Contact TheIPD.US

Regulatory Actions
View Public Comments
Submit Comments

NMFS ITA for Gulf of Mexico
NMFS Acoustic Guidelines
NMFS IHA for Scripps

  Best Available Science on Acoustic Effects on Marine Mammals
  Seismic vs. Sonar
  Physical Effects
 Behavioral Effects
  Sound Propagation
 Extrapolation From Terrestrial Mammal Acoustic Effects to Marine Mammals
  Cumulative and Synergistic Effects
 Indirect Effects

  US Navy
 Sperm Whale Seismic Study
 Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Institute
 The Acoustic Ecology Institute
 Fisheries and Oceans Canada
 Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited

 Relevant NMFS Permits
 Major Studies and Reports

Comment on IPD
  Potential Research Projects
  Research Underway
  Structure of the IPD

CRE Interventions
  Agency Administrative Actions


Soundings Archive

NMFS Requires PAM in Cook Inlet Seismic Permit
On May 11, 2012, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service published Federal Register notice that NMFS has issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization to the Apache Alaska Corporation to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to a proposed 3D seismic survey in Cook Inlet, Alaska, between April 2012 and April 2013. During the public comment on the proposed IHA, NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, environmental nongovernmental organizations, and one member of the public. These comments and NMFS' response to them may be viewed by clicking here.

Here, NMFS rejects the Environmental NGOs' comment that Apache should not be allowed to continue seismic surveys during nighttime (low light) and other low visibility conditions. NMFS' response to this comment states that

    "NMFS believes that requiring Apache to halt seismic surveys during nighttime and other low visibility conditions would increase the amount of time it would take Apache to complete the survey and may require additional survey vessels to be brought into Cook Inlet. As a result, NMFS considers the implementation of this recommendation as a mitigation measure to be impracticable for both economic and practical reasons. However, to further enhance the detection of marine mammals, passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) systems will be deployed, if ice conditions allow, inside the 180/190 dB safety zone in both the up-inlet and down-inlet directions."
Copyright 2005 The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness.
All rights reserved.