IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
FISHERIES SURVIVAL FUND, et al.
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
Civ. No.
)
SALLY JEWELL, et al.
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
DECLARATION OF RONALD SMOLOWITZ
I, Ronald Smolowitz, declare and state as follows:
1.
I am the principal at the Coonamessett Farm Foundation, a not for profit marine research
institution.
2.
I provide consulting, research, and writing services in small scale agriculture, aquaculture,
and fisheries through the Coonamessett Farm Foundation, Inc. My past research projects
include developing open ocean sea scallop culture methods, a trawl survey for deep water
commercial species, testing means to exclude turtles and finfish from scallop dredges,
commercial explorations for oceanic squid using automated jigging gear, reviewing
bycatch technologies for use in European Community fisheries, studying the impact of
tropical shrimp trawl fisheries, testing methods to reduce right whale entanglement in
fishing gear, designing and operating a greenhouse polyculture system, developing beach
plums as a commercial fruit crop, and demonstrating a new method for growing salad
greens year-round in colder climates. The Fisheries Survival Fund is one of my clients.
Attached is a bibliography of my published papers.
3.
From October 1969 until October 1989, I was a Commissioned Officer in the National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce,
achieving the rank of Commander. I was the Commanding Officer of the NOAA Research
Vessel Albatross IV out of Woods Hole. As Captain of the R/V Albatross IV, I conducted
NOAA surveys. Other assignments included fishing gear development and exploratory
fishing throughout the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, directing work on lobster trap escape
vents, ghost fishing panels, large mesh cod ends, scallop ring size, and similar conservation
gear projects. Before retiring from NOAA, I was the Assistant Regional Director for the
Northeast Region of the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Declaration of Ronald Smolowitz
Page 1
4.
Presently, I am also the owner and operator of Coonamessett Farm, Inc., a twenty acre
farming and research enterprise located on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Crops include small
fruit, vegetables, flowers, fish and livestock. I also own Woods Hole Oyster Company,
LLC; an aquaculture operation with three acres of growing area in Buzzards Bay producing
oysters.
5.
I own a 10 kW wind turbine and a similar capacity solar photovoltaic array which I use to
power my farm on Cape Cod. I produce energy and food from the same environment. I had
to go through a detailed permitting process evaluating all the potential impacts of the
renewable energy installations. This type of process is being bypassed for the New York
Wind Energy Area (NY WEA) and most other offshore sites. One thing I learned about
wind turbines from my own experience and reading the daily emails from the European
wind farms; they require continuous maintenance.
6.
I am routinely aboard scallop vessels now, conducting extensive turtle research and testing
new fishing gear technologies.
7.
I hold a degree in Marine Engineering/Naval Architecture from the State University of
New York Maritime College. I was in the Merchant Marine before joining NOAA. I am a
past President of the Cape Cod and Islands Farm Bureau. I also chaired the Marine
Technology Society's Marine Living Resources Committee.
8.
The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) stated initially in the Atlantic Coast Port Access Route
Study it released in March that it recommended keeping offshore wind projects at least two
nautical miles (nm) away from shipping lanes. For this reason, and the reasons stated
below, it is my professional opinion that neither government regulations nor the lessee, in
its operational plan, will permit scallop fishing within the NY WEA.
9.
Likewise, it is my professional opinion based upon my extensive maritime experience that
scallop vessels cannot operate safely while conducting commercial fishing operations or
research surveys within the proposed NY WEA.
10.
A typical scallop vessel is 75-90 feet in length with a seven man crew, towing two 15-foot
dredges, one from each side of the vessel, behind it on the ocean bottom with 400 feet of
wire out of each side if it is in 200 feet of water. Scallop vessels target beds of scallops,
areas of large concentrations of scallops, in order to maximize their catch per unit of effort.
Adult scallops are generally sessile animals that move infrequently once they reach
maturity.
11.
Captains of scallop vessels typically tow the dredges in valleys between parallel sand ridges
in order to maximize scallop catch. When a captain finds a good scallop bed, he will make
multiple parallel tows in both directions until the catch rate drops below an acceptable
amount. Tows typically cover a distance of five miles in length and one hour in duration.
12.
Scallops require specific habitat to survive. They are found in waters that are 100 to 400
feet deep and the bottom is either sandy or has small stones the size of large marbles. As
a result, scallops consistently appear in the same oceanic areas year after year, meaning the
Declaration of Ronald Smolowitz
Page 2
loss of any scallop habitat will impinge on the overall carrying capacity of the ocean for
scallops.
13.
The proposed NY WEA will encompass 81,000 acres of scallop bottom; the USCG
recommendation for a two nm buffer around the site encompasses a similar amount of
acreage; combined, it creates 160,000 acres of lost fishing grounds.
14.
Published reports have declared that offshore wind turbines will be spaced between one
third and one half nautical miles apart. The proposed NY WEA can have as many as 194
wind turbines located in it.
15.
During construction of offshore wind farms it is standard practice to declare a 500 yard
safety zone around each structure, as was done during the construction of the recently
completed Block Island offshore wind farm.
16.
500-yard safety zones around each offshore wind turbine effectively make the area
impassible if the turbines are a half mile or closer together, as each safety zone will abut
the other. A scallop vessel needs approximately .25 nautical miles on either side to safely
operate.
17.
After construction is complete, based upon the approaches taken in the European Union,
some wind farms do not allow any transit through the array, while others maintain a 500yard safety zone around each structure.
18.
Even in the event there are no safety zones, there will still be significant losses of fishing
grounds due to the physical presence of the turbines and the inability to fish certain
headings because the route is blocked by multiple turbines.
19.
Offshore wind arrays significantly compromise the effectiveness of a vessel's radar when
it is operating within the array because of interference with the radar from the spinning
turbine blades. Without effective radar, in poor sighting conditions (night, fog, rain, high
seas, etc.), a vessel will not be able to fish.
20.
Entangling dredges on a wind turbine base or a cable on the seafloor could lead to
significant injuries or the loss of life onboard a fishing vessel.
21.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has rejected the USCG
recommendation for a small vessel channel through the WEA, further indicating a no
mobile bottom fishing strategy for the WEA, and not providing a potential mitigation for
safety.
22.
The NY WEA will decrease scallop production within the NY WEA and down-current of
the site.
23.
Scallops reproduce through the method of broadcast spawning. Adult male and female
scallops eject their sperm and eggs into the water column where they mix. Successfully
fertilized eggs mature into scallop spat that are carried by oceanic currents until they settle
Declaration of Ronald Smolowitz
Page 3
on the bottom. If the bottom is suitable scallop habitat, the scallops attach to the bottom as
spat and then grow out. It takes around 4 years for a scallop to grow to a harvestable size.
24.
In general, the currents in the Mid-Atlantic region, where the NY WEA is proposed, run
from the Northeast to the Southwest. The current scientific opinion of scallop researchers
is that scallops south of Long Island seed scallop beds located east of the New Jersey coast.
25.
Hundreds of offshore wind turbines in the water column will affect the movement of water
and scallop spat in the water column. The location of a large offshore wind array in the
middle of currents that are known to transport juvenile scallops will have an impact on the
number of young scallops that survive. The impact could be highly negative.
26.
The construction period for the NY WEA will take place over many years. During the
construction phase sediment plumes will be generated and will adversely affect scallop
production within the site and down-current from the site.
27.
The area to the south of the NY WEA contains the Mid-Atlantic Scallop Access Area. An
access area is a special area created under the scallop fishery management plan where
scallops traditionally set and grow. Because scallops are so historically abundant in these
areas they are treated like farm land; closed when the areas are full of small scallops and
allowed to grow out. Access areas are extremely important to the scallop fisheries longterm sustainability. The Mid Atlantic Access Area is the largest of the access areas with
an average of 18 million pounds of scallops at a value of over $200 million harvested from
the area annually.
28.
The act of installing offshore wind turbines will likely destroy the existing scallop beds
from sedimentation. Scallops that are covered in silt or dirt, suffocate and starve, as they
are not able to flush water, which is essential for them to breathe and feed.
29.
In addition, the new "riprap habitat" that will be placed around the base of the turbines and
potentially over any cables, is known to support scallop predators such as starfish, which
will further adversely impact scallop production.
30.
I have repeatedly suggested to BOEM employees that they require the establishment of a
research fund similar to the Sea Scallop Research Set Aside (RSA) program. I introduced
this concept to the fisheries managers in 1997 and it is now providing $15 million dollars
a year towards a research program where priorities are annually reviewed by stakeholders,
managers, and scientists. The research monitors resource status and studies ways to
mitigate adverse impacts that the scallop fishery may cause.
31.
Before any work takes place in the NY WEA, a scientific baseline must be established to
evaluate the impacts of construction and operation on the ecosystem and other
stakeholders. Besides the loss of fishing grounds, research in other wind farm areas
overseas indicates we may expect significant changes in the species complex that now
resides in the area with consequences to the fishermen that currently utilize these renewable
resources.
Declaration of Ronald Smolowitz
Page 4
PUBLISHED PAPERS:
Smolowitz, R. J. 1972. Shipboard procedures to decrease lobster mortality. Comm. Fish.
Rev. 34 (5-6):44-48
Smolowitz, R. J. 1978. Trap design and ghost fishing: An overview. Mar. Fish. Rev. 40 (56):2-8
Smolowitz, R. J. 1978. Trap design and ghost fishing: Discussion. Mar. Fish. Rev. 40 (56):59-67
Smolowitz, R. J. 1978. Annotated bibliography on lobster trapping and related subjects. M.
Fish. Rev. 40 (5-6):68-77
Pecci, K. J., R. A. Cooper, C. D. Newell, R. A. Clifford, and R. J. Smolowitz 1978. Ghost
fishing of vented and unvented lobster, Homarus Americanus, traps. Mar Fish Rev. 40 (56):9-43
Smolowitz, R. J. and F. M. Serchuk 1980. Recent USA lobster-trap gear research:
Applications and implications. Canadian Technical Report Fish Aquatic Sci. 932 p73-76
Crossen, J. M. and R. J. Smolowitz 1980. Power system requirements of an electrohydraulic clam dredge. Mar. Technology 80. Mar. Tech. Soc. p433-438
Twohig, P. and R. J. Smolowitz 1980. The application of an underwater color video system
to fishing gear research. Proc of Symp on Sci and Tech. Applications of Underwater
Photography
Serchuk, F. M. and R. J. Smolowitz. 1980. Size selection of sea scallops by an offshore
scallop survey dredge. ICES C.M. 1980/K:24. 38pp.
Smolowitz, R. J. and V. E. Nulk 1982. The design of an electrohydraulic dredge for clam
surveys. Marine Fish Rev. 44(4).
Smolowitz, R. J. 1983. Fisheries engineering and its role in resource management. MTS
Jnal Vol 17(1):31-41.
Smolowitz, R. J. 1983. Mesh size and the New England ground fishery Applications and
implications. NOAA Tech Rep. NMFS SSRF-77-1. 60pp.
Smolowitz, R. J. and R. L. Edwards 1983. The application of technology to the fishing
industry. OCEANS 83 Marine Tech Soc. p853-856.
Smolowitz, R. J. and F. M. Serchuk, J. Nicolas, and S. E. Wigley 1985. Performance of an
offshore scallop survey dredge equipped with rock chains. NAFO SCR DOC 85/89 Serial
No N1064. 29pp.
Smolowitz, R. J. and F. M. Serchuk, 1987. Current technical concerns with Sea Scallop
management. OCEANS 87 Proceedings. P. 639-644.
Smolowitz, R. J. and F. M. Serchuk, 1988. Marine fisheries technology in the United States:
Status, trends and future directions. OCEANS 88 Proceedings. 5pp.
Smolowitz, R. J. and F. M. Serchuk, 1988. Developments in sea scallop gear design. Proc
World Symposium on Fishing Gear and fishing vessel design. P. 531-540.
Smolowitz, R. J., F. M. Serchuk, and R.J. Reidman. 1989. The use of a volumetric measure
for determining sea scallop meat count. J. of Shellfish Research, Vol. 8, No. 1, 151-172.
Declaration of Ronald Smolowitz
Page 6
Serchuk, F. M. and R. J. Smolowitz. 1990. Ensuring fisheries management dysfunction: the
neglect of science and technology. Fisheries 15(2):4-7.
Smolowitz, R. J. and D. N. Wiley. 1992. A model for conflict resolution in marine
mammal/fisheries interactions: The New England Harbor Porpoise Working Group. MTS 92.
pp 354-360.
Smolowitz, R.J. 2006. Sea Scallop Harvest Gear: Engineering for Sustainability. J. Mar.
Tech. Soc. Vol. 40; No. 3. P.25-9.
Smolowitz, R.J., H. Haas, H. Milliken, M. Weeks, and E. Matzen. 2010. Using Sea Turtle
Carcasses to Assess the Conservation Potential of a Turtle Excluder Dredge. North American
Journal of Fisheries Management. 30:993–1000.
Smolowitz, R.J., H.O. Milliken, and M. Weeks. 2012. Design, Evolution, and Assessment of
a Sea Turtle Deflector Dredge for the U.S. Northwest Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery: Impacts
on Fish Bycatch. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 32(1): 65-7
Ceriani, S. A., J. D. Roth, C. R. Sasso, C. M. McClellan, M. C. James, Heather L. Haas, R. J.
Smolowitz, D. R. Evans, D. S. Addison, D. A. Bagley, L. M. Ehrhart, and J. F. Weishampel.
2014. Modeling and mapping isotopic patterns in the Northwest Atlantic derived from
loggerhead sea turtles. Ecosphere 5(9):122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00230.1
Siemann, LA, Parkins, CJ, and Smolowitz, RJ. 2015. Scallops caught in the headlights:
swimming escape behavior of the Atlantic sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) reduced
by artificial light. ICES Journal of Marine Science 72: 2700-2706.
Smolowitz, RJ, Patel, SH, Haas, HL, Miller, SA. 2015. Using a remotely operated vehicle
(ROV) to observe loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) behavior on foraging grounds off the
mid-Atlantic United States. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 471: 8491.
Smolowitz, RJ, Siemann, LA, Huntsberger, C, and Boelke, D. 2016. Application of seasonal
closures to reduce flatfish bycatch in the USA Atlantic sea scallop fishery. Journal of
Shellfish Research 35: 475-480.
Siemann, LA, Huntsberger, C, Leavitt, JS, and Smolowitz, RJ. (in press) Summering on the
bank: seasonal distribution and abundance of monkfish on Georges Bank. Frontiers in
Marine Science.
Patel SH, Dodge KL, Haas HL and Smolowitz RJ (2016). Videography reveals in-water
behavior of loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) at a foraging ground. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:254.
doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.
Declaration of Ronald Smolowitz
Page 7
Exhibit 1
Offshore Wind Development and
Commercial Fisheries
Synopsis




Wind energy development in the Greater Atlantic Region has the potential to substantially
disrupt commercial fisheries activities, particularly in the construction, operational and
decommissioning phases.
Direct impacts of wind energy activities on biological resource remains largely unknown despite
robust development of the industry in Europe.
Current environmental assessments do not properly evaluate impacts on commercial fisheries
due to the lack of site-specific surveys.
Wind Energy developers are in a position to contribute substantial knowledge about the effects
of wind energy activities on biological resources, but currently lack incentive to pursue such
information.
Introduction
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has designated seven Greater Atlantic offshore
parcels as “Wind Energy Areas” (WEA), which are focus areas for offshore wind development (Fig 1.). As
part of the process of evaluating the potential effects of such installations on biological resources,
information on marine mammals, birds and sea turtles is being collected with discreet surveys and
analysis during the development phase. However, although these areas overlap substantially with
important commercial fishing grounds (Fig 2.), current Environmental Assessments (EA) for site
assessment activities lacks a survey-based evaluation of the possible effects on most commercially and
ecologically-important biological resources. Although some site-specific surveys are presently underway,
much of the information currently used to evaluate such impacts comes from data collected for other
purposes (e.g., fisheries resource surveys) and does not consider site-specific biological resource data, as
data on such a fine spatial scale is often not available.
Further, potential impacts to biological resources from site assessment activities (e.g., installation of
towers, seismic surveys) and operation of wind turbines (e.g., vibration, electric transmission) are not
currently well understood and thus, a number of assumptions must be made. What follows here is a
cursory review of the available information pertaining to potential effects identified by various sources,
identification of data gaps, and recommendations for data collection and conflict mitigation.
Figure 1. BOEM WEA areas in the Greater Atlantic. From:
https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/stories/2016/august/wind_energy_areas.
jpg
Discussion
Current Offshore Wind Environmental Assessments
Currently available information on research initiatives geared towards assessment of the effects of
offshore wind development put a particular emphasis on survey-based assessment of birds, marine
mammals and turtles. However, although current BOEM WEAs off the Northeast Atlantic coast
substantially overlap with commercial fishing grounds (Fig. 2), there are currently no WEA-specific
survey-based analyses for commercially exploited biological resources incorporated into site assessment
Environmental EAs (BOEM notes that site assessment EAs do not consider effects from installation,
operation, and decommissioning of a commercial wind energy facility”)1,2. Further, while discreet sitespecific surveys focused on establishing a baseline for biological resources are recommended as part of
BOEM’s guidance to applicants, actual survey-based data collection is not required as a part of site
characterization and development3. The result is the potential reliance on assumptions gleaned from
historical data sets (e.g., broad-scale fisheries resource surveys) as well as generalized information not
specific to the local ecology or oceanographic conditions. This lack of precision-based baseline data in
the vicinity of offshore wind sites greatly complicates the future assessment of actual effects4.
Biological Surveys




Survey-based focus is primarily on avian species, marine mammals and sea turtles.
BOEM-funded Habitat and epibenthic invertebrate survey in Atlantic WEAs is underway, but
data is not yet incorporated into EAs1,2,5.
o These surveys are designed to establish baseline biological occurrence and distribution
data.
o There is no current mandate for follow-up survey-based monitoring and assessment of
impacts past the construction phase (i.e., during the operational or decommissioning
phases), although guidelines are to be developed within the next year6,7.
As of December 2016, no site-specific fisheries survey data are contained in available WEA EAs.
o Fisheries impacts assessed using available survey data.
 Not site-specific; uses data collected for other purposes
 Spatial resolution not sufficient to establish a proper baseline to measure
subsequent impacts.
 Based on historical data – not up-to-date
 Does not take into account long-term changes to fisheries grounds (e.g.,
migrations, shifting distributions, management changes, etc.).
 Does not typically consider potential impacts of larval and juvenile transport
from installed structures (see Potential Impacts to Fisheries – Biological
Resources).
o WEA site-specific survey-based assessments of fisheries resources recently completed or
currently underway:
 Lobster and crab survey within the RI-MA WEA
 Physical habitat and epibenthic invertebrate survey in Atlantic WEAs
 EMF (Electromagnetic Field) Impacts on Elasmobranch (sharks, rays and skates)
and American Lobster Movement and Migration
A Fisheries Survey Plan is required to be submitted by the developer as part of site assessment
activities3.
o Pertaining to Fisheries Survey Methodology, BOEM states the following: Lessees and
grantees are encouraged to use existing data where applicable to their proposed
activities and associated area of potential effect to characterize the natural resources
present3.
o Approval of Fisheries Survey Plan takes place in consultation with US Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
o Lessee / developer Fisheries Survey Plan is not made publically available for review or
comment7.
Industry-funded survey based assessment: Block Island Wind Farm
Prior to approval of the Block Island Wind Farm (BIWF) construction activities, the Rhode Island Coastal
Resources Management Council (RI CRMC) mandated a comprehensive assessment of the impacts to
the groundfish and lobster fisheries8. This ultimately resulted in developer-funded collaborative
monitoring surveys for groundfish and lobster8,9.





Study design teams solicited input from commercial fishermen, scientists and regulators on
study design and execution.
Surveys were executed onboard commercial fishing vessels staffed with commercial fishermen
and scientists.
Study designed to establish a discreet baseline of biological data from which change could be
measured.
Survey activities were complimentary to a robust stakeholder (i.e., commercial and recreational
fishermen) input process.
Unclear of the frequency and duration of sampling, or if this model will be applied to all future
leases (indications are that it will be applied to the RI-MA WEA)9.
It is important to note that, despite published guidelines requiring a fish survey plan, no such
mechanism exists for effectively mandating or incentivizing the collection of discreet survey-based
fisheries resource data at the federal level (BIWF was constructed in RI state waters). Thus, the onus is
entirely on the developer to develop a plan to collect additional site-specific data as part of their
fisheries survey plan. This additional collection of actual survey-based data is somewhat dis-incentivized
by the current language in the BOEM Fisheries Survey Guidelines.
There is also a noted lack of follow-up in the NEPA process10. NEPA-based environmental impact
assessments are focused on potential effects and impacts from development and operation activities
and agencies such as BOEM do not formally mandate methodologies for long-term data collection.
However, it should be noted that BOEM does intend to develop post-construction monitoring guidelines
for lessees in 2017. Such mandates to collect long-term data would provide insight to actual effects of
offshore wind development and serve to greatly improve future environmental assessments.
A
B
C
Figure 2. Maps showing BOEM Wind Energy Planning areas (WEAs) in the Northeast
(A), WEAs overlaid with squid fishery effort (B), and WEAs overlaid scallop fishery
effort (C). Data from: http://www.northeastoceandata.org/data-explorer/
Potential Impacts to Fisheries – Biological Resources
Due to a lack of discreet baseline information, there is a current lack of quantifiable data in regards to
the direct and indirect effects of ocean installations on biological resources, particularly resources of
commercial importance3,8,11,12. Despite the industry being well-developed in Europe, the lack of initial
survey-based data collection to establish a baseline has meant most subsequent research is speculative
with regards to change and effects. Additionally, it is important to note that the ecology of study areas
may differ substantially and broad generalizations of impacts to certain classes of species may not be
wholly applicable. The following is a synopsis of select information regarding potential impacts to
fisheries resources.
Seismic activity


Although it is generally assumed seismic activity for offshore wind site assessments is of a lower
level than oil and gas exploration(e.g., it is an assumption in WEA Environmental Assessments
that air guns will not be utilized)1,13, the operational level of seismic equipment for site
characterization is not explicitly specified by BOEM or other entity14.
o BOEM does allow lessees to utilize seismic equipment not specifically mentioned in the
WEA EAs, though “sound source levels and anticipated impacts must fall within the range of
what was analyzed”14.
Behavioral response of mobile fauna may impact fish catches in the vicinity of seismic activity1517
. Extent and duration of impact will vary with assessment technologies uses and factors such as
local oceanographic conditions15-17.
Vibration and sound effects


Sound from construction activities (e.g., pile driving) has been shown to cause substantial
behavioral and physiological changes in fish, including flight responses, dispersal and
abandonment of spawning grounds18,19. The behavioral changes may apply over a broad range
(over several kilometers), while physical and physiological effects would likely be limited to the
immediate vicinity (i.e., within 100m)20.
Because little effort has been expended on assessing impacts post-operation, the impact to
fisheries resources from vibrations of the turbine structure, as well as effects of long-duration
sound from the turbine operation are not known and should be a focus of future research20,21.
Electromagnetic Fields

The impacts to fish, shellfish and other biological resources from electromagnetic fields (e.g.,
transmission cables) are not well known. Impacts are assumed to be most prevalent in
diadromous fishes and elasmobranchs22.
Changes in upper-ocean circulation



Wind farms may significantly influence local ocean upwelling and downwelling patterns23.
This change could influence temperature structure and nutrient transport in the vicinity of the
installations23
Can also heavily influence or disrupt larval transport24.
Value as habitat

It is generally assumed that wind turbine structures will provide some level of ecological value as
“artificial reef” habitat11,25,26.
o Potential value as habitat in US northeast may be overstated, particularly for species of
commercial importance27.
Potential Impacts to Fisheries – Access and Navigation
Site assessment, construction and operational activities may temporarily or permanently restrict areas
where fishermen can access12,22. There are no known mandated seasonal or other temporal restrictions
on when assessment or constructions activities can take place. Although the footprint of proposed wind
turbine installations in the northeast are relatively small to moderate, displacement of fishing effort will
likely lead to concentration of effort on other fishing grounds, which could result in further user
conflicts. While mentioned briefly in site assessment EAs, to our knowledge the redistribution of fishing
effort, including potential resultant effects on biological resources, has not been effectively modeled.
Initial assessment and survey activities


Seismic testing may require a buffer zone around vessels conducting activity.
No known mandated restrictions on time of year or duration of testing.
Turbine construction & decommissioning


Access to areas around wind turbine installation is restricted whenever construction activities
are taking place and may be restricted or closed for an extended duration12,22,28.
Duration of access impairment varies with construction times, delays and type of activity.
o Construction of the 5 turbines for the Block Island Wind Farm took 18-weeks in 2015
(July-Nov) and approximately 20 weeks in 2016 (April to August)29.
Transmission cable corridor


Access to areas around trench digging and cable laying vessels will likely be restricted.
o Trench digging vessels required a 200 yard floating buffer zone for the BIWF project.
Fishing activities may be restricted in a defined area once the transmission cable is placed.
Operational phase - hazards to navigation


It is well documented that the spinning blades of the turbine result in erroneous radar returns,
effectively rendering radar ineffective as a navigational aid within the vicinity of wind farm
field4,30.
Although the area around a wind farm may be open and accessible in a practical sense, the site
will likely remain effectively inaccessible for moderate to large-sized commercial fishing vessels
with limited maneuverability. This is also applicable to vessels with utilizing with mobile gears
(e.g., trawl and dredge vessels).
Recommendations
Corporations developing offshore wind within BOEM WEA’s are essentially using a public
resource for private gain. Thus, the burden to develop and fund oceanographic research in
regards to the effects from wind installations should be taken up in large part by the developer
(i.e., “giving back” for using a public resource). Further, because the installations are set semipermanently, developers should be open to efforts to utilize the structures as oceanographic
research platforms (e.g., cameras, oceanographic sensors, fish telemetry receivers, etc.).
Incentivizing renewable energy developers to take up such research will likely need to initiate
from government agency mandates.
Biological data collection




The need for baseline data collection in order to assess impacts from ocean installations is well
noted and should remain a priority for assessing impacts to biological resources, particularly
those of commercial and ecological importance.
Collecting survey-based data should be prioritized as early in the process as practical to allow for
effective assessment of the effects of all stages of offshore wind development.
BOEM should consider altering the language in the fishery survey guidelines to incentivize
applicants to undertake actual site-specific fishery surveys.
Fisheries survey plans should be publically available and subject to public review and comment.
Mitigation of impacts to commercial fishing industry




BOEM and applicants / lessees should continue to support forums and mechanisms to
encourage robust stakeholder input.
Fishing areas and seasons should be given due consideration with respect to activities which
restrict access.
o Temporal adjustment of these activities to reduce overlap with fishing activities should
be required.
If access impairments are extended, affected sectors of the fishing industry should receive
compensation (e.g., financial offsets, additional fishing days, etc.).
A system to facilitate advance notice of area closures in an easily available and readable format
will be an important facet of impact reduction.
References
1.
2.
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). Commercial Wind Lease Issuance and Site
Assessment Activities on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf Offshore New York - Revised
Environmental Assessment. 2016. https://www.boem.gov/NY-EA-FONSI-2016/.
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). Commercial Wind Lease Issuance and Site
Assessment Activities on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf Offshore Rhode Island and
Massachusetts - Revised Environmental Assessment. 2013.
https://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/Renewable_Energy_Program/State_Activities/BO
EM%20RI_MA_Revised%20EA_22May2013.pdf.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). Guidelines for Providing Information on Fisheries
for Renewable Energy Development on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf. 2013.
John Williamson pers. comm.
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). Environmental Studies Program - Ongoing
Studies: Fishery Physical Habitat and Epibenthic Invertebrate Baseline Data Collection.
https://www.boem.gov/Benthic-Habitat-Study-Profile/.
Tyler Studds pers. comm.
Brian Hooker pers. comm.
Lipsky A, Moura S, Kenney A, Bellavance R. Addressing Interactions Between Fisheries and
Offshore Wind Development: The Block Island Wind Farm. 2016. http://www.seaplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/Addressing-Interactions-between-Fisheries-and-Offshore-Wind-DevelopmentBIWF-May-2016.pdf.
Aileen Kenney pers. comm.
Karkkainen BC. Toward a smarter NEPA: monitoring and managing government's environmental
performance. Columbia Law Review. 2002:903-972.
Bailey H, Brookes KL, Thompson PM. Assessing environmental impacts of offshore wind farms:
lessons learned and recommendations for the future. Aquatic Biosystems. 2014;10(1):8.
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). Development of Mitigation Measures to Address
Potential Use Conflicts between Commercial Wind Energy Lessees/Grantees and Commercial
Fishers on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf - Report on Best Management Practices and
Mitigation Measures. November 2014.
Oceana. Seismic for Offshore Wind v. Seismic for Oil and Gas. n.d.
http://oceana.org/sites/default/files/Siesmic_for_Offshore_Wind_vs_Seismic_for_Fossil_Fuels_
FINAL.pdf.
Brian Krevor pers. comm.
Løkkeborg S, Soldal AV. The influence of seismic exploration with airguns on cod (Gadus
morhua) behaviour and catch rates. Paper presented at: ICES Mar. Sci. Symp1993.
Wardle C, Carter T, Urquhart G, et al. Effects of seismic air guns on marine fish. Continental Shelf
Research. 2001;21(8):1005-1027.
Engas A, Lokkeborg S. Effects of seismic shooting and vessel-generated noise on fish behaviour
and catch rates. Bioacoustics. 2002;12(2-3):313-316.
Popper AN, Fewtrell J, Smith ME, McCauley RD. Anthropogenic sound: effects on the behavior
and physiology of fishes. Marine Technology Society Journal. 2003;37(4):35-40.
Mueller-Blenkle C, McGregor PK, Gill AB, et al. Effects of pile-driving noise on the behaviour of
marine fish. 2010. https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/1826/8235/1/Effects_of_Piledriving_Noise-2010-2.pdf.
Nedwell J, Langworthy J, Howell D. Assessment of sub-sea acoustic noise and vibration from
offshore wind turbines and its impact on marine wildlife; initial measurements of underwater
noise during construction of offshore windfarms, and comparison with background noise.
Subacoustech Report ref: 544R0423, published by COWRIE. 2003.
Gill A, Bartlett M, Thomsen F. Potential interactions between diadromous fishes of UK
conservation importance and the electromagnetic fields and subsea noise from marine
renewable energy developments. Journal of Fish Biology. 2012;81(2):664-695.
Michel J, Dunagan H, Boring C, et al. Worldwide synthesis and analysis of existing information
regarding environmental effects of alternative energy uses on the outer continental shelf. US
Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Herndon, VA, MMS OCS Report.
2007;38:254.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Broström G. On the influence of large wind farms on the upper ocean circulation. Journal of
Marine Systems. 2008;74(1):585-591.
Williamson TR, Tilley DR, Campbell E. Emergy analysis to evaluate the sustainability of two
oyster aquaculture systems in the Chesapeake Bay. Ecological Engineering. 2015;85:103-120.
Wilson JC, Elliott M. The habitat‐creation potential of offshore wind farms. Wind Energy.
2016;12(2):203-212.
Lindeboom H, Kouwenhoven H, Bergman M, et al. Short-term ecological effects of an offshore
wind farm in the Dutch coastal zone; a compilation. Environmental Research Letters.
2011;6(3):035101.
Caruso C, Idjadi J, Lagueux K, Mandelman J. Impacts of offshore liquid natural gas (LNG)
terminals on local fish populations in Mass Bay. Paper presented at: Oceans 2010 - MTSIEEE2010; Seattle, WA USA.
Faulkner T. Block Island Wind Farm Work Frustrates Fisheremen. 2016.
http://www.ecori.org/renewable-energy/2016/5/1/fishing-and-cable-problems-for-block-islandwind-farm.
Deepwater Wind. Construction Activities. 2016; http://dwwind.com/biwf-construction/.
Anatec Limited. Navigation Risk Assessment Beatrice Offshore Wind Farm. 2012.
http://sse.com/media/341118/ES-Volume-4-Annex-18A-WF-Shipping-NRA.pdf.