Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Rules and Regulations Beaufort Sea region and demonstrated impacts on SBS polar bear utilization of sea-ice and terrestrial habitats, the Service anticipates that polar bear use of the Beaufort Sea coast will continue to increase during the open-water season.
For walruses, climate change may affect habitat and prey availability. The loss of Arctic sea ice has affected walrus distribution and habitat use in the Bering and Chukchi Seas Jay et al.
2012. Walruses use sea ice as a breeding site, a location to birth and nurse young, and a protective cover from storms and predation; however, if the sea ice retreats north of the continental shelf break in the Chukchi Sea, walruses can no longer use it for these purposes. Thus, loss of sea ice is associated with increased use of coastal haul-outs during the summer, fall, and early winter Jay et al. 2012. Coastal haulouts are potentially dangerous for walruses, as they can stampede toward the water when disturbed, resulting in injuries and mortalities Garlich-Miller et al. 2011. Use of land haulouts is also more energetically costly, with walruses hauled out on land spending more time in water but not foraging than those hauled out on sea ice. This difference has been attributed to an increase in travel time in the water from land haulouts to foraging areas Jay et al.
2017. Higher walrus abundance at these coastal haulouts may also increase exposure to environmentally and density-dependent pathogens Post et al.
2013. Climate change impacts through habitat loss and changes in prey availability could affect walrus population stability. It is unknown if walruses will utilize the Beaufort Sea more heavily in the future due to climate change effects; however, considering the low number of walruses observed in the Beaufort Sea see Take Estimates for Pacific Walruses and Polar Bears, it appears that walruses will remain uncommon in the Beaufort Sea for the next 5 years.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2

Potential Effects of the Specified Activities on Subsistence Uses Polar Bear Based on subsistence harvest reports, polar bear hunting is less prevalent in communities on the north coast of Alaska than it is in west coast communities. There are no quotas under the MMPA for Alaska Native polar bear harvest in the Southern Beaufort Sea;
however, there is a Native-to-Native agreement between the Inuvialuit in Canada and the Inupiat in Alaska. This agreement, the Inuvialuit-Inupiat Polar Bear Management Agreement, established quotas and
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:26 Aug 04, 2021

Jkt 253001

recommendations concerning protection of denning females, family groups, and methods of take. Although this Agreement is voluntary in the United States and does not have the force of law, legally enforceable quotas are administered in Canada. In Canada, users are subject to provincial regulations consistent with the Agreement. Commissioners for the Agreement set the original quota at 76
bears in 1988, split evenly between the Inuvialuit in Canada and the Inupiat in the United States. In July 2010, the quota was reduced to 70 bears per year.
Subsequently, in Canada, the boundary of the SBS stock with the neighboring Northern Beaufort Sea stock was adjusted through polar bear management bylaws in the Inuvialuit Settlement Region in 2013, affecting Canadian quotas and harvest levels from the SBS stock. The current subsistence harvest established under the Agreement of 56 bears total 35 in the United States and 21 in Canada reflect this change.
The Alaska Native subsistence harvest of polar bears from the SBS population has declined. From 1990 to 1999, an average of 42 bears were taken annually.
The average subsistence harvest decreased to 21 bears annually in the period 20002010 and 11 bears annually during 20152020. The reason for the decline of harvested polar bears from the SBS population is unknown. Alaska Native subsistence hunters and harvest reports have not indicated a lack of opportunity to hunt polar bears or disruption by Industry activity.
Pacific Walrus Few walruses are harvested in the Beaufort Sea along the northern coast of Alaska since their primary range is in the Bering and Chukchi Seas. Walruses constitute a small portion of the total marine mammal harvest for the village of Utqiagvik. Hunters from Utqiagvik have harvested 407 walruses since the year 2000 with 65 harvested since 2015.
Walrus harvest from Nuiqsut and Kaktovik is opportunistic. They have reported taking four walruses since 1993. None of the walrus harvests for Utqiagvik, Nuiqsut, or Kaktovik from 2014 to 2020 occurred within the Beaufort Sea ITR region.
Evaluation of Effects of the Specified Activities on Subsistence Uses There are three primary Alaska Native communities on the Beaufort Sea whose residents rely on Pacific walruses and polar bears for subsistence use:
Utqiagvik, Nuiqsut, and Kaktovik.
Utqiagvik and Kaktovik are expected to be less affected by the Industrys
PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

43007

proposed activities than Nuiqsut.
Nuiqsut is located within 5 mi of ConocoPhillips Alpine production field to the north and ConocoPhillips Alpine Satellite development field to the west.
However, Nuiqsut hunters typically harvest polar bears from Cross Island during the annual fall bowhead whaling. Cross Island is approximately 16 km 10 mi offshore from the coast of Prudhoe Bay. We have received no evidence or reports that bears are altering their habitat use patterns, avoiding certain areas, or being affected in other ways by the existing level of oil and gas activity near communities or traditional hunting areas that would diminish their availability for subsistence use. However, as is discussed in Evaluation of Effects of Specified Activities on Pacific Walruses, Polar Bears, and Prey Species below, the Service has found some evidence of fewer maternal polar bear dens near industrial infrastructure than expected.
Changes in Industry activity locations may trigger community concerns regarding the effect on subsistence uses.
Industry must remain proactive to address potential impacts on the subsistence uses by affected communities through consultations and, where warranted, POCs. Evidence of communication with the public about activities will be required as part of an LOA. Current methods of communication are variable and include venues such as public forums, which allow communities to express feedback prior to the initiation of operations, the employ of subsistence liaisons, and presentations to regional commissions.
If community subsistence use concerns arise from new activities, appropriate mitigation measures, such as cessation of activities in key locations during hunting seasons, are available and will be applied as a part of the POC.
No unmitigable concerns from the potentially affected communities regarding the availability of walruses or polar bears for subsistence uses have been identified through Industry consultations with the potentially affected communities of Utqiagvik, Kaktovik, or Nuiqsut. During the 2016
2021 ITR period, Industry groups have communicated with Native communities and subsistence hunters through subsistence representatives, community liaisons, and village outreach teams as well as participation in community and commission meetings. Based on information gathered from these sources, it appears that subsistence hunting opportunities for walruses and polar bears have not been affected by past Industry activities conducted pursuant to the 20162021

E:FRFM05AUR2.SGM

05AUR2