," for the protection of the Brown Pelican, and East Anacapa and the Arch Rock Group are "Outstanding Natural Features Subzones" (National Park Service, 1976). The Statement for Management for San Miguel and Prince Islands establishes Natural Zones similar to those designated in the Monument (NPS, 1978). Of greatest relevance to the resources of the study area are NPS management policies concerning visiting. Except for boat access via certain areas off San Miguel Island where entry is restricted by the Navy (see below), the NPS controls visitor access to San Miguel, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands as well as the activi- ties of visitors. Prohibition of or restrictions on visitor ingress and egress to and from certain parts of the islands managed by the NPS tend to discourage other activities which could harm the marine resources found in the waters adjacent to those areas. Such activities include boat anchoring, fishing with nets, swimming, diving, and collecting of artifacts. In addition, restrictions on visitor access and the activities of visitors will protect the living marine resources of the study area, most importantly marine mammals and birds, by preventing potential disturbance. Most important in this regard is the Environmental Protection Subzone established on West Anacapa Island for the protection of the Brown Pelican rookery (NPS, 1976). F-46 Visits to the islands managed by the NPS are generally controlled by a permit system, through which the number of visitors, length of stay, and time of visit may be restricted. Severe restrictions are placed on visits to West Anacapa to protect the Brown Pelican rookery there. Policies for the other Anacapas and Santa Barbara are considerably more liberal. Santa Barbara receives the most visitors (Whelan, 1979, personal communication). Visitation levels at San Miguel are limited by restrictions on access imposed by DFG, the Navy, and the NPS and the lack of facilities on the Island. Enforcement responsibilities of the Park Service are carried out by seven rangers. Two boats, a 40- foot patrol boat and a 20-foot skiff are used for patrols in marine areas (Johnson, 1979, personal communication). U. S. Navy The U. S. Navy conducts numerous military operations in and over the waters offshore of southern California. Various portions of the study area are within military districts operated by the Navy: the northern Channel Islands are within the Pacific Missile Range; the waters south of Santa Cruz Island are part of an Acoustic Range Facility; and Santa Barbara Island is located in the south- west corner of a Fleet Operating Area and is also just north of the Santa Barbara Island Training Area. The Pacific Missle Test Center at Point Mugu schedules control of the Navy operating areas in the vicinity of the Channel Islands. Each week, the U. S. Coast Guard publishes a "Local Notice to Mariners", which projects the use of the military operating areas. F-47 The Navy routinely conducts bombing practice and missile discrimi- nation operations in the airspace over the waters just south of San Miguel Island. A Naval Danger Zone has been established which extends 3 nmi (5.5km) seaward of the eastern half of San Miguel Island. In this zone, the Navy permits nonmilitary uses, includ- ing recreational use, only when the area is not being used for military operations. Bombing practice runs take place in this zone approximately 200 times a year. Because of the short notice and intermittent nature of these exercises, long range planning of recreational activities in the zone will be difficult; the Navy does, however, attempt to provide some advance notification through the use of signs and map designations. The Navy retains the right to escort boaters and other recreational ists violating the zone away from the target area. Although the Navy owns San Miguel Island, the National Park Service, by agreement with the Navy, administers the Island proper. By this agreement, the Navy has relinquished all author- ity to manage the resources of the Island and surrounding waters, except within the Naval Danger Zone discussed above. The Navy has agreed to attempt to conduct its operations in a manner which will cause the least impact to Island resources. The sites selected for and frequency of operations reflect this policy. U. S. Air Force The Air Force will regulate the Space Shuttle Vehicle System which is to operate out of the Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara County. The Air Force is currently conducting a study to determine the impacts on the Island fauna, particularly marine F-48 birds and mammals, of the supersonic boom acompanying the flight of the shuttle. F.l.c. Environmental Consequences Numerous authorities have the power both to regulate uses in the study area and to manage individual resources. Nevertheless, NOAA's review of the existing State and Federal management system indicates that the extraordinary diversity of natural resources concentrated around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island warrants additional protection beyond that provided by the present institutional structure. Although certain uses of the area and certain conduct do not now seriously threaten resource quality here, they could have more significant impact if and when activity intensities grow. The current multitude of regulatory authorities, for example, many of which have different objectives and jurisdictions, could bring about policy conflicts and diminish overall management effectiveness as use pressures mount. Further- more, some agencies suffer from limited enforcement resources. No unified regulatory mechanism exists to protect the study areas from future activities which may pose serious threats to acknow- ledged marine resources. Because Island waters contain so many valuable resources which in turn support so many beneficial uses, they require special acknowledgement and study to ensure that they are used and preserved in the future as effectively as possible. F-49 Habitat and Species Protection The present regulatory system does not provide for the preserva- tion and protection of exceptional marine habitats from the full range of potentially harmful activity, as is discussed in more detail below. Although the Departments of the Interior and Commerce have authority to designate and protect critical habitats for species listed as "endangered" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), no Federal authority currently exists to identify and protect localized marine habitats of exceptional importance to nonendangered species of marine mammals or seabirds. For ex- ample, while the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) explicitly prevent the hunting and taking of marine mammals and seabirds, they are not designed to protect their habitats from potentially adverse uses. This is a particularly significant gap because of the small number of prime habitats remaining in and around the study area. The California DFG, through the establishment of Ecological Reserves, has the ability to protect exceptional marine habitats in territorial waters. Reserves have been established in rela- tively small yet sensitive areas off San Miguel, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands. While the Ecological Reserves protect particularly important breeding grounds and haul-out areas, marine mammals and seabirds (and the resources they feed on) are them- selves dynamic entities and normally utilize areas much larger than these designated protection zones. As discussed in section F.l.b., the California DFG has only three boats to enforce all the California Fish and Game regulations applicable to the Channel Islands and along the mainland counties of San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura. These regulations concern not only Ecological Reserves, but also commercial and sport fishing, endangered species, and migratory birds. Because F-50 of the wide geographic expanse which must be covered and the relatively small enforcement staff at hand to do so, the enforce- ment capabilities of the DFG appear somewhat strained. To provide additional enforcement, the National Park Service (NPS) rangers of the Channel Islands National Monument assist the DFG in enforcing California Fish and Game regulations in the waters within 1 nmi (1.8km) of Santa Barbara, Anacapa, and San Miguel Islands. This relationship has been formalized (since 1978) in a cooperative agreement between the DFG and the NPS. However, this additional enforcement assistance is only provided within 1 nmi (1.8km) of the three islands. In addition, NPS enforcement capa- bilities are also rather limited—seven rangers, one 41-foot patrol boat available for observing all three islands, and one small boat on each island (Johnson, 1979, personal communication). Most of their attention is devoted to the land-based resources of the islands, however. Vessel traffic and Overflights Impacts on species and habitat due to vessel traffic, including noise and visual disturbance, propeller hits upon marine mammals, nearshore ballast discharges, groundings, and accidental oil spills, are not at present fully addressed. Among the results of relying on existing management arrangements would be occasional disturbances caused by the vessel presence near sensitive resource areas or their ballasting near rookeries and haul-out areas. F-51 There is no regulation preventing commercial vessels from transit- ting very nearshore waters where they could cause visual, acous- tic, or pollution disturbances to the marine mammals and seabirds. Compliance with the Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) has generally been good within the study area (see section E.3.d.). TSS utili- zation is not mandatory, however, and vessels may navigate around or between the islands. The present system for regulating the overflight of aircraft does not appear to protect fully nearshore marine mammal and seabird populations. While the existing DFG prohibition on overflights below 1000 feet (305m) over the land areas of Santa Barbara, Anacapa, and San Miguel Islands has lessened visual and acoustic disturbance to island resources, protection does not extend to Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Island, or the nearshore water habitat of marine mammals and seabirds surrounding the five islands. Persistent low altitude overflights in nearshore waters can severely disrupt various marine mammal and seabird behavior patterns, particularly those of breeding and nesting. The existing management system does not control the discharges of solid waste from vessels into these waters. Trash and unregulated discharges will probably increase as recreation and other public uses of the area intensify, and could have adverse environmental effects. Furthermore, although EPA is scheduled to promulgate regulations on the discharge of hazardous substances other than oil, such discharges are not now regulated. Existing regulations generally suffice to prevent the contamination of ocean waters by discharges from point sources (which require an NPDES permit), discharges of oil, and ocean dumping, except that it is difficult F-52 to enforce the prohibition on bilge pumping by tankers in this area (Adie, 1979 personal communication). Petroleum development The present system for regulating oil and gas activities does make some provision for oil spill prevention, protection of sensitive areas, and preservation of air and water quality. However, given the sensitive nature of the area, this system does not appear to provide an adequate buffer zone where no spills, discharges, or other disturbances associated with hydrocarbon development will originate. In the case of an area with resources as valuable and sensitive as those of these waters, the risks of oil pollution and disturbances associated with oil and gas activities, even if closely regulated, may outweigh the resources to be extracted. The Secretary of the Interior withdrew all tracts subject to Sale #48 within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island (see Figure E-22) from the sale, but these tracts may still be offered in lease sales scheduled for 1982 and 1983 and in possible later sales. In addition, the USGS's OCS Order #7 (pertaining to pollution prevention and control) and BLM's present stipulations, in tandem, do not require certain oil spill containment equipment onsite (see Section F.2.b.l.). The presence of adequate onsite equip- ment, in particular a boat to deploy the equipment, is especially important near the islands because of the rather long time requir- ed for the local oil spill cooperative (Clean Seas, Inc.) to respond to a spill in the more distant parts of the Channel or on the seaward side of the islands and because of the need to contain spills, if they do occur, before they reach nearshore resources. The California Coastal Commission has required additional contin- F-53 gency equipment on Exxon's tracts 222, 223, 230, 231, 232, and 238 under the Federal consistency provision of the Coastal Zone Management Act. Development proposals are reviewed for Federal consistency on a case-by-case basis, and there are no guarantees that the State will impose the same requirements on all the tracts near the islands. The protection of sensitive resources from potential impacts of oil and gas development in State waters is also incomplete. State oil and gas sanctuaries prohibiting oil and gas development have been established in State waters around the four northern Channel Islands (San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and Anacapa Islands), but not around Santa Barbara Island. Further, even in these prohibited areas, California can allow leasing if development outside the sanctuary would jeopardize the State's economic interests. Research, and Historic and Cultural Resources The existing management system has no mechanism to aid in ensuring that the area's research value and potential can be maximized over the long term. While a variety of organizations conduct research in the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, no agency serves to coordinate research projects to insure that regional information needs are addressed in a timely and adequate manner. Similarly, no agency or group conducts a systematic scientific monitoring program to follow the conditions and fluctuations in population levels of marine birds, fish stocks, or marine mammals, or the water quality in general. The area's potential to serve as F-54 an ecologic baseline indicator of regional environmental quality conditions is underutilized. Thus, an important mechanism for monitoring and evaluating the long-term adequacy of environmental protection efforts and decisions affecting these resources is presently being ignored. Disturbing underwater archaeological artifacts (see Table E-12) is now prohibited only in the ecological reserves around the San Miguel, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands. Beyond the 1 nmi (1.8KM) boundary of these reserves, as well as around Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands, no regulation currently exists to prevent the disturbance or collection of these resources. Although statutory authority exists for the recognition and protection of underwater historic sites, no sites in the waters around the northern Channel Islands have been nominated to the Federal Register of historic places. Management Presently 11 Federal, seven State, and a multitude of regional and local government agencies are vested with some regulatory author- ity over certain activities within the area. No one entity has management authority to govern resource use and conservation comprehensively. Generally speaking, each has jurisdiction over only a specific resource, region, or activity. Since present arrangements are not responsible for the resource system, they cannot respond to problems which arise in jurisdictional gaps such as the dumping of solid wastes and trash. While the importance of certain resources, such as endangered species, are often well- acknowledged, the present system fails adequately to reflect the national significance and preservation priorities warranted by the total unique marine environment surrounding the northern Channel F-55 Islands region. This failure is especially critical when viewed from the perspective of the need to protect and enhance sensitive natural resources for future generations. F-56 F.2. ALTERNATIVE 2 — the preferred alternative a. Introduction NOAA proposes the designation of a marine sanctuary to preserve the special ecological, conservation, recreational, and aesthetic values of the waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. This sanctuary would extend 6 nmi (11.1km) seaward from the mean high watermark of the following islands and offshore rocks: San Miguel Island, Santa Cruz Island, Santa Rosa Island, Anacapa Island, Santa Barbara Island, Richardson Rock, and Castle Rock (see Figure F-6). The sanctuary waters would include the entire 3 nmi (5.6km) of California State waters plus an equal distance of Federal waters. The coordinates are set forth in Appendix 1. This area possesses an exceptionally rich and diverse assemblage of living marine resources and offers a variety of benefits to human users ranging from commercial and recreational fishing opportunities to the less tangible benefits of studying and finding beauty in a relatively unspoiled wilderness area (see Section E, affected environment). The 6-nmi (11.1km) boundary includes significant sections of several important resource areas; e.g., Santa Rosa Plateau and Santa Rosa Cortes Ridge North extending south of San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Cruz Islands, as well as the Santa Cruz-Catal ina Ridge which forms an underwater connection between the Anacapa Islands and Santa Barbara Island. This boundary also coincides roughly with the 250-ft. (about 80m) bathymetric contour, and F-57 F-58 roughly delineates the island shelf and slope contours. It thereby encompasses the most intense concentration of resources in the area under consideration. As noted in Section E.2, many of the marine mammal, seabird, fish and invertebrate species con- sidered to be important in the ecosystem tend to concentrate in the waters over the shallow island shelves. Populations of certain species (e.g., pinnipeds and birds) are, in fact, among the highest in the world here. Marine sanctuary designation would allow MOAA to: (1) regulate activities which either pose the risk of causing significant damage or may have greater impacts as use of the area increases; (2) to support research on and monitoring of the resources; (3) enhance public awareness of the value of the area; (4) coordinate potentially conflicting authorities; and (5) respond to currently unforeseen threats which might arise. Formal acknowledgement of the species value of these waters should of itself discourage excessive new development, focus attention on the natural re- sources of the area under consideration and direct special atten- tion to future development plans. To protect these resources, NOAA proposes to subject only the following activities to sanctuary regulations: 1. hydrocarbon operations; 2. discharges or deposits of any substance; 3. alteration of or construction on the seabed; 4. vessel navigation and operations (other than fishing and kelp harvesting vessels); 5. overflights below 1000 feet (305m); and F-59 6. removing or harming cultural and historic resources. The designation specifically excludes the harvesting of living marine resources from the scope of possible sanctuary regulation and leaves various other activities to existing authorities. Permits, licenses, and other authorities applicable in the propos- ed sanctuary would remain valid unless they would allow an action which violates a marine sanctuary regulation. In order to prevent unnecessary and costly delays, the proposed regulations certify in advance the validity of permits and licenses which do not conflict with marine sanctuary regulations. b. Regulated Activities 1. Hydrocarbon Operations (A) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation pursuant to any lease executed before the effective date of these regulations and the laying of any pipelines is allowed subject to all regulations, permits, licenses, or other authorizations including those issued by the Department of the Interior, the Coast Guard, the Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency and subject further to the requirement that the following oil spill contingency equipment be available on site: 1) 1500 feet of open ocean containment boom and a boat capable of deploying the boom, 2) one oil skimming device designed for open ocean use, and 3) fifteen bales of oil sorb en t material. (B) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities pursuant to leases executed on or after the effective date of these regulations are prohibited. F-60 These proposed regulations are designed to protect the sensitive living resources of the northern Channel Islands from threats resulting from oil and gas development by keeping such activities at a minimum within the sanctuary and by requiring protective oil spill containment measures when drilling and other operations proceed. The regulations will reduce the likelihood of resource degradation due to: (1) the effects of oil spills; (2) noise and visual disturbances caused by drilling, presence of drill rigs or platforms, work crews, supply boats, and helicopters; and (3) pollution associated with aquatic (and aerial) discharges. Table F-4 summarizes the hazards to marine mammals, seabirds, and marine organisms which may result from offshore oil and gas development; Table F-5 describes how NOAA's sanctuary provisions will help mitigate these impacts. This section addresses the impacts listed above, tells how NOAA's sanctuary provisions will relieve the environmental stress, and describes the projected socioeconomic effects of these regulations . It should be clearly noted at the outset that the present level of oil and gas activity within or adjacent to the 6-nmi (11.1km) proposed sanctuary is minimal. As discussed previously and as illustrated in Figures F-7 and F-8, all tracts within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the northern Channel Islands were withdrawn from Sale #48 , Because this tract withdrawal does not apply to future sales, NOAA proposes to prohibit all future hydrocarbon activities on these tracts. In addition, as Figures F-7 and F-8 show, 19 other 'previously leased tracts, particularly off San Miguel Island, have expired or been terminated. Thus, there are only 15 active leases fully or partially within the 6 nmi (11.1km) boundary: 202, 203, 204, 205, 210 (off Anacapa island); 222 and 223 off Santa Cruz Island; 243-247 (off the south side of Santa Rosa Island); and 289-291 (off Santa Barbara Island). No development activity at all (including exploratory drilling) has occurred on F-61 c c/> E c ■— o E P to t- o ro •!— E to E 3 •i- <4- to to rO S. E -i-i c fO "O Z3 o X •!- en » •r- E J > LU m 01 J3 > CD c •r- to fO u to •i— 4J X> >, E c X iri-r c *J -C °i — c 4-J to rO -r— e o a. o c a> 3 C C i— > o "O •■— o to o a> aj to -f- C +J i. rO s- S_ £ L0 ■!- 4J 4-> •«-> 01 cn 01 ■«- o U fO u m CO S- S- 4-1 X O C ro 3 3 rO <-> S- >> ■i- ro O) 4-> O S. 4-1 c o 4-1 ro 3 to 4-1 4-1 rO fO 1 1 1 Jj am- to to O <-J 4— +J > 1 1 1 U C ro 01 5- o >-, Z3 c C C C C O S- X U ■p o 4-1 O O O ro •— o ■^- 3 ■- ■f— O 0) .^ U •f- -^ -i- ^3 4-1 L. 4-1 •r" XI X g V. 1/1 ro 4-1 4J 4-1 <-. ro -r- ro o ■r— 3 ■<- 3 3 3 3 i— ro 4-J to .O 4J t— 4-1 I— .— r— 4-1 3 ■f— Z5 — S_ j— • Q. r— rO i—i — i— to CX JO O) (O Q. £ 3 CO 3 O O O O O '«- o c rO to LU h- cc o CO O. Q- Q- O Q- id or +-> « c to 0) r- E ra D. • i/l E O u E t— t£> en 4— 0) c ro c r— ro o> r— o r_> O) "O c n to ~OI Ol Ol to 1/1 3 E Ol •i- CD N XI 4J en o 4-1 S. -s: S- u 3 s. S- ro c •f— +J u A3 i- k. 10 o. Ol a> ^ s- c •4- un E =5 CJ ro to 01 u S. ro O 4-J O O to X in C ul ro 01 c c •t-> o — «(- »— c: o >, ro re o ■ |M ■r- at s. r**r- 01 0) o 4-1 1/1 -J-> ro jS i.-'- ro ro i— 4J X to "O r— GO JC o i. C Ol 3 ao 0) Ol .^ e O •!- S- T- o ss o_ >— c _l to z —1 —1 CO •— * r- X «3 O A N (C 03 CD •i— -C s- c o p— .c: O 4J c ec in 4- 01 •i— 4- •r— 1 4-> 4- r— c o fO 3 CD o Cr- -t~> E Ul O O 4- m ■!-! X CL S- o (/> O r0 O J2 c ro 4- >> 01 n- in 3 O CD 4-1 c +J *-> ro _£^, OJ OJ c •i— ■w Q. J* u >)•!- I/) f— ^» r— a. a. c E?+j %- U <4- tj U c 3 in ro >,r- s- ,^ t(_ o ro i — CD ID O -r- n> O X O O) to -i- 1/1 E 13 > U-. s- ^ 4- ■i- ro X -4-> 3 X 4J to 14-1— O r- 01 fc «1 o. 4- •4-J OJ e 4- 1A^) C rO s- H- ro ro u S_ c o- rO 01 u ^r nD lO Ol O U X O c 3 CD C O' o (J c L. s. 3 1 *-> t. C en 1 M- oj to S -t- QJ GO t. Z3 -:— •p- •»— •U e o X i— i~ 3 O 4-1 ■i- C u"> C 1 C E X E ro E to >^ 4J E — o -C O i— o 01 i. s. i— ■.- 0) a. O f L « CO L tl Ol 4-1 fO i/> ■ — 4J (yl S_ aj Q. 1_ o OJ O. en 3 _i 3 -C 3 O 4J JS s. •»— i- -«-- -r— to 4-> M- D. 3 Q.<_) CL >■ O 01 L. o ID <4- 3 10 •i- 3 ro C L- ' •=r t/1 Q CD S_ c to c D- Q- CO ro O C3 4-J Q- d) rO Ol 1 u X Q. S. r— u_ <: LU O 1— r-J LU _1 CO ec ro 301 (1) COl C3 f— I > rO c— I F-64 F-65 CD U C i— o na lery susceptible to oiling of feathers; may concentrate in restricted offshore areas for feeding. F-73 The long-term, cumulative effects °f oil and gas development on seabird habitat areas and foraging grounds in the Santa Barbara Channel area are still unknown (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Because of their direct dependence on nearshore food sources, long-term contamination of foraging grounds could cause major alterations in seabird reproductive capabilities (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Oil spill treatment and clean-up operations also have important impacts on the seabirds and mammals. Often the emulsifiers used and associated human activity have been more harmful than the oil (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Because many new genera- tion dispersants which are supposed to be no more toxic than oil have not yet been totally evaluated, their environmental effects remain largely unkown (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). As with oil spills themselves, the impacts of cleanup operations would be particularly severe at times when seabirds are highly concentrated. --Fishery A large oil spill in a fishing area also poses a serious threat to sport and commercial fisheries such as those encompassed by the preferred sanctuary alternative (see Section E.2.c). Potential long-term effects include not only injury to the generally more sensitive larvae and juveniles but also to adults, altered repro- duction (fish egg viability or sperm-egg interaction) or behavior (feeding or migration), or disruption of the food chain. The precise type of impact depends largely on timing with respect to spawning season, migration patterns, and whether the oil sinks F-74 (i.e., affects bottom or demersal eggs) or floats (i.e., affects pelagic eggs). A spill resulting in a surface slick could affect upper water biota such as the squid, northern anchovy, jack mackerel, and the planktonic base of the food chain. Heavier oils that sink could affect shellfish (abalone, lobster, crabs) and fishes such as the flounders and soles. A spill could prevent or limit fishing for a period of time during and after its occurrence. In the case of the Santa Barbara spill in 1969, it is estimated that fishermen lost a minimum of two months of fishing with the area displaced by the spill (Neal and Sorenson, 1970; U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). The chemical remains of spills in other sectors of the world's oceans, some of shich are similar to portions of the marine sanctuary study area, have closed waters to fishing or other activities for many years (e.g., Hyland, 1977). The effects of oil and gas activities on kelp, particularly in terms of kelp's role as a habitat for fish, are also important. A number of kelp bed concentrations are evident around each of the Northern Channel Islands (see Section E.2.c and Table E-14). It is generally believed that the susceptibility of kelp and other plants to oil pollution varies with its life stage and that the adult generation has an outer mucilage covering which appears to protect it against oil toxicity (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). While there appears to be little evidence to indicate that kelp is harmed by oil, it is an important habitat for fish and fauna which may ingest or come into contact with oil trapped in its fronds. In addition, kelp contamination due to oil (e.g., natural seepage) renders it unfit for human harvest unless suffi- cient wave action cleansing occurs (Szelenyi, 1979, personal communication). F-75 — Reduced risks from spills Sources of oil spills include: (1) blowouts and other accidents at platforms; (2) pipeline ruptures; (3) tanker accidents and discharges; and (4) discharges during operation. The potential for major platform spills, especially from a blowout, is greatest during drilling operations. A blowout occurs when a well is drilled into a zone of unexpected high pressure and rig/platform safeguards cannot prevent oil from escaping to the surface. Major spills can also occur at platforms as a result of fires, explosions, vessel collisions, or other accidents. Once production has begun at a platform, minor spills can occur at any time. Pipeline accidents -- leaks, ruptures, etc. — can result in minor or major spills, although most pipeline spills have been very small (California Office of Planning and Research, 1977). Spills may also result from accidents involving tankers carrying petroleum into southern California ports (see Section E.3.d), the transfer of oil from a production platform to a tanker (as Exxon has proposed to do with its initial Santa Inez Unit production), between tankers (for lightering from very large crude carriers to shallow-draft tankers capable of entering California ports), or between tankers and terminals. Based upon existing knowledge concerning trajectories of oil spilled at sites near and in the proposed sanctuary, the prohibition of hydrocarbon activities within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the islands will substantially reduce the risk to the sensitive resources therein, both by preventing some spills and providing a temporal and spatial buffer. F-76 Immediately following a spill, the oil undergoes rapid weathering and most of the toxic fractions evaporate into the atmosphere or disperse into the water. Given the opportunity for such dilution and chemical /biological degradation, damage from oil spills can be minimized. It is, therefore, important to note that the greater the distance between significant resources and potential oil spill sites, the greater the amount of time available for spills to be diluted and weathered to a less toxic concentration or form. The Bureau of Land Management developed oil spill probabilities for leases predating and included in Lease Sale 48 and an oil spill model to plot trajectories of hypothetical spills. Table F- 7 illustrates the probability of an oil spill (1000 barrels or more) reaching the five islands as a result of activities associated with all the tracts considered for Lease Sale 48 as well as with tracts from earlier sales premised on BLM's oil spill model and probabilities. Figure F-9 shows oil spill trajectories computed by the California Office of Planning and Research (1977). In the Final Environmental Statement of Sale 48 (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979), BLM finds that "(i)f just San Miguel Island, as the major pinniped breeding island is considered, the probability of a major spill within the next 20 years is almost 100 percent." As noted in Section E.3.b. and below, BLM's oil spill probabilities reflect development scenarios analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement on Sale 48 (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Since then, the Secretary of Interior withdrew 69 tracts from Sale 48, including 24 near the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island (Figure F-7). Although the oil spill model was not rerun to reflect changes in oil spill probabi- F-77 to fO Q O * O o o CM to E TO CD cd c cu cu 2 4-> CD eo| o in 00 CO to in cf« in CO LO «d- CM ro r>« «tf- CD co •— in CO CM cd in V) Q O ro CO I co CO CM Q. to -J CO CO o o *—*. o • F— JO CO cu r- j- CD o r— E A s_ +-> o E cu cu F e CD o CD to >> c JD TO +-> o to to e 4-> TO e _J o o u- O «f- o 3 TO >> a -t-> J- •r- 3 r— CO •p- JO o TO OO JO o o S- rD D_ r-v. i o. col to TO Q b-| CD I * tO TO o|u s ro CO CO VO CM ^*. CO to H r-» in co oo co r>* «3- co co co «3- ■ — in cm to oo CO i-h o ** r— CO !•>» «*■ >— in o o cm ■ — i— in cm cm r^ «— i . CO V5 f^ «3" 4-> O 4-> E E E TO E TO TO TO E TO oo to OO *X. 00 >> JO 1 TO JZ TO E -!-> cu »a •>- u —i 2 3 TO M- cu S- to JO 3 TO CO E >> TO ^— • r— -r-> oo to c • f — t cu 13 3 ^—** ^"~ cr CU cu 00 c to **■ e JO TO 3 CU JZ to r— O TO CD oo E > S- TO E CU JZ O JZ JC +-> S- u e o •r— CU E JZ E 2 CU cu ■!-> J= tO TO 4-> cu +J +-> OO S- TO TO E i— CU •r— TO C +J -M OO E 3 t— to E i— to CU UJ U I— i S- E JZ ,— ~ ^r— J= +-> 1— TO 4-J O TO E •> •F~ CO C •i- to 2 •F— U_ -4-> II CD U ■M •r— E TO o CO i- •r- S_ TO o +-> ■!-> • A T3 E to to CU CU O cu - N tO o to oo >i CU TO CO i— J= o cu oo TO -M -M _i :d E TO t|- p^ CD E O r— e o CU •r- •r— to CU Q 4-> TO O E to to cu JZ •!- •r- to -!-> E «4- X TO 1 O UJ _Q ■M >> E 4-> CU II CU CU X to s- tO •!- TO uj m CU OO CU * S- • t— * to Q. CC CU cu CU • «* S- • «t •!— S--— - =tfe to -l-> CD c CU -r- to r^ CU o to ( — CU CD r— S- TO •<- tO i—l TO <4- CU JO TO OO —I TO CU •> E E ■a o E o cu s- TO CU s- 4- y to Q_ CU E 4- o to CU 1 Q. CU O CD c o to ° Q. TO 5 to s- cu &s O E TO >» Q_ JZ ^t" S- TO J- TO 1— co a. n -a c II * * * t F-78 F-79 lities because of these tract withdrawals, the probability of an oil spill reaching the Channel Islands has certainly been reduced. Spills can still result from operations on existing leases in the area and, potentially, from Sale 48 tracts beyond 6 nmi (11.1km). In addition, although the tracts closest to the islands have been withdrawn from Sale 48, without sanctuary designation they can still be leased in subsequent sales. In addition to showing the probability that an oil spill will reach the islands, BLM's oil spill model also developed probabi- lities that an oil spill will affect: (1) major pinniped haulout and breeding areas and (2) seabird breeding and nesting areas within three days; these are shown on Table F-8*. For instance, probabilities of a spill reaching major pinniped haulout and pupping areas from a proposed lease within the proposed sanctuary (see P9 on Figure F-10) north of Santa Cruz and Anacapa Islands (for Lease Sale 48 which was later withdrawn) within three days range as high as 63 percent. Probabilities range as high as 68 percent that spills occurring on a proposed lease (P9) and 70 percent from existing leases (see E5 on Figure F-ll) will reach seabird breeding and nesting areas. These probability figures do not reflect the fact that a significant impact could also occur at sea (i.e., not just to haulout and nesting sites) because of the intensive use of these areas as foraging grounds. *The probabilities that a hypothetical spill will affect pinniped and seabird areas are not specific to the Channel Islands, but reflect areas throughout the Southern California Bight. BLM's resource maps used for this analysis do illus- trate a very high correlation between location of these areas on the Channel Islands and their areal extent throughout the Bight. F-80 TABLE F-8. Probabilities (in percent) that an oil spill starting at a particular location in the vicinity of the northern Channel Islands will reach in three days: (1) major pinniped haul- out and breeding areas and (2) seabird breeding and nesting areas (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1978b). Hypothetical Spill location* (see Figure F-lOand F- 1 1 (Proposed Leases) ,1 ,10 11 12" Major Pinniped Seatr rd Breeding and Haul-out a nd Br eeding Nest' ng Sites** Areas** 13 26 8 46 26 28 4 7 30 13 10 17 11 17 16 14 63 68 3 3 13 24 22 52 (Existing Leases) ii 10 8 23 34 55 49 2 2 18 10 46 40 35 70 52 2 3 37 * See Figures F— 10 and F-ll for hypothetical spill locations and their proximity to San Miguel, Santa Cruz, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands. "P" stands for Proposed Sale 48 Leases and "E" for Existing Leases. BLM's Oil Spill Model also includes probabilities for spills from tankers hitting these resources. ** As noted, BLM's Oil Spill Model does not consider the probabilities of an oil spill on these areas specifically at the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, but rather throughout the Southern California Bight. p p *** 7, 9, and 12 correlate with the 24 tracts around the islands with- drawn from Sale 48. n - less than 0.5 percent. F-81 TABLE F-9. Oil spill recovery equipment in the vicinity of the northern Channel Islands--see Figure F-17 (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Location on Figure F-13 A NOTE: At each drilling location there is a minimum of 1 skimmer, 1,000' of boom and 10 bbls of dispersant. Equipment available at location Clean Seas Getty Oil Terminal 1 trailer 1 51 T ACME Skimmer 800' of 16" Sea curtain boom Clean Seas 3 Exxon Floating Ueir skimmers 1 Komara Mini Skimmer 1 050 Cyclonet Skimmer 800' of 8" Sea curtain boom 400' of 16" Sea curtain boom 1,210' of Sea Sentry boom 2,000' of B-T boom 1 Vicoma sea pack (1,600' of boom) 1 trailer 1 39 T ACME Skimmer 1,500' of 43" Expandi boom 800' of 8" Sea curtain boom Clean Seas Carpinteria yard 1 trailer 1 51 T ACME Skimmer 800" of 16" Sea curtain boom 400' of 8" Sea curtain boom Clean Seas Union Terminal 1 trailer 1 51 T ACME Skimmer 4,400' of 43" Expandi boom 738' of 30" Expandi boom Clean Seas 1 trailer 1 51 T ACME Skimmer 2,410' of 30" Expandi boom F-82 J3 00 en c QJ E GJ CD fO c fT3 c o 13 ro O) S- CO CO CO «t =8= O) fo t/> -o CD CO o CL o s- Cl CO o 4-> TO o o a. to ro o +-> a> JC -m o Q. O r— I I a; F-83 F-84 Because BLM's oil spill model has not been rerun in light of recent tract withdrawals (a total of 24 tracts) around the Islands or the USGS's reduction in estimated resource potential available from Sale 48 (see Table E-13), it is difficult to determine the specific additional protection from oil spils (i.e., a reduction in the probability of a spill hitting an island resources) provided by the 6-nmi (11.1km) buffer. By deleting the hypo- thetical spill locations which correlate with the 24 tracts withdrawn from Sale 48 (see P7, P9, and P12 on Figure F-12), the cumulative probabilities are reduced, but individual probabilities from hypothetical spill sites are still relatively high (see Table F-8). The high probability of a spill originating from tracts within the proposed sanctuary deleted from Lease Sale 48 (p7, p9, and pl2) affecting pinnipeds and seabirds illustrates the need to remove permanently these tracts from any future lease sales (see Table F-8). The 6 nmi (11.1km) buffer created by NOAA's proposed regulations is necessary because oil spill containment measures do not suffice to protect the resources of these waters from the risks of an oil spill in this area. The success or failure of at-sea containment and recovery operations in the event of an oil spill depends heavily on three factors: prevailing marine conditions, the amount of time available before the oil will reach critical resources, and speed of response. Under calm ocean conditions, existing containment and recovery equipment will function effectively, making successful at-sea recovery of the spilled oil more likely. But the effectiveness of containment booms and skimmers falls off dramatically as wave heights or wind velocities increase; the booms will not function F-85 TTm^^^T"*-! rrwrwr**+n^m ^******W**^WMi 03 S- 00 oo 9 0) 03 CO E O i- M- C 5 03 • S- *— -s ■o 03 .c en 4-> r-. •r- CTi 2 1— 1 VI •» +J S- o o 03 • ^ s- s- ■M 0) +-> x: c +-> 1— 1 •^ 2 «+ o Ol +J +J 03 c r— CD £ S- S- o 03 o Q. 00 to i-*. o C3i o t— i ^* #» r— ■M i— C •r- OJ C7) r— 03 rc C O 03 +J OJ T3 .c C +j 03 o _1 Q. >, M- or O CM F-86 effectively if water currents exceed one to two knots (California Office of Planning and Research, 1977). Wave period, height, and the amount of turbulence also affect performance. Skimming devices are, likewise, dependent on sea conditions. Effective skimming is unlikely when ocean conditions are not at least moderately calm (California Office of Planning and Research, 1977). The exposure of the waters seaward of the Channel Islands to currents from the south and north and to storm swells makes sea states too rough during most periods for effective at-sea spill containment. Similarly, the seas around San Miguel Island are typically very rough and would often preclude effective contain- ment. For instance, Clean Sea, Inc. (no date), in its site protection and cleanup plan, states that the convergence of ocean and Channel currents at the easternmost tip of San Miguel Island results in breakers and rough seas. Access or approach for spill control in that region is extremely dangerous (Clean Seas, Inc., n.d.). Waters within the Santa Barbara Channel are more protected from offshore swells and storms, particularly in the eastern portion of the Channel. Chevron (1978) noted that average signi- ficant wave heights in the eastern portion of the Channel are less than 6 feet (1.8m) and that severe storm waves (100-year maximum) have a 95 percent probability of not exceeding 34.4 feet (10.5m) in height. Such currents and winds can still, however, make the waters rough and limit the effectiveness of oil spill containment equipment. Because of rough water conditions around the islands, even the availability of onsite containment equipment may not insure that spills are effectively recovered. F-87 Because the tracts in the sanctuary are far from the mainland where Clean Seas' oil spill response equipment is located (see Figure F-13), in the event of an oil spill it is important that there be sufficient time for Clean Seas to reach the site. NOAA's prohibition on oil and gas operations within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the islands on future leases extends the response time available for possible at-sea oil spill cleanup before the spill reaches nearshore areas. This increase in response time is particularly important because, if a spill does reach shore, it is likely that cleanup crew, equipment, and associated disturbances will greatly compound the impact caused by the spill itself (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). For instance, Lindstet-Siva (1976) stated that attempts to boom rookery beaches may be counterproductive since most species of pinnipeds will abandon rookeries if repeatedly disturbed. Because suitable areas for pinniped rookeries are quite limited, abandonment of a rookery in this area could have severe consequences. Even if disturbed only once, several days may be required before activity patterns return to normal on a disturbed beach. Because of these factors, Lindstet- Siva (1976) noted that the best action is to mechanically contain the oil at the site. If oil reaches rookeries, it is probably best not to attempt cleanup since almost any method would be disturbing to these animals. In their site protection and cleanup plans, Clean Seas, Inc. recognize the potential that oil spill recovery activities may disrupt pinniped rookeries (Clean Seas, Inc., no date). The site protection plans for San Miguel, Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, and Anacapa Islands recognize that pinnipeds are very sensitive to human disturbance and, thus, no onshore cleanup should be attempted near haul out or rookery areas (Clean Seas, Inc., no date). A site protection and cleanup plan is not yet available for Santa Barbara Island. F-88 F-89 In addition to providing additional time for at-sea containment of spilled oil, NOAA's prohibition on oil and gas operations on future leases in the sanctuary will decrease the risk that spilled oil or other discharges will reach nearshore waters and affect haulout grounds, breeding areas, and foraging areas in toxic quantities. The increased distance from shore provides a greater period of time for natural forces to weather, mix, or re- direct the spilled oil. In summary, the additional time/space margin provided by the 6-nmi (11.1km) sanctuary boundary is, thus, an important element for protecting the area's resources from potential oil spill impacts. In order to ensure at least a partial immediate response to an oil spill, NOAA's proposed oil spill equipment regulation requires possible oil and gas development on existing leases within the 6- nmi (11.1km) boundary to meet not only the existing requirements imposed by BLM, USGS, EPA, and others (see Section F.l.b), but also provide onsite oil spill cleanup equipment to assist in preventing damage to nearshore resources. Although OCS Order #7 requires that minimum containment equipment at each drilling location must include a boom, skimming apparatus, and chemical dispersants (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979), this require- ment may be inadequate particularly for sites near the Channel Islands. For instance, the California Coastal Commission, in its review of Exxon's Plan of Exploration on blocks 222, 223, 230, 231, 232, and 238 (see Figures F-7 and F-8) for consistency with the California Coastal Plan, has required: (1) 1500 feet (460m) of open ocean spill containment boom; (2) an oil skimming device capable of open ocean use; (3) fifteen (15) bales of oil absorbent material; and (4) a boat capable of deploying the oil spill boom F-90 at the site at all times (California Coastal Commission, 1979). The Coastal Commission believes that effective onsite spill containment equipment is essential due to the rather long response time (approximately three hours or more) for Clean Sea, Inc. (the responsible oil spill cooperative) to get heavy cleanup equipment to this portion (relatively close to the mainland) of the Santa Barbara Channel (California Coastal Commission, 1979). Chevron (1978), in its environmental report for a proposed exploratory well on lease block 215 in the Santa Barbara Channel, cites the Clean Seas, Inc. general manager's estimate that his firm's equipment can reach the block within seven hours. As Figures F-7 and F-8 illustrate, Block 215 Is approximately 8 nmi (14.8km) from Anacapa Island (Chevron, 1978); response time to spills closer to the islands and, therefore further from the mainland, are very likely to be greater. To protect the waters of the sanctuary from the effects of an oil spill, NOAA will require the equipment required by the California Coastal Commission for the exploration of tracts 222, 223, 230, 231, 232, and 238 (see above) as the minimum onsite oil spill containment equipment for drilling within the sanctuary. Addi- tional equipment requirements set by the California Coastal Commission under the Federal consistency provision of the Coastal Zone Management Act will also apply under NOAA's certification of existing permits (see F.2.C.). F-91 — Acoustic and Visual Disturbance Oil and gas platforms, rigs, and activities produce both a visual intrusion on the scenic qualities of the islands' seascape and disturbances due to construction activities and the sound and movement of boats and helicopters (U. S. Bureau of Land Manage- ment, 1979). The continuous noise and human activity associated with oil and gas development in nearshore waters and the need for a steady stream of crew and supply boats produce visual impacts and noise which may disturb seabirds and marine mammals, particularly during sensitive nesting, pupping, and migration seasons. If these disturbances occur very close to shore, stampeding by pinnipeds or sudden flight by nesting birds can occur (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). During critical breeding periods such re- actions could result in increased mortality rates in young seabirds and marine mammals (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Oil and gas development may have both negative and positive impacts on the area's recreational values. Negative impacts include: increased congestion; the visual effects of platforms, tankers, and other activities on the open sea; degradation of water quality; and the risk of oil spills. Positive benefits could include the potential aid to navigation provided by develop- ment structures and communication assistance for lost or dis- tressed boaters. It is also possible that sportfishing may in- crease around offshore platforms due to the attraction their artificial reef habitat provides sportfish species (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). F-92 NOAA's prohibition of future leasing within the 6-nmi (11.1km) sanctuary boundary would lessen the noise and human activity in nearshore waters and also decrease the need for additional supply boats to enter nearshore waters or incidently approach resting or nesting marine mammals or seabirds. NOAA's requirement is in line with the findings in the 1975 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on Lease Sale 35 (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1975) which considered drilling activity and platform construction one of the greatest dangers to the pinnipeds and seabirds: "activities associated with platform installation, explora- tory drilling and production operations off San Miguel and Santa Barbara Islands could cause significant reductions in seabird populations and the potential elimination of sea lions, fur seals, and harbor seals from their principal breeding area in Southern California" (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1975). In addition, the prohibition of oil and gas activities on future leases within 6 nmi (11.1km) will reduce the potentially adverse aesthetic impact of oil and gas platforms, rigs, pipeline con- struction, and other activities on the Channel Island National Monument, the other islands, and boats in the area. It also serves to preserve the wilderness character of the island waters from industrial oil and gas development. While the significance of such values as undisturbed views and wilderness is difficult to quantify in monetary terms, their protection is, nonetheless, important, particularly in proximity to heavily populated urban areas such as those in southern California. F-93 --Discharges A wide variety of pollutant discharges are associated with OCS oil and gas develpment: drill cuttings and muds; sewage and trash; formation waters; and air pollutants (e.g., petroleum aerosols and engine exhausts) . Drilling effluent discharges include drill cuttings (pulverized rock fragments and chips removed during core drilling) and drill muds (complex chemical mixtures that cool and lubricate the drill bit, transport cuttings upward, equalize hydrostatic pressures, and minimize corrosion of the drill pipe and casing) (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). The literature on toxic effects of drilling discharges indicates that, while certain toxic effects must be considered potentially significant, most of the chemical constituents of drilling muds are relatively unreactive in a biologic sense and disperse to background concentrations within a few thousand feet of the drilling site (see, for instance, ECOMAR, 1978), particularly in areas with strong currents such as the waters around the islands. At present, the data do not warrant further control of normal OCS discharges, such as formation waters and drill cuttings and muds, within the proposed sanctuary beyond the regulations of the Department of the Interior, the Coast Guard, and EPA. If evidence of the need for more stringent controls is found after monitoring and studying operations in the sanctuary, NOAA will take steps to implement further controls. F-94 Air pollutant discharges typically disperse rapidly into the atmosphere or ocean waters and thus pose relatively minor threats to sanctuary resources. A major effect, however, would be on the area's aesthetic qualities and to adjacent regions (e.g., coastal California). In addition, the Channel Islands National Monument (composed of Santa Barbara and Anacapa Islands) has been proposed as a Class I area under the Clean Air Act. Oil and gas develop- ment in the vicinity of these islands would greatly enhance the probability that the Class I standards (if the Monument is so designated) would be violated (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). --State oil and gas sanctuaries Finally, of particular importance to the State of California, the prohibition of future leasing with 6 nmi (11.1km) will also help to insure that the SUte Oil and Gas Sanctuaries can continue to provide protection to nearshore marine resources. If oil and gas development is allowed adjacent to the Oil and Gas Sanctuaries, it is possible that California would have to hold a drainage sale within State waters to avoid losing State reserves. -- Socioeconomic Impacts of the Proposed Regulation The economic impact of this prohibition in large part depends on two factors: the estimated selling price of the tracts and the amount of economically recoverable hydrocarbons which would be foregone under the proposed regulations. F-95 Amount of Oil and Gas Reserves Affected Reliable data on the hydrocarbon reserves within the sanctuary are not available. Approximately half of the proposed sanctuary has never been considered for leasing and NOAA has no resource esti- mates in these areas. In the remaining half, there are 43 un- leased tracts, twenty-four of which were originally considered for Lease Sale #48 and then withdrawn (Leases in the other 19 tracts have expired due to insufficient attempts at development - pos- sibly indicating low resource potential). The U. S. Geological Survey's most recent resource estimate specifically for those 24 tracts was 5.7 million barrels of oil and 8.9 billion cubic feet of gas. This represents approximately 0.8 percent of the oil and 1 percent of the gas reserves estimated for all the tracts consi- dered for Lease Sale 48 in the Final Environmental Impact State- ment, or less than 1 day's supply of oil and gas for the United States (average daily consumption in the U. S. is about 19 million barrels of oil and 53 billion cubic feet of gas). Since the publication of the Final Environmental Impact Statement, USGS reduced its resource estimates for the Sale 48 area by about 84 percent (see Table E-14). There is no data available to estimate the precise effect of this revision on the estimates for the 24 tracts around the Islands deleted from the Sale. The extent to which any resources, whatever their potential, will be foregone as a result of the proposed prohibition is question- able. At least some of the available reserves could be recovered by slant drilling from outside the sanctuary despite any prohi- bition. Eleven of the forty-three currently leased tracts fall only partially within the proposed sanctuary. Furthermore, in many areas where recovery will be unfeasible under the prohi- F-96 bition, it would be blocked by other agencies. The Department of the Interior has already withdrawn 24 tracts and the number of tracts it would actually offer for lease cannot be predicted. The State of California prohibits oil and gas development within its waters around 4 of the 5 islands in the proposed sanctuary. Since there is a limited amount of capital available for the development of OCS oil and gas reserves, the prohibition on exploration and exploitation activities on new leases in the sanctuary will have the effect of redirecting rather than stopping investment in oil and gas operations in the southern California OCS in the near future. Thus this proposed prohibition is unlike- ly to affect the amount invested in offshore hydrocarbon produc- tion. Judging by the area leased in OCS Sale 35 and 48 and by the area receiving two or more positive nominations for leasing in the call for nominations for Lease Sale 48, and assuming that there will be about two lease sales every five years, there will be opportunity for exploration over the next 25 years in the Southern California Bight without the excluded sanctuary tracts. However, although positive nominations provide some indication of industry interest, they are not fully accurate indicators of resource potential. In addition, the above estimate of available tracts for investment does not take into account the possibility that patterns of investment could shift toward or away from the southern California OCS. It is important to note that the proposed prohibition on hydro- carbon activities on new leases in the sanctuary does not neces- sarily mean that affected reserves will be permanently unavail- able. These reserves will be preserved for future use, when technology may improve or the need for resources may increase. In fact, various groups, including Get Oil Out (1978) and the Scenic F-97 Shoreline Preservation Conference, Inc. (1979), have proposed that the Channel become a hydrocarbon reserve so that resources can be saved for specific uses (such as petrochemicals) for which suit- able substitutes are not yet available. Should petroleum tech- nology improve so that the risk of injury to sanctuary resources would be sufficiently reduced, sanctuary regulations could be changed to allow development subject to appropriate controls. However, a decision to reevaluate the prohibition on petroleum activities would be based on a requirement to permit only those activities consistent with the fundamental purposes of the sanc- tuary, particularly living marine resource protection. Effect of Federal Income from OCS Leasing The proposed prohibition could reduce U. S. income from offshore leasing. It is unlikely that the industry will bid on affected tracts located completely within the sanctuary if those tracts are offered in future lease sales. Tracts located partially within the sanctuary would also be less attractive to industry given a prohibition on drilling in the sanctuary and would draw lower bids or none. This change in bidding could represent a reduction of revenue to the U. S. Treasury if these leases might otherwise have been sold. The total amount of lost revenues cannot be estimated at this time. The prices of leases are based on data much of which is proprietary. Furthermore, the future prices of leases in the Channel will depend heavily on the results of exploratory activity from Sale 48. Prices for tracts leased in earlier sales do not follow any clear geographic pattern. The Department of the Interior estimated the social value of the 24 tracts deleted from Sale 48 to be $1 million* (U. S. Department of the Interior, 1979c). The social value is the savings gained by producing oil * Tnis estimate is Dased on the reduced USGS resource estimates. F-98 domestically rather than importing it. The Federal government obtains most of these savings through leases, royalties, and taxes. Effect on Industry Under this proposed prohibition the petroleum industry would forego the profits it could otherwise realize from the development of the affected tracts. Companies that have leased tracts in the area include Texaco, Chevron, Exxon, Mobil, Continental, Union, Phillips, and Champlin oil companies. However, as discussed above, in the short term, this prohibition will impose only minor losses, if any, on the industry, because operators can channel their capital for exploration and development to other areas of the Southern California Bight. If resources in the sanctuary were substantially higher than in other portions of the Bight, industry would forego a higher profit margin. However, the data available from USGS indicate that the resource potential in the excluded tracts is relatively low. Finally, development on tracts and portions of tracts within 6 nmi of the Islands which are already leased would have to meet the proposed provision requiring 1500 ft of open ocean spill contain- ment boom, 15 bales of oil sorbent material, an oil skimming device for open ocean use, and a boat capable of deploying the boom on location. Since these requirements exceed those imposed by USGS operating order #7, they would impose some additional costs on the industry. However, since it is likely that in many cases the California Coastal Commission would also require identi- cal onsite spill containment equipment, NOAA's minimum may not impose any additional cost. F-99 Sectors Affected The primary sectors affected are the Federal and State of California governments because of the loss of possible revenues from lease sales. However, the State of California already has an oil and gas sanctuary surrounding 4 out of 5 of the islands in the proposed sanctuary. The oil industry would forego the profits it might otherwise realize from the sale of the oil under the affected tracts. However, as discussed above, in the short run, the regulations would redirect rather than curtail oil and gas investment activities. The oil industry might also have slightly greater costs to meet the oil spill contingency requirements. Offshore drilling and service industries may also be indirectly affected in the long run. The tourism and recreation industry in the Santa Barbara and Ventura area may benefit from the restric- tion on petroleum development around the Islands, but these benefits cannot be estimated. Sport and commercial fishing may also gain from this regulation, although, again, the possible economic gains cannot be projected precisely. 2. Discharge of polluting substances No person shall deposit or discharge any materials or substances of any kind except: (A) indigenous fish or parts and chumming materials; (B) effluents from marine sanitation devices; (C) nonpolluted cooling waters from ocean vessels; (D) effluents incidental to those hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities with an NPDES permit. F-100 The proposed regulation prohibiting discharging and littering within the sanctuary complements the existing regulatory system and would enhance the area's overall recreational and aesthetic appeal. At present, specific discharges such as oil are regu- lated in order to protect the marine environment. In particularly sensitive offshore zones, such as those designated by the State of California as areas of special biological significance (ASBSs), harmful discharges are prohibited (This prohibition does not apply to vessels, (see Section F.1.6)). This regulation would ensure that solid wastes will not degrade wildlife rookeries or otherwise alter the area's aesthetic appeal. It would prevent floating or submerged waste debris (e.g., non- biodegradable plastic or metal objects) from entering foraging areas, where they could be ingested, possibly leading to unhealthy conditions or death. Under current human activity levels casual littering, most notably by recreational boaters, is not widespread and observed adverse impacts upon resources have so far been minimal (Johnson, 1979, personal communication). NOAA's regu- lation would ensure that future activity level increases do not lead to substantial degradation. In addition, this regulation prevents the discharge of hazardous substances which are not yet regulated. The prohibition will also prevent the possibility of dredge disposal or ocean dumping in the area in the future. The impacts of this regulation on sanctuary users is expected to be minor; trash will have to be kept on boats and disposed of at proper facilities, most likely on the mainland. F-1Q1 3. Alteration of or Construction on the Seabed Within 2 nmi (3.7km) of any island, no person shall dredge, drill, or otherwise alter the seabed in any way, nor construct any structure, except for a navigation aid or except in connection with any hydrocarbon exploration or exploitation activity other- wise allowed by sanctuary regulation. Dredging and dredge disposal activities, while not ongoing within the proposed sanctuary area, represent a potential threat to particularly sensitive marine resources. Foremost among these potentially adverse impacts would be increased turbidity levels, disruption/displacement of benthic communities, and human intru- sions near seabird and marine mammal concentrations. A 2-nmi (3.7km) offshore buffer area will help ensure that these impacts do not affect breeding grounds, haulout areas, and adjacent foraging areas. Dredging for pipeline construction (i.e., for oil, water, and gas) is allowed subject to authorization by the California Coastal Commission and all other regulating agencies. This regulation will enhance resource protection by prohibiting the presence of large, and often noisy, dredging machinery within 2 nmi (3.7km) of the shore. Thus, both over the short and long- term, human intrusion upon marine wildlife along with potentially adverse impacts on their food supplies (e.g., benthic and pelagic fish resources) will be minimized. By prohibiting dredge disposal in the immediate vicinity of marine bird and mammal breeding grounds and haulout areas, risks from the distribution of contaminant materials (e.g., toxic substances, heavy metals) are F-102 reduced. However, there has been no evidence of contamination to date within the study area. No economic impacts upon commercial firms are expected because current dredging operations are located outside of the sanctuary's boundaries and no zone within the 6 nmi (11.1km) boundary is used for dredge spoil disposal. Dredging restrictions may limit the harbor facilities of the Channel Islands if expansions are pro- posed in the future. This may affect visitor access to the Channel Island National Monument Islands of Anacapa and Santa Barbara, but the precise extent of impact is presently unknown. 4. Operations of Yessels and Aircraft Except to transport persons or supplies to or from an island, or for enforcement purposes, no person shall, within 1 nautical mile of any island: (A) fly any aircraft at less than 1000 feet; or (B) operate any vessel unless engaging in activities directly associated with the resources of the area including but not limited to commercial or recreational fishing (in accordance with Article 5, section 1 of the Designation), research, sightseeing, and diving or other recreational activities, and the primary purpose of such vessel is to engage in such activities. To the extent consistent with International law, within 1 nmi (1.8km), NOAA would allow vessel traffic by commercial fishing and kelp harvesting, research, enforcement, and recreational vessels, but prohibit all other vessel operations, except those necessary for access to the islands. F-103 This regulation will reduce certain environmental impacts within 1 nmi (1.8km) from large commercial vessels including: (1) visual and acoustic disruption of hauled out seals and sea lions, nesting seabirds, and whales; (2) possible accidents involving groundings or collisions with nearshore vessels; (3) routine or accidental discharge of pollutants (from ballast discharge, tank washing, and bilge bunkering) directly into important nearshore habitats; and (4) aesthetic intrusion on the view from the islands. It is difficult to predict what level of human intrusion will disturb marine mammals and birds. Frequently, birds will act as sentinels; warning signals by birds will cause hauled out pinni- peds to flee. Shyness varies according to species, time of year, location of the animals, and nature of the disturbance, among other factors (Beach, 1979, personal communication). DeLong (1975) reported that the mere sight of a passing vessel off crowded pinniped haulout areas has been sufficient to cause a stampede into the ocean. If pups are in the hauled out herd, larger seals or sea lions may trample, kill, or injure smaller animals in their rush to the sea. Stampedes may also cause permanent separation of pups from their parents as a result of the confusion. Similarly, a ship passing near the shore may frighten nesting birds and leave chicks and eggs unprotected. However, other reports indicate that on occasion pinnipeds may show rela- tive indifference to small vessels as long as they do not land or make noise. F-104 As noted in section E.3.d., a significant amount of vessel traffic currently uses the Santa Barbara Channel. A U.S. Coast Guard survey reported a daily average load of nine large vessels (300 feet or 90m, or even longer) and seven medium (100-299 feet or 30- 90m long), small (less than 100 feet or 30m) or tug-in- tow vessels en route along the Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) in a northerly direction (Cherney, et_. al_. , 1978). In addition, current traffic levels are likely to increase as a result of new southern California offshore oil production and a number of other maritime projects now being planned. If vessels remain in the TSS, they will not infringe on the 1 nmi (1.8km) buffer (Figure F-14). While compliance with the TSS has been good (Adie, 1979, personal communication), it is not mandatory; vessels can and occasionally do enter nearshore waters. In addition to disturbing marine mammal and seabird rookeries, nearshore vessel traffic would create an aesthetic impact out of character with the present wilderness and recreational features of the islands and surrounding waters. Tankers and freighters transitting the Channel are substantially larger than other craft in the area, ranging in length from slightly less than 100 feet (30m) to more than 300 feet (90m). On the other hand, commercial fishing boats range in size from about 35 feet (10m) to 85 feet (26m) and most recreational vessels average approximately 35 feet (10m) (Johnson, 1979, personal communication; Larson, 1979, personal communication). The DFG presently protects particularly sensitive areas from small boat intrusion through its Ecological Reserve Program (see Section F.l.b). 0CS supply and crew boats, although they do not generally exceed 65 feet (20m) (Cassel, 1979, personal communication), have no need to enter nearshore waters and are therefore subject to the regulatory prohibition. F-1Q5 F-106 Finally, the restriction on some commercial traffic within 1 nmi (1.8km) reduces the risk that vessels will collide with the smaller recreational, fishing, or other boats. The nearshore area is more treacherous to navigate due to shallow rocky areas. Prohibiting nearshore navigation by larger vessels would thus reduce both near-island spills and pollution resulting either from collisions or from accidental groundings. Exclusion of certain vessels from a 1 nmi (1.8km) band around the islands will not result in extended travel times to port or other major impacts on commercial shipping because vessels generally adhere to the TSS. In fact, it is the most direct route for transitting the region. Those vessels which have any need to be present in this particular nearshore zone are exempted from the regulation. As noted for vessels, the prohibition on overflights below 1000 feet (305m) is designed to limit potential noise impacts—parti- cularly those that might startle seals and sea lions hauled out or birds nesting along the shoreline margins of the sanctuary. It would complement the existing California Fish and Game regulation (which prohibits overflights below 1000 feet (305m) over San Miguel, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands) by extending prohi- bitions out over adjacent water areas where these animals forage. It would also parallel the National Marine Fisheries Service's selective prohibition of overglights under 1000 feet in areas where marine wildlife harassment is likely. This regulation would affect recreational aircraft and some charter airline groups which fly passengers over the islands to enjoy the scenery or observe whales. As noted in section E.3.g., two companies presently charter planes for nature observation. In addition, a number of F-107 private planes in the area may, on occasion, fly over migrating gray whales around the islands. This regulation will contribute to the protection of natural, undisturbed behavior patterns of marine mammals and seabirds concentrating and breeding along island shorelines. Necessary and reasonable uses of the area's air space, such as Coast Guard surveillance, kelp bed surveys, landing at island airstrips, and military operations, would be exempted. Since no commercial airlines (other than the above mentioned charters) fly regular routes over the islands at these low altitudes, this regulation should pose no burden on other commercial airline carriers. Although the charter planes often fly as low as 75-100 feet (23- 30m) and private planes on occasion as low as 50 feet (15m) (Glendinning, 1979, personal communication), marine mammals can still be seen from altitudes of 1000 ft. (305m) or above. 5. Removing or Damaging Historical or Cultural Resources No person shall remove or damage any historical or cultural resource. This regulation is aimed at protecting archaeological or paleon- tological resources from damage and/or removal. Additionally, NOAA will seek listing of identified resources on the National Register of the National Historic Preservation Act. Listing in the National Register would make possible grant and survey funds from the Secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI) (Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service) to study the F-108 artifacts and identify their distribution. Listing on the National Register also insures that proposed activities which could affect the resource are carefully reviewed. This regulation should not significantly affect activities within the sanctuary. c. Other Activities —Permits for certain research activities Permits to conduct specific research activities which are other- wise prohibited by sanctuary regulations may be issued by the Assistant Administrator of the Office of Coastal Zone Management if such research is: (1) directly related to the resources of the sanctuary or (2) to further the sanctuary's education value, or (3) for salvage or recovery operations. A permit system would allow research activities which would otherwise be prohibited by sanctuary regulations. For instance a study of the effects of introducing pollutants could be permitted if it would contribute toward increased understanding of the sanctuary area and its resources and not cause substantial harm. The primary advantages of the permits would be to allow research projects which could not be allowed on an uncontrolled basis and to enable more effective management of the resources. OCZM would seek to coordinate its permit process with that for the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Acts. --Defense Activities The regulations shall not prohibit any activity conducted by the Department of Defense that is essential for national defense or because of emergency. Such activities shall be conducted consis- tently with the sanctuary regulations to the maximum extent F-109 practicable. All other activities of the Department of Defense are subject to regulation. NOAA has no information to indicate that military operations as currently conducted in sanctuary waters harm the sanctuary's marine mammal, seabird, fish, or intertidal marine life. Indeed, the Navy has ongoing efforts to protect the natural marine re- sources of San Miguel Island. These include turning management authority for San Miguel Island over to the National Park Service and conducting its activities in areas as far away as practicable from key marine mammal and seabird concentration points such as Point Bennett on San Miguel Island. NOAA/Navy consultation efforts might enhance protection of marine life in the area. Increased protection might be realized through monitoring and studies which would coordinate military operations and provide guidance to assure minimum interference with critical life stage periods and habitat areas for significant marine life. Since military operations necessary for national defense or emergency will not be prohibited, the sanctuary will not signi- ficantly inhibit military activities. A potential threat to marine birds and mammals is the United States Air Force's Space Shuttle Vehicle System (SSVS). This project is expected to create overpressures resembling jet air- craft sonic booms in and around the northern Channel Islands during both takeoff and reentry (see Section E.3.e). The Air Force is now conducting a special noise impact study to evaluate the intrusive effect which these intermittent flights could have upon island fauna, including seabird and marine mammal popula- tions, particularly on San Miguel Island (Wooten, 1979, personal communication) . F-110 In the proposed sanctuary, NOAA and the Air Force would consult both during this impact assessment period and throughout the life of the SSVS. The effects upon marine birds and mammals could be closely monitored and, wherever possible, joint steps could be taken to minimize environmental harm without hindering the pro- gram's effectiveness. —Fishing and Plant Harvesting Fishing and plant harvesting are not subject to sanctuary regu- lation (except with respect to discharges.) In its decision advising NOAA to proceed with the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed marine sanctuary, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) also recom- mended that the management of living marine resources remain under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC). NOAA's analysis of living marine resources in section E and the existing State and Federal management system (i.e., California DFG and the PFMC) has shown that these authorities can adequately protect acknowledged resources. By relying on the existing arrangements, NOAA will avoid unnecessary duplication of regu- lations and programs. F-lll NOAA will consider the possibility of making funds available for technical assistance for studying the area's marine finfish, shellfish, and plant resources and for strengthening the present enforcement capabilities of the DFG and other enforcement entities including the National Park Service and the Coast Guard (see Management, below). d. Management While the preceding regulations provide the most direct form of protection for the resources of the proposed marine sanctuary, an equally important and beneficial element of marine sanctuary designation will be onsite management. The sanctuary manager will have two types of responsibility: (1) the enforcement of the regulations, and (2) the administration of policies and programs to maximize the area's beneficial use in a nonregulatory manner. Under the proposed action the sanctuary manager will: • Enforce the regulations, in cooperation with the U. S. Coast Guard, • Establish a Sanctuary Information Center, • Promote awareness of sanctuary resources, • Maintain a register of research projects with the Sanctuary Information Center, t Monitor the resources and the effects of human activities in the sanctuary, • Encourage research and evaluate permit requests for research and educational activities otherwise in violation of sanctuary regulations, • Compile an inventory and map of historical resources, and F-112 t Consult with other authorities in the sanctuary to exchange information and coordinate activities and policies. NOAA plans to delegate onsite management to an existing authority in order to benefit from the expertise of agencies familiar with the area. For example, NOAA is now involved in discussions with the California Department of Fish and Game and the National Park Service on the possibility of coordinating management with those agencies. Both entities have had considerable experience managing the resources, activities, and problems occurring in and around the proposed marine sanctuary area. --Enforcement Although a detailed management plan for the sanctuary will not be prepared until after the sanctuary is officially designated, NOAA presently envisions a State-Federal cooperative enforcement system involving the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG), the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the National Park Service (NPS). Since the proposed sanctuary would include both State and Federal waters, close coordination between State and Federal authorities would be required. As noted in section F.l.b., the DFG and the NMFS have a co- operative agreement to enforce the Fishery Conservation and Management Act; the DFG and the NPS have a cooperative agreement concerning NPS enforcement of California Fish and Game regulations within 1 nmi (1.8km) of San Miguel, Santa Barbara, and Anacapa Islands. A new cooperative agreement, modeled after the existing ones, could be adopted within the sanctuary which would allow the DFG, NMFS, and NPS within 1 nmi (1.8km) of San Miguel, Santa F-113 Barbara, and Anacapa Islands to jointly enforce existing State and Federal regulations as well as sanctuary regulations. As noted under the discussion of living marine resources in Section E.2 above, it is also possible that NOAA could provide funds to strengthen the present management and enforcement capabilities of the DFG, NMFS, and NPS. Congress is currently considering proposals to create a Channel Island National Park. The House has passed H. R. 3757 (U. S. House of Representatives, 1979) and the Senate is considering S1104 (U. S. Senate, 1979). Both bills would encompass all the islands embraced by the proposed sanctuary, including the sub- merged lands and waters 1 nmi (1.8km) offshore of each island. If the park is designated, particularly with a 1 nmi (1.8km) seaward boundary, it is likely that the staff and facilities of the present NPS staff for the Channel Islands National Monument will increase from 7 rangers to approximately 14 or more (Johnson, 1979, personal communication). This increase would allow the NPS to provide additional assistance in enforcing California Fish and Game regulations and, if designated, sanctuary regulations. Since the proposed marine sanctuary relies heavily on existing regulations for the protection of the area's resources, its enforcement agents would also enforce regulations imposed by other authorities. Thus, the marine sanctuary would provide protection for the area not only by imposing new regulations, but also by enhancing the effectiveness of existing regulations by providing funds for additional enforcement. F-114 --Education and Research A major responsibility of the sanctuary manager is to enhance education and research efforts. An integral component of that effort would be the establishment of the Sanctuary Information Center, which would also serve as administrative headquarters for the sanctuary. The Sanctuary Information Center would be primar- ily a research and education facility intended to serve as a respository for scientific literature and information on resources and activities in the sanctuary, as well as visitor orientation and education materials such as slides, brochures, and displays. The visitor information would help tourists and recreationists more fully appreciate and enjoy the resources of the sanctuary; at the same time, it would apprise them both of regulations and the need for protecting marine resources. The general information collection would include both technical and nontechnical reference material for public use in studying sanctuary resources and would collectively provide as complete and detailed a description of sanctuary conditions and use over time as possible. To further this end, the sanctuary managers would ask researchers to notify the Sanctuary Information Center of projects in the sanctuary and to submit reports of their research. This notification process would result in a master listing of research projects conducted from the time of designation. This listing would be continually updated and kept open for public use. F-115 A notification procedure should ensure that research parties are not only familiarized with existing regulatory controls but also that they better understand which resources are particularly susceptible to adverse research-related impacts. In addition, the master listing could: (1) provide a record of scientific inves- tigations which might provide important management information; (2) contribute to efforts to monitor use patterns within the sanctuary; (3) be of assistance in identifying areas of research not receiving adequate attention; and (4) insure that sanctuary managers are aware of relevant area- specific studies and liter- ature. Finally, this notification process could provide both sanctuary managers and researchers with a record of individuals and groups who have firsthand experience with the area's re- sources. This would provide a valuable tool for coordinating research efforts and encouraging multi disciplinary analyses. The notification of research projects in the sanctuary and the submission of reports on the research to the Sanctuary Information Center would constitute a slight inconvenience for researchers. However, in turn, researchers could benefit from the resources of the Information Center and, unless the research would require a permit (see above in this section) notification would not impose any delay. To the extent possible, efforts to develop the Sanctuary Infor- mation Center will be coordinated with existing systems, parti- cularly that developed for the Channel Islands National Monument by the National Park Service. The Information Center would be located on the mainland, possibly in the same place as the head- quarters of the Channel Islands National Monument in Ventura. F-116 The compilation of technical documents in the Sanctuary Infor- mation Center will provide a baseline of site-specific information which would help long-term environmental analysis and encourage further research within sanctuary boundaries. In addition to providing information and coordination to attract researchers to the proposed marine sanctuary, the sanctuary manager will directly encourage research by sponsoring monitoring programs, providing partial funding for research, and encouraging researchers and funding organizations to conduct or support studies in the sanctuary. The monitoring effort will focus on the overall health of the natural resources of the area as well as the level and effects of human acitivites occurring nearby. The information gained from such monitoring efforts and other research projects should enable NOAA to manage and regulate the sanctuary more effectively, and to assist other applicable authorities in carrying out their responsibilities. Another objective of the sanctuary managers would be to map and compile an inventory of historical resources. As part of BLM's baseline study of the Southern California Bight, Science Appli- cations, Inc. (1978) listed the known wrecks around the northern Channel Islands. Although some archaeological research has been conducted on the islands themselves, no research or mapping has been done on the possible historical artifacts in the waters around the islands. F-117 Finally, the sanctuary manager will promote coordination between all the authorities in the sanctuary, and will particularly stress consideration of the special value of the marine sanctuary's living resources in the formulation of policies affecting the area. The greater understanding of sanctuary resources and the effects of human use gained as a result of the research and monitoring described above will enable NOAA to provide valuable assistance to other authorities in the area in deciding upon the best level of protection for the natural resources of the sanc- tuary. F-118 F.3. ALTERNATIVE 3 Boundaries The sanctuary consists of those waters off the coast of California adjacent to the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, seaward to a distance of 6 nautical miles (11.1km). The boundary and the proposed regulations for discharges, removing or damaging historic or cultural features, defense activities, and fishing and plant harvesting are the same and have the same environmental consequences as those discussed in the preferred alternative. More stringent regulations for hydrocarbon opera- tions, seabed alterations, operations of vessels and aircraft, and firearms, as well as management provisions are described below, and alternative 3 is compared to the preferred alternative at the end of this section. Prohibited Activities Hydrocarbon operations (a) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities are prohibited, except on those leases that predate the sanctuary designation which are located entirely within the sanctuary. Operations on such leases are allowed subject to all prohibitions, restrictions, and conditions imposed by the Department of the Interior, the Coast Guard, the Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency, and all other agencies and subject further to the requirements that certain oil spill contingency equipment (see Section F.2.b.) be available on site for such operations. (b) Resources underlying tracts located partially within the F-119 sanctuary may be recovered by directional drilling from platforms outside the sanctuary boundaries. The environmental consequences of prohibiting operations on future leases within 6 nmi (11.1km) are the same as those of the prefer- red alternative. Alternative 3 is, however, more stringent because the siting of drilling rigs and platforms within the sanctuary is prohibited, except on tracts 243 and 244 which are located entirely in the proposed sanctuary. Without this exclu- sion, the lessees of tracts 243 and 244 would be completely prohibited from developing their lease. The prohibition on operations affects these existing tracts: 203, 204, 205, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 289, 290, and 291 (see Figures F-12 and F-13). Under this alternative, resources from these tracts may only be recovered by drilling from platforms situated more than 6 nmi (11.1km) from the islands. This prohibition would extend the level of sensitive resource protection provided by the preferred alternative's prohibition of oil and gas operations on future leases within 6 nmi (11.1km) around the five islands (except for tracts 243 and 244). This action would further lessen the risk of oil spills and routine discharges reaching sensitive nearshore resources in toxic quanti- ties and would increase the response time available for at- sea oil spill containment should a spill occur on an existing lease. Supply boat traffic and other disturbances associated with oil and gas development would also be reduced near the islands. The economic effects of prohibiting the location of platforms and rigs on existing leases within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the islands are difficult to quantify. Operators can still exploit resources in the sanctuary from platforms located beyond the 6 nmi (11.1km) F-120 boundary, but this siting requirement is likely to increase the cost of reaching these reserves or reduce the total amount of reserves ultimately recoverable from that lease. Although no drilling is currently occurring within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the islands, several adjacent discoveries have been made. For ex- ample, tract 202 and the adjacent tract 203, are being developed by Union; a platform--Gina--is to be located on tract 202. Platform Gina will be approximately 9 statute miles (14.4km) from Anacapa Island (Adams, 1979, personal communication). Discoveries have also been made on tracts 204 and 205. Because of the traffic separation scheme (TSS) and policies against siting in it, the exploratory wells to define these reserves were drilled north of the TSS and thus further from the islands. Because the rest of the reserve appears to underlie tracts 208 and 209 (north of the islands -- see Figures F-12 and F-13), the platform will probably be sited north of the northerly TSS lane and thus well beyond the 6-nmi (11.1km) boundary (Adams, 1979, personal communi- cation). Because tracts 245-247 south of Santa Rosa Island and tracts 289- 291 near Santa Barbara Island have had zero and one exploratory well respectively, no reliable estimate of reserve potential, location of reserve, or possible location of a platform can be made (Adams, 1979, personal communication). The rationale for and effects of NOAA's required additional onsite oil spill contingency equipment are discussed under alternative 2, the preferred alternative. F-.121 Alteration of or Construction on the Seabed Within the sanctuary, no person shall dredge, drill, or otherwise alter the seabed in any way, nor construct any structure, except for navigation aids (or in connection with any hydrocarbon exploration or exploitation activity otherwise allowed by sanctuary regulation). This regulation differs from that of the preferred alternative by extending the prohibition over the entire sanctuary area rather than only within 2 nmi of the islands. This expanded prohibition offers slightly greater protection from displacement or sediment smothering to the benthic resources of the proposed sanctuary; however, it would provide relatively little additional protection to marine birds and mammals, and shallow sub tidal and intertidal organisms. Operations of Vessels and Aircraft Within 1 nmi (1.8km) of any island, no person shall operate any vessel nor fly any aircraft at an altitude of less than 1000 feet (305m) except: (A) to transport persons or supplies to or from an island; or (B) in the case of aircraft or vessels whose primary purpose is commercial or recreational fishing, kelp harvesting or surveying, boating, diving, and other recreational activities, research, law enforcement, and sea and air rescue. F-122 Within the remaining portions of the sanctuary, (A) U.S. flag and, to the extent consistent with international law, foreign flag vessels (except for fishing, military, kelp harvesting, enforcement, research, and recreation vessels) traveling parallel to established shipping lanes shall remain in those lanes, and (B) no person shall fly any aircraft at an altitude of less than 500 feet (152.1m). Alternative 3 incorporates from alternative 2, the prohibition on most commercial vessel traffic within 1 nmi (1.8km) of the is- lands. In addition, alternative 3 requires that all commercial traffic -- U.S. flag and, to the extent consistent with interna- tional law, foreign flag vessels -- traveling parallel to estab- lished shipping lanes must remain in shipping lanes while transit- ting sanctuary waters. As discussed under the preferred alternative, most commercial traffic already follows the traffic separation scheme. This regulation would preclude trip shortcutting, either through island passages or close to their shores. However, since few large commercial vessels have used such shortcuts, little incon- venience to commercial shipping traffic due to this restriction is envisioned. This regulation would remove certain collision, intrusion, and pollution risks from the islands; nearshore zones which contain some of the region's more sensitive resources, as discussed in the preferred alternative and in section E. F-123 NOAA's regulation of overflights under alternative 3 would include and expand upon regulations described under the preferred alter- native. In addition to prohibiting overflights below 1000 feet (305m) within 1 nmi (1.8km) seaward of the mean high tide line of the islands and exposed rock, NOAA would prohibit aircraft flights below 500 feet (152m) over all other areas of the sanctuary. This regulation would extend protection from low flight engine noise to offshore areas of a 6 -nmi (11.1km) sanctuary, as well as onshore and nearshore marine mammals and seabirds. The purpose of this added regulation is to protect swimming marine mammals from harassment by aircraft engaged in whale watching or other activ- ity. As described under the preferred alternative, this regula- tion would affect only some charter planes and recreational flyers; commercial carriers do not fly at such low altitudes and military planes and kelp survey flights are exempt. This regula- tion would not supercede more stringent regulations prepared pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Firearms No person shall use firearms, except as necessary for military operations and enforcement. This regulation is designed to protect the area's resources from direct harm and indirect disturbance, as well as to protect the safety of sanctuary users. Because State and Federal regulations (see section F.l.b.) prohibit the use of firearms in many situa- tions, the impacts of this prohibition on sanctuary users are expected to be minimal. F-124 Other Activities Fishing and Plant Harvesting Fishing and plant harvesting are not subject to sanctuary regula- tions, except in specified research zones (see Management, below). The implications of restricting the harvesting of living marine resources in specified research zones are discussed in the Manage- ment section. Otherwise, the environmental consequences of this regulation are the same as those discussed in the preferred alternative. Management The management system applied under this alternative would be the same as that described under the preferred alternative, except that this alternative would establish specific research zones in the sanctuary. Because of similarities between alternative 3 and the preferred alternative, the discussion focuses on establishing additional research areas. The purpose of establishing research zones would be to dedicate areas within the sanctuary to research. One of the primary purposes of these sites is to gather baseline information on sanctuary conditions which reflect as closely as possible the natural undisturbed state of ecosystem processes, bio tic diver- sity, abundances, and general environmental conditions. Neither the exact location, number, or size of these areas has been F-125 selected; such specifics would be developed after a more thorough consultation with area researchers, area user groups, and appli- cable authorities, such as the California DFG. In general, the system of sanctuary research areas envisioned might include perhaps three to five sites of variable sizes dispersed throughout the sanctuary (e.g., one or two off San Miguel, one off Anacapa Island, and one off Santa Barbara Island). Within these research zones, only selective scientific studies such as taking water samples or limited numbers of marine or- ganisms for laboratory analysis would be allowed. Other uses within reserves zones would be limited to those with negligible impacts. Boat access would be allowed on a case-by-case basis but all consumptive or potentially polluting/disturbing uses would be prohibited. Commercial and recreational fishing would be limited to areas outside research zone boundaries. Discharges, transit by large vessels, pipelines, and other potentially disruptive uses would similarly be excluded. Research would be allowed in these zones under permit from sanctuary managers and would be controlled to prevent significant impact to natural resources. NOAA would seek inclusion of these marine research zones in existing systems which identify and/or set aside areas solely for research pur- poses. Examples include the National Science Foundation's system of Experimental Ecological Reserves and the Federal Committee on Ecological Reserves' system of Research Natural Areas. This management measure would result in an improvement in natural conditions within established research zones. The extent of improved protection would be proportional to the extent that disruptive activities are excluded. The information developed from studies within these zones will assist sanctuary managers in assessing effects other sanctuary users might have on different F-126 portions of the sanctuary. In this manner, research zones should have a beneficial effect of areas beyond their boundaries through their contribution to improved management capability. The estab- lishment of research zones would thus recognize research interests as representing a valuable ocean use which has a right to the exclusive use of localized ocean areas in much the same manner other areas are set aside for recreation, military activities, or oil and gas development. The establishment of research zones could limit and perhaps displace several other uses of the area's resources, most notably fishing and plant harvesting and various recreational activities. The extent of these impacts would be proportional to the size of the area and the intensity to which it is currently used. The displacement of uses, such as recreation, from these research areas may intensify use and impacts in other ocean areas. For example, the prohibition of recreational diving from a previously available area could lead to increased diving pressure in another area. NOAA would try to minimize such potential impacts and concerns by working closely with both area users and research interests on the selection of areas. Area., with high research value and minimal use by rrshfng Vid^Tarrc^ recrea- tional users would be sought. Comparison with the Preferred Alternative Although Alternative 3 is more environmentally protective than the preferred alternative, it has been rejected for several reasons. F-127 Because there are no oil and gas activities occurring within the proposed sanctuary, and only 11 potentially developable tracts, further restrictions on oil and gas development activities on existing leases is not deemed necessary at this time. Further- more, this prohibition could make certain reserves on leased tracts inaccessible and thus constitute a taking of the lease. Development on future leases is banned by the preferred alterna- tive. The regulation prohibiting seabed alteration and construction throughout the sanctuary would provide little protection beyond the preferred alternative to marine birds and mammals and inter- tidal and nearshore sub tidal organisms. These resources are most vulnerable in the nearshore areas. The regulation prohibiting most commercial vessels from the waters within i .- nautical mile of the islands is identical to the regulation in the preferred alternative. Since minor disturbances beyond 1 nautical mile from the islands are less likely to disrupt critical bird and mammal behavior, and since most vessels observe the TSS anyway, the regulations requiring vessels to stay within the shipping lanes is not considered necessary. The 500 foot (152m) overflight restriction from 1 nmi (1.8km) to 6 nmi (11.1km) offshore is also not warranted because, as described above in the preferred alternative, the greatest danger from disturbance to marine birds and mammals is at rookeries and resting places. Beyond i mile from shore, the harassment provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act probably provide adequate protection. F-128 The need to restrict firearms is presently unclear. Federal and State laws regulate the use of firearms and hunting of most species in the area; additional regulation does not appear war- ranted at this time. The additional controls imposed upon uses, including fishing and plant harvesting in specified research areas ; would provide some protection for the area's resources beyond that afforded by the preferred alternative. At the present time, however, the need for an additional level of protection is unclear. Although the establishment of research zones could have substantial benefits for research, NOAA prefers to work with the California DFG through the State's ecological reserve program to accomplish this. The other aspects of sanctuary management are the same as those in the preferred alternative. F-129 ALTERNATIVE 4 Boundaries The sanctuary consists of the entire Santa Barbara Channel from Point Arguello to Point Mugu and 12 nautical miles around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. This sanctuary includes the Santa Barbara Channel from Point Arguello north of Point Conception to Point Mugu east of Anacapa Island and extends 12 nmi (22.2km) seaward from the high water mark around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. This boundary alternative includes most of the waters and airspace utilized by resident and transient marine mammals, seabirds, and fishes for primary habitat, foraging, or migrations. The area also includes most of the existing and projected offshore petro- leum development of the Southern California Bight, as described below. This boundary option includes the same water area proposed in the sanctuary nomination by the County of Santa Barbara (Resources, 1978). In addition, however, it incorporates adja- cent State waters not included in that nomination. In alternative 4, the proposed regulations concerning overflights and alteration of or construction on the seabed are identical to those of the preferred alternative. The regulations concerning discharges of polluting substances, removing or damaging histor- ical or cultural features, defense activities, and fish and plant F-130 harvesting also resemble the proposed regulations of the preferred alternative, except that the prohibition on discharges applies to the much larger area of alternative 4, excluding the waters within 3 nmi of the mainland, and the other regulations cover the entire area encompassed by the boundaries for alternative 4. The regulation for vessel traffic resembles that in alternative 3, except that it applies to the entire Channel. In general, the increased areas of coverage would expand the level of environmental protection while only slightly increasing the costs and inconvenience to sanctuary users. Major costs are avoided by the exemptions which permit uses compatible with the sanctuary to continue. By exempting the State waters next to the mainland from the prohibition on discharges, the impositions of major costs on mainland dischargers is avoided. The regulations for hydrocarbon operations and the provisions for management are discussed below. Prohibited Activities Hydrocarbon Operations (a) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation pursuant to any lease executed prior to the effective date of these regulations and the laying of any pipeline is allowed except in vessel traffic separation scheme lanes and separation zones and within a quarter nautical mile of these lanes subject to all prohibitions, restric- tions, and conditions imposed by applicable regulations, permits, licenses or other authorizations including those issued by the Department of the Interior, the Coast Guard, the Corps of Engi- F-131 neers and the Environmental Protection Agency and subject further to the requirement that certain spill contingency equipment (see Section F.2.b.l) be available onsite for such operations. (b) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation, activities within 6 nmi of the islands to leases executed on or after the effective date of these regulations are prohibited. Within 6 nmi (11.1km) of the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, alternative 4 has the same environmental conse- quences as the preferred alternative, except that development of existing leases is prohibited in the tanker lanes and separation zone and within one-quarter nmi (0.45km) of the lane. This provision affects development on tracts 203, 204, 205, and 210 within 6 nmi (11.1km) and development on certain leases including (202, 209, 221, 222, 223, 230A, 231, and 232) beyond 6 nmi (11.1km) from the islands which are traversed by the tanker lanes or separation zone. NOAA's restriction on oil and gas exploration and extraction in and within 0.25 nmi (0.45km) of shipping lanes in the sanctuary is similar to the California Coastal Commission's (CCC) stated policy for consistency review that petroleum exploration within vessel traffic lanes or within 1650 ft. (500m) of them is inconsistent with the policies and objectives of the California Coastal Plan (California Coastal Commission, 1979). It is CCC policy that proposals not adhering to this policy cannot proceed. NOAA's restriction is also consistent with the special condition attached by the Army Corps of Engineers to Exxon's permit to anchor a drill ship in navigable water for exploratory drilling on tracts 222, 223, 230, 231, 232, and 238. The special condition provided "(t) hat vessels shall not engage in drilling inside sea lanes or within one-quarter nmi (0.45km) of established sea lane boundaries" (California Coastal Commission, 1979). The purpose of F-132 this prohibition is to eliminate the hazard of a collision or ramming and possible subsequent oil spills that the presence of a fixed structure within a designated vessel traffic lane or buffer poses to navigation. Because this restriction is being implemented by the California Coastal Commission for all future development and by the Corps of Engineers on a case-by-case basis, NOAA's provision would not have any additional effects on operators. NOAA's provision would insure, however, that the California Coastal Commission's and Corps of Engineers' present policy is incorporated into a long- term management framework for the area. NOAA's requirement for ftftslte oil spill containment equipment has the same environmental consequences as discussed in the preferred alternative and is applied for the same reason — to insure more effective at- sea oil spill containment. In alternative 4 however, this stipulation applies to all development around the Islands and in the Channel . NOAA did not consider prohibiting all new oil and gas development in the area encompassed by alternative 4 because the evidence indicates that substantial economically recoverable petroleum reserves underlie the portions of the Channel near the mainland. The threats do not appear to warrant the sacrifice of these potential reserves located away from the most sensitive breeding and resting areas for seabirds and marine mammals. F-133 Management In addition to the provisions specified in the preferred alter- native under alternative 4 the sanctuary manager will: t Establish a Sanctuary Management Advisory Committee. The environmental consequences of the management measures esta- blishing a Sanctuary Information Center, promoting awareness of sanctuary resources, and encouraging scientific research are the same as discussed under the preferred alternative, except that they apply to a larger area. Efforts to inventory and map histo- rical resources, coordinate with other activities, and maintain a research registry are also basically the same although a larger, more intensively researched, area is involved which will increase the scale of the effort. The management measure of monitoring sanctuary resources and uses and working with other authorities would have all the environ- mental consequences described under the preferred alternative but would also have a regional management aspect. Under this alter- native, monitoring and coordination provisions would afford sanctuary managers an opportunity to develop a broad regional perspective of ocean uses as they influence regionally significant natural marine resources. This regional perspective could then be used to guide decision-making concerning resource and use alloca- tions throughout the Santa Barbara Channel region. With a broad overview of interactions between all significant uses, resources, and interests, the risks of hidden cumulative impacts could be highlighted, brought to the attention of appropriate authorities, and addressed. F-134 The establishment of a Channel marine sanctuary advisory committee would insure a formal structure for cooperation between the sanctuary manager and other interested parties. The advisory committee would review and make recommendations on sanctuary management plans and decisions. Among the parties which might actively participate on the Committee would be representatives of the National Park Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the counties of Santa Barbara and Ventura, fishing and plant harvesting representatives, the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, the local Audubon Society, and The Nature Conservancy. Their participation would enable sanctuary managers to benefit from their broad spectrum of knowledge. Comparison with the Preferred Alternative In alternative 4, the sanctuary boundaries are extended to include the Santa Barbara Channel from Point Arguello to Point Mugu, as well as 12 nmi (22.2km) around the northern Channel Islands. This alternative is rejected in favor of the preferred alternative for several reasons. The justifiable regulations on overflights and alteration of or construction on the seabed are exactly the same as those discussed under the preferred alternative. The justi- fiable regulations concerning removing or damaging hsitorical or cultural features, discharges of polluting substances, defense activities, and fishing and plant harvesting are also the same as under the preferred alternative, except that they would apply to a much larger area. Although the entire Santa Barbara Channel area is an interrelated ecosystem, most of the sensitive marine re- sources concentrate in the nearshore waters surrounding the islands. Evidence compiled to date does not indicate that such a F-135 large boundary is needed to protect these resources; the preferred alternative appears adequate. As noted in the preferred alternative, since vessels tend to adhere to the TSS anyway, an additional sanctuary regulation requiring such compliance seems unnecessary. This is particularly true since the preferred alternative includes a regulation prohi- biting such vessels from entering nearshore waters within 1 nmi (1.8km) of any island. Protecting the resources from nearshore disturbances is more important to the purposes of the sanctuary than requiring vessels to remain within designated traffic lanes. The regulation of hydrocarbon operations by alternative 4 is similar to the preferred alternative, except for the prohibition of development within the TSS. Since this requirement is already a policy of the California Coastal Commission and the Corps of Engineers, an additional regulation for the entire Channel is unnecessary. While extension of NOAA's oil spill containment equipment requirements to the entire Channel is desirable, this alone is not an adequate reason for extending the sanctuary boundaries beyond those in the preferred alternative, particularly because onsite equipment is slightly less crucial for platforms closer to the mainland, and thus to the locations of Clean Seas (Figure F-12). As noted, the environmental consequences of most of the require- ments specified under management are the same as those discussed under the preferred alternative except for the creation of an advisory committee. F-136 The establishment of a formal advisory group would add a level of complication of the management of the marine sanctuary, perhaps not necessary or desired. Under the preferred alternative the sanctuary manager will be open to informal advice and comment from interested parties in any case. F-137 ALTERNATIVE 5 Boundaries The sanctuary boundary consists of the waters 3 nautical miles (5.6km) beyond the Territorial Sea (State waters) around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. The 3-nmi (5.6km) "donut" around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island excludes State waters. Hence, many of the habitats of valuable marine resources that concentrate in the upper shelf waters would not be included in the sanctuary. The stated regulations concerning hydrocarbon development, dis- charges of polluting substances, vessel traffic and overflights, defense activities, and fish and plant harvesting, as well as the management provisions, are the same as those in the preferred alternative. Because of the exclusion of State waters from alternative 5, they offer less protection to the resources. Alternative 5 would offer no protection from nearshore vessel traffic and overflights, from alteration of or construction on the seabed, or from damage or removal of historical or cultural resources. Also, because State waters are not included in this alternative, it is possible that oil and gas development could occur within the 3-nmi (5.6km) limit. This is not likely, how- ever, particularly at San Miguel, Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, and Anacapa Islands, since State Oil and Gas Sanctuaries have been established in the waters out to 3 nmi (5.6km) around these F-138 Islands. Within these sanctuaries, oil and gas development is prohibited, except in certain instances to allow a "drainage" sale to protect the State's economic interests. Since oil and gas development would be prohibited in adjacent Federal waters, it is unlikely that State petroleum resources will be drained. However, because the waters around Santa Barbara Island have not been designated as a State Oil and Gas Sanctuary, oil and gas development could occur under the present management system. Alternative 5 provides no protection against this possibility. Under alternative 5, littering and discharges could continue shoreward (in State waters) of sanctuary boundaries. Under this alternative, management would focus attention on the waters extending 3 nmi (5.6km) beyond the territorial sea. As discussed in section E.2, the most important resource areas are in State waters over the island shelf area. Since these more valu- able resource areas would be excluded from sanctuary boundaries, the nonregulatory management efforts involving research and public awareness would not be addressed to the most important resource areas. Provisions to establish: (1) a Sanctuary Information Center, (2) an effort to promote sanctuary resources, (3) a registry of research projects, (4) a monitoring program for human uses and sanctuary resources, and (5) an effort to encourage non-consump- tive research would be similar to those described under the preferred alternative, except they would apply to a smaller geographic area of less direct resource significance. In terms of research, the exclusion of State waters will significantly lower F-139 the number of research projects subject to sanctuary management because: (1) the inshore waters (where marine life tends to concentrate) are attractive to a greater variety and number of research projects and (2) the geographic area is significantly smaller. The benefits of this alternative, while covering the same types of impacts described under the preferred alternative, will thus be considerably smaller both in terms of coordination and protection of marine life. Since the sanctuary boundaries under this alternative almost exclusively include deeper waters where the likelihood of finding archeological resources is remote, initiation of a cultural resource inventory is not considered appropriate. NOAA would seek cooperative agreements with appropriate State agencies to ensure that protective provisions applied in the sanctuary complement and further the resource protection objec- tives of the adjacent state waters. These agreements would be designed to coordinate state and sanctuary decision making and to reduce the potential that actions by either party would negate resource protection policies and objectives of the other. Comparison with the Preferred Alternative This alternative has been rejected in favor of the preferred alternative for the following reasons. First, in terms of the regulation of the discharge of polluting substances, the regu- lation as stated is the same, but no protection is provided the particularly important nearshore waters The regulation provides a buffer from the potential impacts of oil and gas development on the Federal OCS, but does not insure that oil and gas development F-140 is prohibited in State waters, particularly around Santa Barbara Island. In terms of management, even with cooperative agreements with other agencies and the other sanctuary provisions relating to the information center, promoting awareness of sanctuary resources, registering research projects and encouraging nonconsumptive research, the failure to include the most important natural resource areas within sanctuary boundary compromises and restricts the potential that sanctuary designation will achieve long-term protection of critical resources. F-141 ALTERNATIVE 6 Boundaries The entire Santa Barbara Channel from Point Argue!!© to Point Mugu and 12 nautical miles around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island, excluding State waters. This "donut" sanctuary resembles alternative 4, but excludes all State waters — i.e., all waters within the 3-nmi (5.6km) Terri- torial Sea. The remaining waters include portions of the forage and migration areas of important resources, yet leave out the vital waters overlying the upper island shelf. This boundary alternative is the same as that nominated by the County of Santa Barbara, California (Resources, 1978). The regulations on discharges, and policies on defense activities, and fishing and plant harvesting would be the same as in the preferred alternative except that they would not apply in State waters and would apply throughout the Santa Barbara Channel (excluding territorial waters) and out to 12 nmi around the islands. They therefore, provide no direct protection for the nearshore resources. Under alternative 6, NOAA would not regulate overflights or the alteration of or construction on the seabed because the exclusion of the nearshore waters renders such prohibition unnecessary. F-142 The regulation concerning vessel traffic and hydrocarbon opera- tions and management provisions are discussed below. Hydrocarbon Operations (a) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation pursuant to any lease executed prior to the effective date of these regulations and the laying of any pipeline is allowed except in vessel traffic separation scheme (TSS) lanes and separation zone and within a quarter nautical mile of these lanes, subject to all prohibitions, restrictions and conditions imposed by applicable regulations, permits, licenses or other authorizations including those issued by the Department of the Interior, the Coast Guard, the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency and subject further to the requirement that certain oil spill contingency equipment is available onsite for such operations. (b) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities pursuant to leases executed on or after the effective date of these regu- lations are prohibited. Beyond State waters, the environmental consequences of this regulation are the same as discussed under alternative 4. The environmental consequences of excluding State waters from regu- lation are discussed under alternative 5. /\ s noted, it is pos- sible that oil and gas development could occur within 3 nmi (5.6km) of the islands. Operation of Vessels Require U.S. flag and, to the extent consistent with international law, foreign flag vessels (except for fishing, kelp harvest- ing, military, research, enforcement, and recreational vessels) travelling parallel to established shipping lanes to remain in those lanes. F-143 The environmental consequences of this regulation are similar to those discussed under alternative 4, except that there is no regulation prohibiting vessels within 1 nmi of the islands, which is the area most sensitive to disturbances from traffic. This is because these waters are not included in the sanctuary. Management In addition to the provisions specified in the preferred alter- native, under alternative 6, the sanctuary manager will: • Establish a Sanctuary Management Advisory Committee. Nonregulatory management under this alternative represents a combination of attributes and deficiencies described under alter- natives 4 and 5. It features a regionwide approach, but lacks authority in the most important natural resource areas--i.e., marine habitat over most of the island and mainland shelf areas. Comparison with the Preferred Alternative This alternative has been rejected in favor of the preferred alternative for the following reasons. The regulations for discharges of polluting substances are similar to those under the preferred alternative, but do not cover sensitive nearshore resources. Although the Santa Barbara Channel area is an inte- grated ecosystem, most of the sensitive marine resources concen- trate in the nearshore waters surrounding the islands. F-144 The alteration of and construction on the seabed, removal or damage of historic resources, the operation of vessels, and overflights may also continue in nearshore waters under this alternative. An adequate buffer from the potential impacts of oil and gas development in Federal waters is provided, but the contin- ued protection of nearshore resources from oil and gas activities in State waters is not insured, particularly at Santa Barbara Island. As in alternative 5, even with cooperative agreements with other agencies and the other sanctuary provisions, the management provisions fail to include the most important natural resource areas within the sanctuary boundary which compromises and restricts the potential that sanctuary designation will achieve long-term protection of critical sanctuary resources. F-145 G. Literature and Personal Communications Cited a. References Allen, A. A. 1969. Santa Barbara Oil Spill. Statement presented U.S. Senate Interior Committee Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials, and Fuels. 11 p. American Petroleum Institute. 1978. Oil and Gas Well Drilling Fluid Chemicals. American Petroleum Institute. Washington, D.C. API Bui. 13F. 9 p. Anderson, E. K. and W. J. North. 1967. In situ studies of spore production and dispersal in the giant kelp, Macrocystis. ln_ Proceedings: International Seaweed Symposium (Editors, E. G. Young and J.L. McLachlan). Pergamon Press, New York. 5:73-86 (424 p). Anderson, E.K. and I.T. Anderson. 1976. Distribution and Status of Brown Pelicans in the California Current. American Birds, 30(1):3-12. Anderson, E.K., L.G. Jones, and C.T. Mitchell. 1969. Evaluation of ecological effects of liberated oil in the Santa Barbara Channel, Feb. 14-19, 1969. Prepared for Western Oil and Gas Association. 57 p. Battel le-Northwest. 1969. Review of Santa Barbara Channel Oil Pollution Incident, for the Department of the Interior and Transportation. Bean, M. 1977. The Evolution of National Wildlife Law. Council on Environmental Quality. Bigford, T.E. 1978. Status of the Fishery Councils and Fishery Management Plans. The Coastal Society Bulletin 2(4): 16-19. Blumer, M. 1971. Scientific aspects of the oil spill problem. Environmental Affairs, pp. 54-73. Boesch, Donald F. e_t. al_. 1973. Oil Spills and the Marine Environment. Briggs, John C. 1974. Marine Zoogeography. McGraw-Hill Series in Population Biology. McGraw-Hill Book Co. New York, New York. 475 p. G-l California Coastal Commission (CCC), 1978. Consistency Certification Summary and Staff Recommendation on Chevron's Plan of Exploration for Tracts 204, 208, 209, and 215. (Approved on December 12, 1978). (Consistency Certification No. CC-2-78). California Coastal Commission (CCC), 1979a. Consistency Certification Summary and Staff Recommendation on Exxon's Plan of Exploraation for Tracts 222, 223, 230, 231, 232, and 238. (Consistency Certification No. CC-3-79) (Approved on March 19, 1979). California Coastal Commission (CCC), 1979b. Coastal News. Vol. 2, No. 8. September, 1979. California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, 1975. California Coastal Plan. California Department of Fish and Game (DFG), 1976. Coastal County Fish and Wildlife Resources and Their Utilization. Published by the Univ. of California Sea Grant Marine Advisory Program in cooperation with the California Department of Fish and Game. Revised June 1, 1976. 258 p. California Department of Fish and Game (DFG), 1979. Preliminary Draft Living Marine Resources of the Proposed Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary. State of California. Department of Fish and Game. Long Beach, California. California Department of Fish and Game (DFG), In Process. Atlas of Prominent Southern California Marine Resources. Manuscript research and design by Robert F. Bell. State of California. Long Beach, California. California Department of Fish and Game and Department of Commerce, 1978. Cooperative Agreement on Fishing (December 3, 1978). California Fish and Game Commission, 1978. Orders, rules, and regulations for 1978: Title 14 - Natural Resources; Divisions 1-7. California Office of Planning and Research, 1977. Offshore oil and gas development: Southern California. Volumes I and II. Prepared by OCS Task Force. California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), 1974. California Outdoor Recreation Resources Plan. G-2 California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), 1979. State Parks System, Underwater Parks Master Plan (preliminary). January, 1979. 69 p. California State Water Resources Control Board, 1976. Areas of Special Biological Significance. California Water Resources Control Board, Annual Report, 1978. California State Water Resources Control Board. 1978. Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California. Cherny, J.J., et. al., 1978. Marine Traffic Data of Southern CalifornTa, Prepared for U.S. Dept. of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard. Chevron, 1978. Environmental Report for Tracts 204, 208, and 209. Clark, J. and C. Terrell, 1978. Environmental planning for off- shore oil and gas, Vol. Ill: Effects on living resources and habitats. Prepared by the Conservation Foundation for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. Clean Seas, Inc. No date. Site protection and cleanup plans. Santa Barbara, CA. Clendenning, K.A. 1968a. A comparison of the annual harvesting yields of certain California Kelp beds, 1950-60. In Utilization of Kelp-bed Resources in Southern California (Editors, W.J. North and C.L. Hubbs). State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. Fish Bulletin No. 139:219-222. Clendenning, K.A. 1968b. Harvesting effects on canopy invertebrates and on kelp plants. In_ Utilization of Kelp-bed Resources in Southern California (Editors, W.J. North and C.L. Hubbs). State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin No. 139:219-222. Daugherty, A.E. 1965. Marine Mammals of California 1972 Revision. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California. 91 p. G-3 Davies, D.H. 1968. Statistical Analysis of the Relation between Kelp Harvesting and Sportfishing in the California Kelp Beds. In Utilization of Kelp-bed Resources in Southern CalifornTa (Editors, W.J. North and C.L. Hubbs). State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. Fish Bulletin No. 139:151-212. DeLong, R.L. 1972. Environmental pollutant residues in parturient California sea lions: premature vs. normal. Unpublished manuscript. National Marine Fisheries Service, Marine Mammal Division, Seattle, Washington. DeLong, R.L. 1975. San Miguel Island Management Plan. Prepared for the Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, D.C. February, 1975. 38 p. DeLong, R.L., W.G. Gilmartin, and J.G. Simpson. 1973. Premature births in California sea lions: association with high organochlorine pollutant residue levels. Science 181: 1168-1170. Ebeling, A.W., e_t. al_. , In Process. Habitat Groups and Island- Mainland Distribution of Kelp Bed Fishes Off Santa Barbara, California. Department of Biological Sciences and Marine Sciences Institute. University of California. Santa Barbara, California. ECOMAR. 1978. Tanner Bank Mud and Cuttings Stude. Prepared for Shell Oil Company. Goleta, California. 495 p. Ehorn, W. 1978. Public Workshop Comment. Proceedings of Public Workshop on Potential Marine Sanctuaries Offshore of California. Sponsored by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, April 19, 1978, Santa Barbara, CA pp. 10-21. Evans, W.E. 1975. Distribution, Differentiation of Populations, and other Aspects of the Natural History of Delphinus delphis Linnaeus in the Northeastern Pacific. Ph. D. Dissertation. Executive Order 6896. 1934. Office of the President of the United States. Fairchild, E.J., R.L. Lewis, and R.L. Tatkin. 1977. The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Institute of Safety and Health. 2 volumes. G-4 Federal Register, Volume 44, Number 177. September 11, 1979. pg. 52893. Fitch, J.E. 1960. Offshore Fishes of California. State of California, Department of Fish and Game. 79 p. Gress, F. et^. al_. 1973. Reproductive Failure of Double Crested Cormorants in Southern California and Baja, California. Wilson Bulletin 85: 197-208. Hanshew, R. 1970. California Coastline Recreation Tip No. 2, September, 1970. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. May, 1974. Hedgpeth, Joel W. 1957. "Marine Biogeography" in Treatise on Marine Ecology and Paleoecology. Volume 1: Ecology. Edited by Joel W. Hedgpeth. The Geological Society of America. Memoir 67. The Geological Society of America, pp. 359-382. Horn, M.M. 1974. Fishes of Southern California: A Literature Survey. In a Knowledge of the Southern California Coastal Zone and Offshore Areas. Volume II. Biological Environment. Southern California Ocean Consortium. Prepared for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Los Angeles, CA. p. 11-1 to 11-124. Hyland, J.L., 1977. A review of oil polluting incidents in and around New England. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ecological Research Series--EPA-600/3-77-064. 35 pp. Jones, G.F. and K. Fauchauld. 1977. Benthic Macrofauna. Bureau of Land Management. Southern California Baseline Study. Vol. Ill, Sec. 2.4:412 p. Leighton, D.L., L.G. Jones, and W.J. North. 1967. Ecological Relationships between Giant Kelp and Sea Urchins in Southern California. In_ Proceedings: International Seaweed Symposium (Editors, E.G. Young and J.L. McLachlan). Pergamon Press, New York. 5:141-153 (424 p.). McMullen, John J. Associates, 1977. Environmental Impact Report for Point Conception LNG Import Terminal -Draft Vessel Traffic Analyses. Prepared for California Utilities Commission. 660 p. plus Appendices. G-5 Miller, D.J. and R.N. Lea. 1972. Guide to the Coastal Marine Fishes of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin 157: 1-235. National Academy of Sciences. 1975. Petroleum in the Marine Environment. Washington, D.C. National Marine Fisheries Service. 1978. The Marine Protection Act of 1972 Annual Report. U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. U.S. Government Printing Office. GPO #0-261-238/190. Washington, D.C. 183 p. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1979. Georges Bank Marine Sanctuary Issue Paper. Office of Coastal Zone Management. Washington, D.C. July 27, 1979. Neal , M.J. and P.E. Sorenson. 1970. The Economic Cost of the Santa Barbara Oil Spill in Santa Barbara Oil Spill Symposium, Offshore Production, An Environmental Inquiry - December 16-18, 1970. U.C. Santa Barbara. Sponsored by NSF and the Marine Science Institute. UCSB. Nelson-Smith, A. 1973. Oil Pollution and Marine Ecology, Chapter F: Birds and Mammals. Plenum Press, New York. 260 p. Neushul , M. and F.T. Haxo. 1968. The Life History of Macrocystis in the Sea. ln_ Utilization of Kelp-bed Resources in Southern California (Editors, W.J. North and C.L. Hubbs). State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin No. 139:13-15. New England River Basins Commission (NERBC), 1976. Onshore facilities related to offshore oil and gas development. Boston, Mass. North, W.J. and C.L. Hubbs (Editors). 1968. Utilization of Kelp- bed Resources in Southern California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin No. 139, 264 p. Offshore Operators Committee. 1978. Comments on EPA Draft Document "Permit Conditions for NPDES Permits at the Flower Garden Reefs, Gulf of Mexico. OCS - August, 1978." Otteman, L.G. 1976. Letter commenting on EIS for BLM OCS Sale No. 44 to New Orleans OCS Office. Bureau of Land Management. G-6 Pacific Fishery Management Council. 1978a. Final Environmental Impact Statement and Fishery Management Plan for the Northern Anchovy Fishery. Prepared by the Pacific Council and NMFS, Terminal Island, CA. 131 p. plus appendices. Pacific Fishery Management Council. 1978b. Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Fishery Management Plan for the California, Oregon and Washington Groundfish Fishery. Prepared by the Pacific Council and NMFS, Seattle, WA. 165 p. Pacific Fishery Management Council. 1979. Draft Fishery Management Plan for the Jack Mackerel Fishery. Prepared by the Pacific Council and NMFS, Terminal Island, CA. 90 p. Pearse, J.S., M.E. Clark, D.L. Leighton, C.T. Mitchell and W.J. North. 1970. Marine Waste Disposal and Sea Urchin Ecology. Appendix to: Kelp Habitat Improvement Project, Annual Report, 1969-70, pp. 1-87. Ed. by W.J. North, Pasadena, CA. California Institute of Technology. Pfeiffer, Colonel Robert M. 1979. Letter to Center for Natural Areas Concerning Marine Sanctuaries in California. U.S. Air Force, The Joint Chiefs of Staff. Washington, D.C. Pirie, D.M., M.J. Murphy and J.R. Edimisten. 1974. California Nearshore Surface Currents. Proceedings, NASA Earth Resources Survey Symposium. Houston, Texas. June. Vol. 2-B, pp. 195-216. Quast, J.C. 1968. Fish Fauna of the Rocky Inshore Zone. In Utilization of Kelp-Bed Resources in Southern California, Fish Bulletin 139. Edited by W.J. North and C.L. Hubbs. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California, pp. 35-55. Reeves, R.R. 1977. The Problem of Gray Whale ( Eschrichtus robustus) Harassment: At the Breeding Lagoons and During Migration. Marine Mammal Commission, Report No. MMC-76/06. Washington, D.C. 60 p. G-7 Resources. 1978. Santa Barbara Channel Marine Sanctuary- Nomination. Prepared for the County of Santa Barbara, CA for NOAA. 83 p. Santa Barbara News-Press, 1979. "It would all be gone in a week, Report Says." April 22, 1979 (pp A-l and A-10). Science Applications. 1978. Archaeological Literature Survey and Sensitivity Zone Mapping of the Southern California Bight Area. Volume I Technical Report, Prepared for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Pacific OCS Office. Los Angeles, CA. Sheen Technical Committee. 1976. Environmental Aspects of Drill- ing Muds and Cuttings from Oil and Gas Extraction Operators in Offshore and Coastal Waters. (Offshore Operators Committee). Houston, Texas. 50 p. Siva, J. 1976. Oil Spill Response Planning for Biologically Sensitive Areas of the Santa Barbara Channel. Atlantic Richfield Co., Los Angeles, CA. 31 p. Slack, J., R.T. Wyant and K.L. Lanfear. 1978. An Oil Spill Risk Analysis for the S. California (Proposed Sale No. 48) Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area. USGS, Reston, VA. Smith, E.J. Jr., D.H. Fry, Jr., H.W. Frey, J. Speth, A. Rutsch, and L. Fisk. 1976. Coastal County Fish and Wildlife Resources and their Utilization. Univ. of Calif. Sea Grant and Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game. June 1, 1976 (revision of August 1, 1973 version). 258 p. Southern California Ocean Studies Consortium. 1974. A Summary of Knowledge of the California Coastal Zone and Offshore Areas. Volume II Biological Environment. Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Los Angeles, CA. pp. 12-36. Squire, J.L., Jr., and S.E. Smith. 1977. Angler's Guide to the United States Pacific Coast — marine fish, fishing grounds and facilities. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, NMFS. G-8 University of California, Santa Cruz. 1976. Draft Final Report 1975-1976 Marine Mammals and Seabird Survey. Volume III. Principal Investigators Report. Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Department of Interior, Los Angeles, CA. Part I - Pinnipeds by Bernie LeBoeuf, M.L. Bonne! , M.O. Pierson, D.H. Dettman and G.D. Farrens. pp. III-l to III-269. Part II - Cetacea by Kenneth S. Norris, T.P. Dohl, R.C. Guess, L.J. Hobbs, and M.W. Honig. pp. III-270 to 1 11-441. Part III - Seabirds by K.T. Briggs, H.L. Jones, G.L. Hunt, Jr., D.B. Lewis, W.B. Tyler and E.W. Chu. pp. III-473 to III-775. University of California, Santa Cruz. 1978. Draft Final Report, 1975-76. Marine Mammal and Seabird Survey of Southern California Bight Area. Vol. II Detailed Synthesis. The Regents of the University of California, Santa Cruz. BLM Contract No. 08550-CT5-28. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1976. Waterborne Commerce of the United States. U.S. Bureau of Land Management. 1975. Final Environmental State- ment on OCS Sale 35. Volume 1-5. U.S. Department of Interior. Pacific OCS Office. Los Angeles, California. U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1975. Final Environmental Statement on Lease Sale No. 35. (Offshore Southern California). Volumes I - V. Pacific OCS Office. Los Angeles, CA. U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1978a. Status of Leases Held in Pacific OCS Office (Active). U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1978b. Pacific Outer Continental Shelf Reference Paper No. VI. U.S. Department of the Interior, BLM - Los Angeles, CA. U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1978c. Pacific Outer Continental Shelf Reference Paper No. II, Vol. 2. U.S. Department of Interior. Bureau of Land Manage- ment. Pacific OCS Office. Los Angeles, CA. G-9 U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1979. Final Environmental Statement OCS Sale No. 48. Volumes I-V. U.S. Depart- ment of Interior. Bureau of Land Management. Pacific OCS Office. Los Angeles, CA. United States Departments of Interior and Transportation, 1972. Memorandum of Understanding. (August 16, 1971). U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), 1979a. "Andrus Seeks Governor's Input in Southern California OCS Decision." News Release. March 9, 1979. U.S. Department of Interior. 1979b. Secretarial Issue Document: Southern California OCS Sale #48 (February 28, 1979). U.S. General Accounting Office. 1979. Progress and Problems of Fisheries Management under the Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Report of the Comptroller General CED- 79-23. 144 p. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 1975. Map Showing Oil and Gas Fields, Leased Areas, and Seeps in the Santa Barbara Channel Region. (Map 1-974). U.S. Geological Survey. 1976. Final Environmental Statement -- Oil and Gas Development in the Santa Barbara Channel Outer Continental Shelf Off California. Volume 2 of 3. U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 3757, 1979. (A bill amending the National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978, and for other purposes) . U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 1056, 1979. (A bill to prohibit vessels transporting Alaskan oil from using routes through the Channel Islands territorial and international waters northward of the Santa Barbara Channel Islands). U.S. National Park Service (NPS), 1976. Management Statement for Channel Islands Monument. U.S. National Park Service (NPS), 1978. Management Statement for San Miguel and Prince Islands. G-10 U.S. Senate, S. 1104, 1979. (a bill to establish a National Park in the Santa Barbara Channel Islands). Ventura County and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (APCD), 1978. Crude oil transportation — tankering versus pipelining: an air pollutant emissions comparison. Ventura and Santa Barbara, California. Wilkinson, E.R. 1972. California Oil and Gas Seeps: California Division of Oil and Gas - Summary Report. 11 p. Wine, V. and T. Hoban. 1977. Southern California Independent Sportfishing Survey. Annual Report. July 1, 1975 - June 30, 1976. California Department of Fish and Game, Marine Resources Region, Long Beach. Mimeo, 109 p. Woodhouse, Charles, R.K. Cowin and L.R. Wilcoxon. 1977. A Summary of Knowledge of the Sea Otter, En hydra lutris , L., in California and an appraisal of the completeness of biological understanding of the species. Prepared for the Marine Mammal Commission by the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History. National Technical Information Service. NTIS #PB-270374. 71 p. Yellin, M.B., C.R. Agegian andJ.S. Pearse. 1977. Ecological Benchmarks in Santa Cruz County Kelp Forests before the Reestablishment of Sea Otters. Report No. MMC- 76/04. University of California, Santa Cruz. Prepared Young, P.H. 1973. Partyboat Logs Show How Skin and SCUBA Divers Fared - 1965 through 1970. California Department of Fish and Game 59 (l):69-72. Zingula, R.P. 1978. Statement before the U.S. Department of Interior. Bureau of Land Management, on Proposed Oil and Gas Leasing on the Mid-Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS Sale #49). Atlantic City, NJ. June 27-30, 1978. G-ll b. Personal Communications Cited (L) Letter (T) Telephone (V) Visit Adams, M.V. 1979. Conservation Division. U.S. Geological Survey. Los Angeles, CA. May 5, 1979(T); June 11, 1979(V); June 22, 1979(T). Adie, Lt. Klaus. 1979. Commanding Officer, Group Santa Barbara, Port Safety Detachment, U.S. Coast Guard, Santa Barbara, CA. June 8, 1979(V). Bannon, J. 1979. U.S. Coast Guard. Washington, D.C. January 23, 1979(T). Barry, Jim. 1979. California Department of Parks and Recreation. Sacramento, CA. May 2, 1979 (T). Beach, Doug. 1979. National Marine Fisheries Service. Washington, D.C. September 4, 1979(T). Berry, P. 1979. South Central Coast Regional Commission. Santa Barbara, CA. June 22, 1979(T). Bonnell, Dr. Michael. 1979. Senior Researcher, Long Marine Lab. University of California at Santa Cruz. July 9, 1979 (T). Bromley, Gene. 1979. Water Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region IX, San Francisco, CA. January 15, 1979(T). Cassell, John. 1979. Staff Ecologist, Environmental Affairs. Chevron, USA. San Francisco, CA. June 28, 1979 (T). Coffin, S. 1979. Santa Barbara Aviation. Santa Barbara, CA. March 30, 1979(T). Connelly, L. 1979. Ivan-Packers Co., Ventura, CA. March 26, 1979 (T). Duffie, D. 1979. Sea Landing Sport Fishing, Inc. Santa Barbara CA. March 26, 1979(T). Edgerton, Leslie. 1979. Executive Secretary, Fish and Game Commission. Sacramento, CA. July 11, 1979(T). G-12 Get Oil Out, Inc. 1978. Testimony on Santa Barbara Channel Marine Sanctuary before Subcommittee on Oceanography, House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee by Stephen R. Boyle. July 24, 1978. Glendinning, Neal. 1979. Santa Barbara Aviation. Santa Barbara, CA. June 25, 1979(T). Grumbine, J. 1979. California Nature Conservancy. San Francisco, CA. March 2, 1979 (T). Johnson, Craig. 1979. Park Ranger. National Park Service. Channel Islands National Monument. Ventura, CA. June 7, 1979(V); June 25, 1979(T); July 6, 1979(T). Kaneen, Robert. 1979. California Department of Fish and Game. January 18, 1979(T); January 22, 1979(L). Kelly, Randy. 1979. Marine Biologist. California Department of Parks and Recreation. Sacramento, CA. April 9, 1979 (T). Kostow, Lloyd. 1979. Air Programs. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, San Francisco, CA. January 17, 1979(T) Larson, Dana. Exxon Corporation. Houston, TX. June 29, 1979(T). Loughlin, T. 1979. National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C., January 24, 1979(T). Leatherwood, Stephen. 1979. Senior Research Biologist, Hubbs- SeaWorld Research Institute. San Diego, CA. July 9, 1979(T). Lebovich, Bill. 1979. Office of National Register, HCRS. May 4, 1979(T). Martin, Howard. Patrol Inspector, California Department of Fish and Game, Division of Enforcement. Santa Barbara, CA. June 19, 1979(T). Muncie, M. 1979. U.S. Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington, D.C. February 16, 1979(T); May 18, 1979(T). Nakatsu, Lorrie M. 1979. Executive Director, Pacific Fishery Management Council, Portland, Oregon. January 18, 1979(L,T). Ono, David. 1979. California Department of Fish and Game.(L). G-13 Patterson, Ron Storro. 1979. Research Director, Whale Center. Oakland, CA. June, 1979(L). Pfeiffer, Colonel Robert M. 1979. U.S. Air Force, The Joint Chiefs of Staff. Washington, D.C. May 21, 1979(L). Pirog, Don. 1979. Commercial Ab alone diver (and member Ab alone Association and Abalone Seeding Association). Santa Barbara, CA. June 7, 1979(V); July 11, 1979(T). Reese, W.P. 1979. J. J. McMullen Associates. Oxnard, CA. April 20, 1979(T). Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference, Inc. 1979. Letter to Joann Chandler, Sanctuary Programs Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from Fred Eissler, Director. Santa Barbara, CA. June 10, 1979(L). Scruggs, Captain R. 1979. U.S. Department of the Navy, The Pentagon, Washington, D.C. February 12, 1979 (T). Stamey, Teresa. 1979. California Air Resources Board. Sacramento, CA. May 3, 1979(T). Stanley, S. 1979. South Central Coast Regional Commission. Santa Barbara, CA. June 22, 1979(T). Stark, Lt. JG. James. 1979. U.S. Coast Guard. Port Safety Branch. Long Beach, CA. September 11, 1979(T). Szelenyi, Bela. 1979. Plant Manager. Stauffer Chemical Company. Oxnard, CA. July 24, 1979(T). Trabert, Richard F. 1979a. Merck and Co., Inc. Rahway, N.J. June, 1979(L). Trabert, Richard F. 1979b. Merck and Co., Inc. Rahway, N.J.(T). Trabert, Richard F. 1979. Merck and Co., Inc. Rahway, N.J. June 28, 1979(L). U.S. Department of the Navy. 1979. Letter to Joann Chandler, Sanctuary Programs Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from Mitzi M. Weatheim. Deputy Under Secretary, Washington, D.C. July 3, 1979(L). G-14 Whelen, N. 1979. Park Ranger, Channel Islands National Monument. Yentura, CA. January 29, 1979(T). Wooten, Major R.C. 1979. U.S. Department of the Air Force. Project Director, Space Shuttle Noise Impact Study. Los Angeles, CA. May 25, 1979 (T). G-15 Section H. List of Preparers Many persons participated in the preparation of this document. A major portion of the environmental analysis was performed under contract with the Center for Natural Areas, 1525 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. The following persons have made major contributions to the effort. Center for Natural Areas John T. Epting, Resource Planner Thomas E. Bigford, Office Director and Marine Affairs Specialists David W. Laist, Coastal Ecologist Kermit Rader, Environmental Attorney Joel E. Blumstein, Environmental Attorney Brian J. 'Sullivan, Environmental Planning Analyst George Robertson, Resource Management Specialist Office of Coastal Zone Management Sanctuary Programs Office Jo Ann Chandler, Director Dr. Nancy Foster, Deputy Director Diane Mayerfeld, Program Analyst John Mil ho 11 and, Attorney H-l I. APPENDICES TITLE 15 - COMMERCE AND FOREIGN TRADE CHAPTER IX - NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION PART 935 - THE CHANNEL ISLANDS MARINE SANCTUARY AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce ACTION: Proposed Rule SUMMARY: These regulations define permissible activities within the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary, the procedures by which persons may obtain permits for prohibited activities, and the penalties for committing prohibited acts without a permit. DATE: Comments due 60 days after publication in the Federal Register ADDRESS: Send Comments to: Director, Sanctuary Programs Office, Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. , Washington, D. C. 20235. PERSON TO CONTACT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: JoAnn Chandler, Acting Director, Sanctuary Programs Office, Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, 3300 Whitehaven St. N. W. , Washington, D. C. 20235. 202-634-4236. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, 16 U. S.C. 1431-1434 (the Act) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce, with Presidential approval, to designate ocean waters as far seaward as the outer edge of the Continental Shelf as marine sanctuaries to preserve or restore distinctive conservation, recreational, -2- ecological, or aesthetic values. Section 302(f) of the Act directs the Secretary to issue necessary and reasonable regulations to control any activities permitted within a designated marine sanctuary. The authority of the Secretary to administer the provisions of the Act has been delegated to the Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce (the Assistant Administrator). The Office of Coastal Zone Management proposes to designate as a marine sanctuary an area of the waters off the Coast of California, adjacent to the Northern Channel Islands, and Santa Barbara Island seaward to a distance of 6 nautical miles (nmi). The waters around these Islands, located in an area of upwelling and in a transition zone between the cold waters of the California Current and the warmer Southern California Counter Current, support an exceptionally rich and diverse biota, including one of the world's most diverse concentrations of marine mammals, several endangered species, and numerous seabirds; the area sustains a variety of human uses. In 1977 NOAA received several recommendations for sanctuaries of varying dimensions to be established in the general area. NOAA held a public meeting in April 1978 to discuss these recommendations and in June 1978 the County of Santa Barbara submitted a nomination. The Office of Coastal Zone Management prepared and issued an Issue Paper in December 1978 outlining alternatives for public review. Based on the responses to this Paper and consultation with other Federal -3- agencies, the Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council, State and local governments, and interest groups, NOAA prepared a draft environ- mental impact statement (DEIS) which is being published concurrently with these regulations. (A copy can be obtained by writing to the contact identified above). The rationale for designation and for the proposed regulatory system as well as alternative approaches, both regulatory and nonregulatory are more fully set forth in the DEIS. OCZM will receive public comments on the proposal, hold public hearings in Santa Barbara and Ventura, California and prepare a final EIS and regulations which incorporate and respond to the comments received. Only after final consultation with Federal agencies, and with Presidential approval, can the Secretary designate the sanctuary and promulgate the regulations. NOAA policy and its general Marine Sanctuary regulations (15 CFR Part 922, 44 F. Reg. 44831, July 31, 1979) provide that the regulatory system for a marine sanctuary will be established by two documents, a Designation document and the regulations issued pursuant to Section 302(f) of the Act. The Designation will serve as a constitution for the sanctuary, establishing among other things the purposes of the sanctuary, the types of activities that may be subject to regulation within it and the extent to which other regulatory programs will continue to be effective. As proposed, the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary Designation document would provide as follows: -4- Draft Designation Document Designation Of The Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary Preamble Under the authority of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, P. L. 92-532, (the Act) the waters surrounding the Northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island are hereby designated a Marine Sanctuary for the purposes of preserving and protecting this unique and fragile ecological community. Article 1. Effect of Designation Within the area designated as The Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary (the Sanctuary), described in Article 2, the Act authorizes the promul- gation of such regulations as are reasonable and necessary to protect the values of the Sanctuary. Article 4 of the Designation lists those activities which may require regulation but the listing of any activity does not by itself prohibit or restrict it. Restrictions or prohibitions may be accomplished only through regulation and additional activities may be regulated only by amending Article 4. Article 2. Description of the Area The Sanctuary consists of an area of the waters off the Coast of California, adjacent to the Northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island seaward to a distance of 6 nautical miles (nmi). The precise boundaries are defined by regulation. Article 3. Characteristics of the Area That Give it Particular Value The Sanctuary is located in an area of upwelling and in a tran- sition zone between the cold waters of the California Current and the warmer Southern California Countercurrent. Consequently, the Sanctuary contains an exceptionally rich and diverse biota, including 30 species of marine mammals and several endangered species of marine mammals and sea birds. The Sanctuary will provide recreational experiences and scientific research opportunities and generally will have special value as an ecological, recreational, and esthetic resource. Article 4. Scope of Regulation Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation . In order to protect the distinctive values of the Sanctuary, the following activities may be regulated within the Sanctuary to the extent necessary to ensure the protection and preservation its marine features and the ecological, recreational, and esthetic value of the area: -5- a. Oil and gas operations b. Discharging or depositing any substance or object c. Dredging or alteration of or construction on the seabed d. Navigation and operation of vessels other than fishing vessels and overflights below 1000 feet e. Removing or otherwise deliberately harming cultural or historical resources Section 2. Consistency with International Law . The regulations governing the activities listed in Section 4 of this Article will apply to foreign flag vessels and persons not citizens of the United States only to the extent consistent with recognized principles of international law including treaties and international agreements to which the United States is signatory. Section 3 Emergency Regulations. Where essential to prevent immediate, serious and irreversible damage to the ecosystem of the area, activities other than those listed in Section 1 may be regulated within the limits of the Act on an emergency basis for an interim period not to exceed 120 days, during which an appropriate amendment of this Article would be proposed in accordance with the procedures specified in Article 6. Article 5. Relation to Other Regulatory Programs Section 1. Fishing. The regulation of fishing is not authorized under Article 4. However, fishing vessels may be regulated with respect to discharges in accordance with Article 4, paragraph (b). All regulatory programs pertaining to fishing, including particularly regulations promulgated under the California Fish and Game Code and Fishery Management Plans promulgated under the Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq . shall remain in effect and all permits, licenses and other authorizations issued pursuant thereto shall be valid within the Sanctuary unless inconsistent with any regulation implementing Article 4. Section 2. Defense Activities . The regulation of those activities listed in Article 4 shall not prohibit any activity conducted by the Department of Defense that is essential for national defense or because of emergency. Such activities shall be conducted consistently with such regulation to the maximum extent practicable. All other activities of the Department of Defense are subject to Article 4. -6- Section 3. Other Programs. All applicable regulatory programs shall remain in effect and all permits, licenses and other authorizations issued pursuant thereto shall be valid within the Sanctuary unless inconsistent with any regulation implementing Article 4. The Sanctuary regulations shall set forth any necessary certification procedures. Article 6. Alterations to this Designation This Designation can be altered only in accordance with the same procedures by which it has been made, including public hearings, consultation with interested Federal and State agencies and the Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council, and approval by the President of the United States. [End of Draft Document] Only those activities listed in Article 4 are subject to regulation in the Sanctuary. Before any additional activities may be regulated, the Designation must be amended through the entire designation procedure including public hearing and approval by the President. The primary purpose of the proposed regulations is to protect and to preserve the marine birds and mammals and their habitat and other natural resources of the waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island. This area supports a wide array of species partially because it is located in a transition zone between northern and southern waters and in an area of upwelling, and partially because it is one of yery few areas on the Southern California coast that has remained relatively unaltered by human use. However, use of the Santa Barbara Channel is increasing and additional pressure is being placed on the resources from a number of human activities. Accordingly, those activities which pose a significant threat to the special marine features of these waters are prohibited. Such activities include: -7- discharges except for marine sanitation effluents, vessel cooling waters, fish cleaning wastes and chumming materials, and discharges incidental to allowed hydrocarbon operations (sec. 935.7(a)(1)); construction on or alteration of the seabed except for navigation aids or in connection with those hydrocarbon operations which are allowed under section 935.6 (Sec. 935.7(a)(2)); the unnecessary operation of vessels or aircraft in the vicinity of important habitats within 1 nmi of the islands and at lower than 1000 ft. in the case of aircraft (Sec. 935.7(a)(3)); and removing or harming of historical or cultural artifacts (Sec. 935.7(a)(4)). All prohibitions must be applied consistently with recognized principles of international law. Hydrocarbon operations under existing leases may continue subject to conditions imposed by other authorities particularly the U.S. Geological Survey in its operating orders and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through permits issued under section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U. S. C. 1431, (known as NPDES permits) In addition, operators must maintain adequate oil spill contingency equipment on site. (Sec. 935.6(b)). To reduce the possibility of damage to the resources by pollution, hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation under leases issued after the effective date of these regulations will be prohibited. (Sec 935.6(c)). The regulation of fishing in the waters proposed for the Sanctuary will remain the responsibility of the California Department of Fish and Game, the Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council and the -8- National Marine Fishery Service pursuant to the Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, 16 U.S. C. 1801 et seq. (See Article 5, Section 1 of the Designation) and no additional regulation of fishing has been proposed by OCZM. However fishing vessels are subject to the same discharge regulations as other vessels. (Sec. 935.7(a)(1). PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT: NOAA invites public review and comment on these proposed regulations. Written comments should be submitted to: JoAnn Chandler, Acting Director; Sanctuary Programs Office; Office of Coastal Zone Management; National Oceanic and Atomospheric Administratrion; 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. , Washington, D. C. 20225, on or before Samuel Lawrence Administrator for Administration Accordingly, Part 935 is proposed as follows: PART 935 - THE CHANNEL ISLANDS MARINE SANCTUARY REGULATIONS 935.1. Authority. 935.2. Purpose. 935.3. Boundaries. 935.4. Definitions. 935.5. Allowed Activities. 935.6. Hydrocarbon Operations. 935.7. Prohibited Activities. 935.8. Penalties for Commission of Prohibited Acts. -9- 935.9. Permit Procedures and Criteria. 935.10. Certification of Other Permits. 935.11. Appeals of Administrative Action. 935.1. Authority. The Sanctuary has been designated by the Secretary of Commerce pursuant to the authority of section 302(a) of Title III of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, 16 U. S. C. 1431-1434 (the Act). The following regulations are issued pursuant to the authorities of sections 302(f), 302(g) and 303 of the Act. 935.2. Purpose. The purpose of designating the Sanctuary is to protect and preserve the the extraordinary ecosystem including marine birds and mammals and other natural resources of the waters surrounding the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island and ensure the continued availability of the area as a research and recreational resource. This area supports a particularly rich and diverse marine biota, partially because it is located in a transition zone between northern and southern waters and partially because it is one of wery few areas on the Southern California coast that has been relatively unaltered by human use. 935.3. Boundaries. The Sanctuary consists of an area of the waters off the coast of California adjacent to the following islands and offshore rocks: San Miguel Island, Santa Cruz Island, Santa Rosa Island, Anacapa Island, Santa Barbara Island, Richardson Rock, and Castle Rock extending -10- seaward to a distance of 6 nautical miles (nmi). The coordinates are in Appendix B. 935,4 Definitions . (a) "Administrator" means the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (b) "Assistant Administrator" means the Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (c) "Person" means any private individual, partnership, corporation, or other entity; or any officer, employee, agent, department, agency or instrumentality of the Federal government, or any state or local unit of government. 935.5. Allowed Activities : All activities except those specifically prohibited by sections 935.6. and 935.7. may be carried on in the Sanctuary subject to all prohibitions, restrictions and conditions imposed by any other authority. 935.6. Hydrocarbon Operations (a) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation pursuant to any lease executed prior to the effective date of these regulations and the laying of any pipeline is allowed subject to paragraph (b) and all prohibitions, restrictions and conditions imposed by applicable regulations, permits, licenses or other authorizations including those issued by the Department of the Interior, the Coast Guard, the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency. (b) No person may engage in any hydrocarbon operation -11- unless the following oil spill contingency equipment is available at the site of such operation. (1) 1500 feet of open ocean containment boom and a boat capable of deploying the boom: (2) one oil skimming device capable of open ocean use; and (3) fifteen bales of oil sorbent material. (c) Hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities pursuant to leases executed on or after the effective date of these regulations are prohibited. 935.7. Prohibited Activities . (a) Except as may be necessary for the national defense, in accordance with Article 5, section 2 of the Designation, or as may be necessary to respond to an emergency threatening life, property or the environment, the following activities are prohibited within the Sanctuary unless permitted by the Assistant Administrator in accordance with sections 935.9 or 935.10. (1 ) Discharge of polluting substances . No person shall deposit or discharge any materials or substances of any ki nd except: (A) indigenous fish or parts and chumming materials (B) effluents from marine sanitation devices (C) non-polluted cooling waters from vessels (D) effluents incidental to hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities as allowed by section 935.6. -12- (2) Alteration of or construction on the seabed. Except in connection with hydrocarbon exploration or exploitation activities allowed by section 935.6, within 2 nautical miles of any island, no person shall: (A) construct any structure other than a navigation aid, or (B) drill through the seabed, or (C; Dredge or otherwise alter the seabed in any way (3) Unnecessary operations of vessels and aircraft: Except to transport persons or supplies to or from an island, or for enforcement purposes, no person shall, within 1 nautical mile of any island: (A) fly any aircraft at less than 1000 feet; or (B) operate any vessel unless engaging in activities directly associated with the resources of the area including but not limited to commercial or recreational fishing (in accordance with Article 5, section 1 of the Designation), research, sightseeing, and diving or other recreational activities, and the primary purpose of such vessel is to engage in such activities. (4) Removing or damaging distinctive historical or cultural resources. No person shall remove or damage any historical or cultural resource. (b) All activities currently carried out by the Department of Defense within the Sanctuary are essential for the national defense and, therefore, not subject to these prohibitions. The exemption of additional activities having significant impacts shall be determined in consultation between NOAA and the Department of Defense. -13- (c) The prohibitions in this section are not based on any claim of territoriality and will be applied to foreign persons and vessels only in accordance with recognized principles of international law, including treaties, conventions and other international agreements to which the United States is signatory. 935.8. Penalties for Commission of Prohibited Acts . (a) Section 303 of the Act authorizes the assessment of a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 against any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States for each violation of any regulation issued pursuant to the Act, and further authorizes a proceeding in rem against any vessel used in violation of any such regulation. Procedures are set out in Subpart D of Part 922 (15 CFR Part 922) of this chapter. Subpart D is applicable to any instance of a violation of these regulations. 935.9 Permit Procedures and Criteria. (a) Any person in possession of a valid permit issued by the Assistant Administrator in accordance with this section may conduct any activity in the Sanctuary including any activity specifically prohibited under section 935.7 if such activity is either (1) research related to the resources of the Sanctuary, (2) to further the educational value of the Sanctuary, or (3) for salvage or recovery operations. (b) Permit applications shall be addressed to the Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management, Attn: Office of Sanctuary Programs, Division of Operations and Enforcement, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. , Washington, -14- D.C. 20235. An application shall provide sufficient information to enable the Assistant Administrator to make the determination called for in paragraph (c) below and shall include a description of all activities proposed, the equipment, methods, and personnel (particularly describing relevant experience) involved, and a timetable for completion of the proposed activity. Copies of all other required licenses or permits shall be attached. (c) In considering whether to grant a permit the Assistant Administrator shall evaluate such matters as (1) the general professional and financial responsibility of the applicant; (2) the appropriateness of the methods envisioned to the purpose(s) of the activity; (3) the extent to which the conduct of any permitted activity may diminish or enhance the value of the Sanctuary as a source of recreation, educational or scientific information; (4) the end value of the activity and (5) such other matters as deemed appropriate. (d) In considering any application submitted pursuant to this Section, the Assistant Administrator may seek and consider the views of any person or entity, within or outside of the Federal Government, and may hold a public hearing, as deemed appropriate. (e) The Assistant Administrator may, in his or her discretion, grant a permit which has been applied for pursuant to this Section, in whole or in part, and subject to such condition(s) as deemed appropriate. The Assistant Administrator or a designated representative may observe any permitted activity and/or require the submission of one or more reports of the status or progress of such activity. Any information obtained shall be made available to the public. -15- (f) The permit granted under paragraph (e) may not be transferred. (g) The Assistant Administrator may amend, suspend or revoke a permit granted pursuant to this Section, in whole or in part, temporarily or indefinitely, if the permit holder (the Holder) has acted in violation of the terms of the permit or of the applicable regulations. Any such action shall be set forth in writing to the Holder, and shall set forth the reason(s) for the action taken. The Holder may appeal the action as provided for in 935.11. 935.10. Certification of Other Permits All permits, licenses and other authorizations issued pursuant to any other authority are hereby certified and shall remain valid if they do not authorize any activity prohibited by section 935.6. Any interested person may request that the Assistant Administrator offer an opinion on whether an activity is prohibited by these regulations. 935.11. Appeals of Administrative Action (a) Any interested person (the Appellant) may appeal the granting, denial, or conditioning of any permit under section 935.9 to the Administrator of NOAA. In order to be considered by the Administrator, such appeal shall be in writing, shall state the action(s) appealed and, the reason(s) therefore, and shall be submitted within 30 days of the action(s) by the Assistant Administrator. The Appellant may request an informal hearing on the appeal. (b) Upon receipt of an appeal authorized by this Section, the Administrator shall notify the permit applicant, if other than the Appellant, and may request such additional information and in such form -16- as will allow action upon the appeal. Upon receipt of sufficient information, the Administrator shall decide the appeal in accordance with the criteria set out in 935.9(c) as appropriate, based upon infor- mation relative to the application on file at OCZM and any additional information, the summary record kept of any hearing and the Hearing Officer's recommended decision, if any, as provided in paragraph (c) and such other considerations as deemed appropriate. The Administrator shall notify all interested persons of the decision, and the reason(s) therefor, in writing, normally within 30 days of the receipt of sufficient information, unless additional time is needed for a hearing. (c) If a hearing is requested or if the Administrator determines one is appropriate, the Administrator may grant an informal hearing before a Hearing Officer designated for that purpose after first giving notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the hearing in the Federal Register. Such hearing shall normally be held no later than 30 days following publication of the notice in the Federal Register unless the Hearing Officer extends the time for reasons deemed equitable. The Appellant, the Applicant (if different) and, at the discretion of the Hearing Officer, other interested persons, may appear personally or by counsel at the hearing and submit such material and present such arguments as determined appropriate by the Hearing Officer. Within 30 days of the last day of the hearing, the Hearing Officer shall recommend in writing a decision to the Administrator. (d) The Administrator may adopt the Hearing Officer's recommended decision, in whole or in part, or may reject or modify it. In any event, the Administrator shall notify interested persons of the decision, -17- and the reason(s) therefor in writing within 30 days of receipt of the recommended decision of the Hearing Officer. The Administrator's action shall constitute final action for the Agency for the purposes of the Administrative Procedures Act. (e) Any time limit prescribed in this Section may be extended for a period not to exceed 30 days by the Administrator for good cause, either upon his or her own motion or upon written request from the Appellant or Applicant stating the reason(s) therefore. APPENDIX l.A: Coordinates of the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 LATITUDE LONGITUDE / // / // 335628.959 1191623.800 3358 3.919 1191456.964 34 133.846 11914 7.740 34 424.203 1191521.308 34 6 6.653 1191727.002 34 654.809 1191946.046 34 657.988 1192324.905 34 651.627 11924 4.198 34 7 1.640 1192540.819 34 659.904 1192650.959 34 8 2.002 1192847.501 34 817.693 1192927.698 34 852.234 1193039.562 34 916.780 1193522.667 34 9 5.106 1193641.694 34 8 2.782 1193933.421 34 846.870 1194148.621 34 935.563 1194557.284 34 932.627 1194637.335 34 933.396 1194732.285 34 943.668 11948 9.018 341010.616 11950 7.659 341021.586 11951 5.146 341033.161 1195317.044 341036.545 1195557.373 341021.283 1195726.403 34 8 7.255 120 1 7.233 34 813.144 120 227.930 34 747.772 120 5 5.449 34 729.314 120 636.262 34 730.691 120 935.238 34 636.285 1201239.335 34 640.634 1201333.940 34 810.759 12015 7.017 34 912.290 12017 7.046 3410 5.117 1201859.630 341025.736 1202014.203 3410 3.509 12025 7.344 34 927.475 1202621.842 34 741.330 1203130.040 34 436.784 1203334.917 34 216.398 1203426.665 335913.122 1203353.385 LATITUDE LONGITUDE 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 3357 1.427 335536.973 335530.037 335450.522 3355 1.640 335434.409 335323.129 335039. 990 334953.260 3349 3.437 334836.087 334739.280 334737.617 334759.351 334838. 700 334852.167 335028.486 335055.128 335213.338 3352 4.900 335139.919 335148.592 335135.798 335144.374 335223.857 3353 9.365 335312.754 335317.114 335338.865 3354 2.277 335456.444 335439.349 335415.236 3354 7.847 3354 4.682 335414.311 335422.824 335446. 904 3355 5.834 332856. 904 332632.364 332419.904 332326.019 3322 4.836 1203154.590 1202737.188 1202514.587 1202229.536 1201926.722 1201827.344 1201739.927 1201513.874 1201341.904 12012 6.750 1201110.821 120 759.707 120 6 4.002 120 4 8.370 120 233.188 120 150.244 1195750.820 1195519.934 1195253.439 1195210.719 1194721.152 1194613.213 1194434.589 1194112.738 1193914.708 1193730.784 1193535.793 1193454.567 1193251.578 11931 6.274 1192854.052 1192737.512 1192523.779 1192422.849 1192258.006 1192144.573 11921 9.003 1191954.677 1191916.027 11910 4.092 11910 1.328 119 852.236 119 754.826 119 516.716 LATITUDE LONGITUDE 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 332149.387 332144.594 332149.556 3322 7.538 332227.774 332247.957 332320.805 332418.458 332624.130 3329 2.820 333127.917 333217.935 333510.090 333524.575 3335 6.497 333448. 322 119 4 1.551 119 249.887 119 137.839 1185949.357 1185851.623 11858 7.633 1185714.375 11856 8.450 1185451.352 1185422.276 1185450.367 1185518.396 1185940.0910 119 122.1081 119 359.4632 119 5 3.3743 119°20' 33°50' -617,760' 601,920' 586,080' 570,240' 40' 554,400 538,560' 522,720' 506,880' 30' 491,040' 475,200' 459,360' 443,520' 33°20' -427,680 10' 119°0O 1 19°20' 10' 119°0a lis^sc 8 v-601,920 586,080 570,240 554,400 538,560 522,720 3J°50' 506,880 491.040 475,200 459,360 443,520 | 427.680 33°2C -411.840J 118°50' ^ PREFERRED MARINE SANCTUARY BOUNDARY DIGITIZED POINTS — 0»i APPENDIX 2. Fish and shellfish species of commercial and recreational Interest in the waters around the northern Channel Islands and Santa Barbara Island (California Department of Fish and Game, in process). Fishery Resources Listed on Atlas by Island SAN MIGUEL 1. Mollusks in Rocky Areas: Red Abalone Black Abalone 2. Kelp Bed 4 Rocky Bottom Fish: White Abalone Cab ezo n Black Rockfish Kelp Rockfish Vermillion Rockfish Barred Surfperch Rubber! ip Surfperch Monkey face Eel Black & Yellow Rockfish Gopher Rockfish Yellowtail Rockfish Black Surfperch Striped Surfperch Kelp Green ling Blue Rockfish Grass Rockfish Blue Shark Pile Surfperch Tomsmelt Surfperch 3. Fish Over Shallow Sand Bottom; 0-1 8m (0-60 ft.): N. Anchovy White Seabass Spotfish Surfperch Pacific Butterfish Barred Surfperch Rainbow Surfperch Tomsmelt C-0 Turbot 4. Fish Over Moderate Deep Sand Bottom; 18-46m (60-150 ft.): Jacksmelt Pile Surfperch Walley Surf- perch Horny Head Surfperch Spiny Dogfish Stripetail Rockfish Shiner Pacific Sanddab English Sole Curl fin Turbot 5. Pelagic Fish Off This Coast: Albacore Jack Mackerel Blue Shark Swordfish SANTA ROSA ISLAND Northern Anchovy King Salmon Mako Shark Calico Rockfish Sand Sole Ho my he ad Turbot Pacific Bonito Pacific Sardine Thresher Shark 1. Mollusks in Rocky Areas: Red Abalone White Abalone California Sea- mussel Rock Scallop Lingcod Copper Rockfish Olive Rockfish Leopard Shark Pile Surfperch Queenfish Spinner Surfperch White Surfperch Halfbanded Rockfish Pink Surfperch Pacific Hake Pacific Saury White Shark Black Abalone Rock Scallop Piddocks 2. Kelp Bed & Rocky Bottom Fish: Cabezon Monkeyface Eel Black & Yellow Rockfish Blue Rockfish Gopher Rockfish Kelp Rockfish Blue Shark Leopard Shark Pile Surf perch Rubber! ip Surf perch 3. Fish Over Shallow Sand Bottom; 0-18m (0-60 ft.) Anchovy Leopard Shark Pacific Butterfish White Seabass ANACAPA ISLAND Lingcod Copper Rockfish 01 ive Rockfish Cal ifornia Sheephead Striped Surf- perch Rainbow Surf- perch Walleye Surf- perch 1. Mollusks in Rocky Areas: Black Abalone White Abalone Pink Abalone California Mussel 2. Kelp Bed & Rocky Bottom Fish: Kelp Bass Black & Yellow Rockfish Leopard Shark Garibaldi Gopher Rockfish Rubberlip Surfperch Black Rockfish Blue Shark Monkey faced Eel Copper Rockfish Pile Surfperch Kelp Rockfish Tom smelt 3. Fish Over Shallow Sand Bottom; 0-18m (0-60 ft.) Northern Anchovy Pile Surfperch Rainbow Surfperch C-0 Turbot Tomsmel t Queenfish Rock Scallop Yellowtail Rockfish Blacksmith Blue Rockfish Black Surfperch Opal eye Striped Surf- perch White Surf- perch Jacksmelt Spotfin Surf- perch Walleye Surfserch 4. Fish Over Moderate Deep Sand Bottom; 18-46m (60-150 ft.) Black Rockfish China Rockfish Yellowtail Rockfish Black Surfperch Tomsmel t C-0 Turbot Hornyhead Turbot Red Abalone Giant Sea Bass Brown Rockfish California Sheep- head Hal f moo n Olive Rockfish Tree Rockfish Pacific Butterfish Shiner Surfperch White Seabass Spiny Dogfish English Sole Hornyhead Turbot Stripetail Rockfish Curl fin Turbot Halfbanded Rockfish 5. Pelagic Fish Off This Coast: Albacore Northern Anchovy Pacific Hake Sword fish SANTA BARBARA ISLAND 1. Mollusks in Rocky Areas: Pacific Bonito Jack Mackerel Pacific Sardine Black Abalone Rock Scallop White Abalone Piddocks 2. Kelp Bed & Rocky Bottom Fish: Cabezon Monkey faced Eel White Seabass Rubberlip Surf perch Striped Surf perch Sculpin Blue Rockfish California Sheephead Gopher Rockfish Calico Rockfish Kelp Greenling Giant Sea Bass Ocean White fish Black & Yellow Rockfish Leopard Shark Opal eye 3. Fish Over Shallow Sand Bottom; 0-18m (0-60 ft.) Northern Anchovy Barred Surf perch Pacific Butterfish Pile Surf perch Shiner Surf- perch Calico Rockfish Pink Surf perch Pacific Saury Blue Saury Blue Shark Rainbow Surfperch Shiner Surfperch White Surfperch White Seabass Mussels Black Surfperch Olive Rockfish Squarespot Rockfish Lingcod Black Rockfish Swell Rockfish Half moon Spotfin Surf- perch Walleye Surf- perch C-0 Turbot 4. Fish Over Moderate Deep Sand Bottom; 18-46m (60-150 ft.): Spiny Dogfish Pacific Sanddab Calico Rockfish Halfbanded Rockfish Stripetail Rockfish English Sole 5. Pelagic Fish Off This Coast: Albacore Jack Mackerel Sand Sole Pink Surfperch Shiner Surf- perch Mako Shark Pacific Sanddab Sand Sole Mako Shark Thresher Shark White Shark Red Abalone Bat Rays Pile Surfperch Yellowtail Rockfish Blue Shark Horn Shark Tomsmel t Copper Rockfish Top smelt Jacksmelt Queenfish Curl fin Turbot Hornyhead Turbot Yellowtail Northern Anchovy Pacific Bonito Pacific Hake Jacksmelt Shiner Surf perch Pacific Sardine Pacific Saury Blue Shark Pile Surf perch Tom smelt Thresher Shark White Shark Sword fish White Surf perch Speckled Sand- dab Isl and Surfperch 4. Fish Over Moderate Deep Sandy Bottom; 18-46m (60-150 ft.) Spiny Dogfish Pacific Sanddab Calico Rockfish Halfbanded Rockfish Stripetail Rockfish English Sole Cal i form' a Halibut 5. Pelagic Fish Off This Island: Albacore Northern Anchovy Pacific Bonito Pacific Saury Pacific Kake Pacific Mackerel Pacific Sardine White Shark Sand Sole Pink Surfperch Shiner Surf- perch Blue Shark Mako Shark Thresher Shark (Commercial fishing close in for Abalone, Lobster, Squid) SANTA CRUZ ISLAND 1. Mollusks in Rocky Areas: Red Abalone Bay Mussel White Abalone California Sea Mussel 2. Kelp Bed & Rocky Bottom Fish: Cabezon China Rockfish Kelp Rockfish Lingcod Yellowtail Rockfish Tom smelt Grass Rockfish Copper Rockfish Black Surfperch Kelp Greenling Gopher Rockfish Striped Surfperch Blue Rockfish Opal eye Rock Scallop California Sheephead Blacksmith Olive Rockfish Rubberlip Surf- perch Black & Yellow Rockfish Leopard Shark Kelp Bass 3. Fish Over Shallow Sand Bottom; 0-18m (0-60 ft.): Northern Anchovy Barred Surfperch Calico Surfperch Walleye Surfperch Rainbow Surf- perch Jacksmelt Dogfish Soupfin Shark Queenfish White Croaker Curl fin Turbot Hornyhead Turbot Soupfin Shark Swordfish Mola Jack Mackerel Black Abalone Monkeyfaced Eel Kelp Rockfish Pile Surfperch Black Rockfish Blue Shark Garibaldi Pacific Butterfish Pile Surfperch White Surf perch White Seabass Spotfin Surf perch Queenfish Isl and Surfperch Hornyhead Surfperch Shiner Surf- perch C-0 Turbot Speckled Sanddab 4. Fish Over Moderate Deep Sandy Bottom; 18-46m (60-150 ft.): Spiny Dogfish Stripetail Rockfish English Sole Hornyhead Turbot Curl fin Turbot Halfbanded Rockfish 5. Pelagic Fish Off This Island: Albacore Pacific Sardine Sword fish Jack Mackerel Pacific Mackerel White Shark Pacific Hake Mako Shark Shiner Surf- perch Calico Rockfish Pink Surfperch Thresher Shark Pacific Bonito Blue Shark Opah Tomsmel t Grunion Pacific Sanddab Sand Sole Northern Anchovy Pacific Saury Mola APPENDIX 3: Brief Review of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Development Process In virtually all instances, the pattern of XS oil and gas devel- opment follows the same basic steps: 1) pre-expl oration, 2) leasing, 3) exploratory drilling, 4) development drilling, 5) production, and 6) completion. During pre-expl oration activity, oil companies send research vessels to conduct seismic surveys of an area to determine the geologic structure and location of potential petroleum bearing strata. Since OCS lands are federally owned, oil companies must first secure the right to drill and exploit the natural resources before any drillings can be conduct- ed. Drilling rights on the XS are obtained by leasing areas (called blocks or tracts) from the responsible federal agent -- the Bureau of Land Mangement (BLM). The oil companies nominate for lease sale those tracts which they view as promising and bid on those tracts in a competitive bid lease sale. BLM reviews the highest bids and may accept or reject them. If the high bids are deemed commensurate with the resource potential, the company is granted a lease to drill and develop the block. Upon award of a lease, exploratory drilling from a drilling "rig" may be conducted to determine the precise location, extent, and quantity of oil and gas resources. This involves drilling an average of about four exploratory wells per tract from a movable, temporary rig. If an exploratory well indicates the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons, additional wells are drilled to determine the areal extent of the reservoir (s) and to aid in locating the optimal site for production platforms. After exploration is complete, but before commercial production can begin, a develop- ment plan must be prepared by the developer and submitted for approval to the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS). The USGS reviews this plan to insure that safety and environmental standards are met. After approval of the development plan, production "platforms" are installed on the tract and development wells are drilled. A tract with a high resource potential might include two platforms and approximately 40 wells. Production "platforms'' are more permanent structures than drilling "rigs" since they must serve throughout the production life of the field (which may be 15 to 40 years) and withstand the rigors of even the most severe ocean storms. In addition to platforms, production facilities normally include transportation systems to shore and onshore processing and storage plants. After all recoverable oil and gas resources have been exploited, the well is closed below the sea floor and the platform and pipelines are removed. APPENDIX 4: BLM Special Stipulations for OCS Sale #48 (U. S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Stipulation No. 1. Department of Defense restriction Requires lessee and/or operator to coordinate boat and aircraft traffic with appropriate military commander; provides for tempo- rary suspensions of OCS operations, and requires control of electromagnetic emissions. Stipulation No. 2. Department of Defense restriction Indemnifies and saves harmless the United States against claim for injury or damage from space and missile testing. Stipulation No. 3. Cultural Resources Requires surveys to identify resources of historical or archaeo- logical significance, and subsequent protection. Stipulation No. 4. Trawl grounds Requires that protrusions above the sea floor, and irregular pipe surfaces, be protected by shrouds which will prevent damage to the structures, or fishing gear. Stipulation No. 5. Areas of special biological interest Requires prevention, to the maximum extent possible, of detri- mental impact upon areas of special biological interest. Stipulation No. 6. Transport of oil and gas This stipulation establishes regional and state working groups, consisting of federal, state, and local government, and industry representation, to formulate regional transportation management plan recommendations. Stipulation No . 7. Tanner-Cortes Banks To mitigate the impacts of physical disruption and sedimentation on significant biological communities of Tanner-Cortes Banks. APPENDIX 5: Summary of USGS Pacific OCS Orders and Notices to Lessees (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). Pacific Area OCS Order No. 1 This Order requires all platforms, drill ig rigs, drilling ships, and wells to have standard signs identifying the operator, the specific lease block of operation, and well number. Pacific Area XS Order No. 2 Order No. 2 concerns procedures for drilling of wells. In requires the operators to file an application for drilling which includes information on the drilling platforms or vessel, casing program, blowout prevention equipment, well control training and safety training of operators' personnel, and a list or description of critical drilling operations. Pacific Area XS Order No. 3. This Order is established to provide regulation of plugging and abandonment of wells which have been drilled for oil and gas. For permanent abandonment of wells, cement plugs must be placed so as to extend 30m (100 feet) above the top and 30m (100 feet) below the bottom of fresh water, oil , and gas zones to prevent those fluids from escaping into other strata. Portions of a well in which abnormal pressures are encountered are also required to be isolated with cement plugs. Plugs are required at the bottom of the deepest casing below which an open hole exists. Plugs or cement retainers are required to be placed 30m (100 feet) above the top and 30m (100 feet) below any perforation interval of the well hole used for production of oil and gas. Pacific Area OCS Order No. 4 An OCS lease provides for its extension beyond its primary term for as long as oil or gas may be produced in paying quantities provided the operator has met the requirements for diligent development. If these circumstances should occur, the lease can be extended beyond its initial term, pursuant to Section 8(b)(2) of the XS Lands Act and Title 30 CFR 250.11 and 250.12(d)(1). In addition, an XS lease may be maintained beyond the primary term, in the absence of actual production, when a suspension of produc- tion has been approved by the Supervisor. Order No. 4 defines the conditions and requirements for such suspensions. Pacific Area PCS Order No. 5 This Order sets regulations for the installation, design, testing, operation, and removal of subsurface safety devices. Pacific Area OCS Order No. 6 This Order pertains to procedures for completion of oil and gas wells. Wellhead equipment such as casing-heads, wellhead fit- tings, valves and connections are specified and rating require- ments are noted here. Testing procedures for wells and subsurface safety devices are also specified in the Order along with methods for multiple or tubingless completions. Pacific Area OCS Order No. 7 Order No. 7 concerns the control or pollution to the marine environment and provides regulations for the disposal of waste materials generated as a result of offshore operations. Pacific Area OCS Order No. 8 This Order requires that platforms, fixed structures, and arti- ficial islands be designed with consideration for geological, geographical, environmental and operational conditions. Prior to structural approval by the Supervisor, detailed design and stress load data must be submitted to the USGS. Certification of struc- tural adequacy by a registered professional engineer is required by the Order. Pacific Area OCS Order No. 9 OCS Order No. 9 provides approval procedures for oil and gas pipelines on the OCS. All pipelines and related equipment must be designed and maintained with high-low pressure sensors, automatic shut-in valves, checkflow valves (to control backflow), and metering systems to detect input/output variances (leakage). The Order also requires adequate provisions for cathodic corrosion protection, trawling compatibility, hydrostatic testing, storm scour and other environmental stress in OCS pipelines. Procedures and schedules for regular inspection of pipelines along with recording of such inspections are stipulated. Pacific Area OCS Order No. 10 OCS Order No. 10 provides for drilling twin core holes located adjacent to core holes drilled on the OCS under earlier California State authorization. Such holes were drilled prior to the esta- blishment of Federal authority beyond the 3-mile limit. Pacific Area PCS Order No. 11 This Order provides for prevention of waste, conservation of oil and gas resources, and protection of correlative rights by defin- ing and setting standards for rates of production, production testing procedures, and joint production requirements. Pacific Area XS Order No. 12 The purpose of this Order is to make the records of the Department of the Interior available to the public to the greatest extent possible. Notice to Lessees Nd . 77-1. "Applications for exploratory opera- tions" "" This NTL summarizes the requirements and instructions relative to the approval of applications for a permit to drill exploratory wells. Notice to Lessees No. 77-2 "Minimum requirements for shallow drilling hazard surveys" Minimum requirements of geologic hazard surveys, which must be conducted pursuant to 30 CRF 250.34(a), are described. Notice to Lessees No. 77-3. "Minimum cultural survey requirements" Describes necessary measures to be taken to identify and preserve all Federally-owned sites, structures, and objects of historic, architectural, or archeological significance as directed by Executive Order No. 11593. Notice to Lessees No. 77-4. "Minimum requirements for biological surveys" Requires a plan of survey to identify significant biological communities. 6U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 O — 305-010 '6592 PENN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES ADDQ07D MD DEH