Stellwagen Bank Final EIS and Management Plan 



Page 107 



southern borders of boundary alternative #3. 

 Borders of the Sanctuary are equidistant from the 

 land points of Cape Cod, to the south, and Cape 

 Ann, to the north. 



The preferred boundary alternative #5 

 encompasses all of the Stellwagen Bank feature; 

 TiUies Bank to the northeast of Stellwagen Bank; 

 and southern portions of Jeffreys Ledge, to the 

 north of Stellwagen Bank. Portions of the 

 Sanctuary are adjacent to three ocean areas 

 designated by the Commonwealth as Ocean 

 Sanctuaries. The northwestern border coincides 

 with the North Shore Ocean Sanctuary. The 

 southern border coincides with the seaward limit of 

 Commonwealth jurisdictional waters adjacent to the 

 Cape Cod Bay Ocean Sanctuary; and is also 

 tangential to the Cape Cod Ocean Sanctuary. As 

 with boundary alternative #3, therefore, the 

 potential for coordination efforts with the 

 Commonwealth of Massachusetts related to ocean 

 system management is optimal; as is the potential 

 for cooperative educational and/or research efforts 

 with the Massachusetts Bays Program/NEP. 



I The preferred boundau^ alternative #5 



encompasses identified important marine habitats 

 resulting from the predictable cyclic seasonal 

 upwelling and mixing phenomena caused by the 

 presence of the Stellwagen Bank feature. Several 

 species of endangered and other cetaceans, 

 pinnipeds, sea turtles, and numerous species of 

 commercially-important fish and invertebrates 

 depend on the habitats over and surrounding the 

 Bzmk feature. The boundary includes the entirety of 

 the most frequently-utilized feeding and nursery 

 habitats for the largest high-latitude population of 

 humpback whales occurring in the contiguous 

 United States. Additional endangered cetacean 

 species utilizing the habitats enclosed by boundary 

 alternative #5 are fin and northern right whales. 

 Other non-listed marine mammal species found 

 within this boundary area include minke, orca, and 

 pilot whales, as well as white-sided dolphins, harbor 

 porpoises, and harbor seals. 



I The expanded area of boimdary alternative #5 



encompasses additional habitat areas around Tillies 

 Bank and southern portions Jeffreys Ledge which 

 are also important to fish, invertebrate, and 



cetacean species. Jeffreys Ledge, to the north of 

 Stellwagen Bank, provides feeding grounds for 

 harbor porpoise and fish spawning areas. TiUies 

 Bank, situated to the northeast of Stellwagen Bank, 

 is an additional important feeding area for 

 humpback and fin whales. Sand lance, primary prey 

 for humpback and fin whales, as well as for some 

 fish species, spawn within habitats included in 

 boundary alternative #5. 



The natural resource values of boundiU7 

 alternative #5 also result in high levels of both 

 commercial and recreational fishing and 

 whalewatching activities. Again owing to its 

 resource values, the majority of areas of particular 

 interest to the research community are enclosed 

 within boundary alternative #5. 



The preferred boundary alternative #5 

 encompasses a portion of the 'Interim" MBDS; 

 however, the disposal site proposed by EPA for 

 permanent designation is located entirely outside 

 the Sanctuary boundary. Adoption of this expanded 

 boundary alternative would not invalidate NOAA S 

 authority under Title III to prohibit disposal 

 activities at the MBDS which enter the Sanctuary 

 and harm Sanctuary resources or quahties; nor 

 would adoption of the expanded boimdary option 

 alter NOAA S prohibition on disposal and discharge 

 activities inside the Sanctuary. Inclusion of all or 

 pju-t of the MBDS would conflict with the general 

 NOAA poUcy against ocean disposal activities in 

 marine sanctuaries. Encompassing the MBDS 

 within the Sanctuary is not necessary to protect 

 Sanctuary resources or quahties, because, pursuant 

 to their own programs, EPA and COE ocean 

 disposal activities must avoid heum to Sanctuary 

 resources. 



B. Management Alternatives 



1. Management Alternative #1 



Under this alternative, management of the 

 Sanctuary would be conducted from SRD 

 headquarters in Washington, D.C. Sanctuary 

 Manager responsibiUties would be assumed by an 

 SRD Project Manager, who would coordinate, 

 through cooperative agreements, with other Federal 

 and State agencies located in the area of the 



