Correction: Expected occurrence of wildlife in US Atlantic offshore wind areas

Le résumé fourni par la source

Amidst advancements in offshore wind (OSW) on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) of the U.S., driven by the growing demand for renewable energy infrastructure, it remains crucial to evaluate the potential impacts on the wildlife sharing these habitats (Sinclair et al., 2018;Copping et al., 2020;Galparsoro et al., 2022;Methratta et al., 2023;Congressional Research Service, 2024). With an ambitious goal of reaching 30 gigawatts of OSW energy capacity by 2030, more than 50 projects have been proposed across US Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf of America waters, and over 30 leases issued in the Atlantic OCS alone (Croll et al., 2022;Methratta et al., 2023;Congressional Given the complexity of the potential impacts of OSW, a more nuanced, systematic approach to risk assessments is crucial to help integrate the spatiotemporal variations across species and habitats. One approach for compound evaluations is the "Occurrence, Exposure, Response, Consequence" (OERC) framework, originally adapted by the U.S. Navy for their Integrated Comprehensive Monitoring Program for marine species. This framework provides a systematic progression, starting with the foundational understanding of species occurrence and then moving to the more complex aspects of exposure, response, and consequence, ultimately leading to an assessment of potential risk (Bell, 2013). Each element of the OERC framework, described in detail in figure 1, can be evaluated quantitatively, as retrospective assessments, models, or simulations. By organizing information in a ladder structure, the OERC framework accommodates data from diverse sources and can integrate cumulative impacts. The focus of our study on species occurrence serves as the critical first step in the OERC framework, providing essential baseline knowledge of temporal and spatial habitat use patterns and lays the groundwork for subsequent assessments.Here, we employ widely used Spatial Distribution Models (SDMs) for 84 marine life taxa to evaluate their occurrence within Wind Energy Lease Areas (WELAs) and five subregions along the U.S. Atlantic coast to identify spatiotemporal overlaps of marine life and offshore wind activities. This analysis aims to better understand the species, time periods, and areas that may be most vulnerable to potential OSW impacts, helping inform prioritization of mitigation and monitoring efforts. For each of the 29 active Atlantic WELAs, we calculated the average monthly predicted densities for 13 marine mammal taxa (12 species and one guild), 49 seabird species and four sea turtle species. We also calculated average annual density for 18 additional marine mammal taxa (14 species and four guilds) for which only year-round average predictions were available. To provide a more focused and representative subset for this assessment and enable clearer interpretation of risk across multiple taxa, we concentrated more closely on eleven focal species, chosen to capture a range of spatiotemporal patterns, behaviors, conservation statuses and ecologies. The focal species include four marine mammal, three avian, and four sea turtle species.The marine mammal focal species are fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), humpback whales (Megaptera novaengliae), minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), and North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis). North Atlantic right whales, listed as "Critically Endangered" on the IUCN Red List (Cook, 2020), have been a primary focus of monitoring and mitigation in the region. While minke and humpback whales (Northwest Atlantic population) are currently listed as "Least Concern" (Cook, 2018a(Cook, , 2018c)), both species, as well as North Atlantic right whales, are currently experiencing an unusual mortality event in the region, as defined by the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA 16 U.S.C. § 1421h(9)), highlighting the importance of continued study (Silber et al., 2023;Stepanuk et al., 2023;Congressional Research Service, 2024). Fin whales are listed as "Vulnerable" and have limited migratory movement making them more sensitive to displacement risk (Cook, 2018b;Davis et al., 2020).The avian species selected -Red-throated Loons (Gavia stellata), Northern Gannets (Morus bassanus), and Great Black-backed Gulls (Larus marinus) -were chosen due to their high sensitivity to collision and displacement, and habitat use patterns (Willmott, Forcey and Kent, 2013;Heinänen et al., 2020;Peschko et al., 2021;Fauchald et al., 2024). While all three bird species are listed as "Least Concern" on the IUCN Red List (BirdLife International, 2018a, 2018c, 2018b), Red-throated Loons and Northern Gannets are both designated as "Priority" under the Bird Conservation Region 30 (BCR30) from the North American Bird Conservation Initiative and as "High Concern" by the Atlantic Marine Bird Conservation Cooperative (AMBCC) (Steinkamp, 2008;Marine Bird Species Priority List -July 2014, 2014;Curtice et al., 2019). Additionally, Great Black-backed Gulls are year-long residents in the northeast making them more vulnerable to potential habitat degradation (Welcker and Nehls, 2016;Goodale, Milman and Griffin, 2019).Although sea turtles are not often the focus of OSW studies, they may be particularly vulnerable due to their strong fidelity to migratory routes and critical habitats, as well as their attraction to artificial light and structures, which could increase overlap with WELAs (Secor, O'Brien and Bailey, 2025). All four of the modeled sea turtle species -green (Chelonia mydas), Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) -were considered focal species for this analysis and are all listed on the IUCN Red List. Greens, who are considered "Endangered", and Kemp's ridleys, who are listed as "Critically Endangered", are especially tied to specific nesting sites, raising concerns about displacement risk (Wibbels and Bevan, 2019;Seminoff, 2023;Secor, O'Brien and Bailey, 2025), while leatherbacks and loggerheads, both classified as "Vulnerable", may be sensitive to the noise frequencies produced by OSW activities (Wallace, Tiwari and Girondot, 2013;Bailey, Brookes and Thompson, 2014;Casale and Tucker, 2017).To provide further context for this analysis, we use subregional divisions -Gulf of Maine (GOM), Southern New England (SNE), New York/New Jersey Bight (NYNJB), Central U.S. Atlantic (CA), and Southeastern U.S. Atlantic (SEA) -established by the Regional Wildlife Science Collaborative (figure 2). To account for regional variations in species distribution and to create a standardized context for comparability across the region, we calculated the 90 th percentile of monthly density, hereafter referred to as "thresholds", for each species across these divisions. This approach highlights locations and time periods of particularly high species occurrence, identifying potential areas of elevated risk and facilitating the prioritization of monitoring and mitigation.As OSW development expands across the U.S. OCS, understanding the cumulative and interconnected nature of its ecological effects -across regions, seasons, and life stages -will be critical. However, major knowledge gaps persist in predicting the long-term, population-level outcomes of these overlapping effects, particularly due to the complexity of ecological connectivity and impacts of concurrent stressors (Methratta et al., 2023;Silber et al., 2023). By establishing a robust baseline of species occurrence, this work provides a critical foundation for integrating wildlife distribution patterns into broader, multi-faceted risk frameworks. These insights are essential not only for informing near-term mitigation and monitoring efforts, but also for supporting more proactive spatial planning that aligns OSW expansion with long-term conservation and sustainability goals.Materials and methodsThe species distribution products used in this study are Density Surface Models (DSMs) that cover 84 marine taxa,

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.