[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
1992-1993 Biennial Report to Congress on the Administration of the Coastal Zone Management Act VolumeIl April 1994 HT 392 U558 v2 FY 1992/93 1994 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere Washington, D.C. 20230 March 1, 1994 The President President of the Senate Speaker of the House of Representatives Sirs: I am pleased to submit the Biennial Report of the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Ocean service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, pursuant to Section 316 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1451, et seq.) for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993. The report discusses the progress made during these years in administering the coastal zone management and estuarine research reserve programs and the challenges encountered. Sincerely, D. James Baker LIBRARY NOAA/CCEH 1990 HOBSON AVE. THE ADMINISTRATOR (CHAS- SC 29408-2623 The Biennial Report to Congress is a status report on implementa- tion of the national Coastal Zone Management Program (CZM) and Na- tional Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA). Covered in the report are the major accomplishments in program administration, particularly in imple- menting the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, and problems encountered for the two preceding years. The CZMA requires that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration submit this report to Congress no later than April 1. Reporting requirements are set forth in Section 316 of the CZMA. The first of the report's two volumes is a national overview of programs under the CZMA and highlights efforts in implementing the programs for the preceding fiscal years. It will give a brief history of the Coastal Zone Management Program and National Estuarine Research CA Reserve System and NOAA:s vision for the future of both programs. Volume I also identifies NOANs interest through the CZMA in other environmental programs legislated and authorized by Congress, several of which are now facing re- authorization. Volume 11 provides a more detailed discussion of the program areas highlighted in the National Overview, including case examples, especially in areas implemented under the 1990 Amendments. Volume 11 also contains a section covering the status and accomplishments of each state coaslal management program and estuarine research reserve site. The section is organized by state, and contains summaries for state coastal management programs and reserve sites located within that state. Volume 11 also con- tains appendices summarizing the status of coastal management programs and estuarine reserves, allocation of funds, and regulations issued during the biennium. Afmos@&,@@ 0_ k), noRR 0 .0 @)97-MENT OF ('o TABLE OF CONTENTS Biennial Report, Volume II An Introduction to CZMA Programs ................................................................................................................I Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments Carrying Out the New Agenda ..........................................................................................................................2 Program Development - Section 305 ..............................................................................................................3 State-by-State Summaries Program Administration - Section 306 ...........................................................................................................6 Federal Consistency - Section 307 .................................................................................................................7 Coastal Zone Management Fund - Section 308 .............................................................................................. 19 Coastal Zone Enhancement Program - Section 309 ....................................................................................... 20 Technical Assistance - Section 310 ................................................................................................................. 23 Review of Performance - Section 312 ............................................................................. .............................. 26 Awards Recognizing Excellence in Coastal Zone Management - Section 313 ............................................. 28 National Estuarine Research Reserve System - Section 315 ......................................................................... 30 Research and Monitoring Programs ................................................................................................... 30 Education and Outreach Efforts .......................................................................................................... 31 Proposed National Estuarine Research Reserves ................................................................................ 32 NERRS Review Panel Report ............................................................................................................. 35 Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program - Section 6217 ....................................................................... 36 Education and Outreach .................................................................................................................................... 38 Coastal Hazards ................................................................................................................................................. 41 State-by-State Coastal Management Programs and National Estuarine Research Reserves Alabama Coastal Area Management Program ................................................................................................... 44 Weeks Bay NERR ............................................................................................................................... 46 Alaska Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 50 American Samoa Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 54 California Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 58 Elkhorn Slough NERR ....................................................................................................................... 62 Tijuana River NERR ........................................................................................................................... 65 Connecticut Coastal Management Program... ......................................................................................................... 68 Delaware Coastal Management Program ..................................................................................... ...................... 72 Delaware NERR ................................................................................................................................. 74 Florida Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 78 Apalachicola NERR ............................................................................................................................ 81 Rookery Bay NERR ........................................................................................................................... 83 Georgia Sapelo Island NERR ........................................................................................................................... 86 Guam Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 92 Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................................................................. 96 Waimanu Valley NERR ...................................................................................................................... 98 Louisiana Coastal Resources Program ................................................................................................................ 102 Maine Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 106 Wells NERR ........................................................................................................................................ 110 Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................................................................. 116 Chesapeake Bay - Maryland NERR ................................................................................................... 118 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................................................................. 122 Waquoit Bay NERR ............................................................................................................................ 126 Michigan Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................................................................. 130 Mississippi Coastal Program .................................................................................................................................. 136 New Hampshire Coastal Program .................................................................................................................................. 140 Great Bay NERR ................................................................................................................................ 142 New Jersey Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 146 New York Coastal Management Program ........................................................................................................... 150 Hudson River NERR .......................................................................................................................... 153 North Carolina Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 158 North Carolina NERR ......................................................................................................................... 160 Northern Mariana Islands Coastal Resources Management Program .......................................................................................... 164 Ohio Old Woman Creek NERR ................................................................................................................... 168 Oregon Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 172 South Slough NERR ........................................................................................................................... 1,74 Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................................................................. 180 Puerto Rico Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 184 Jobos Bay NERR ................................................................................................................................ 186 Rhode Island Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 187 Narragansett Bay NERR ..................................................................................................................... 192 South Carolina Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 196 ACE Basin NERR ............................................................................................................................... 198 North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR .......................................................................................................... 201 Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................................................................. 206 Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program .......................................................................................... 210 Chesapeake Bay- Virginia NERR ....................................................................................................... 212 Washington Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................................................................. 216 Padilla Bay NERR ........................................................................................ ..................................... 219 Wisconsin Coastal Management Program ............................................................................................................ 222 IV. Appendix ........................................................................................................................................................... 226 A. Status of State Coastal Management Programs B. Status of National Estuarine Research Reserve Programs C. Maps of the State Coastal Management Programs and National Estuarine Research Reserves D. Itemization of Allocation of CZMA Funds - FY 1992 and 1993 E. Coastal States Section 309 Priority Needs F. Projects of Special Merit Under Section 309 - FY 1992 and 1993 G. National Estuarine Research Reserve System Program Regulations H. Program Contacts 1. Credits An Introduction to CZMA Progrorns he Coastal Zone Manage- CZM programs. Together, these - priority consideration for coastal ment Act (CZMA) of 1972 estab- programs protect 94 percent of the dependent uses and energy facil- lished a national program to plan Nation's 95,000 miles of coastline, ity siting; for and wisely manage develop- bordering three oceans and the ment of the nation's coastal land Great Lakes. Of the seven eligible - public shorefront access; and water resources. Recognizing states and territories without pro- the national interest in wise man- grams, five - Georgia, Minne- - assistance in redevelopment of agement of the nation's coastal sota, Ohio, Texas, and Indiana - urban waterfronts and ports; resources, the CZMA created a are either developing or consider- voluntary federal- state-local part- ing developing CZM programs. coordination and simplification nership dedicated to comprehen- of administrative procedures to sive management of these finite ensure expedited governmental and fragile resources. Adminis- decisionmaking for management tered by the National Oceanic and of coastal resources; Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the CZMA operates consultation and coordination principally through implementa- with federal agencies; tion of federally approved state coastal zone management (CZM) public participation in coastal programs that seek to balance the decisionmaking; protection and sustainable use of resources in the U.S. coastal zone. comprehensive planning, con- servation and management of liv- In implementing the s; and ing marine resource CZMA, NOAA administers funds, and provides policy guidance and study and develop plans for ad- technical assistance to states to dressing the adverse effects upon help them establish and maintain the coastal zone of land subsidence coastal management programs. and sea level rise. NOAA provides continuous over- Although the CZMA pro- sight of the federally approved vides flexibility to states in devel- The 29 state and territory CZM programs to ensure that oping their programs, the Act's programs taking part in the na- states and territories comply with guidelines require that all state tional Coastal Zone Management CZMA goals and objectives. At programs will further the national (CZM) Program depict the the national level, NOAA works policy of effective management, nation's great diversity. Beyond to ensure coordination and integra- beneficial use, protection and de- obvious differences in size, region tion of the CZM programs with velopment of the coastal zone. In and extent of coastal development, other federal agency programs that developing programs, states must each state and territory faces dif- have compatible goals. address national objectives: ferent political and social climates. As a result, states develop CZM Since 1974, with the ap- * protection of natural resources; programs that address their indi- proval of the first state CZM pro- vidual needs, while considering T gram in Washington, 24 coastal a management of coastal devel- the broader national interest. For states and five island territories opment to protect life and prop- example, some states, such as have developed federally approved erty from coastal hazards; California, South Carolina and Louisiana, passed comprehensive An Introduction to CZMA Programs legislation as a framework for State CZM programs have coastal management. Other states, also made significant contribu- ME including Florida, New York and tions to improving coastal water Virginia, networked existing, quality and tackling shoreline ero- -purpose laws into a com- sion problems. In addition, states single prehensive umbrella for coastal have made great strides in promot- management. These programs ing water dependent uses of the continue to evolve as priorities coast, such as ports and marinas, change and as better information commercial fisheries and recre- and technical capabilities become ation, and in enhancing public ac- available. cess to the shoreline. 309 of CZARA. The new program Since 1974, the federal Despite these strides, the gives states and territories the op- government has invested over job of coastal management is far portunity to compete for additional $700 million in coastal zone man- from complete. In 1990, Congress Federal funds to strengthen their agement. On average, the 29 CZM strengthened and modernized the coastal management programs in programs share approximately $35 law to address new and emerging several areas, including wetlands million annually in federal funds. issues, specifically the problem of protection, cumulative and sec- These federal funds, which are nonpoint source pollution. The ondary impacts of coastal growth, matched in part by state dollars, Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization increased opportunities for public are used by states to implement Amendments (CZARA) of 1990 access and natural hazards man- their CZM programs. The funds created a new Coastal Nonpoint agement. are allocated to states by a formula Source Pollution Control Program which takes into account shoreline under section 6217 which requires The 1990 Amendments mileage and coastal population. states to develop programs con- also gave NOAA new authority to trolling the sources of nonpoint impose interim sanctions on states Despite continuing chal- pollution and significantly impact and territories that fail to adhere lenges, increased responsibilities coastal waters. In a coordinated to federally approved programs. and shrinking budgets, the 29 effort, NOAA and EPA take joint During the biennium, NOAA de- CZM programs have made sub- responsibility for administering veloped a process for invoking in- stantial progress in responding to the coastal nonpoint source pollu- terim sanctions. CZARA also threats to coastal resources. Sig- tion program. At the state level, strengthened the Federal consis- nificant progress has been made by CZM agencies and water quality tency provisions under section 307 states in restoring lost wetlands agencies work together to develop and clarified through a new re- and mitigating damaged wetlands. and implement the programs. quirement that the public should Coastal states have played a posi- be able to participate in consis- tive role in reducing the risk to life Responding to growing tency determinations of both fed- and property from coastal storms. concerns about the declining eral and state activities. States work to deter development health of the nation's coastal re- in highly vulnerable areas of the sources, including increased popu- Highlights of NOANs ef- shoreline through adoption of such lation growth along the nation's forts to implement these new pro- measures as setback requirements. coasts and intense competition for visions over the past two years are Currently, 13 states have some use of coastal resources, Congress described in the following pages. form of setback requirement for created a new Coastal Zone En- These descriptions are organized coastal development. hancement Program under section on a section-by- section basis. 2 TOWARD PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT - Implementing Section 305 n 1990, Congress restored laws and regulations before award- Under the Coastal Zone funding opportunities under sec- ing funds. During fiscal years Act Reauthorization Amendments tion 305 of the Coastal Zone Man- 1992 and 1993, annual program of 1990, Congress limited each agement Act for non-participating development awards under section state's eligibility for program de- states to develop coastal manage- 305 ranged from $70,000 to velopment grants to two years. ment programs for federal ap- $200,000. States receiving pro- This could become an issue for proval. Section 305 authorizes gram development funds must some states in the later stages of grants and specified requirements match federal dollars with state program development if two years to assist and guide states in the funding at a four to one ratio. does not prove sufficient time to development of coastal zone man- create an approvable program. agement programs. The states are currently Another issue is the requirement working with NOAA. to develop to develop an approvable state Between 1974 and 1986, approvable programs over the next Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Con- 29 of 36 eligible states and terri- two years. Ohio, Texas, and Geor- trol Program under section 6217 tories developed coastal zone gia, now in their second year of of the CZMA at the same time as management programs that program development, are closest the state is developing its core OCRM approved. Six states - to completing the process. CZM program. It is very difficult Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Minne- NOAAA recently published a no- to develop both programs simul- sota, Ohio and Texas - and the tice of intent to issue a draft envi- taneously given the tight schedule Pacific Trust Territory of Palau ronmental impact statement on the for completing each. Furthermore, currently do not have federally Ohio program document- a ma- states developing CZM programs approved coastal management jor step toward public review and do not have access to program de- programs. Each of the states, ex- program approval. Most recently, velopment funding under section cept Palau, participated in the pro- Minnesota and Indiana began to 6217, even though states are sub- gram development process in the develop coastal management pro- ject to the same requirements as 1970's, but withdrew of the pro- grams in the fall of 1993. approved state programs. cess for various reasons. Factors generally included the lack of state authorities to meet federal ap- Section 305 Program Development Funding proval and local opposition. FY 92 $300,000 Beginning in 1993, NOAA IFY 93 determined that five states which .0 $250,000 had expressed renewed interest in 0 $200,000 developing CZM programs Z $150,008 Texas, Georgia, Minnesota, Ohio, 0 and Indiana - were eligible to 0 $100,000 apply for the newly reinstated sec- tion 305 program development $50,000 funds. NOAA reviewed formal $0 requests from the governors of Gn IN MN ON TH these states to develop coastal State zone management (CZM) pro- grams under the Coastal Zone Combined 2-year grant Management Act and reviewed each states' coastal management 3 I TOWARD PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Implementing Section 305 State-by-state CZM program Georgia's program will efforts was sparked in 1991 when development activities rely on a combination of direct the Department of Natural Re- CRD permitting authority and sources, the lead agency for pro- Georgia CRD's authority to certify that gram development, funded a study other activities within the coastal entitled "Toward a Management Since 1979, when Georgia zone are undertaken in accordance Plan for Indiana's Shoreline of withdrew its original request for with the resource policies of the Lake Michigan." This eventually federal approval of a state coastal CZM program. The resource poli- prompted DNR to apply for fund- management program, the state cies, to be approved as DNR regu- ing in 1993. Having received its has pursued stricter environmen- lations, specify how activities first one-year grant for program tal legislation and amended sev- within the coastal zone must be development ($166,000) in Octo- eral key authorities. Georgia undertaken to minimize impacts ber, 1993, Indiana is in the earli- strengthened the Coastal Marsh- on coastal resources. est stage of developing a program. lands Protection Act and later passed the Shore Protection Act, Georgia's coastal zone The state has significant which together regulate activities management staff have completed authorities to address issues re- in Georgia's extensive coastal all of the first year program devel- lated to submerged lands, but may marshes, bottom lands, beaches, opment tasks, including an outline need to strengthen its authority and dunes. of the coastal zone management with regard to wetlands and shore- program document and the first line development, particularly to draft of the program's re- prevent darnage to shoreline struc- source policies and pro- tures from erosion. With some posed Coastal Management older, industrialized areas along Act. Georoda established an the shoreline and a new state-ap- advisory committee of pri- proved riverboat gambling indus- vate citizens and state and try, Indiana faces some interesting local officials working challenges regarding how to man- closely with staff to develop age its urban shorelines. the program's goals and ob- jectives. Georgia expects to Minnesota have developed an accept- able program by Fall 1996. Minnesota's effort in the Georgia applied for pro- 1970's to develop a coastal zone gram development funds under Indiana management program for its Lake section 305 to again pursue devel- Superior shoreline ceased due to opment of a CZM program. The Indiana began developing concerns by local governments state received $165,000 in federal a comprehensive coastal manage- and citizens that the federal gov- funding for fiscal year 1992 and ment program in the 1970's and ernment would gain undue influ- $170,000 in FY 1993. In January early 1980's but was unable to pass ence over local activities and de- 1992, Governor Zell Miller desig- legislation necessary to support a cision-making. This, in part, was nated the Department of Natural CZM program. After 20 years, the a direct reponse to the U.S. Resources (DNR) as Georgia's state has again expressed an inter- government's acquisition of the lead agency for program develop- est in developing a program un- Boundary Waters Canoe Area in ment, with CZM staff housed in der the CZMA. Interest in renew- northeastern Minnesota. DNR's Coastal Resources Divi- ing CZM program development sion (CRD). 4 TOWARD PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT - Implementing Section 305 Minnesota's current ef- Resources (DNR), lead agency for The state's renewed effort began forts to develop a coastal zone both program development and with the passage of Senate Bill management program is predi- implementation, to designate an 1053, comprehensive coastal leg- cated on strong local involvement. erosion hazard area along the Lake islation, which established a Early indications are that the state Erie shoreline. The DNR ex- Coastal Coordination Council, an will network many of existing au- pended tremoundous time and interagency board chaired by the thorities, relying heavily on city, money to determine and map, at General Land Office and charged county and township local pro- large scale, an appropriate erosion with adopting goals and policies grams. The North Shore Manage- hazard area. DNR is now complet- of the coastal management plan ment Board, a joint powers board ing draft regulations to implement and with reviewing actions that of local governments created in Ohio's hazards program. may adversely affect coastal natu- 1987, will play a key role in de- ral resource areas. Texas will rely veloping local area plans and strat- NOAA and Ohio plan to on a networked approach to imple- egies for environmental protec- issue a joint Program Document/ ment the Council's new policies tion. Draft Environmental Impact State- utilizing existing state authorities. Substantial efforts have been ex- Minnesota's Department pended over the past two years of Natural Resources, the lead in developing management poli- agency for program develop- cies and procedures to imple- ment, received a combined two- ment SB 1053. 4 year section 305 grant totalling $294,000 on Aug. 1, 1993. Two key issues remain for developing an approvable coastal Ohio management program in Texas. The state needs to fill the gap in Ohio continued to de- protection of privately owned velop a coastal zone management ment (P/DEIS) in 1994. Release wetlands, which are not now spe- program during the 1980's, even of the P/DEIS will coincide with cifically protected under Texas au- when federal funds were not avail- Ohio's issuance of draft hazard thorities. Texas also needs to able. When the CZARA restored maps and draft rules for the haz- clarify how it will coordinate pro- program development funds in ards program, so that all will be- gram implementation between 1990, Ohio applied for a section come available for public com- various independent and quasi-in- 305 grant to complete its program, ment at the same time. dependent state agencies, many of which is based on existing state which are not directly under the laws and state coastal management Texas Governor's control. legislation passed in 1988, which includes a new coastal hazards Texas tried several times in Texas, in the second year management provision. the 1970's and 1980's to develop of program development, com- a CZM program, without success. pleted a working draft of its pro- Now in its second year of The General Land Office, the lead gram document. The state is program development, implemen- agency, completed several draft scheduled to release a draft docu- tation of the state's hazard pro- program documents, but the docu- ment for public hearing in Spring gram remains the largest issue fac- ments failed to meet federal re- 1994 with final approval of a Texas ing Ohio. The hazard program re- quirements for program approval CZM progarn slated for late 1994. quires the Department of Natural or were not submitted by the state. 5 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION Implementing Chonges to Section 306 he Coastal Zone Act Re- quirements for public participation mit the procedure to NOAA as a authorization Amendments of under section 306(d)(14). For ex- program change. NOAA devel- 1990 added two new requirements ample, states are already required oped policy guidance outlining to section 306 of the CZMA. The to provide for public participation what will constitute acceptable first provision, under 306(d)(14), in state permitting processes and public participation procedures. requires that coastal management state review of consistency certi- programs provide for public par- fications for federally licensed and Section 306(d)(15) ticipation in permitting processes permitted activities. Therefore, the and consistency determinations new requirement applies to state Section 306(d)(15) re- for federal activities reviewable review of federal agency consis- quires that each state coastal man- under section 307 of the CZMA. tency determinations for direct agement program provide a The second provision, under federal activities under section mechanism to ensure that all state 306(d)(15), requires that coastal 307(c)(1) of the CZMA. agencies adhere to the program. management programs contain a Under NOAA regulations, state mechanism to ensure that state During the biennium, CZM programs are already re- agencies adhere to the program. NOAA determined that the Mai or- quired to have mechanisms in During the biennium, OCRM de- ity of coastal management pro- place to ensure that state agencies veloped policy guidance for state grams do not provide for public comply with the goals and policies coastal management programs to participation in consistency deter- of their approved programs. implement these new provisions. minations under section 307(c)(1). As a result, NOAA instructed all In implementing section Section 306(d)(14) states and territories to develop a 306(d)(15), NOAA documented procedure for incorporating pub- existing state authorities and Existing NOAA regula- lic participation into its consis- mechanisms to determine whether tions largely address the new re- tency review procedures and sub- the mechanisms remain viable and are working. This information, which was sent to the states for La. review and comment, will help <11@4 NOAA gain an overall under- standing of the status and effec- tiveness of existing mechanisms, what mechanisms are appropriate under the various program struc- what problems or con- tures, and 4- MR 0 8@ I, -.. ..... . y be addressed through cerns ma policy guidance. NOAA will con- tinue to assess each state's com- pliance with section 306(d)(15) during the routine evaluation pro- ler cess under section 312 of the CZMA, which requires a continu- ing review of state programs. 6 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State , Coastal Programs hen Congress of the consistency provision, the aware of, or minimize or dispute passed the CZMA, it recognized Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization their consistency responsibilities. that the federal government was a Amendments of 1990 (CZARA). In addition, while some states are major contributor to environmen- proficient in their use of consis- tal problems in the coastal zone, Specifically, CZARA tency, other states are either disin- but could also be part of the solu- overturned the Supreme Court's terested or unwilling to apply con- tion. Section 307 of the CZMA decision in Secretary of the Inte- sistency in a more active and con- requires that federal activities (in- rior v. California, 464 U.S. 312 sistent manner. cluding private activities requiring (1984), making outer continental federal permits and licenses and shelf oil and gas lease sales sub- Over the past two years, federal financial assistance to j ect to the requirements of CZMA OCRM has placed greater empha- states and local governments) be section 307(c)(1). The new Ian- sis on outreach to states and fed- consistent with a state's federally guage also clarifies that all federal eral agencies to promote the ben- approved coastal management activities, whether within or out- efits of federal consistency and to program. The intent of the fed- side the coastal zone, are subject assist states and federal agencies eral consistency provision is to to the federal consistency require- in fulfilling their consistency re- foster a state/federal partnership in ments of the CZMA if an activity sponsibilities. This outreach in- the wise management of coastal can be reasonably expected to af- cludes a full-time Federal Consis- land and water uses and natural fect any land or water use or natu- tency Coordinator to work with the resources by early consultation, ral resource of a state's coastal states and federal agencies on the coordination, and negotiation be- zone. The language codifies use of consistency in general and tween states, fed- on specific conflicts eral agencies, and that arise; Federal applicants for fed- Consistency Bulletins eral approvals and which document sig- funding, and adher- nificant state consis- ence to state CZM S,! tency issues, NOAA M, program enforce- coordination with fed- able policies. eral agencies, NOAA `7 policy guidance and While the projects, and Secre- federal consistency tarial appeal decisions; provision has been development of a Fed- No vY, sh ipyw nd in Philadelph ia effective in ensur- eral Consistency ing compliance Manual (in produc- with the state coastal management NOAA's existing regulations, tion); and possible future work- programs and resolving conflicts which require that the geographic shops for states and federal agen- between federal agencies and scope of federal consistency be cies. states, its full potential has not based on the effect of a federal been realized because of contro- activity on coastal uses and re- The following sections (1) versy in its application and at- sources, not on the location of the highlight both the success of fed- W tempts to either circumvent or activity. While these changes have eral consistency and areas of con- minimally meet the consistency improved the effectiveness of the flict and (2) summarize decisions requirements. Thus, Congress federal consistency provision, fed- issued by the Secretary of Com- passed, in part to clarify the scope eral agencies still are often un- merce on appeals of state objec- 7 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs tions to federal permit or license sel, on April 12, 1993, requested sylvania had disagreed with the activities and OCS plans. that Justice review its opinion. On Corps' consistency determination June 29, 1993, Justice informed for the NWP regulations, after the MAJORISSUES Secretary Brown that its position Corps treated proposed State DURING THE BIENNIUM had not changed. The Secretary, on NWP conditions as a denial of July 30, 1993, informed all parties State water quality and CZMA Lake Gaston: Reviewing that, based on Justice's review, the consistency certification. Pennsyl- Activities in Another State Secretary declines to reconsider vania, on March 20, 1992, then Secretary Franklin's decision. In brought suit against the Corps' The City of Virginia August 1993, North Carolina sued promulgation of the final NWP Beach, Virginia, is seeking to with- the Secretary of Commerce on regulations. However, Pennsylva- draw up to 60 million gallons of several counts associated with nia and the Corps settled the issue water per day from Lake Gaston, Secretary Franklin's and Secretary by agreeing that the State has six which straddles the North Caro- Brown's decisions. In December months to review an applicant's lina - Virginia border. Lake Gaston 1993, Justice advised NOAA that CZMA consistency certification, was created by a dam operated by Justice reconsidered its earlier ad- as provided for in NOANs federal the Virginia Electric Power Com- vice and withdrew its foriner opin- consistency regulations. Further, pany (VEPCO). In September ion on interstate consistency. The the State may establish conditions 1991, North Carolina formally Secretary of Commerce fully ac- for Pennsylvania's concurrence objected to the proposed water with an applicant's consistency withdrawal which requires amend- certification. The Corps will in- ment of VEPCO's Federal Energy In the Lake Gaston case clude such conditions in any ap- Regulatory Commission license. plicable permit authorization. If VEPCO requested the Secretary of North Carolina challenged the Corps does not include the Commerce to override North an activity in Virginia under conditions, the Corps will consider Carolina's objection. On Decem- section 307 of the CZMA. the State's conditioned concur- ber 3, 1992, former Secretary rence as an objection and will not Franklin terminated the appeal, cepted NOAXs recommendation authorize the activity unless the based on advice from the Depart- that, in the absence of a Justice permittee chooses to comply vol- ment of Justice (Justice) that one pinion, the Department of Com- untarily with all conditions in the state may not object to a federally o conditioned concurrence or the permitted activity which occurs merce should revert to the origi- State withdraws the conditions entirely within another state. On nal NOAA interpretation of sec- considered to have been objected February 3, 1993, the State of tion 307 of the CZMA. to by the Corps. North Carolina requested that Sec- Pennsylvania, the Corps, & New York and GSA/ U.S. retary Brown reconsider former Nationwide Permits Marshals Service Land Disposal Secretary Franklin's decision. On February 10, 1993, Virginia Beach requested that Secretary Brown let The Pennsylvania Depart- When the General Ser- the previous decision stand. ment of Environmental Resources vices Administration (GSA) and (DER) and the U.S. Army Corps the U.S. Marshals Service set out Because the Justice opin- of Engineers (Corps) agreed to a to dispose of a parcel of land that ion on interstate consistency has settlement in Pennsylvania's legal was seized by the U.S. Marshals challenges to the Corps' Clean Service, the State of New York re- such important implications for Water Act section 404 nationwide quested to review the land sale for the reach of the CZMA, Depart- permit (NWP) regulations. Penn- consistency with the New York ment of Commerce General Coun- FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs Coastal Management Program. CZMA federal consistency provi- responsible for the plutonium GSA asserted that GSA: s "broker" sion. shipment, Japan is responsible for activities for the disposal of the establishing and executing the land is exempted from CZMA Hawaii, American Samoa, and transportation plan, and that the consistency requirements by fed- Guam and Japanese Plutonium shipment and plan are not being eral drug statutes, that acting as a Shipments undertaken by or on behalf of the "broker" is not a federal activity United States. Therefore, OCRM under 15 C.F.R. � 930.31(a), and Beginning in November concurred with DOS that DOS in- that a consistency determination is 1992, Japan began shipping plu- volvement was not a direct federal unnecessary when selling federal tonium to Japan from Europe activity under CZMA section surplus real property where the through the Pacific Ocean (the plu- 307(c)(1). OCRM also found that sale is "environmentally neutral." tonium is fuel from U.S. reactors DOS's approval of the transporta- that has been processed in France tion plan was a federally licensed NOAA maintained that for further use). Japan will use the or permitted activity. However, consistency is applicable to such because of the governmental char- land transfers. After negotiations When the GSA and the acter of Japan's actions in this failed, the State sued to enjoin U.S. Marshals Service set out case, Japan was not an entity "ex- GSA from finalizing the sale on to dispose of seized land, isting under the laws of any state," the grounds that GSA failed to NOAA maintained that and was therefore not an applicant comply with federal consistency. consistency was applicable. for such approval pursuant to 15 On April 5, 1993 the United States C.F.R. � 930.52. OCRM also ad- District Court, Northern District plutonium in an experimental vised DOS to work with the state for New York, denied preliminary "breeder" reactor, a new type of and territories to resolve the injunctive relief, finding in part nuclear power plant that produces coastal programs' substantive con- that the State's injury would not additional plutonium while gener- cerns. be irreparable because the State's ating power. Hawaii, American policies may still be enforced Samoa, and Guam requested that Hawaii also requested that against the private landowner the U.S. Department of State the Nuclear Regulatory Commis- through the State's police power (DOS) provide them with a con- sion (NRC) and the U.S. Coast and eminent domain. While the sistency determination for DOS Guard submit consistency deter- Court confirmed that GSA activi- activities related to the transpor- minations for possible actions re- ties are subject to consistency, the tation plan and the shipment. The lated to the plutonium shipment. Court found that the State did not state and territories maintained The NRC replied that there were show how GSXs failure to ob- that U.S. involvement was a fed_ no proposed NRC activities or serve procedural dictates of the eral activity under the CZMA sec- approvals related to Japan's plu- CZMA damaged coastal environs tion 307(c)(1). The state and terri- tonium shipment. Hawaii was also since there was no change in the tories were concerned that ad- concerned with possible Coast present use of the land. The prop- equate safeguards were not in Guard emergency actions. OCRM erty was conveyed by GSA and the place to protect the coastal and informed the Coast Guard that the Marshals Service to the new prop- ocean environment. CZMA and NOAA regulations do erty owner. The State has decided not specifically address emer- not to further pursue the litigation, DOS requested OCRM re- gency actions, but that consistency but has requested that Secretary view of DOS's response to the did apply, and that any Coast Brown and Attorney General Reno state's and territories' request for Guard actions should be consistent require that federal agencies ad- a consistency determination. to the maximum extent practi- here to the letter and intent of the OCRM confirmed that Japan is cable. OCRM made several sug- 9 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs .. .. . . ..... ration of the EIS and concurred that the list of criteria for site des- ignation was appropriate. The site has been used for disposal of low level radioactive wastes (discon- tinued in late 1972), and disposal of contaminated dredged materi- als. However, recent permits have not allowed projects to dispose of contaminated sediments at the MBDS (e.g., the Third Harbor Tunnel sediments which have been disposed at upland sites). The MCZMP negotiated a gestions to address the State's con- project, the CCC voted to concur written agreement with EPA re- cerns, but the Coast Guard did not with the applicant's certification quiring that only clean materials address the suggestions. that the project was consistent with would be deposited at the MBDS. the California Coastal Manage- EPA consented to prepare a record California and the Transporta- ment Program. of decision (ROD) that states that tion Corridor Agencies the designation allows only marine Massachusetts, EPA and Ocean dredged materials deemed clean The Transportation Corri- Dump Site Designation by toxicological testing. The dor Agencies (TCA), a consortium MCZMP has also stressed that this of local governments, proposed to The Marine Protection, federal consistency approval is build several new public toll roads Research and Sanctuaries Act only for the site selection and in Orange County, California. One (MPRSA) section 102, requires stipulates the deposition of only of the proposed toll roads, the San that EPA formally designate fed- clean material. Any and all uses Joaquin Hills project, is located erally operated marine disposal of the site will also be subject to both within and outside of sites. EPA recently designated the individual federal consistency re- California's coastal zone. Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site view, which should assure that (MBDS), after EPA included pro- only clean material is being depos- The major issues raised by visions that Massachusetts as- ited there. this project were the applicability serted were necessary in order to of federal consistency to projects be consistent with the Massachu- However, the Corps dis- outside of the coastal zone and the setts Coastal Zone Management trict questioned EPNs approval. application of the geographic Program (MCZMP). The MBDS, The Corps asserted the ROD was scope requirements found at 15 formerly known as the Foul Area not noticed properly and appar- C.F.R. � 950.53. Both the Corps Disposal Site, has been used for ently EPA will re-notice the ROD. and TCA requested OCRM's disposal of dredged materials for The Corps is also questioning opinion on the federal consistency several decades and received an EPKs authority to agree, at the site requirements for the project. interim designation until the designation stage, to state-re- OCRM reiterated its position that completion and acceptance of the quested and EPA approved provi- the applicability of federal consis- Environmental Impact Statement sions regarding use of the site. The tency is based on effects, not lo- (EIS). The MCZMP worked Corps maintains that use of a site cation. Following its review of the closely with EPA during the prepa- can only be authorized by the 10 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs Corps under MPRSA section 103 2,100 feet offshore in 30 feet of dents if failure occurs in any as- and that the Corps strongly objects water (low tide). All construction pect of plant operation such that to the section 103 type conditions activities will occur on the New shellfish harvesting or swimmers agreed to by the State and EPA Hampshire side of the line, with would be temporarily at risk. EPA under the section 102 process. The the pipe discharging approxi- has committed to the MCZMP that Corps does agree that a state has mately 1,000 feet north of the bor- if monitoring indicated that the the right, under consistency pro- der. Prevailing currents flow closure zone needs to be extended visions, to raise those type of is- southeast towards the Massachu- into Massachusetts waters, they sues when a disposal is proposed setts town of Salisbury and the will reopen the permit and require under section 103. OCRM ex- popular Salisbury Beach recre- relocation Of the outfall. pressed concern with the Corps' ation area. view since the 1990 amendments Massachusetts and GSA Land to the CZMA allow a state to re- The Town of Seabrook and Acquisition view future reasonably foreseeable the Corps objected to a Massachu- cumulative effects of activities at setts review. With OCRM's and Another Massachusetts an initial stage of an activity. This EPA's backing, the MCZMP consistency review involved con- issue is ongoing and will undoubt- moved forward with the review currence with a project on feder- edly involve further discussions and the Corps agreed to delay is- ally owned land. The U.S. General among the State, EPA, Corps, and suing its authorizations until after Services Administration (GSA) OCRM. a decision was made on issuance acquired a 4.56-acre portion of the of an EPA discharge. prized Fan Pier site on Boston's Massachusetts, New waterfront, for the purpose of de- .41 M Hampshire and Interstate veloping a new Federal Court- Consistency house. Clearing the way for this federal action was a decision by Another Massachusetts the MCZMP, on November 23, consistency review involved a 1992, to concur with a determi- project wholly within another nation by GSA that both the pro- state, but potentially affecting posed acquisition and develop- Massachusetts' coastal resources ment of the land were consistent and uses. In September 1992, the with the enforceable policies of MCZMP concurred with a federal the MCZMP. Such consolidation consistency certification for the With significant coopera- of consistency determinations proposed Seabrook, New Hamp- tion from EPA, two matters were made sense in this case because it shire wastewater treatment facil- resolved that made it possible for involved the preparation of an EIS ity, ending a two year effort to se- the MCZMP to issue a finding of for the project site plan and build- cure the right to review a project consistency for the project: 1) con- ing design and then evaluated the in an adjacent state. (This issue sensus was reached on a closure extent of conformance with rel- was settled prior to the Lake line around the outfall incorporat- evant state and local standards for Gaston decision regarding inter- ing only shellfish beds in New waterfront development, espe- state consistency). Hampshire waters: and 2) the cially those embodied in the tide- Town of Seabrook was required to lands licensing regulations under The facility's discharge put into place an expanded regime the state's Public Waterfront Act. pipe will run through the town's Of outfall monitoring and an elabo- heavily developed barrier beach rate notification system for alert- In terms of promoting fed- and discharge approximately ing Salisbury officials and resi- eral accountability to state coastal FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs management plans, this "one- CZMA make it clear that no fed- and expanded in 1984). After sev- stop" approach is clearly desirable eral activity is exempt from the eral discussions and the exchange in that it allows all potential effects consistency requirements. OCRM of correspondence among the of the project to be identified be- and EPA have not yet resolved this State, Coast Guard, and OCRM, fore the federal government in- issue. OCRM informed the Coast Guard vests substantial funds. It also al- and the State that the establish- lowed GSA to adhere to a rela- EPA Region III did sub- ment of such security zones is not tively tight schedule by avoiding mit, to the DCMP, a consistency exempt from consistency, but that a potential legal clash and avoided the consistency regulations do not unnecessary delay and duplication EPA Region III questioned provide for after-the-fact consis- of effort. whether CZMAfederal tency determinations. OCRM rec- consistency is applicable to ommended that the State and the Delaware, EPA, and Superfund "on-site" activities for Coast Guard attempt to come to Superfund sites. an agreement regarding the current The Delaware Coastal OCRM and EPA have not yet dispute outside of consistency Management Program (DCMP) resolved this issue. mechanisms, and that the Coast reviewed clean-up activities, un- Guard provide consistency deter- der the Comprehensive Environ- determination for on- site activities minations for future security zones mental Response, Compensation, at the DuPont-Newport site. They or changes to security zones. and Liability Act of 1980 based their submission on their (CERCLA), at the DuPont-New- determination that the CZMA was The Coast Guard's re- port Superfund site in Delaware. a relevant and appropriate require- sponse to Connecticut's inquiry EPA Region III questioned ment for this particular site. The into establishing and modifying whether CZMA federal consis- DCMP responded with several this zone implied that the estab- tency is applicable to 66on-site" concerns and requested that EPA lishment of such security zones activities for Superfund sites. EPA revise their consistency determi- may be exempted, at the Coast guidance defines "on-site" as the nation to address these concerns Guard's discretion, from the con- areal extent of contamination and and additional DCMP policies. sistency requirements. OCRM in- suitable areas in very close prox- DCMP is also requesting the stan- formed the Coast Guard that such imity to contamination. EPA as- dard federal consistency review an interpretation is incorrect given serts that on-site activities need period. the plain language of the CZMA only meet the substantive require- that all federal activities are sub- ments of other federal law before Connecticut, the Coast Guard, ject to consistency if they affect a final EPA decision is issued. This and Security Zones any land or water use or natural means that for on-site activities resource of a state coastal zone. EPA will make a determination of In the Spring of 1992, consistency, but will not submit while investigating recent enforce- the determination under federal ment actions against Connecticut OCRM recommended that the consistency review procedures and fishermen by security personnel of State and the Coast Guard timeframes. OCRM disagreed General Dynamics Electric Boat attempt to come to an with this position finding no lan- Division, the State discovered that agreement regarding the guage in CERCLA that would su- the Coast Guard never submitted current dispute outside of persede any CZMA requirements, a consistency determination for consistency mechanisms. substantive or administrative. Fur- Security Zone B, New London ther, the 1990 changes to the Harbor (established in July 1973 12 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs New Jersey and Ocean Disposal rence for the dumping activity at Merchant Marine and Fisheries of Dredged Material Containing the Mud Dump was presumed. Committee chastising New Jersey Dioxin Both states were under pressure and New York for not using the from the environmental commu- federal consistency provision as a On May 26, 1993, after nity and NOAA to address dump- means to review the dumping. three years of negotiations be- ing of dioxin-contaminated dredge tween federal agencies, commer- materials through federal consis- The State plans to block cial port and shipping interests and tency reviews on dredging and ocean dumping of such sediments environmental groups, the Army dumping activities off the coast of after Dec. 31, 1995, if the federal Corps of Engineers (Corps) ap- New Jersey. government does not adopt scien- proved a controversial permit for tific-based standards for disposing the Port Authority of New York Addressing dioxin-tainted of dredge material contaminated and New Jersey to dredge 450,000 sediment dumping has proven dif- with dioxin. In addition, subse- cubic yards of dioxin-tainted sedi- ficult for states in part due to the quent to the Port Authority dredg- ment near a former Agent Orange lack of federally approved stan- ing permit, the NJCMP has suc- factory, and dump them six miles dards for ocean disposal of dioxin cessfully negotiated a Navy dredg- off Sandy Hook, New Jersey, in contaminated sediment. For the ing project using federal consis- what is called the "Mud Dump." purposes of this project, the Corps tency as a tool to require additional The portion of the Passaic River, and EPA reached an agreement on testing for dioxin levels. in New Jersey, where the dredg- proposed interim guidelines for a ing will occur has been listed as a dioxin management approach for Maine, the Corps, and Mitigation Superfund site on the National the sediments to be disposed of at Priorities List. The Mud Dump is the Mud Dump. The State of Maine has located near an important com- several Corps projects requiring mercial and recreational fishing In an effort to make fed- mitigation under Maine's CMR area, which also hosts three endan- eral and state agencies address The Corps District, instead of gered species each of whales and environmental concerns regarding complying with the State CMP sea turtles. The permit is the first ocean disposal of dioxin contan-ii- policies, has informed the State of an anticipated 40 Corps permits nated dredge materials, a coalition that such mitigation requirements for dredging in the New York/New are a local or State responsibility, Jersey harbor. While not all of the Both states were underpressure and that if the State requires the future dredge spoils wi I contain from the environmental com- Corps to provide the mitigation, as high a level of dioxin contami- munity and NOAA to address then the Corps cannot undertake nation, issuance of this permit and dumping of dioxin-contami- the project. The Maine CMP, the the states' response set an impor- nated dredge materials through Governor, and the State's Con- tant precedent. federal consistency reviews.... gressional delegation have all dis- cussed the issue with the Corps. In January 1993, New Jer- However, at this time, the State sey issued a Waterfront Develop- of environmental groups, includ- and local governments must pay ment Permit and Section 401 Wa- ing the Coast Alliance, Clean mitigation costs. ter Quality Certification for the Ocean Action, the Natural Re- maintenance dredging project, and sources Defense Council, the En- NOAA discussed the issue found the dredging project to be vironmental Defense Fund, and with Corps Headquarters in Wash- consistent with New Jersey's others sent a letter to Rep. Gerry ington, and the Corps indicated Coastal Management Program Studds, Chairman of the House that its policy is to mitigate all (NJCMP). The State's concur- 13 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs that its policy is to mitigate all publishing the ROD, or the State SECRETARIAL damages to the extent justified and would treat the draft consistency APPEAL DECISIONS allowed under its regulations and detenrnination as final. In addition, appropriations law. However, if a the Corps intended to release the Under CZMA � 307(c)(3), state wishes to impose mitigation ROD before the State's 45-day re- a state's consistency objection pre- requirements that go beyond view period (on the draft determi- cludes a federal agency from is- Corps requirements, or Congress nation) was completed. As a result suing a permit for an activity at has not otherwise authorized the of the State's letters and coordi- issue unless, upon appeal by the Corps to fund the mitigation, then nation between NOAA and Corps applicant, the Secretary of Com- the Corps cannot undertake the headquarters, the Corps District merce finds that the activity is ei- project. If there are important in- office delayed issuance of the ther consistent with the objectives terstate or national defense issues, ROD, but still expects to issue the of the CZMA (Ground I) or nec- the Corps may do the project re- ROD before the State completes essary in the interest of national gardless of state concerns or ob- its consistency review. However, security (Ground H). If the require- jections. the State may go along with this ments of either Ground I or so long as the Corps assures the Ground II are met, the Secretary California and the Closure of State that it will provided addi- must override the state's objection. Fort Ord tional consistency determinations In 1992 and 1993, the Secretary for later phases of the closing of issued the following consistency The Corps is in the process Fort Ord. appeal decisions. of closing Fort Ord and reviewing alternatives for re-use of the site. Secretary's Decision in a Request Florida - Appeal of Chevron, Fort Ord is a large military base to Reconsider an OCS Decision (Chevron Destin Dome adjacent to Monterey Bay. The Decision), January 8,1993 Corps issued a draft environmen- On January 8, 1993, tal impact statement (DEIS), former Secretary Franklin issued Chevron U.S.A., Inc. and which contained a draft consis- a decision in the consistency ap- others acquired an interest in tency determination. The Corps peal of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. Destin Dome Block 97 in 1985 as District also informed the State (Chevron) from an objection by a result of a successful bid in Outer that the record of decision (ROD) the State of Florida. On February Continental Shelf (OCS) Lease would be issued prior to submit- 26, 1993, the Assistant General Sale 94. Chevron is the operator ting a final consistency determi- Counsel, Office of the Governor of the lease, which is located about nation stating that the ROD was of the State of Florida, requested 29 miles from Perdido Key, not the final agency action. Cali- that Secretary Brown reconsider Florida. In November of 1990, fornia notified the Corps prior and former Secretary Franklin's deci- Chevron submitted a Plan of Ex- subsequent to the issuance of the sion. Secretary Brown's response, ploration (POE). for Block 97 to DEIS of the need to make a final dated March 23, 1993, declined to the Minerals Management Service consistency determination before reconsider former Secretary of the Department of the Interior. Franklin's decision. Secretary Chevron proposes to drill an ex- Secretary Brown declined to Brown stated that the Chevron ploratory well to assess natural gas reconsider a decision by the appeal was decided on the merits reserves, using water-based drill- previous administration, and based on a completely devel- ing fluids. The State of Florida in the State of Florida vs. oped record, which was weighed objected to Chevron's POE to con- Chevron U.S.A.,, Inc. in light of the applicable law and duct drilling activities on Destin regulations. Dome Block 97, citing in its ob- 14 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federol Activities with Stote Coostol Progroms jection, among other things, the tially affected coastal habitats and nental Shelf (OCS) Lease Sale 79. state's coastal management plan resources. Florida also stated that The lease blocks are located about (CMP) policies protecting and pre- Mobil failed to provide sufficient 170 miles south west of Tampa serving potentially affected coastal information and analyses to dem- Bay, 135 miles southwest of Fort resources. On appeal, the Secre- onstrate that all of its proposed Myers, and about 44 miles north- tary of Commerce found that the activities, associated facilities and west of the Dry Tortugas, Florida. Appellant's proposed project sat- effects are consistent with the pro- In February of 1988, Union sub- isfied all four elements of 15 visions of the state's coastal man- mitted a Plan of Exploration C.F.R. � 930.121 and was there- agement plan. On appeal, the Sec- (POE) for Blocks 629 and 630 to fore consistent with the objectives retary of Commerce found that the Minerals Management Service or purposes of the CZMA. Al- Mobil failed to satisfy Ground I of the Department of the Interior. though inconsistent with the in that the proposed POE's adverse Union proposes to drill up to three state's CMP, Chevron's proposed effects on the coastal zone out- exploratory wells to assess the exploration may be permitted by hydrocarbon potential of the two federal agencies. Secretary of Commerce lease blocks. The State of Florida . declined to override objected to Union's POE to con- Florida - Appeal of Mobil, the Florida objection to a duct drilling activities on Pulley (Mobil Pulley Ridge Decision), Ridge Blocks 629 and 630, citing January 7,1993 proposal by Mobil Exploration in its objection, among other & Producing U.S. Inc. to drill things, the state's coastal manage- Mobil Exploration & Pro- four exploratory wells ment plan (CMP) policies protect- ducing U.S. Inc. is the operator of off the coast of Key West. ing and preserving potentially af- Pulley Ridge Block 799, acquired fected coastal habitats and re- in Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) weigh its national interest benefits. sources. On appeal, the Secretary Lease Sale 79, and located about The Secretary also found that there of Commerce found that Union 59 miles northwest of the Dry will be no significant impairment failed to satisfy Ground I in that Tortugas islands, 75 miles from the to a national defense or other na- the proposed POE's adverse ef- nearest Florida mainland (near tional security interest if Mobil's fects on the coastal zone outweigh Cape Romano), and 120 miles project is not allowed to go for- its national interest benefits. The west-northwest of Key West, ward as proposed. Because Secretary also found that there will Florida. In May of 1988, Mobil Mobil's proposed project did not be no significant impairment to a submitted a Plan of Exploration meet the requirements of either national defense or other national (POE) for Block 799 to the Min- Ground I or Ground 11, the Secre- security interest if Union's project erals Management Service of the tary declined to override the state's is not allowed to go forward as Department of the Interior. Mobil objection. proposed. Because Union's pro- proposes to drill four exploratory posed project did not meet the re- wells to assess the hydrocarbon Florida - Appeal of Unocal, quirements of either Ground I or potential of the lease block. The (Unocal Pulley Ridge Decision), Ground 11, the Secretary declined State of Florida objected to January 7,1993 to override the state's objection. Mobil's POE to conduct drilling activities on Pulley Ridge Block Union Exploration part- The Secretary also declined to 799, citing in its objection, among ners, LTD., with Texaco Inc., ac- override an objection other things, the state's coastal quired an interest in Pulley Ridge by South Carolina management plan (CMP) policies Blocks 629 and 630 as a result of to a citizen's proposal to fill protecting and preserving poten- a successful bid in Outer Conti- and permanently alter a local wetland. 15 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY- Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs South Carolina - Appeal of including a floating pier with 18 South Carolina objected to a Henry Crosby, (Crosby Decision), slips, extending into the Hudson farmer's proposed project December 29, 1992 River in Rensselaer, New York. to fill part of his wetland The New York State Department property and impound another In February of 1989, Mr. of State objected to the Appellant's portion to create a livestock Henry Crosby (Appellant) applied proposed project on the ground watering and irrigation pond. to the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- that it is inconsistent with, among The state maintained that the neers for a permit to place fill other things, the state's CMP poli- project was inconsistent material in a wetland for the pur- cies of facilitating the siting of with South Carolina's pose of constructing an impound- water dependent uses and facili- coastal management plan. ment and installing a water con- ties on or adjacent to coastal wa- Appellant's proposed project on trol structure. The South Carolina ters, and CMP policies on activi- the ground that it is inconsistent Coastal Council objected to the ties in historic areas. In its objec- with the state's coastal manage- Appellant's proposed project on tion letter, the state identified an ment plan (CMP) policies provid- the ground that it is inconsistent alternative of constructing a small ing for the protection of wildlife with the state's coastal manage- dock with eight slips. On appeal, and fisheries resources from sig- ment plan (CMP) policies provid- the Secretary of Commerce found nificant negative impacts and for ing for the protection of wildlife that the Appellant's proposed the protection of freshwater wet- and fisheries resources from sig- project failed to satisfy 15 C.F.R. lands from significant permanent nificant negative impacts and for � 930.121(d) in that the state had alteration. In its objection letter, the protection of freshwater wet- identified a reasonable, available the state identified an alternative lands from significant permanent alternative that would be consis- of constructing a pond on the alteration. On appeal, the Secre- tent with the state's CMR Because Appellant's upland property. On tary of Commerce found that the the Appellant failed to satisfy appeal, the Secretary of Com- Appellant's proposed project Ground I and did not plead Ground merce found that the Appellant's failed to satisfy 15 C.F.R. 11, the Secretary declined to over- proposed project failed to satisfy �930.121 (b). The proposed project ride the state's objection. 15 C.F.R. � 930.121(d) in that the would permanently alter wetlands, state had identified a reasonable, thus causing loss of normal func- South Carolina -Appeal of available alternative that would be tions and values, while contribut- A. Elwood Chestnut, (Chestnut consistent with the state's CMP. ing minimally to the national in- Decision), November 4,1992 Because the Appellant failed to terest. Because the Appellant satisfy Ground I and did not plead failed to satisfy Ground I and did Mr. A. Elwood Chestnut Ground 11, the Secretary declined not plead Ground 11, the Secretary (Appellant) owns farmland and to override the state's objection. declined to override the state's adjacent freshwater wetlands near objection. the town of Longs, Horry County, New York - Appeal of South Carolina. The Appellant Claire Pappas, (Pappas New York - Appeal of Robert E. applied to the U.S. Army Corps of Decision), October 26, 1992 Harris, (Harris Decision), De- Engineers for a permit to fill 0.7 cember 2, 1992 acres of his wetland property and In June of 1989, Claire to impound another eight acres of Pappas (Appellant) applied to the In January of 1990, Rob- his wetland property in order to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for ert Harris (Appellant) applied to create a livestock watering and ir- a permit to construct a wood deck the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers rigation pond. The South Carolina structure for dining over a canal for a permit to construct a dock, Coastal Council objected to the as an addition to her seafood res- 16 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs taurant in Hemstead, New York. North Carolina. Historically, the on the Appellant's property in The New York State Department lot has been subject to erosion and Hanihan, South Carolina. The con- of State objected to the Appellant's flooding. In March of 1989, the struction of the dam would result proposed project on the ground Appellant applied to the U.S. in the flooding of an additional 2.5 that it is inconsistent with the Army Corps of Engineers for a acres of freshwater wetlands. The .state's CMP policies of facilitat- permit to dredge submerged fill South Carolina Coastal Council ing the siting of water dependent adjacent to the property and fill a objected to the Appellant's pro- uses and facilities on or adjacent section of the property bordering posed project on the ground that to coastal waters. In its objection the lake. The North Carolina De- it is inconsistent with the state's letter, the state identified alterna- partment of Natural Resources and CMP policies of discouraging tives of relocating the proposed Community Development ob- projects which require the filling deck to an upland area, making jected to the Appellant's proposed or significant permanent alteration more efficient use of existing res- project on the ground that it is in- of productive freshwater marsh. In taurant floor space, or adding consistent with the state's CMP its objection letter, the state iden- space onto the existing restaurant policies of protecting areas clas- tified an alternative of construct- structure. On appeal, the Secretary sified as conservation areas and ing a lake on the Appellant's up- of Commerce found that the discouraging projects which re- land property. On appeal, the Sec- Appellant's proposed project quire the filling or significant per- retary of Commerce found that the failed to satisfy 15 C.F.R. � manent alteration of productive Appellant's proposed project 930.121(d) in that the state had freshwater marsh. On appeal, the failed to satisfy 15 C.F.R. � identified a reasonable, available Secretary of Commerce found that 930.121(d) in that the state had alternative that would be consis- the Appellant's proposed project identified a reasonable, available tent with the state's CMP. Because failed to satisfy 15 C.F.R. alternative that would be consis- the Appellant failed to satisfy �930.12 1 (b). The proposed project tent with the state's CMP. Because Ground I and did not plead Ground would eliminate emergent wet- the Appellant failed to satisfy 11, the Secretary declined to over- lands and associated wildlife habi- Ground I and did not plead Ground ride the state's objection. tat, while contributing minimally 11, the Secretary declined to over- to the national interest. Because ride the state's objection. North Carolina -Appeal ofRoger the Appellant failed to satisfy W. Fuller, (Fuller Decision), Ground I and did not plead Ground South Carolina -Appeal ofDavis October 2Y 1992 11, the Secretary declined to over- Heniford, (Heniford Decision), ride the state's objection. May 21, 1992 Roger W. Fuller (Appel- lant) owns an unimproved lot bor- South Carolina - Appeal of Davis Heniford (Appel- dering one of the Boiling Spring Yeamans Hall Club, (Yeamans lant) applied to the U.S. Army Lakes, in Brunswick County, Hall Decision), August], 1992 Corps of Engineers for a permit to place about 7,000 cubic yards of The Secretary also declined to In May of 1990, Yeamans fill into 2.5 acres of freshwater override an objection by North Hall Club (Appellant) applied to wetlands to construct a Food Lion Carolina to a property owner's the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers grocery store, strip mall and adja- proposal to dredge submerged for a permit to place 5,200 cubic cent parking lot, located in the fill and to fill another wetland yards of fill into 0.23 acres of town of Loris, Horry County, because the proposedproject freshwater wetlands to create a South Carolina. The South Caro- would have eliminated emergent dam across a small stream for the lina Coastal Council objected to wetlands and wildlife habitat. purpose of creating a six-acre pond the Appellant's proposed project 17 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY - Aligning Federal Activities with State Coastal Programs on the ground that it is inconsis- that it is in inconsistent with the construct a 41-foot pier to facili- tent with the state's CMP policies PRPB's CMP policies of discour- tate convenient water access to his of discouraging such projects aging lateral expansion along the property located on Culebra Is- when there are other feasible al- coast, discouraging utilization of land, Puerto Rico. The Common- ternatives. In its objection letter, lands with important natural re- wealth of Puerto Rico objected to the state identified an alternative sources for urban uses, and pro- the Appellant's consistency certi- of using the available uplands on hibiting land development and fication for the proposed project the Appellant's property. On ap- construction in areas affected by on the ground that it is inconsis- peal, the Secretary of Commerce floods and wave surge. On appeal, tent with Puerto Rico's coastal found that the Appellant's pro- the Secretary of Commerce found management program policies posed project failed to satisfy 15 that the Appellant's project failed providing for the protection of sea C.F.R. � 930.121(b) and (d). The to satisfy 15 C.F.R. � 930.121(a) turtle habitat. proposed project would eliminate in that the project does not further wetlands and associated wildlife one or more of the competing na- On appeal, the Secretary of habitat, while contributing mini- tional objectives or purposes con- Commerce found that the mally to the national interest. Fur- Appellant's proposed project thermore, the state had identified failed to satisfy 15 C.F.R. a reasonable, available alternative Puerto Rico used CZMA �930.12 1 (b). The proposed projec 't that would be consistent with the Federal Consistency to prevent will adversely affect the natural state's CMP. Because the Appel- a group of local land owners resources of the coastal zone by lant failed to satisfy Ground I and from acquiring "after the fact" leading to more boating activity in did not plead Ground 11, the Sec- permits for residences, landfills, the Tamarindo Bay area which retary declined to override the piers and bulkheads in areas could degrade sea turtle habitat state's objection. that held important natural and potentially harm endangered resource value. and threatened sea turtles feeding Puerto Rico - Appeal of the on seagrass in the vicinity. These Asociaci6n de Propietarios de adverse effects on the natural re- Los Indios, (Los Indios Decision), tained in CZMA �� 302 or 303. sources of the coastal zone are February 19,1992 The Secretary also found, that the substantial enough to outweigh project is not necessary in the in- any minimal contribution of the The Asociaci6n de terest of national security. Because project to the national interest. Propietarios de Los Indios (Appel- the Appellant failed to satisfy ei- Because the Appellant failed to lant), a committee of landowners ther Ground I or Ground 11, the satisfy Ground I and did not plead located in the Los Indios Sector, Secretary declined to override the Ground 11, the Secretary declined Las Mareas Ward, Salinas, Puerto PRPB's objection. to override Puerto Rico's objec- Rico, applied to the U.S. Army tion. Corps of Engineers for after-the- Puerto Rico - Appeal of fact permits to authorize already- Jorge L. Guerrero- Calderon completed or nearly -completed (Guerrero- Calderon Decision), residential structures, landfills, March 5,1993 Seven of the Secretary's piers and bulkheads, and to main- 12 appeal decisions tain a private road on their proper- In August of 1988, Mr. declined to override ties. The Puerto Rico Planning Jorge L. Guerrero-Calderon (Ap- objections by states, reinforcing Board (PRPB) objected to the pellant) applied to the U.S. Army coastal management policies Appellant's project on the ground Corps of Engineers for a permit to that protect wetland ecosystems. 18 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT FUND he Coastal Zone Act Re- authorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA), replaced the Coastal Energy Impact Fund with M, the Coastal Zone Management Fund, created by new section 308 R of the CZMA. The CZM Fund, consisting of loan repayments from the Coastal Energy Impact Program, provides funding for a number of specified purposes: ad- ministration of the coastal zone management program, regional and interstate projects, demonstra- tion projects for improving coastal e 1@1@ zone management, emergency I e"t grants for unforeseen or disaster- related circumstances, awards rec- Wisconsin coastal managers used CZMfunds obtained through an ognizing excellence in coastal enhancement grant to increase public access in Kenosha. zone management, program devel- opment grants authorized by sec- tion 305, and investigation and thorized NOAA to spend $7.8 mil- regional or interstate demonstra- application of the public trust doc- lion from the CZM fund. The en- tion projects through grants to trine through state coastal manage- tire appropriation funded state as- state CZM programs and estuarine ment programs. sistance grants under section 306. research reserves. Approximately 20 percent will be used to further During the biennium, the Looking to the future, the national objectives by providing CZM Fund, appropriated by Con- budget allocation for the CZM support for national, international, gress, funded the section 309 en- Fund in fiscal year 1994 rose dra- and regional meetings having di- hancement grant program at Con- matically from the previous two rect impact on programs created gress' direction, section 306 state years, allowing NOAA to fund under the CZARA; funding na- assistance grants, and section 305 projects benefitting state coastal tional program assessment studies program development grants. zone management programs and and ocean management studies; programs within the National Es- and developing a national plan for In fiscal year 1992, the tuarine Research Reserve System. education and outreach. The're- Fund primarily supported en- Of the total $7.8 million available maining 10 percent will fund sec- hancement grants to approved in fiscal year 1994, $3.5 million tion 305 program development state coastal management pro- will be used for program adminis- grants for states entering the grams under section 309. Of the tration expenses, with the remain- coastal zone management pro- $6.0 million appropriated by Con- der devoted to the other purposes. gram, as well as fund emergency gress, $5.6 million funded en- grants to state coastal management T hancement grants. The other $0.4 Though the figures are still agencies for response to hurri- million funded, in part, a state as- preliminary, NOAA proposes to canes, floods, and other natural sistance grant to American Samoa. devote approximately 70 percent disasters. In fiscal year 1993, Congress au- of the remaining $4.3 million for 19 COASTAL ZONE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM Encouraging Improvement ond Innovation ramatic population Eight Enhancement Areas The enhancement program growth along the U.S. coastlines Under Section 309 encourages states to achieve these brings new challenges to manag- objectives by strengthening their ing national coastal resources - to protect, restore, or en- coastal management programs challenges in protecting life and hance the existing with new laws, regulations, or property from natural hazards; in coastal wetlands base, other enforceable mechanisms to settling conflicts between such or create new coastal provide greater protection for competing needs as dredged ma- wetlands; coastal resources. terial disposal, commercial devel- opment, recreational uses, national to prevent or signifi- Identifying States'llWority Issues defense needs, and port develop- cantly reduce threats to ment; and in protecting coastal life and destruction of In 199 1, states put a great wetlands and habitats while ac- property by eliminating deal of effort into assessing the commodating needed economic development or redevel- status of their coastal resources growth. opment in high hazard and determining how to improve areas and managing de- the management of those re- Targeting velopment in other haz- sources. The states sought public National Coastal Priorities ard areas; input to help them identify the most pressing coastal issues fac- In 1990, to meet mounting e to increase opportunities ing their coasts and the best ways public concern for the well-being for public access to to tackle those issues. Many states of the nation's coastal resources, coastal areas; used surveys, coastal commission the Congress created a new pro- or citizen advisory group meet- gram under section 309 of the - to reduce marine debris ings, which are open to the pub- Coastal Zone Management Act in the coastal and ocean lic, as well as information docu- (CZMA) of 1972 to encourage environment; ments to aggressively solicit pub- states to address coastal issues of lic input in identifying states' national significance. The new - to assess the cumulative coastal enhancement priorities. Coastal Zone Enhancement Pro- and secondary impacts gram provides additional incen- of population growth Each state developed an tives for states to make program and urban development "assessment" based on the infor- changes in any of eight national around the coast; mation collected during the interest enhancement objectives. scoping process. The assessments - to identify and develop examined how the state is address- plans to manage coastal ing each of the enhancement ob- areas with special jectives, the significance of each needs; ssue for the state, and the oppor- tunities for the state to improve V to plan wise use of ocean performance in the enhancement N.ZK UP i resources; and areas. States used the assessment to prioritize the improvements i "D to help in placing energy needed in state coastal manage- facilities and govern- ment programs within the eight ment facilities along the enhancement areas. coast. 20 COASTAL ZONE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM - Encouroging Improvement ond Innovation Coastal state participation Developing a Multi- Year Strategy ranking. OCRM reviewed the in the effort was high; 27 of the strategies and assigned new eligible 29 coastal states and U.S. After setting priority man- weighting factors. All together, the island territories submitted assess- agement issues within the eight states' strategies showed a broad ments in January 1992. Most states enhancement areas, each state de- range of projects to achieve the en- concentrated on four of the en- veloped a multi-year strategy for hancement objectives - a true hancement objectives, but did not achieving the goals set out in the reflection of the unique character rank them. The most frequently assessment. In the strategy, each of each state and each state's identified areas were: protecting state identified program changes coastal program. coastal wetland resources; manag- that would bring the state closer ing cumulative and secondary im- to its goals in the priority areas Allocating pacts of coastal growth; increas- identified in the assessment. The Enhancement Resources ing opportunities for public access states then worked to bring about to the shore; and reducing threats these changes. States used their Section 309(f) of the to life and property from natural strategies in developing enhance- CZMA requires that between 10 hazards. Of the 27 assessments ment grant proposals for fiscal percent and 20 percent of the submitted, OCRM approved 23 in year 1992 and will continue to use amount appropriated for sections fiscal year 1992. The four remain- them in subsequent years. 306 and 306(a) be set aside each ing states revised their assessments year to implement the new en- and received OCRM's approval in OCRM approved the 23 hancement grants program. Figure fiscal year 1993. By the end of fis- strategies submitted in fiscal year I depicts the distribution of cal year 1993, all eligible coastal 1992 and assigned each a weight- CZMA funding between sections states were participating in the sec- ing factor to determine each state's 306, 305, and 309. tion 309 enhancement grants pro- funding. OCRM approved the re- gram. A summary of individual maining four state strategies in fis- OCRM used two methods state priorities by enhancement cal year 1993. Five states also re- to allocate enhancement grant area can be found in the Appen- vised their strategies and submit- funds: a weighted formula ap- dix. ted the revisions to OCRM for re- proach based on an evaluation of each state's strategy, and an assess- ment of individual projects of spe- Enhancement Areas Selected* cial merit. The weighted formula funding gives states a predictable 3 0-- level of funding to undertake 2 5-- projects necessary to achieve the benchmarks listed in their strate- 2 0-- gies. Under the weighted formula 1 5-- approach, OCRM calculates 1 0-- weighted formula funding targets for each state by multiplying the 5 state's coastal zone management award under section 306 by a 0 OkZ be ot, weighting factor" derived fr Eft V, 6, P 410 OCRM's evaluation of the state's C1, strategy. The most funding can choose multiple areas 21 COASTAL ZONE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM Encouraging Improvement and Innovation awarded to a state using the Results of the Through the enhancement weighted formula in FY92 and Enhancement Program program, states reaped greater FY93 was $273,600, while dividends than the actual sum of $52,800 was the least amount. Fig- Coastal states and OCRM funding for the projects. The pro- ures for each state can be found in have put tremendous effort into gram enabled the states and table F of the Appendix. implementing the enhancement OCRM to identify priority coastal grants program. For the first time management areas, provided an Allocating money for since CZMA program approval incentive for states to evaluate projects of special merit gives regulations were issued in the late ways to improve their programs, states an opportunity to be inno- 1970's, OCRM provided national and allowed the states to develop vative and undertake projects that guidance on specific management and implement a multi-year strat- will demonstrate improvements in objectives for each of the eight egy to address the priority areas. achieving coastal zone enhance- enhancement areas. States re- The assessment process strength- ment objectives. Enhancement sponded with detailed assessments ened the public's role in coastal projects will also provide models of their priority needs for improve- zone management and enabled transferable to other states. States ment and produced multi-year states to set priorities which will compete annually for funding to strategies to achieve the needed guide their programs in future undertake projects of special improvements. Several states used years. OCRM firmly believes that merit; only the highest ranked the assessment process to exam- the enhancement program and the projects are approved. The follow- ine coastal management issues individual proposals funded in fis- ing table shows funding awarded beyond the eight enhancement ar- cal yeafs:1992 and 1993 provide for projects of special merit (PSM) eas. Many states even used CZMA the foundation for substantial im- in fiscal years 1992 and 1993, section 306 implementation funds provements in the way states man- listed by enhancement area. The to address issues identified in their age coastal resources in the eight majority of PSM funding sup- assessments and strategies for enhancement areas. ported program enhancements in which enhancement funds were cumulative and secondary impacts not available. and coastal hazards. FIGURE I Of the $5,603,800 Distribution of CZM Funding* awarded in fiscal year 1992 for section 309, $2,226,000 was awarded to 27 of the 119 compet- FY 1992 FY 1993 ing Projects of Special Merit. Of the $5,696,000 OCRM awarded in fiscal year 1993, $1,742,800 went 13% 14% to 17 of the 5 1 competing projects % 2% of special merit. The largest award V in FY92 and FY93 to any one state was $215,000 and $201,000, re- H spectively. For a summary of state ED Sec. juti funding under the weighted for- "4!4 mula and for projects of special E Sec. 305 merit in FY92 and FY93, (See El Sec. 309 86% 84% table F in the Appendix.) Distribution excludes Section 6217funding 22 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE - Supporting State Programs OAA recognizes the project that will benefit coastal ity of the environment in the growing need for technical assis- research in the areas of environ- Charleston Harbor estuary; tance and infon-nation transfer to mental impact assessment and sus- state and local governments to tainable development. In the area - to maintain the range of uses of support coastal management ef- of coastal hazard mitigation, waters and natural resources of the forts. NOANs efforts take many NOAA continues to assist states Charleston Harbor estuary system; shapes, ranging from conducting in developing and improving workshops and projects to produc- coastal hazard programs by col- - to develop a model for the sus- ing technical bulletins and quar- lecting and disseminating maps tainable development and man- terly information "exchanges." and other technical information to agement of estuarine resources; OCRM provides technical assis- the states, and through grants to and tance to states to enhance manage- states following coastal storms. A ment-oriented research necessary brief description of these projects - to develop management pro- to support CZM program develop- follows. grams to reduce/minimize ment and implementation. In spe- nonpoint source pollution within cial area management planning, Charleston Harbor Project the Charleston estuary drainage NOAA continued funding for the basin. Charleston Harbor project - a The purpose of the Charleston Harbor The Charleston Harbor Project is 4M Project is to develop a using a proactive approach to ad- Special Area Manage- dress potential problems before T3, @,t ment Plan (SAMP) adverse impacts occur. for the Charleston Harbor estuary area. NOAA began funding Under the direction of project planning in 1990 and the South Carolina implementation in 1991. In the Coastal Council, the first year, the Project developed an project's overriding organizational framework to coor- objective is to develop dinate the many participants and and implement determine the status of the area's growth management resources. "A Physical and Eco- guidelines that will logical Characterization of the promote sustainable Charleston Harbor" resulted from development around the initial efforts. In 1991, the :114111il-, the estuary, while pro- Charleston Harbor Project began tecting the estuary's selecting and prioritizing research rich natural and cul- projects -giving priority to those tural resources. Four that provided fundamental re- primary goals guide source management information this effort: and/or provided information vital for future resource management to develop and projects. implement a manage- N In North Carolina, hazard mitigation means ment plan to maintain In 1992, the project began addressing coastal erosion. and enhance the qual- characterizing important cultural 23 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE - Supporting State Programs and living resources within the development of communication NOAA seeks to achieve this goal study area. Building on experience with local governments. through state coastal management that water quality typically de- programs, and has placed increas- clines with increasing urban The information gathered ing emphasis on improvements in growth and that excessive nutri- through research projects con- this area through the Coastal Zone ents cause this decline in water ducted in the past two years, on- Enhancements Program. NOAA quality, the project identified nu- going projects, and new projects assists states with technical assis- trient enrichment as the primary beginning in the next year or two, tance in the area of coastal haz- water quality concern in the Har- will contribute to a management ards through various activities, in- bor. The project identified toxic plan for the greater Charleston cluding participation on mitigation contamination as an important, but Harbor area. As a model for the teams, information sharing, and in secondary water quality concern. sustainable development and man- limited cases, by using discretion- agement of estuarine resources, ary funding to conduct post-storm the Charleston Harbor project will research for use in coastal hazard Charleston Harbor Project provide useful information for planning efforts. Funding included $1,500,000 other state CZM programs. in federalfunds for 1992 and For example, in 1993, NOAA was $960,000 for 1993. Coastal Hazard Mitigation able to award funding to Hawaii to complete its storm assessment The CZMA declares a na- and mitigation efforts following Research studies in 1992 tional policy for minimizing the Hurricane Iniki. This project in- focused on nutrient loadings in the loss of life and property caused by cluded a review of the factors that Harbor from point and nonpoint inappropriate development in ar- caused overwash and affected the sources, nutrient dynamics in the eas prone to erosion and flooding. coral reefs and the 1 00-year flood surface water, nutrient loading rates from upland development patterns, and the efficiency with which current storm water best management practices (BMPs) manage nutrients. In addition, 14 studies were conducted. on the ef- @1' fect of contaminated sediments. In 1993, the Charleston Harbor project continued to select research proposals designed to understand the relationships be- tween land use changes, impacts to water quality, and impacts to living resources. The 1993 re- The CZMA encourages states to restrict development in hazardprone areas, such search projects have been chosen as eroding shorelines like this one, and to direct permitted construction behind to work toward at least one of the natural barriers, such as dunes. following objectives: characteriza- tion of the watershed, develop- ment of management tools, and 24 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE - Supporting State Programs zone in five populated locations on mation necessary for state and fed- NOAA's OCRM also pro- Kauai. eral agencies to respond to coastal vides technical assistance through hazards. NOAA is currently en- the Coastal Zone Information NOAA assists state efforts gaged in two pilot projects, in Center (CZIC). Established in in coastal hazards planning and Califomia and Massachusetts, to 1974, the center houses a unique mitigation by working with the assess ways that NOAA mapping collection of information about the Federal Emergency Management products can be used by states for nation's coasts and the various Agency (FEMA) on post-hazard management purposes. approaches to managing coastal mitigation teams, and exercising resources. The collection includes its responsibilities with other fed- During the biennium, over 4,000 state CZM work prod- eral agencies. Interagency Hazard OCRM produced' a technical bul- ucts and over 25,000 books, docu- Mitigation Teams identify and letin on the Coastal Zone En- ments, periodicals, maps and at- evaluate areas having significant hancements Program, highlighting lases on ocean and coastal related hazards; review existing land use the ongoing work of states in con- topics. NOAA staff, university re- regulations, building codes/con- struction standards, communica- tions and utility networks, and ex- isting hazard mitigation programs and authorities; recommend ac- tions to prevent flooding and dam- 11" Ztq @@k age from future storm events; and coordinate actions to implement the team's recommendations. CRM staff participated with FEMA on Interagency Hazard Mitigation Teams in Hawaii fol- -ricane Iniki in Septem- lowing Hur IRM 4ft 49mp,@ ber 1992 and in New York follow- ing the December 1991 storm. . ..... . Information Sharing As part of the agency's day-to-day operation, NOAA pro- fronting pressing coastal issues. In searchers, teachers, and the gen- vides states with technical infor- addition, OCRM produced several eral public use CZIC's collection mation that is valuable in creating editions of the Information Ex- and services. and strengthening coastal hazards change, a quarterly document programs. In the course of devel- spotlighting the latest in policy and Over the next several oping nautical charts and other science developments ftom years, NOAA expects to expand map products, NOAA creates NOAA and other federal agencies its technical assistance progams products that states can use to and featuring ongoing efforts of and services for state management identify and map shoreline change states to better manage coastal re- efforts. and coastal resources, such as sources. natural protective features, devel- opment patterns, and other infor- 25 PROGRAM EVALUATION - Strengthening Section 372 he program evaluation With a final rule issued public meeting(s) on evaluations; process - a fundamental manage- July 14, 1992, NOAA revised its written responses in the findings ment tool of the Coastal Zone regulations for conducting reviews document to all written comments Management Act -.is the primary of performance under section 312 received on the evaluation; and means by which NOAA assures of the CZMA to incorporate completion of the final evaluation the continued adherence of the 29 changes from the 1990 amend- findings within 120 days of the last federally approved state coastal ments. Those changes served to: evaluation public meeting in the zone management (CZM) pro- state. The regulations provide a grams and 22 designated National increase opportunities for flexible and phased approach for Estuarine Research Reserves public participation in re- invoking the new interim sanc- (NERRs) to CZMA programmatic views of state CZM pro- tions. Also, recognizing the flex- requirements. The Coastal Zone grams and estuarine re- ibility given to states under the Act Reauthorization Amendments serves; CZMA in meeting the goals of the of 1990 strengthened NOAA7s Act, NOAA:s regulations provide ability under the section 312 evalu- provide timelines for com- "indicators of non-adherence" for ation process to ensure that all pleting final evaluation find- both CZM programs and estuarine ings; and reserves, rather than rigid nation- wide performance standards. _7 Interim Sanctions The use of interim sanc- tions provisions gives NOAA a VP tool to require states or reserves to correct partial non-adherence problems, short of terminating state coastal management pro- grams or de-designating reserves. NOAA's flexible approach is based on mandatory recommenda- L tions (called Necessary Actions) during section 312 evaluations to correct adherence-related prob- 74 state CZM and NERR programs provide proce- are adhering to the national pro- dures and perffor- grams, particularly by authorizing mance indicators the use of interim sanctions. By for new interim placing a state or site on interim sanction provi- sanctions, NOAA may withhold sions. program funding until all neces- sary actions have been completed NOAA:s regula- to bring the program into adher- tions now require a 45- ence with the CZMA. day advance notice of 26 PROGRAM EVALUATION - Strengthening Section 312 lems, and, if warranted, a finding ere, t6urunt, is'a V@i@i i@dwtry, that a state or reserve is "not fully adhering" to its approved CZM 001 Z, program or reserve management plan. ni nt'12@Ti-@`; Tl@ Before making such a finding, NOAA regulations re- 5@ quire that the state be given ample j notice and opportunity to rebut the finding. In the case of a final find- ing that the program is not fully adhering," the regulations allow NOAA to either invoke interim dim .11 N@T 0 Interim Sanctions tem (see page 101 for additional in Practice: information on this request). W."ME Al In the three years since the In September, 1993, the W authorizing in- Coastal Ocean Policy Roundtable provision terim sanctions has been in (COPR), an informal group of ex- effect, NOAA has placed ternal experts on coastal zone one estuarine reserve, management, issued a report on Waimanu. Valley (HI), on the Section 312 evaluation pro- 1P, interim sanctions, and four cess. The report makes 10 recom- state CZM programs and mendations for improving the three estuarine reserves on evaluation process, streamlining work programs to correct CZMA reporting requirements, adherence problems. One developing on-the-ground perfor- state CZM program, mance measures, and using infor- Florida, has completed all mation from evaluations for edu- of the actions necessary to cational and technical assistance sanctions immediately or to pro- return to full adherence, and has purposes. NOAA proposes to vide a period of time to accom- substantially strengthened its pro- implement the COPR recommen- plish specific tasks that would cor- gram in this process. However the dations on a priority basis, reflect- rect the problems before NOAA State of Hawaii has recently re- ing available staff resources and decides whether to invoke interim quested that the Waimanu Valley the need- for further policy and le- sanctions. National Estuarine Research Re- gal review of some of the recom- serve be withdrawn from the sys- mendations. 27 AWARDS PROGRAM Recognizing Excellence in Coastal Zone Management n 1992, the Nation cel- ebrated 20 years of ocean and coastal resource management un- f der the National Coastal Zone Management Program, the Na- tional Estuarine Research Reserve System and the National Marine Sanctuary Program. These pro- grams allow NOAA to work closely with states, U.S. island ter- ritories, and local governments to confront pressing ocean and coastal issues. To celebrate the anniver- sary, NOAA sponsored an awards program, created under the 1990 NOAA also selected rine research reserves. In addition Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization award recipients in five other cat- to developing an education pro- Amendments, to honor people and egories. The South Carolina gram that reaches over 11,000 government agencies across the Coastal Council received an award people each year, Lytton rallied country who dedicated countless for "Excellence in Coastal Zone support for the reserve and imple- hours and energy striking a bal- Management." The Council is rec- mented numerous resource man- ance between protection and de- ognized as a national leader in pro- agement activities, such as replant- velopment along the Nation's gressive coastal zone management ing mangroves and rescuing in- 95,000 miles of coastline. programs. The award cited South jured manatees. Carolina's aggressive beachfront On Sept. 29,1992, NOAA management program that uses Billy Causey of the Florida hosted the "First Awards for Ex- science to justify building away Keys National Marine Sanctuary cellence in Coastal, Marine, and from the shoreline, an innovative received an award for "Excellence Estuarine Management" to cel- storm water protection program to in Marine Sanctuary Manage- ebrate the work of 17 leaders reduce pollution in coastal waters, ment" for his extraordinary energy across the country. The agency and a model freshwater wetland and ingenuity in reef damage as- also honored, posthumously, permit program that addresses the sessment, environmental monitor- House Merchant Marine and Fish- concerns of environmentalists and ing, research project identification eries Chairman Walter B. Jones. developers. and education at the Florida Keys A "Coastal Steward of the Year" sanctuary. award honored Sarah Chasis, a An award for "Excellence senior attorney at the Natural Re- in Estuarine Reserve Manage- NOAA also presented sources Defense Council and a co- ment" went to Gary Lytton of the awards to five local government founder of the Coast Alliance. Rookery Bay National Estuarine agencies for significant and inno- Chasis was honored for two de- Research Reserve in Naples, vative implementation of coastal cades of work fighting for coastal Florida. In just over two years, zone management principles. The resource protection, primarily as Lytton transformed a relatively Town of Brunswick, Maine, Plan- a leader of the national effort to inactive site into one of the ning Department was recognized solve the problem of nonpoint country's premier national estua- for its precedent- setting zoning source pollution of coastal waters. 28 code that incorporated sophisti- AWARDS PROGRAM - Recognizing Excellence in Coostol Zone Monogement cated water quality management identifying marine debris. Gradu- $3.3 million for the Wells National for the Waquoit Bay watershed. ate student David Jansen of the Estuarine Research Reserve in Jim Stadler, city clerk for University of Washington was also Maine, and Texaco Exploration Kewaunee, Wisconsin, was hon- honored for his. studies on public and Production Co., Inc., of New ored for his 12-year effort to revi- access and efforts to educate de- Orleans, Louisiana, for its coop- talize Kewaunee's deteriorating cision-makers on the public trust erative efforts in the creation of the waterfront and for publishing Re- doctrine, as well as Ilka Feller of Flower Garden Banks National vitalization of a Small City Water- Georgetown University in Wash- Marine Sanctuary in the Gulf of front: Focus on Finances. John ington, D.C., for developing a Mexico. Patton of Santa Barbara, Califor- teacher training program in coastal nia, was honored for his work on education geared specifically at Over 300 people attended the onshore impacts of offshore oil educating the citizens of Belize. the awards ceremony, which took development. Also honored for place at the Smithsonian their coastal programs were Specials awards were also Institution's National Museum of Sebastian Inlet Tax District of presented to Barbara Fegan of Natural History. The reception that Indialantic, Florida, - the state's South Wellfleet, Massachusetts, followed the program gave attend- first local government to develop the founder of the annual ees to the opportunity to exchange and implement a comprehesive, Coastweeks celebration, for her ideas and discuss the projects hon- long-range, coastal management volunteer work; the Laudholm ored during the ceremony. OCRM plan and comply with Florida's Trust in Wells, Maine, a philan- plans to begin work on the next beach management act - and the thropic organization, for raising awards program in the near future. City of Newburgh's Community Development Agency in New York Award Recipients for developing model land use Coastal Steward of the Year plans for the state on capital Sarah Chasis, Natural Resources Defense Council projects along the coast, protect- Excellence in Coastal Zone Management ing critical natural or cultural re- The South Carolina Coastal Council sources, and revitalizing deterio- Excellence in Estuarine Reserve Management rated waterfronts. Gary Lytton, Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Excellence in Marine Sanctuary Management NOAA also honored five Billy Causey, Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Excellence in Coastal and Marine Graduate Study graduate students for new or im- E. Laurence Libelo, College of William and Mary proved approaches in coastal zone Helen Talge, University of South Florida management study. The student Joan Boomsma, Florida Institute of Technology recipients were E. Laurence David Jansen, University of Washington Libelo of the College of William Ilka Feller, Georgetown University Excellence in Local Government and Mary in Virginia for his work Amy Naylor, Planning Department, Brunswick, Maine monitoring ground water pollution Jim Stalder, City Clerk, Kewaunee, Wisconsin around Chesapeake Bay; Helen Bob McKenna Community Development Agency, Newburgh, NY Talge of the University of South John Patton, Resource Management Department, Florida for her research on how Santa Barbara County, California Richard Giteles, Sebastian Inlet Tax District Commission, recreational divers affect fragile Indialantic, Florida coral reefs, and Joan Boomsma of Administrator's Awards for Coastal Leadership the Florida Institute of Technology Barbara Fegan, League of Women Voters for her work on sampling and Laudholm Trust Texaco Exploration and Production, Inc. 29 NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM Building Blocks for Coostol Monagernent he National Estuarine veloped by NOAA to reflect re- sity, qualified public or private in- Research Reserve System gional variations in the nation's stitution, individual, coastal state (NERRS) protects hundreds of coastal zone. A goal of the Sys- or U.S. territory to conduct re- thousands of acres of estuarine tem is to have at least one site rep- search within the reserves. Re- waters, marshes, shorelines, and resenting each of the 27 biogeo- search funds support manage- adjacent wetlands throughout the graphic regions and subregions. ment-related research that will country. Incredibly rich and di- There are now 23 approved sites enhance scientific understanding verse, estuaries are among the in the National Estuarine Research of estuarine environments within most productive natural places on Reserve System. the reserve system, provide infor- earth. Ecologists have found that mation needed by reserve manag- estuaries produce more food per Coastal states, with finan- ers and coastal zone management acre than the best midwestern cial assistance through federally program decision makers, and farmland. The estuaries also help funded matching grants, own, improve public awareness of es- maintain water quality, prevent implement and administer Na- tuaries and estuarine management erosion, provide flood control, tional Estuarine Research Reserve issues. serve as fish and wildlife habitat, sites. Each site develops and and provide recreational opportu- implements research and monitor- NOAA awarded 12 competi- nities. ing programs, education and out- tive research grants in fiscal year reach programs, and builds and (FY) 1992, focusing on several The NERRS program, different estuarine issues. established by Congress in 1972 NOAA along with the National through section 315 of the Science Foundation and the U.S. Coastal Zone Management Act, Evironmental Protection was designed to establish and Agency, also continued to sup- manage a national system of es- port a Land Margin Ecosystem tuarine research reserves through Research (LMER) project in federal-state cooperation. The Waquoit Bay to study nutrient objectives of the reserves are to: transport through the watershed. provide opportunities for long- term estuarine research and Beginnning in FY 1993, monitoring by serving as natural operates visitor centers, interpre- NOAA instituted a system of fo- field laboratories; provide oppor- tive facilities, and other facilities cused research objectives. NOAA tunities for estuarine education that are appropriate for bringing chose as the primary research ob- and interpretation; provide a ba- the public and researchers to the jective for a 10-year period the sis for more informed coastal man- site. study of natural and human-in- agement decisions; and promote duced change in the ecology of public appreciation of estuarine RESEARCHAND estuarine and estuarine-like eco- ecosystems and their relationships MONITORING PROGRAMS systems within the reserve system. to the environment as a whole. Within the overall objective, Research -facilitating NOAA identified five two-year Reserve sites are chosen the study of estuarine systems research priority categories to to reflect regional differences be- serve as foci for awarding grants tween ecosystems throughout the The NERRS provides re- under the competitive research T United States, using a biogeo- search funds on a competitive ba- program over this ten-year period. graphic classification scheme de- sis to any public or private univer- 30 NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM - Building Blocks for Coastal Management The first of the two-year re- agers and researchers will be able monitoring protocols for all sites. search priorities, nonpoint source to easily reference work that has By standardizing the monitoring pollution, began in FY 1993. been done in areas of interest. process, researchers and managers NOAA awarded ten competitive could draw from a long-terin da- research awards that focused on Monitoring - discovering tabase that tracked spatial and tem- nonpoint source pollution. In the long-term trends in the estuaries poral changes across the entire last year of the LMER project, NERRS system. NOAA also granted two awards to NOAA awards each reserve funds stimulate research in reserve sites to conduct a phased monitoring EDUCATIONAND that had not received competitive program, in three stages. These OUTREACHEFFORTS funding in the previous two years. are: These awards, given to Weeks Bay Striving toward leadership (AL) and Wells (ME) NERRs - ecological characterizations to in estuarine education were designed to initiate small build an accurate baseline of in- projects that would generate coop- formation on the sites' most im- The mission of the erative work between the Reserve portant resources; NERRS education program is to and a local University or research design and implement a compre- institution. - preparation of site profiles that hensive program of education and describe the resources, manage- interpretation to strengthen under- Work began in fiscal year ment issues, and long-term plans standing, appreciation, and stew- 1992, and continued in FY93, to for monitoring; and, ardship of estuaries and their as- synthesize all research funded by sociated coastal habitats. With a NOAA in the reserves. The final - the implementation of a moni- goal of developing a program of document, scheduled for comple- toring program that will provide excellence in estuarine education tion early in FY94, summarizes all long-term data on key resources, on a national and international research projects funded by regularly analyze and publish find- level, the NERRS is involved in a NOAA since the inception of the ings, and provide a mechanism to wide variety of activities which research program in t985. The evaluate program effectiveness in seek to provide information to document will be updated to in- addressing the long-term needs of coastal decision makers and the corporate new research. A com- estuarine resource management. public. prehensive listing of research funded by other agencies at In FY92, various sites One of the most ambitious NERRS sites will be added in the sponsored monitoring projects of these programs is the Kids Net- future. With this document, man- specific to their management prob- work, a cooperative effort with the lems and data needs, In fiscal year National Geographic Society, co- 1993, NOAA encouraged ordinated for the reserve system by all sites to begin work on the Great Bay NERR in New Hampshire. Using an education site profiles if they had not I dy done so. To date, award, the NERRS sponsors 75 site profiles are co mplete schools across the country to par- for Tijuana River and ticipate in the Kids Network. Great Bay NERRs. Through KidsNet, fourth-, fifth-, NOAA also continued to and sixth-graders sample estuarine water at any of the 16 participat- work with the reserves to develop standardized ing reserves, and ex change infor- `@,vikp ct,Wz e AWe 7 31 NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM Building Blocks for Coastal Management mation, observations and formu- tegic planning process late and test hypotheses using an and a continued commit- on-line system designed by Na- ment to excellence, the tional Geographic. The system al- reserves are being recog- lows students to question the es- nized as leaders in the tuarine environment and explore field of estuarine educa- the answers, through hands-on re- tion. search and peer interaction. X A p U .. . ..... . OPOSED � fi@ 'Ma, During this biennium, in- NATIONAL dividual reserves have achieved ESTUARINE RESEARCH significant accomplishments in guided interpretive tours, educa- RESERVES estuarine education. In Washing- tional classes and "hands on" ton, the Padilla Bay NERR earned training in estuarine ecology and Four sites are currently the excellence award from the conservation issues. Exhibits, in- working to become part of the National Association of Environ- ternships, lecture series, teacher National Estuarine Research Re- mental Communicators for its workshops, volunteer programs, serve System: San Francisco Bay high school education program. conferences, and printed materials (CA), Mullica River-Great Bay The North Carolina NERR re- at the sites are aimed at providing (NJ), St. Lawrence River (NY), leased Sound Ideas: Elementary timely and accurate information and East Coast Florida. Pro ect Estuary, a teachers guide about estuaries and other fragile that encourages teachers and stu- coastal resources. The road to designation dents to actively learn about estu- aries. In Southern California, In 1993, the NERRS edu- States may receive federal Tijuana River NERR promotes a cation coordinators initiated a stra- funds to work through the Na- bilingual curriculum on coastal tegic planning process to define tional Estuarine Research ecology with field trip materials, the long term education mission Reserve's designation process - a poster, and video. Education co- and objectives for the NERRS pro- a process that consists of site se- ordinators from Ohio's Old gram. Recognizing the value of lection, preparation of a draft en- Woman Creek NERR and New developing strategic education vironmental impact statement/ York's Hudson River NERR initi- plans that complement one an- draft management plan, and re- ated a cooperative education other, NERRS education coordi- search studies to characterize the project with the National Aeronau- nators and National Marine Sanc- site(s). To receive federal funds for tic and Space Administration and tuary education coordinators have site selection, a state must present Cornell University to incorporate been working together to NOAA with a description of the remote sensing techniques and strengthen both program plans. process that will be used to select skills into education programs. In The joint meetings also Provided the proposed site and how the site conjunction with this project, the an opportunity to meet for the first fits into the NERRS scheme of NERRS has provided the first in- time and share experiences and representing all coastal biogeo- service training for all education education program ideas. graphic regions throughout the coordinators in the system. nation; an identification of the The reserves continue to agencies that will select and man- The National Estuarine create and deliver current, high- age the sites; and a description of Research Reserves continue to at- quality, and innovative education how public participation will be tract hundreds of thousands of programs. Through a sound stra- incorporated into the site selection visitors each year to participate in process. 32 NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM - Building Blocks for Coastol Manogement During this process, a state Proposed Sites - First Phase river, which is used by bald eagles must demonstrate that the pro- Toward Development and osprey. St. Lawrence River posed site represents an estuarine also provides a favorable habitat ecosystem that has been mini- St. Lawrence River: The for muskellunge, lake sturgeon mally affected by human activity. St. Lawrence River is part of the and walleye - important recre- The state must also choose bound- Eastern Great Lakes biogeo- ational and ecological species. The aries for the site that encompass graphic province connecting the proposed St. Lawrence Aquarium key land and water areas of the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean. and Ecological Center could offer natural system to approximate an The St. Lawrence Eastern Ontario excellent visitor centers, laborato- ecological unit, so that the state Commission is examining sites nes, and auditoria for NERR in- can conserve the estuary's natural along a 36-mile stretch of the river volvement. function for long-term research between Waddington and Massena. purposes. Two sites, St. Lawrence for incorporation into a National The state has completed River in New York, and East Coast Estuarine Research Reserve. The the data collection phase and base Florida, are working on the first Cominission is currently working and resource overlay maps for the phase toward designation. with the New York Power Author- area. Before proceeding with de- ity, which owns the land, the De- velopment of the draft manage- After NOAA has approved partment of Environmental Con- ment plan and environmental im- the proposed site, the state may servation, Office of Parks, Recre- pact statement, New York state request funds to develop the draft ation and Historic Preservation, must submit a nomination pack- management plan and collect in- New York Department of State, age by the Governor to be ap- formation for preparing a draft U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, St. proved by NOAA. environmental impact statement. Lawrence County Planning Board The Draft Environmental Impact and the St. Lawrence Aquarium East Coast Florida: The Statement/Draft Management and Ecological Center, Inc. New Florida Department of Environ- Plan should contain the reserve's York state received a $ 10,000 site mental Protection's Bureau of goals and objectives, management selection award from NOAA in Sanctuaries and Reserves (Bu- issues, and strategies for meeting 1989 to examine potential sites. reau) has received a site selection those goals and objectives; an ad- award from NOAA to investigate ministrative framework; a research The Commission is now areas along the east coast of and monitoring plan; an education/ favoring an area that encompasses Florida that would be suitable for interpretive plan; a public access 5895 acres of habitat along the designation as a National Estua plan; a construction plan; an ac- k quisition plan; and a restoration plan, if applicable, and other nec essary documentation. Kayakers enjoy a day in the sun Two sites, San Francisco .0 at the North Bay and Mullica River, have been Carolina NERR formally nominated by the Go ernors of California and New Jer- sey, respectively. Both sites are now preparing a Draft Manage- ment Plan/Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 33 NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM Building Blocks for Coastal Management rine Research Reserve. The state life Area; Suisun Marsh: Rush and is preparing a response indi- established-a site selection com- Ranch, Peytonia Ecological Re- cating which components the state mittee with representatives from serve, and Hill Slough Wildlife should pursue. Upon receiving the Florida Department of Educa- Area; and Delta: Browns Island NOAA`s response, San Francisco tion, the Governor's office, the and Lower Sherman Island. State University will begin collect- Florida State University Marine ing information on the approved Lab, the Rookery Bay and CalifQrnia proposes that sites, hold public meetings, and Apalachicola National Estuarine San Francisco State University prepare a draft management plan Research Reserves, the Florida will manage the San Francisco and environmental impact state- Coastal Zone Management Office, Bay NERR. The University houses ment. NOAA awarded a coopera- the Bureau, and NOAA:s Office of a number of internationally known tive agreement totaling $75,000 to Ocean and Coastal Resource Man- scholars in the fields of aquatic and begin this step toward designation. agement. Staff have collected data, conservation biology, geochemis- visited sites and conducted nu- Mullica River-Great Bay merous public meetings in the (NJ): In July 1993, New Jer- areas under consideration - sey Governor Florio nomi- Indian River Lagoon, nated the Mullica River- Great Tolomato/Guana and Matanzas Bay estuary to become a Na- area, Mosquito Lagoon, and tional Estuarine Research Re- Banana River. The Governor of serve. The site, located in Florida is expected to submit southern New Jersey, is re- an official nomination package garded as one of the least-dis- by the end of December 1993. turbed settings in the densely Mmg , 14 N populated urban corridor of 7 Proposed sites that have been the northeastern United States. formally nominated: The proposed reserve encorh- passes 114,047 acres, which San Francisco Bay: would make it second in size On May 21, 1993 California only to the Apalachicola re- Governor Pete Wilson formally serve in Florida. The Mullica nominated sites within the San River-Great Bay site incorpo- Francisco Bay to be included rates a great diversity of ter- in the National Estuarine Re- Sunsei overApalachicola NERR. restrial, wetland, and aquatic search Reserve System. The habitats, ranging from pro- nomination package for the pro- try and geographic information tected state forests to barrier is- posed San Francisco Bay National systems. San Francisco State Uni- lands. Estuarine Research Reserve iden- versity also operates the Romberg tifies a multi-component reserve, Tiburon Center for Environmen- Governor Florio assigned consisting of six salt and tidal tal Studies, a field center for re- administrative responsibilities for brackish marshes: South Bay: Bair search on San Francisco Bay and developing the site to the State Island Ecological Reserve; Cen- its environment. Department of Environmental tral Bay: Corte Madera Marsh Protection and Energy's Office of Ecological Reserve; San Pablo NOAA has reviewed the Land and Water Planning and day- Bay: China Camp State Park; proposed San Francisco Bay to-day management responsibili- Petaluma: Petaluma Marsh Wild- NERR site selection document ties to Rutgers University's Insti- 34 NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM - Building Blocks for Coastal Management NERRS review panel supplies independent evaluation In January 1993, NOAA!s Assistant Admin- completing the national system of estuarine research istrator for the National Ocean Service set up a panel reserves; of experts, chaired by Robert Knecht of the Univer- sity of Delaware, to conduct an independent review * Increase links with coastal zone management programs of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System to give the reserves more long-term protection from (NERRS). From this review, the Panel was asked to external threats; recommend ways to enhance the program's posi- tion in providing critical research, education, and * Increase coordination among federal agencies; information to policy makers responsible for man- aging and protecting the nation's coasts. * Improve internal and external education, information- transfer, and outreach efforts; Panel members interviewed representatives from NOAA and. visited the Apalachicola Reserve a Improve staff development; in Florida and the Weeks Bay Reserve in Alabama. The Panel also sought input for the review from re- * Improve technical assistance; serve and coastal zone management program man- agers, through questionnaires sent to each. e Revise the NERRS funding cycle; .After providing the reserves and OCRM 9 Establish a NERRS program office within OCRM; with an opportunity to comment on the draft, the Panel issued their final report in November 1993. 9 Work with citizen groups and non-governmental or- The Panel recognized the National Estuarine Re- ganizations; search Reserve System as a winning combination of research, education, and long-term protection. The Expand international links; Panel also recognized the opportunities to improve the program. The NERRS Review Panel recom- Address the issue of minimum size of multi-compo- mended that OCRM do the following: nent reserves; and � Define a national dimension for the reserve system; Develop a business plan for the NERRS program. � Use reserves for resource-related research (nonpoint OCRM will take these recommendations into source, exotics, remediation, etc.); account in the upcoming year. This report will be addressed by OCRM and the NERR managers at Evaluate the possibility of incorporating existing future joint meetings. federal lands into the reserve system, an effort toward tute of Marine and Coastal Sci- the site's ecological characteris- Once NOAA/ OCRM has ences. tics; assurances that the site's received and reviewed the addi- boundaries approximate an eco- tional information, the state of Upon reviewing the pro- logical unit; the site's suitability New Jersey can begin work on the posal, NOAA requested specific for long-term research; the site's next phase of designation- devel- information on the following site compatibility with existing and oping the Draft Environmental selection issues: a description of potential land and water uses and Impact Statement and Draft Man- the process used to solicit public approved coastal and estuarine agement Plan (DEIS/DMP) for the Views on project; the site's contri- management plans; and the value site. bution to the biogeographical and of the site for education and inter- typological balance of the system; pretive efforts. 35 COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION Working Toward a Solution ince the passage of the ties: agriculture (crops and live- Guidance Published Clean Water Act in 1972, great stock), forestry (timber harvest- Under Section 6217(g) strides have been made in reduc- ing), urban (cities, roads and new ing water pollution in the United home construction), marinas (boat As part of the ongoing co- States. Much of this progress has storage and service facilities), and ordination in the cooperative ad- been realized through improve- hydromodification (construction ministration of section 6217, ments to wastewater treatment of dams and channelization). Pol- OCRM worked with the Environ- plants and industrial discharges, lutants from these activities in- mental Protection Agency (EPA) involving substantial investment in clude sediment (soil particles), nu- on the publication of two guidance new treatment and control technol- trients (nitrogen and phosphorus), documents - one on management ogy. While results of this focus on and chemicals (pesticides, oil, measures and another discussing "point sources" (discrete pipes or salts, and metals). program development. As required outfalls) can be seen in measurable by section 6217(g) of the statute, water quality improvement, there Comprehensive EPA, in consultation with NOAA remain significant areas of water Programs to Address Coastal and other federal agencies, devel- resource impairment due to Nonpoint Pollution oped Guidance Specifying Man- 44nonpoint sources" (diffuse agement Measures for Sources of sources or runoff pollution). Recognizing the need to Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal address the impact of nonpoint Waters. Among the nonpoint Nonpoint source pollution source pollution on coastal re.- sources covered in this technical is not easily identified as a discrete sources, Congress expanded the guidance are: agriculture, forestry, discharge from a pipe or factory Coastal Zone Management Act in urban runoff, hydromodification, outfall. Instead, this pollution re- 1990 to include a new section and marinas. The document also sults from rainwater and melting 6217 entitled "Protecting Coastal addresses the use of wetlands in snow running over lawns, parking Waters." Section 6217 requires controlling the impact of runoff. lots and farm fields, through city that states with existing coastal Working groups composed of in- streets and forests, picking up and zone management programs de- dividuals from state and federal carrying pollution into rivers, es- velop Coastal Nonpoint Pollution agencies with particular expertise tuaries, and coastal waters. In Control Programs. These coastal in each category developed the coastal areas of the U.S., nonpoint nonpoint programs are to be de- technical guidance. OCRM staff source pollution is generated by veloped by July 1995. participated in all of the work several major categories of activi- groups and co-chaired many. 36 COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION - Working Toward a Solution In addition to the guidance 1993, NOAA and EPA conducted nonpoint program, which was dis- required by section 6217(g) of the seven regional workshops for the tributed along with other nonpoint CZMA, NOAA and EPA pub- 29 states and territories develop- source education materials, to state lished Coastal Nonpoint Pollution ing coastal nonpoint programs. coastal zone and water quality Control Program: Program Devel- Workshops took place in: Alexan- agencies. opment and Approval Guidance to dria, VA; Cromwell, CT; Chicago, assist states in creating coastal IL; Seattle, WA; Atlanta, GA; Ho- Threshold Reviews nonpoint pollution control pro- nolulu, HI; and New Orleans, LA. grams under section 6217. This These workshops provided an op- Development of an effec- program guidance provides the portunity for additional dialogue tive coastal nonpoint program rep- basic structure for coastal on the technical and program guid- resents a major challenge to the 29 nonpoint programs and describes ance in the context of regional is- states and territories. In order to NOAA and EPA expectations for sues. The workshop series also assist the states and help them tar- presented an op- get their limited resources, NOAA portunity for the and EPA offered to conduct early Z77 states to identify reviews of state proposals. This needs for techni- threshold review process is part of cal assistance a continuing dialogue between the ZJJ from the federal states and the federal agencies de- agencies. signed to assist the states to meet the federal requirements in a Othertech timely manner. The first threshold nical assistance review was conducted for South efforts included Carolina in November 1993. the production of NOAA believes that a majority of a public educa the states will avail themselves of tion brochure on this opportunity during fiscal year the coastal 1994. no" Urban development contributes lo nonpoint source pollution. the state programs. Each state must submit its proposed program for federal approval. NOAA and EPA have supplemented this guid- ance with additional policy guid- ance as states raise issues on 6217 program development. Technical Assistance All, t NOAA and EPA have placed a high priority on techni- cal assistance to the states as they Acldii?gl)ttiiil)ottislotioiistoiiicii-iiiosiiciN,i-(,ditee nonpoint sources qf pollution, develop their coastal nonpoint pol- lution control programs. During 37 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH Sharing Ideas he need to foster progress NOAA served as co-chair sions to exhibiting new technolo- and advance the state of knowl- of Coastal Zone 93 (CZ 93), which gies and research developments. edge in coastal and ocean manage- took place July 19@23, 1993, in During CZ 93, NOAA spotlighted ment practices are key to NOANs New Orleans, Louisiana. This its ongoing efforts to deal with a mission. As the principal federal event, the eighth in the conference myriad of coastal and ocean prob- agency charged with protecting series, was built around the theme lems. Specifically, NOAA shared the Nation's valuable coastal and "Healing the Coast," which re- its experiences with developing ocean resources, NOAA takes an flected a worldwide effort and and implementing a new coastal active role in sharing information commitment to protect, wisely use nonpoint source pollution control on new concepts and research de- and enhance coastal and ocean re- program under the Coastal Zone velopments with state and local sources. Some of the issues de- Management Act. Other NOAA governments and other federal bated at CZ 93 included coastal sessions explored the lessons agencies that must make critical nonpoint source pollution and learned from such coastal disas- decisions about the use and care mitigation techniques, ecosystem ters as Hurricanes Andrew and of these valuable, finite resources. management, wetlands policies, Iniki and Typhoon Omar and how NOAA also facilitates dialogue offshore oil and gas activities, partnerships between government with the coastal and ocean com- coastal erosion, coastal hazards and private industry can minimize munity at large - policyrnakers, planning, and global climate risks from these natural disasters; managers, scientists, planners, en- change and sea level rise. the value of partnerships in pro- gineers, educators, business lead- ers and environmentalists - as a way of identifying workable solu- tions to the problems plaguing ocean and coastal resources. For the past 15 years, NOAA has taken a lead role in organizing the Coastal Zone Con- ference series, an international fo- AL rum on ocean and coastal issues. @;.,U n Begun in 1978, the conference brings together individuals from all disciplines around the globe to focus on ways to achieve long- term economic and environmen- tal health for the world's oceans and coasts. More than 30 groups ren "treasure hunt" at the North Carolina NERR as part of an education co-sponsor the biennial event, project that demonstrates which creatures call an estuary home. which serves as an important link for scientists studying coastal and ocean issues with public NOAA:s participation in tecting valuable coastal ecosys- policyrnakers and planners con- CZ 93 was wide ranging - from tems, such as the coral reef tract fronting such issues of coastal res- developing the plenary program that encompasses the Florida Keys T toration, pollution, resource use and technical sessions to present- National Marine Sanctuary; and and the impact of coastal storms. ing papers and co-chairing ses- the critical role of education in 38 enhancing resource protection. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH - @;hcrjng We-as Recognizing the value of and coastal resources for future of estuaries, those valuable, yet this exchange, NOAA will con- generations. In the early 1980s, fragile areas where rivers meet the tinue to play a major role in the NOAA and coastal states launched sea. Since Much of the nation's conference series. The agency be- a national celebration of the coasts shipping and fishing industries lieves that it is through integrated, with the goal of heightening rely on healthy estuaries, organiz- interdisciplinary efforts such as awareness of the sensitive nature ers hope that this day-long celebra- this that strategies will result Of these resources. What began as tion will provide citizens with a which can be responsive to today, s a national coastal cleanup day has greater understanding of the link issues. The conference series pro- grown to a three-week celebration between a healthy coast and a vides flexibility in meeting an devoted to exploring the beauty, healthy economy. ever-changing suite of problems, diversity and value of coastal habi- as well as a forum for generating tats. This annual celebration, In celebration of the day- long-range, innovative programs called "Coastweeks," now spans long observance, a wide range of to address the complex issues of the last two weeks in September bay and coastal activities, from the coming decades. and the first week of October. guided boat tours to nature walks to teacher workshops, are spon- Involving the Public The annual celebration sored by National Estuarine Re- begins with Estuaries Day, a day search Reserves around the coun- The public plays a critical set aside to show coastal users and try. The three-week-long celebra- role in the fight to preserve ocean the general public the importance tion that follows Estuaries Day enables citizens to take a close YounlPters in. New Haltlp.@hir t aftel fbr look at the health and conserva.- coastal s"vnems b'v touching ish at a local tion of coastal resources that are visitor's centet: vital to the environment and economy of our nation. The eel- ebration, which varies from state to state, has a common thread - to bring families, individuals, fish- ermen, teachers, scientists, elected officials, industry and all people interested in the environment to- gether to focus national attention 'M on the nation's vital coastal re sources. A major activity of Coastweeks celebrations are an- VIM nual beach cleanups, where ardent volunteers scour the nation's beaches to collect costly, unsightly and sometimes deadly trash. This activity has spilled into the inter- national community, which now annually honors September 18 as International Coastal Cleanup 39 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH Sharing Ideas Day. In 1992, over 160,000 people , ers' & Anglers' Pledge. The pro- beach or shoreline for monitoring from 36 countries scanned their gram educates boaters and anglers and year-round cleanup. These coastlines and grabbed over 3.5 about marine debris, how they volunteer monitoring efforts pro- million pounds of trash - with may have contributed to the prob- vide valuable information for over two million pounds collected lern in the past and how they can coastal managers on the uses of the in the United States by some become part of the solution. coast, where problems may occur 134,000 volunteers in 53 coastal Through the program, boaters and and which users may benefit most communities. The volunteers re- anglers can also pledge to cleanup from environmental education port on data cards the types of waterways and coasts and to pre- programs. vent more debris from entering The activities that charac- N waterways. terize Coastweeks provide a valu- able tool for bringing multiple 0 t h e r coastal management issues 1--- 77 dAL states such as from illegal dumping and nonpoint New Hampshire, source pollution to the cost of use Coastweeks marine debris and the impact of to heighten coastal storms - into the national awareness for spotlight. Coastweeks organizers adopt-a-shore or and coastal managers hope that 0 adopt-a-beach this national celebration spawns a programs. These tale of care and apprecfation for trash they find. This information programs ask citizens and busi- the coast. is then used by coastal resource nesses to select portions of the educators to target educa- tion programs toward par- ticular coastal user groups. Data collected has also be 0 useful in recommending federal and state legisla tion to reduce marine de- bris and ocean dumping. Other activities celebrating Coastweeks around the country in- Hu% clude underwater clean- UPS, seminars, outings, li- brary and museum exhib- its, fairs, art contests, and seafood festivals. In the Gulf of Mexico, states used the 1993 celebration to kick off a five-state campaign called the Boat- Many people learn about coastal management issues during exhibits and local fairs like this one in Washington and the one above in Florida. 40 COASTAL HAZARDS - Reducing Storm Damage Through Coastal Management he Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act directs NOAA to ensure that state coastal zone manage- ment programs manage coastal development both to minimize the 'o@ loss of life and property from storms, beach erosion, and other geologic hazards, and to preserve natural features that buffer the impact of these processes - fea- tures such as beaches, dunes, wet- @4 lands, and barrier islands. To implement the CZMA's coastal hazards mandate, coastal states have developed policies and programs to limit or control devel- i '@ P@ opment in high hazard areas as part of their state coastal zone Hazards mitigation controls shoreline development in order to save lives and management programs. State ef- propertyfrom the damage of coastal storms and other coastal problems, such forts include comprehensive set- as beach erosion. back programs based on docu- mented erosion rates, building area and have initiated projects to ing the impacts of coastal storms codes specific to hazardous areas, improve performance in this area, and using that knowledge to plan post-disaster redevelopment plans, ranging from policy forinulation to mitigation strategies. In March and planning activities that restrict technical data collection. Ameri- 1993, in response to Hurricane development densities. Several can Samoa is developing hazard Bob in 1991 and the nor'easters states have been recognized as mitigation regulations for its of 1991 and 1992, Massachusetts having developed strong hazards coastal hazards program, to be hosted a workshop on coastal haz- mitigation programs and authori- implemented at the village level. ards and mitigation for eight states ties. South Carolina, for example, Several states, including Maine in the Northeast and Great Lakes was distinguished with a national and Oregon, are using the en- region. Building on the success of award for excellence in coastal hancement grants program to map the first workshop, South Carolina zone management. hazard-prone areas, and in some hosted a similar workshop in June These state coastal hazard cases, define setback policies. By 1993. programs continue to evolve and undertaking these projects, states continue to be strengthened, now intend to minimize the amount and NOAA also assists states with assistance through the section severity of damage 'caused when in assessing storm damage and coastal storms strike and to reduce developing post-storm mitigation 309 enhancement grants program. losses from long-term erosion, and strategies, particularly by working Twenty-four states and territories to protect natural features such as with the Federal Emergency Man- over 80 percent of all those eli- dunes. agement Agency on Hazard Miti- gible to receive enhancement gation Survey Teams following grants - identified coastal haz- Both NOAA and the states hurricanes and other disastrous ards as a priority enhancement have taken an active role in study- coastal storms. NOAA also par 41 COASTAL HAZARDS - Reducing Storm Damoge Through Coostol Monogement ticipates on the Interagency Com- mittee on Floodplain Management and the Community Rating Sys- tem Task Force, which encourages improved floodplain management, including preserving floodplains in their natural state and non-struc- tural solutions to coastal erosion problems. South Carolina confronts challenge to beach act In late 1991, the U.S. Su- mean high water. Most recently, land given the current circum- preme Court agreed to review in 1973, large tidal pools covered stances in which the property is Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal most of the lots. presently found. In making its Council - a case that challenged ruling, the Court accepted with- the state's authority to regulate The U.S. Supreme Court out consideration the trial court's development along the shoreline. issued an opinion in May 1992 but detern-tination that the BMA ren- David Lucas sought reversal of a did not find the BMA unconstitu- dered Lucas' property valueless. South Carolina State Supreme tional or find that there had been Court ruling that the state's a taking. Instead, the Court re- On reconsideration, the Beachfront Management Act, ad- manded the case back to the State State Supreme Court found that ministered by the South Carolina Supreme Court with instructions Lucas had suffered a temporary Coastal Council (SCCC) did not for reconsideration based on a line taking; the SCCC later settled out result in a taking of Lucas' prop- of inquiry for cases in which a of court by paying Lucas for the erty. regulation renders a property lots and acquiring title. completely valueless. The new Lucas owned two lots lo- inquiry required an analysis of: Few courts have cited the cated in an inlet erosion zone on the harm Lucas' use of the land Lucas case in subsequent taking Isle of Palms, SC, entirely seaward may cause; the social value of de- decisions, perhaps because the of the "no construction" line that veloping the lots and the suitabil- decision provides little guidance the SCCC had designated under ity of the lots in question for de- as to how courts should approach the Beachfront Management Act velopment; and how easily either taking cases generally. To date, the (BM.A). Rapid shoreline change in Lucas or the SCCC could have decision's primary effect on land inlet areas is not uncommon. Rec- prevented the harm development use management programs na- ognizing the special hazard inlet would cause. The Court summa- tion wide appears to have been to areas pose, the BMA required that rized that to demonstrate there make local and state officials re- the no-construction fine be set at had been no taking of Lucas' luctant to regulate some land uses the most landward point of shore- property, the SCCC must show out of concern they will face line retreat over the previous 40 before the State Supreme Court Lucas-like lawsuits. The decision years. At various times since 1950, that the state common law of nui- also appears to have fueled the the Lucas lots have been com- sance and property contain back- property rights movement's mis- pletely underwater, within the ground principles that would pro- taken belief that any restriction of surf zone, and well landward of hibit Lucas' proposed use of the land uses constitutes a taking. 42 000 e@ 0@1 ;,@Oo , 4 \Aol\, ,,,o e@' \@ee*s cp 9,65 @zeSeO@ ay NERR Weeks IB 43 Alabama Coastal Area Management Program uthority for the Ala- within ADEM, giving the agency Alabama Coastal Founda- bama Coastal Area Management permitting authority for activities tion: In 1992 and 1993,the Program (ACAMP) is based pri- that directly affect the state's ACAMP worked with the Coastal marily in Act 534, the Alabama coastal zone. ADEM is also re- States Organization to set up a Coastal Area Act of 1976, which sponsible for determining whether coastal foundation dedicated to mandated a comprehensive coastal those state and federal actions that conserving the natural and eco- management program and estab- are not directly regulated are con- nomic resources of Alabama's lished a coastal zone boundary. sistent with goals of the ACAMP. coastal area. Established in the The boundary encompasses all spring of 1993, the Alabama lands seaward of the 10-foot in- PROGRAM Coastal Foundation (ACF) is a land contour to the limit of the ACCOMPLISHMENTS membership organization de- state's territorial waters, includ- signed to broaden citizen partici- ing coastal barrier islands. In 1982, Program Staffing: During pation and increase the public's the state legislature passed legisla- the biennium, the ADECA coastal voice in coastal management. It is tion which dissolved the Coastal office in Fairhope was expanded Area Board and transferred its to include two planners, a secre- The Alabama Coastal Program coastal management authority to a tary, and a full-time public educa- earnedfederal approval networked program consisting of tion and outreach coordinator. The on Sept. 25,1979. a new Department of Environmen- ADEM field office in Mobile hired tal Management (ADEM) and the a Nonpoint Source Coordinator. similar to the Chesapeake Bay Department of Economic and With the additional staff, the Foundation set up for Virginia Community Affairs (ADECA). ACAMP has become involved in and Maryland. With an Executive more issues, including special area Director in place, the ACF has Under the revised struc- management planning for the de- begun outreach activities by pro- ture, ADECA became the lead graded estuary in Orange Beach/ viding public information to the agency responsible for the admin- Ono Island/Cotton B ayou, prepar- forestry community on the Coastal istrative and planning functions of ing local zoning ordinances in Nonpoint Pollution Control Pro- Alabama's coastal program. The Baldwin County, and assisting gram created under section 6217 1982 law consolidated state envi- with the Gulf Shores Strategic of the CZMA. The Foundation ronmental permitting functions Plan. published its first newsletter in September 1993. Technical Advisory Com- mittee: Alabama's coastal pro- gram established a Technical Ad- ommittee during 1992 in visory respons to the findings of the Governor's Coastal Waters Ini- 77 tiative. ACF membership includes representatives of state and fed- eral agencies with responsibili- A Me, ties for coastal resource manage- ER ment. At monthly meetings, com- WILD mittee members exchange infor mation, serve in an advisory ca- pacity for the ACAMP, and pro 44 Alabama Coastal Area Management Program Coastal program helps solve island resource problems From the time the Alabama Committee, to oversee the develop- The Institute developed a Coastal Area Management Program ment of a comprehensive manage- draft master plan for the area and a began working with the Town of ment plan for the east end of Dau- blueprint for implementing this plan, Dauphin Island in 1988 (when it in- phin Island. The Committee includes which phased in a landscape plan, a corporated) until 1990, the town representatives from the agencies facilities plan, a programs plan, and demonstrated little coordinated and local governments that own or financing suggestions. Having iden- management of the natural, cultural, manage land on the east end - all of tified sensitive areas, such as beaches recreational, and educational re- whom expressed a strong interest in and dunes, wetlands and flood sources of the island's east end. His- developing a resource management zones, the group tailored the man- toric structures were in physical de- plan. Alabama's Department of ECO- agement plan to minimize adverse cline, and the shoreline on some nomic and Community Affairs effects on these special areas. beaches was eroding at 50 feet per (ADECA) funded the preparation of year. Numerous drownings oc- a comprehensive management plan. This on-going work showed curred in the Mobile Pass tidal inlet; almost immediate results for the east yet the local government did noth- The Economic Development end coastal environment. The Army ing to discourage swimming there. Institute (EDI) of Auburn University Corps of Engineers is now undertak- Also, government agencies offered prepared the plan using expertise in ing a major erosion control project few educational or interpretive pro- economics, planning, architecture, on the east end to slow the rate of grams for the public to promote re- and public relations. The Institute erosion. Swimming has been banned sponsible interaction with the coastal worked with the East End task force on the east end to prevent loss of life. environment. to inventory existing facilities and (No drownings have occurred in over needed repairs to those facilities; and a year.) Also, a public education fa- In response to these prob- analyze needs in the areas of beach cility called "Estuarium" that in- lems, the coastal programs office es- access, interpretive and education cludes a restored marsh is now un- tablished a management task force, programs,natural resource manage- der construction on the east end. known as the East End Management ment, facilities and maintenance. vide interagency coordination. The SIGNIFICANT provision for public notice and Technical Advisory Committee PROGRAM CHANGES hearings; and make more restric- was instrumental in developing the tive changes to the variance crite- ACAMP's Assessment and Strat- In July 1992, OCRM ap- ria and provisions. egy for the section 309 Enhance- proved the revised Gulf Shores ment Grant Program and is work- City Zoning Ordinance and the SUMMARYOF ing collectively to solve erosion state's recertification of the del- EVALUATION FINDINGS problems on Dauphin Island. egation of local permitting author- ity to the City of Gulf Shores as a No evaluation was con- Public Education and routine program implementation ducted during the biennium. The Awareness: Alabama has made change. Among other things, the next evaluation of Alabama's major strides in public education revised ordinance restricts struc- Coastal Zone Management Pro- and outreach during the biennium, tures permitted seaward of the gram is scheduled for early Febru- including creating a Citizens'Wa- Coastal Construction Line to sand ary 1994. ter Quality Monitoring Program fences and dune and the Alabama Coastal Founda- walkovers; in- tion; cultivating a greater media creases consider- Alabama Program Funding presence; and increasing publica- ation of wildlife, 3061306A 309 6217 tions and activities for the public, wildlife habitats, such as the Mobile Bay Barom- and cultural re- FY92: $533,700 $59,300 eter, Alabama's COASTWEEKS sources; adds a FY93: $589,333 $72,800 $45,000 celebration, and Boaters'Pledge. 45 1 Weeks Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve ocated along the east- benefit educational and research and comment. The revised plan is em shore of Mobile Bay in Baldwin programs at the reserve, including intended to more specifically de- County, the Weeks Bay National field sampling equipment, labora- fine management strategies than Estuarine Research Reserve en- tory/analytical equipment, audio- the previous version, giving the compasses over 3,000 acres in and visual equipment, two boats, and a site a stronger focus. around Weeks Bay. This small, truck. shallow estuary is surrounded by RESEARCHAND forested wetlands. Managed by Facilities andPropertyAc- MONITORING PROGRAMS Alabama's Department of Eco- quisition: The reserve recently se- nomic and Community Affairs cured funding to construct a 3,000- Over the past two years, (ADECA), the reserve serves as a foot boardwalk nature trail; to de- Weeks Bay staff worked to attract nursery for shrimp and other com- velop exhibits for the Interpretive over $1 million in nonpoint source mercially important fisheries. Center, and to purchase additional research and demonstration projects. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, for example, The reservesponsoi-s annital coastal clealitips in assocation. vvith the national granted $450,000 to study pesti- Coastweeks celebi-ation. cides in the sediments and water column of the Weeks Bay water- shed and the effect of pesticides on the watershed's biota. EPA allo- cated another $700,000 to fund a series of watershed protection projects, granting $300,000 to the zlwlp@ Baldwin Soil and Water Conser- I vation District for a demonstration proje ct on preventing pollution from entering the waterways, $40,000 to monitor water quality, $40,000 for a septic systemproject, and $19,000 to educate students on these issues. Reserve staff also devel- PROGRAM lands for reserve protection. Funds oped an impressive reference col- ACCOMPLISHMENTS came from a combination of pri- lection of biological specimens, vate sources - over $60,000 historical artifacts, and literature Program Staffing: During through the Weeks Bay Founda- the biennium, the reserve filled tion and $40,000 in other grants Although with 3,028 acres four and a half positions: a man- from federal and state agencies. the reserve has already ager, program assistant, secretary, reached a 100% acquisition interpretive coordinator, and part- ManagementPlan: Weeks status, managers are time laborer. Bay staff revised the reserve's evaluating this status and management plan, and submitted L Equipment: Weeks Bay a draft to OCRM's Sanctuaries may add additional land for managers acquired equipment to and Reserves Division for review reserve protection. 46 Weeks Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve related to the ecology and history Program which ties local class- As accomplishments, the of the area. The reserve also re- room curriculum to site visits to findings noted that Alabama be- cently began a long-terin water Weeks Bay. gan constructing a Weeks Bay quality monitoring effort which Interpretive Center; that the site will add to the reserve's informa- In December 1993, the re- was designated an Outstanding tion banks. serve opened an interpretive cen- National Resource Waters, and ter, located halfway between with state help, community lead- Pensacola, Fla., and Mobile, Ala. ers established a Weeks Bay Foun- The site also hired a coordinator to dation to provide private support develop and implement the inter- for reserve activities. pretive program. The Weeks Bay Reserve SUMMARYOF was designated in 1986 EVALUATION FINDINGS in the Louisiana biogeographic region. The most recent evalua- tion findings for Weeks Bay were issued in July 1992. The evalua- The findings recom- tion found that the state was oper- mended that Alabama secure state funding, hire an education coordi- ating the reserve in a manner con- nator, revise the reserve's man- sistent with the goals of the Na- agement plan, and obtain boats tional Estuarine Research Reserve S yIstem and was adhering to the and vehicles, and offered several EDUCATIONAND federally approved management administrative suggestions. Re- OUTREACH PROGRAMS plan for the site. serve managers immediately be- gan working to implement these Staff members worked changes. with Baldwin County's Board of Education to locate a science in- ecosvstems like these (and abov orpublic, fi I0e_iTtifle structor at the site to help reserve research. staff with reserve education pro gram. As part of the overall edu- cation strategy, the reserve devel- ops exhibits, teaches visiting classes about the site, and offers _@j A", numerous teacher training work- '@-q shops. The reserve also partici pates in a National Geographic Federal funding accounted for $139,000 of the reserve budget in FY92 and $209,000 in FY93. 47 el e@@ i 69 '@N C@0\00 Goo.) N wo 0 @\Idc@ Ole CA rmm@ 0 rml@4 4t!@ 49 Alaska Coastal Management Program n Alaska, the state's ties (DTPF), Coastal Management Act and the (ACMA) of 1977 provides the DGC. To in- foundation for Alaska's Coastal sure consis- Management Program (ACMP). tency with The Act also created the Alaska coastal poli- Coastal Policy Council, which is cies, the composed of six state agency ACMP pro- heads, the director of the Division vides for co- of Governmental Coordination ordinatedre- (DGQ and nine local government view of representatives. The DGC, a unit projects of the Office of the Governor, within the provides staff assistance to the coastal zone council. Under the ACMP, local through the consistency review Alaska anticipates that the governments and specially orga- process. report will lead to a memorandum nized coastal resource service ar- of understanding between the state eas develop locally specific dis- PROGRAM and MMS. This memorandum trict coastal management pro- ACCOMPLISHMENTS should lead to improved coopera- grams. The inland coastal zone tion, provide a standardized pro- boundary is based on biophysical Federal Consistency: cess, and help insure that issues relationships, and generally fol- Alaska received funding under the are addressed as early as possible lows the 1,000-foot elevation con- CZMA section 309 enhancement in the review process. tour. More specific boundaries are grants program for a project of set during local plan development. special merit to reconcile timing Improved Government Qp- and substantive differences be- erations: Under ACMP's coordi- TheACMPisanetworked tween the federal outer continen- nated permit review process, Di- program that binds state agencies tal shelf (OCS) oil and gas lease vision of Governmental Coordi- to implement responsibilities in sale process and Alaska's consis- nation publishes a list of permits: accordance with the coastal tency review process. The Divi- which have been categorically ap- program's goals and policies. sion of Governmental Coordina- proved as being consistent with Agencies on this team include the tion, working with other state and the ACMP ("A" List); generally Departments of Commerce and local agencies and the U.S. Min- consistent with the ACMP pro- Economic Development (DCED), erals Management Service vided certain standard conditions Community and Regional Affairs (MMS), analyzed differences in are met ("B" List); and subject to (DCRA), Environmental Conser- timing and substance between the the full review process ("C" List). vation (DEC), Fish and Game federal OCS leasing process and During the biennium, DGC led an (DFG), Natural Resources (DNR), the state's consistency review pro- effort to update and revise the A- Transportation and Public Facili- cess and prepared a report on these B-C List. Through annual revi- differences. To implement some sions, the state maintains an accu- of the report's recommendations, rate list thereby streamlining the The Alaska Coastal Zone Alaska developed regulatory permitting process. Management Program received changes which are now under the federal approval in July 1979. state's internal review process. Resource Protection: Alaska spent several years devel- 50 Alaska Coastal Management Program oping performance standards for Service Area completed the draft federal permits and activities that gravel pits on the North Slope River plan for public hearing. When fi- the state reviews for consistency floodplains to ensure that the mine nal, the plan will provide a basis with the coastal program. sites are developed or restored in for reviewing the consistency of ways that provide fisheries habi- local, state, and federal decisions. In FY92, the state operated with tats. Section 309 enhancement $2,014,000 infederalfunds and grant funds enabled Alaska to turn SIGNIFICANT in FY93 with $2,015,000. several years of research into PROGRAM CHANGES changes to the coastal manage- ment program. Among the changes During the biennium, SUMMARYOF is a proposed addition to the "B" OCRM approved new or revised EVALUATION FINDINGS List, which would provide stan- district coastal programs for Ju- dard conditions on permits for min- neau, Thorne Bay, Aleutians East, OCRM conducted an ing activities to ensure uniform Sitka, and Haines. Of the thirty- evaluation of Alaska's Coastal environmental practices. The state six districts, thirty-four now have Management Program in Septem- also developed model policy lan- approved programs in place. ber 1991. Final evaluation find- guage covering gravel mine sites OCRM also approved AMSA ings, issued in January 1992, iden- for the North Slope Borough plans for the Point MacKenzie area tified as accomplishments the local coastal management pro- state's streamlined permit gram. review procedures and focus on problem- solving; Resource Protectionl completing 33 out of 36 Economic Development: To district coastal manage- achieve and maintain a balance ment programs and the between subsistence activities, initiative to revise old natural resources, economic plans; interim guidelines development and recreational for handling petitions opportunities in the commu- brought before the Coastal nity of Unalaska, the Aleutians Policy Council; revisions West Coastal Resource Service to the Forest Resources Area is developing a plan for this and Practices Act, and Area Meriting Special Attention of the Matanuska- Susitna Bor- data- sharing and outreach efforts. (AMSA). Unalaska, located in the ough, Mitchell, Hood and Chaik- eastern portion of the Aleutian Is- Whitewater Bays in S.E., Skagway The findings also recom- lands chain, includes the Port of Port and River, and Port Graham/ mended the following actions to Dutch Harbor, among the English Bay. improve Alaska's program: pro- country's top seafood landing and moting improved reporting of processing ports. The coastal dis- Several statutory and regu- single agency project reviews; fi- trict is concerned with protecting latory changes to Alaska's Coastal nalizing rules to handle petitions subsistence activities, natural re- Management Act and regulations brought before the Coastal Policy sources and habitats, recreational governing state forest practices Council; improving training of opportunities, and improving im- were also approved. Furthermore, agency and district staff; increas- paired water quality, while pro- Alaska's Coastal Management ing local participation in monitor- viding vital infrastructure to sup- @ Program added permits issued ing and enforcement efforts; and port the seafood industry. The under the Resources Conservation increasing the emphasis on public Aleutians West Coastal Resource and Recovery Act to its list of outreach and education. 51 0 % C, @. % (P, 7 1 0 ,:@s -. v 4 (-) @A % -( -P,, uj 0 Q 55) 0 American Sa American Samoa Coastal Management Program T: merican Samoa's coastal zone boundary encom- 7%, passes all of the territory's land and water areas. Villages, which are overned by chiefs and coun- ke, 9 cils, retain communal control of 92 percent of the territorial land area. As directed by the American Samoa Coastal Management Act of 1990 (the Act), all territorial agencies must conduct their ac- tivities consistent with the Ameri- can Samoa Coastal Management Program (ASCMP). The program, originally authorized by an execu- tive order, is now governed by the Act, which designates the Eco- nomic Development Planning Of- fice (EDPO) as the lead agency for p ram funding and administra- rog tion. The EDPO issues land use permits for all activities affecting ASCMP rested in an executive ment agencies, the ASCMP has the resources of the coastal zone order issued by the Governor. To been able to reach more people through an interagency review pro- replace the executive order, more often throughout the year. cess known as the Project Notifi- American Samoa's Fono (Legis- The annual Coastweeks (Vaiaso o cation and Review System lature) passed enabling legislation Gataifale) celebration is the (PNRS). The PNRS board, which for the program - the American island's most rigorous public conducts interagency site visits and Samoa Coastal Management Act awareness project with which the holds bi-monthly meetings, con- in 1990. American Samoa is now ASCMP is involved. Since 1987, sists of representatives from eight nearing completion of adminis- American Samoa's first celebra- territorial agencies. trative rules to implement the act, tion of Coastweeks, the festival which are expected to be adopted grew from one week to three weeks PROGRAM by March 1994. of fun educational activities spot- ACCOMPLISHMENTS lighting environmental issues and Public Awareness: Envi- concerns. Other public awareness Enabling Legislation and ronmental education recently be- activities include: environmental Administrative Rules: From the came the focus of most environ- activities in schools; an anti-lit- program's approval in 1980 until mental agencies on American Sa- tering campaign, sandmining en- 1990, legal authority for the moa. To maximize its resources, forcement; 0 Lau Samoa, a the ASCMP brings the efforts of a monthly television program on en- number of environmental agen- vironmental issues; Pulenu'u The territory's coastal program cies into its public awareness/ edu- workshops (for village mayors); received $703,800 in federal cation efforts. By working with and community presentations on funding support during FY92 other American Samoa Govern- ASCMP functions and activities. and $607,800 during FY93. 54 American Samoa Coastal Management Program Wetlands Protection: Coastal Management Program is trol Program. These projects, de- American Samoa's remaining wet- also using 306A resource manage- veloped in conjunction with the lands, dominated by mangrove ment improvement grant funding American Samoa Environinental communities, are being threatened, to construct solid waste collection Protection Agency, include dem- primarily by filling for residential facilities in designated Special onstrations of appropriate meth- and commercial use, and by illegal Management Areas where re- ods of collecting waste oil, han- dumping of solid waste. Because sources are at risk from illegal dling piggery waste, controlling Western-style regulatory programs dumping. These facilities will pro- soil and coastal erosion, and han- sometimes fail to have a major vide an alternative to illegal dump- dling stormwater drainage. impact on the traditional village- ing for residents of villages in based Samoan system of land man- mountainous areas that do not re- agement, the American Samoa ceive regular solid waste collec- SIGNIFICANT Coastal Management Program, PROGRAM CHANGES developed innovative programs The coastal program for the that involve working with village territory receivedfederal The American Samoa councils to enlist their support in approval in September 1980. Coastal Management Program did enforcing wetlands regulations. not submit any program changes The goal of this effort is to develop during the biennium. village-based wetlands manage- tion because their roads are too ment and regulatory programs. steep and narrow for collection vehicles to navigate. SUMMARYOF EVALUATION FINDINGS Solid Waste and Marine Coastal Hazards Protec- Debris: Working with other terri- tion: American Samoa is faced with No evaluation of Ameri- torial agencies to address the acute risks from natural hazards- can Samoa's Coastal Management territory's pressing marine debris including hurricanes, landslides, Program was conducted during problem, the ASCMP is develop- shoreline erosion, tsunamis, and the biennium. The next evalua- ing new legislation to establish earthquakes. ASCMP will develop tion is scheduled for March 1994. advance disposal fees for and re- new regulations and procedures strictions on selected imports, an for hazard mitigation through its increase in fines for illegal dump- Coastal Hazard Assessment and Coastal program ing, and an enterprise fund to sup- Mitigation Project (CHAMP). The port municipal solid waste man- CHAMP's objective is to develop lends a helping hand agement. In addition to a vigorous plans and regulations at both the The Ameri Ican Samoa public education campaign, village and territorial levels to miti- ASCMP and the American Samoa gate against natural hazards. Coastal Management Program Environmental Protection Agency is working to protect a 20-acre are working with villages to de- Village Nonpoint Source parcel of lowland rainforest, the velop village-based solid waste Pollution Control Demonstration last remnant of such an ecosys- management, regulation, and en- Projects: The ASCMP has devel- tem left on the main island of Tutuila. forcement programs. These initia- oped demonstration projects in sev- tives have been funded through eral island villages as part of the The forest is a critical site the section 309 enhancement grant development of its section 6217 for both native plants and wild- program. American Samoa's Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Con- life of American Samoa. 55 eP' (:'0 e S\p @,ce XNOII @ec e@ ,0 e e ec e ec Elkhorn Slough NERR Tijuana River NERR 57 California Coastal Management Program alifomia's coastline is industrial development. The CCC operates under the Conservancy managed in two segments under is responsible for ensuring that all Act of 1976, as amended, is the California Coastal Manage- development activities affecting charged with protecting agricut- ment Program (CCMP): the San the coastal zone meet the Act's tural lands, providing opportuni- Francisco Bay segment, which policies. ties for public access, land acqui- extends inland generally 100 feet sition and resource protection, and from marshes and tidal waters The BCDC operates under undertaking restoration projects. around San Francisco Bay and is the McAteer-Petris Act, but is also managed by the San Francisco B ay responsible for implementing the PROGRAM Conservation and Development Suisun Marsh Preservation Act in ACCOMPLISHMENTS Commission (BCDC), and the re- the Suisun Marsh area. Applicants mainder of the coast which covers proposing any development that Resource Management: In the vast majority of the state's 1986, the U.S. Environ- 'YU 1, IT0,11 '001 1 1 1 i shoreline and adjacent waters, and IX mental Protection Agency is managed by the California (EPA) designated the San Coastal Commission (CCC). 4@ Francisco Bay/Delta Es- tuary Project (SFEP) un- nME, The CCC administers the . . . . . . . der the National Estuary .... ... ... California Coastal Act of 1976 Program. The SFEP is in- @,E F 11,1- -1 (the Act), as amended, which es- tended to achieve effec- tablished a statewide commission tive and cooperative man- to administer a coastal permit pro- Chwinel Islands M-Wonal Marine SanctitarY agement of the Bay/Delta gram and required that all coastal System. BCDC played a cities and counties prepare local involves filling, dredging, or sub- major role in developing a final coastal programs. The CCC also stantial changes in shoreline use Comprehensive Conservation Plan serves as the lead agency for pro- within the designated San Fran- (CCMP), which the SFEP submit- gram implementation under sec- cisco Bay segment of the coastal ted to EPA in the fall of 1993. tion 306 of the Coastal Zone Man- zone must obtain a BCDC permit. BCDC is also a key player for B CDC also uses special area plans, impl 'ementing the plan's recom- The state program developed in cooperation with lo- mendations. was approved in two parts: cal governments, to implement the the BCDC in February 1977 San Francisco Bay Plan. Special Natural Resources Protec- and the CCC in November 1977. area plans must be adopted by the tion: To address a serious problem BCDC as an amendment to the of non-compliance with the agement Act. The coastal zone area Bay Plan and by relevant local Coastal Act, as well as other regu- governed by the Act extends ap- governments as amendments to latory programs, the CCC created proximately 1,000 yards inland their general plans. an enforcement task force for the from the mean high tide line and Santa Monica Mountains area. The seaward three miles to the limit of A third agency, the Cali- Santa Monica Mountains Task the state's territorial sea. In areas f6mia Coastal Conservancy (Con- Force brings together federal, state of significant co'astal resources the servancy), is a non-regulatory seg- and local agencies that regulate coastal zone boundary extends in- ment of the program involved pri- development activities, and coor- land up to five miles. The Act sets marily with land acquisition, pub- dinates the monitoring and en- forth policies on public access, lic access, and critical area resto- forcement activities of these agen- C recreation, marine environment, ration. The Conservancy, which cies. The Task Force's goals are, land resources, development and among others, to: protect the area's 58 California Coastal Management Program natural resources, coordinate en- one innovative project, BCDC ten years. To continue to be effec- forcement efforts, and decrease pulled together an aff angement to tive, and to meet its mandate to illegal development activities. To have dredged materials transported provide the widest opportunity for help achieve these goals, the Task to an upland location for drying, public participation, the CCC re- Force published the "Santa and then moved to a landfill site to alizes that it is imperative to con- Monica Mountains Enforcement provide daily cover material. nect with this constituency through Directory, " which describes each outreach and education efforts, as agency's area of jurisdiction, vio- The Conservancy has been well as to increase the representa- lation activities of interest, inves- the driving force behind another tion of minorities among coastal tigative powers, cease and desist innovative proj ect- recreating salt managers. In an innovative project, authority, and ability to impose marsh habitat in the Sonoma the CCC has joined with a non- penalties or require restoration. By Baylands. The Sonoma Baylands profit group, the Environmental sharing information and coordi- is a 322-acre site, now diked off Careers Organization, and devel- nating resources, the Task Force from San Francisco Bay. The oped the "Coast and Ocean Mi- has been very successful in maxi- Conservancy's plan calls for add- nority Intem Program." The pro- mizing limited public resources to ing three million cubic yards of gram is designed to provide em- substantially improve its ability to dredged material to the site and ployment opportunities in with the detect and successfully resolve breaching the dike to recreate salt CCC for minority college students violations in one of the most threat- marsh habitat. To date, the Con- and recent graduates. ened regions of the coast. !2,31 Rk, Join SIGNIFICANT Resource Managementl PROGRAM CHANGES 0 Port Development: H w to dis pose of materials dredged from During the reporting pe- San Francisco Bay is a critical riod, OCRM approved changes issue facing the region and the resulting from the state Oil Spill BCDC. Ports around the Bay rely Bill and several minor changes to on dredging to maintain existing the BCDC's regulations. BCDC channels and to develop new or also amended its findings and poli- deeper channels so that they can 14m. Francisco Prol)osed NERR cies regarding dredging. Finally, remain competitive. As current OCRM approved LCP's for major disposal sites within the Bay fill servancy has spent 2 million dol- portions of Orange and Mendocino up, alternative sites for disposal lars on property acquisition and counties. must be identified so that the ports site design. The Sonoma Baylands can continue to operate effectively. project is a good example of how SUMMARYOF BCDC has taken a leadership role the Conservancy's efforts comple- EVALUATION FINDINGS in promoting upland alternatives ment the regulatory functions of for dredge material disposal, in- the CCMP. The last evaluation site cluding disposal sites and options visit was in June 1993. The draft to use dredged materials for ben- Public Outreach: Califor- findings are scheduled to be re- eficial wetlands creation. Over the nia has been undergoing a dra- leased in early 1994. past year, BCDC has identified matic change in demographics - The state received $2,014,000 approximately 100 sites around minorities now make up 43 per- in federal 306 program the Bay, and characterized each cent of the State's population, a administration funding in FY92 site according to its ability to ac- ten percent increase over the past and $2, 015, 000 in FY93. commodate dredged materials. In 59 California Coastal Management Program ^L aTate launches coastal outreach program To involve the public in Thousands of clean up volunteers have the proceeds from the recycling pro- coastal issues in a positive way, the joined the Adopt-A-Beach Program gram to purchase and preserve threat- California Coastal Commission de- to keep their adopted areas clean and ened rainforests in Costa Rica. veloped an award-winning, multi- free of marine debris all year long. faceted program of public education The emphasis on education and outreach. Along with these "hands on" continues with the expanison of the events to raise public awareness and curriculum. Developed in conjunc- Called the Coastal Conser- understanding of coastal pollution, and tion with the Center for Marine Con- vation Education Program, the focus on what the public can do to servation, the Commission's new Save project consists of prevent it, are the curricula and youth Our Seas curriculum now covers kin- @ a school Adopt-A-Beach cur- and citizens guides to facilitate learn- dergarten through high school. n .culum; ing about the coasts, and several * a Youth Group Guide adapted to award-winning posters, brochures and The CCC also identified al- the special needs of youth organiza- public service announcements (PSAs), ternative funding sources; for ex- tions, such as Campfire, Scouts, which have been developed to pro- ample, a public/private partnership YMCA, YWCA, and 4H; mote the program - Among other hon- provides finanical and promotional e a citizens organizations' Adopt- ors, the Adopt-A-Beach PSA has re- support for the Coastal Conservation A -Beach manual with particular em- ceived a JOEY (San Jose Convention Education Program. Private partners phasis on broadening community in- and Visitors Bureau/San Jose Film include Lucky Stores, Inc., Pepsi, volvement; and Video Commission Award of Ex- Kraft General Foods, the American * a Beach Managers' Guide to the cellence), an ADDY (Northern Cali- Plastics Council, the California State Adopt-A-Beach program structure; fornia Advertising Association award Parks Foundation, and the advertis- -, general public educational mate- for the best Regional/National Cam- ing firm of Foote, Cone and Belding, rials, such as public service an- paign in Public Service Advertising), Inc. These sponsors were critical to nouncements, feature articles, TV a Silver Apple (National Educational the program in 1993, when the state's and radio appearances, and Film and Video Festival award for budget crisis almost ended it. They - an education outreach program best PSA), a State Information Offic- stepped in to provide the financial for schools and youth and citizen ers Council Award, a nomination for and promotional support that made groups. best PSA at the Sacramento Film Fes- statewide organizing possible. tival and a nomination for an EMMY. The program grew out of The Coastal Conservation the annual coastal cleanup the Com- The CCC organized a special Education Program received national mission launched during Coastweeks celebration of the 20th Anniversary recognition when it was awarded first '85, with 2,000 people pitching in to of Earth Day. As part of this celebra- place in the 1991 'Keep America clean up over 100 sites all along the tion, the CCC worked with the media Beautiful" National Awards compe- Californiacoast. ByCoastweeks'93, to focus special attention on one suc- tition in the State/Federal Agency the number of volunteers had shot up cess story in the Los Angeles area. category and twice won national Take to 50,000) and the number of cleanup Students participating in the Venice Pride in America awards. The pro- sites more than quadrupled to well High School Adopt-A-Beach program gram continues to develop in over 400. took what they learned at the beach innovarive ways and increase its ben- (that "Recycling is a Solution to P01- eficial connections with educators and In 1989, the Adopt-A-Beach lution"), and applied that knowledge citizens interested in learning about Program,was expanded beyond a one through initiation of a recycling pro- coastal issues. day event to a year-round activity. gram in their school. They then used 60 California Coastal Management Program Y,!,'I'0"R w5i 5.2 "In 61101 The Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve provides a research base for California's decision makers looking at coastal issues, such as wetlands restoration and pu blic access. 41 Califomia 000.5 public access with opening of the Pecho Coast Trail The California Coastal Com- quested by Pacific Gas & Electric dition provides for public access mission holds a long record of note- (PG&E) in 1983 to expand the limited to docent-led tours of no worthy achievement in securing in- utility's nuclear facility located in more than 15 people two times creased public access to the Califor- San Luis Obispo County. per week. nia coast. The condition required The Nature Conservancy, One of CCC's latest PG&E to dedicate a 3-1/2-mile a national non-profit conservation successes is opening the 3-1/2 mile lateral bluff trail for public use organization, agreed to operate long Pecho Coast Trail in San Luis and to develop a detailed plan to and maintain the Trail under a Obispo County. provide public access compatible Memorandum of Understanding with the security needs of the with CCC and PG&E. The opening in Feb- nearby nuclear powerplant and ruary 1993 culminated a 10-year without endangering the area's A beautiful brochure has planning and construction effort. sensitive natural resources. been produced to acquaint the The trail allows the public - for public with the Trail. As a further the first time - to enjoy a spec- The most sensitive re- permit condition, PG&E estab- tacular stretch of coast that had source concern is protection of sea lished a fund which paid for con- been privately owned and virtu- otters which pup on the area's struction of the Trail and some ally closed to the public since the small pocket beaches. This is a operation and maintenance. time of Spanish rule in California. very rare occurrence attributable to the long history of minimal hu- Efforts are underway to The Trail resulted from a man disturbance. create a "Friends of the Pecho condition placed by CCC on a Coast Trail" organization to en- coastal development permit re- The Accessway Manage- sure the Trail's long-term mainte- ment Plan resulting from this con- nance. 61 Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve Whom Slough, one of grounds for many fish species, in- site is used primarily for visits by the last remaining relatively un- cluding the Pacific herring, starry the general public, teacher-guided disturbed coastal wetlands in Cali- flounder, and several species of school groups, and special interest fornia and the largest between San shark. groups such as birdwatchers; edu- Francisco and Morro Bay, is lo- cation and research; and habitat cated on the central coast at Moss Elkhorn Slough is man- restoration. Landing, north of Monterey. The aged by the California Department Reserve encompasses approxi- of Fish and Game, under a man- PROGRAM mately one-third of the slough and agement plan approved by NOAA ACCOMPLISHMENTS contains salt marsh, grasslands, in 1985. Reserve staff includes a woodlands, maritime chaparral, manager, research coordinator, Habitat Restoration: Res- mud flats, freshwater ponds, and education coordinator, volunteer toration efforts include replacing open water. These natural com- coordinator, and clerical and main- non-native eucalyptus trees with munities provide nursery areas for tenance staff. A research fish and are a critical stop along advisory committee as- the Pacific flyway for migratory sists the manager with birds. Marine mamirnals resident decisions concerning in the reserve are harbor seals and various facets of the sea otters. Bird populations con- site's management in- ul@k sist primarily of migratory, water- cluding research, educa- associated species, with popula- tion, facilities develop- tion peaks in fall and spring. En- ment, and resource pro- dangered birds, including the Cali- tection. The Elkhorn fornia brown pelican and peregrine Slough Foundation, a falcon, also use the reserve. Por- non-profit support tions of Elkhorn Slough, protected group, provides assis- by the reserve, provide nursery tance and funding. The native live oaks; thousands of seedlings have already been planted. Additionally, exotic vegetation is being controlled in an effort to eliminate their spread and maximize native vegetation. Feral cats are also being trapped and removed to protect ground-nesting birds. A 11',@ @311 Facilities: Construction of a new administrative build- ing, funded by NOAA and the 7V state of California, began in August 1993, and is slated for completion in January 1994. The building is designed to take advantage of open space 62 Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve -5 near the visitor center and will be teers are given opportunities to pleted during 1994-1995. similar in style and color to exist- enrich their skills. Volunteers pro- ing structures. The 2,700 square- vide valuable assistance in virtu- RESEARCHAND foot building will include offices ally all aspects of the reserve's MONITORING PROGRAMS for the staff, a computer work sta- operation; they help in interpre- tion, storage and work areas, and a tive and research activities, main- Several major research taining trails, staffing the book projects are underway at the re- Stretching 1,385 acres, the store and visitor center, helping serve, including an innovative reserve is now 92% complete. with computer operations, and agroecology project conducted by serving as docents to lead trail the University of California at walks. In the last two years, 105 Santa Cruz. This project, centered meeting room. Staff will be moved active volunteers devoted over around a series of pocket marshes from the visitor center, freeing 13,000 hours to the reserve. With- on or adjacent to the reserve, will space that will be dedicated to in- out the benefit of the time and look at the impacts of strawberry terpretive activities. effort of the volunteer network, cultivation on an estuarine envi- the reserve would be unable to ronment and will result in recom Volunteers: Elkhorn maintain the high level of visita- Slough NERR has developed an tion it enjoys. exceptional volunteer network. Management Plan: Anew Elkhorn Slough NERR Volunteers complete nine weeks received $154,523 in federal of training in the history and ecol- management plan is being drafted funding in FY 1992 and ogy of the slough; the training for the Elkhorn Slough NERR. $186,707 in FY 1993. course is held annually and volun- The plan is expected to be com- 63 Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve I mended farming methods. A 10- Day and use of a portable display creasing networking activities with year study of reproductive behav- at fairs and demonstrations. the community on research; com- ior in songbirds is also continuing. pleting the administration build- The reserve has developed an SUMMARYOF ing; conducting research on and "Elkhorn Slough Bibliography" EVAL UA TION FINDINGS discussing erosion issues; and co- that provides resource managers, ordinating research on nonpoint scientists, and educators with an The last evaluation of source pollution. overview of research in the slough. Elkhorn Slough NERR, conducted in May 1992, showed that the Cali- The final evaluation find- EDUCATIONAND fornia Department of Fish and ings cited accomplishments in the OUTREACH PROGRAMS Game was managing the reserve commitment of the State to the in a satisfactory manner. reserve, the improved working re- Educational programs fo- lationship among the managing cus on training teachers to lead agencies of the reserve, the educa- Based on the findings of tion program, the working rela- that report, the reserve is currently tionship of the Research Advisory The Elkhorn Slough Reserve working on a new management Committee, and the completion of was designated in 1980 in the plan and long-term staffing; in- the Elkhorn Slough Bibliography. Central California biogeographic region. Awturn of the birds The Elkhorn Slough re- The Caspian tern rook- their classes through the reserve serve has seen marked increases ery is located in a more remote and providing curricula and equip- in nesting great blue herons, great portion of the reserve on an is- ment to the school groups; in the egrets, and Caspian terns in re- land constructed during a marsh last two years, 19,000 students cent years. restoration project in 1983. have participated. Plans have been completed and materials purchased Herons began nesting at The terns were first dis- for constructing a boardwalk al- the reserve in 1985. That year, only covered nesting in the area in lowing students access to a mudflat one heron nest was spotted. Sev- 199 1; by 1993 there were approxi- on the reserve. School children eral years later, the herons were mately 80 nests. can then easily take mud samp es Joined by egrets The total number of nests in 1993 grew to 88, with 27 A graduate student re- for investigations in the laboratory heron nests and 61 egret nests. cently selected the terns as the and study this "lifeblood" of an subject of her master's thesis, con- estuarine ecosystem. The reserve, This rookery has become tinuing detailed study of this fas- with the help of the Elkhorn Slough a major breeding site for herons cinating rookery. Foundation, has received a video and egrets on the central Califor- microscope that enables visiting nia coast and is a favorite of slough The reserve staff con- teachers to find items in samples visitors every spring. cluded that the restoration of the using a microscope and then have South Marsh at the reserve in them displayed simultaneously for A reserve trail brings 1983 expanded foraging areas birdwatchers well within good and provided the necessary prey the entire class on a television view of the rookery. base for these growing nesting monitor. Outreach efforts include colonies. the annual celebration of Estuaries 64 Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve he Tijuana River National Estuarine Re- search Reserve encom- passes 2,5 3 1 acres of tid- @Di SO Zx ally flushed wetlands, ri- 01 - parian, and upland habi- gg tats extending immedi- MIA ately north of the U.S.- Mexico border in south- ern San Diego County. As the southern most estuarine system on the West Coast, the re- serve is one of the few remaining examples of nia least tern, brown pelican, and with assistance from Southwest peregrine falcon. An endangered Wetlands Interpretive Association, plant, the salt marsh bird's beak, a non-profit agency cooperating also flourishes in the area. with California's Department of Parks. California's Department of Parks (CDP) manages the Tijuana PROGRAM River Re%erve, located within the ACCOMPLISHMENTS relatively undisturbed, tidally jurisdictions of Imperial Beach and flushed coastal wetlands in south- San Diego and near the City of During FY92 and FY93 ern California. Tijuana River is Tijuana, Mexico. Responsibility the reserve focused its efforts on one of about 30 such wetlands for setting management policies completing four major projects. south of Point Conception. lies with the Tijuana River Na- The artwork on the large topo- tional Estuarine Research Reserve graphic watershed map which The estuary provides pro- Management Authority comprised spans the door into the visitor cen- ductive marsh habitat for inverte- of representatives from the lead ter was completed. A 15-minute brates, fish, and birds including agency, the California Department video, "Timeless River", was pro- federal and state-listed endangered of Parks and Recreation, and from duced. An enhancement plan re- or threatened species, such as the the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, ceived funding and a project man- light-footed clapper rail, Califor- City of San Diego, the City of ager was hired. Finally, a set of Imperial Beach, San Diego County, GIS maps of the reserve were pro- the California Coastal Commis- duced based on 1986 aerial pho- T The reserve was designated sion, and the California Coastal tography and data collected from in 1982 in the Californian Conservancy. Education and vol- fieldwork at the site. biogeographic region. unteer programs are developed 65 Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve RESEARCHAND for research and education pro- EDUCATIONAND MONITORING PROGRAMS grams. Research compares the OUTREACH PROGRAMS value of constructed marshes ver- The reserve experienced sus natural marshes and seeks ways The reserve's education substantial physical changes from to improve restoration methods. programs center around Marsh severe winter flooding in 1992- Awareness with Resources for 93. Unusually heavy summer Research conducted with the U.S. Slough Habitats (M.A.R.S.H.) de- floods, caused by the draining of Fish and Wildlife Service is also veloped for fifth and sixth grade Barrett Reservoir to a safe level focusing on the problems associ- students. This ecologically based before the 1993-94 winter season, ated with global climate change curriculum includes two award added to the changes. Flooding on a regional scale. Geographic winning videotapes, posters, flash presented an opportunity for a new Information Systems are being cards and extensive materials for and heated round of discussions used to identify the affects of sea field investigation. Before visit- level rise on wetland plant com- ing the site, teachers must partici- At 2,531 acres, the reserve munities using Tijuana River as a pate in a two day training course has reached a100% complete model. Further data on accretion and prepare their students for at and subsidence rates will be inte- least two weeks in the classroom. acquisition status. grated into the GIS as part of re- Materials forworkshops, offered gional studies to evaluate loss of year-round, have been produced regional and local biodiversity and in both English and Spanish. Over with residents of the river valley, predict future trends. 500 teachers from San Diego and the city and county of San Diego, surrounding counties have re- and the International Border Wa- ceived training through the ter Commission. Monitoring pro- M.A.R. S.H. and other training pro- grams have tracked the influence of hydrologi- cal disturbances on the Reserve and the recent diversion, before the flooding, of virtually all sewage flow from the es- tuary through a tempo- rary connector to San Diego's treatment plant. Now the monitoring pro- gram is tracking the re- sults of sustained fresh- water flow. 412, '4 The Pacific Estuarine Research Laboratory, managed by the San Di- ego State University and located within the re- serve, serves as a center 66 Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve I'M' @ra research on habitat restoration pro- tocol for and coastal wetlands, for salt marsh restoration in general, impacts and means of addressing urban waste water problems and the ecological functioning of coastal salt marshes; publication of an ecological profile; develop- MIT ment of a five-acre native plant garden; acquisition of approxi- mately 250 acres; and develop- ment of important curriculum W documents, bilingual education documents, and sponsoring of teacher workshops. The OCRM identified concerns with: site ad- ministration; non-adherence to Wt Coastal Aredgin 9 t 'Pe 'eN,"?N, ....... ... grams. Reserve staff have begun ticipates in the 7: to coordinate with the local school National Geo- district in their Extended Year Pro- graphic Kid's gram by offerering a new wet- Network project. I - lands investigation class every A4. three weeks. To complete this pro- SUMMARYOF important elements of the man- gram, students must visit the re- EVALUATION FINDINGS agement plan; ineffectiveness of serve six times. A part-time, bilin- the Management Authority; inad- gual education specialist teaches NOAA issued final evalu- equate staffing; inadequate coor- nature classes after school and on ation findings for the period Of dination of research issues with weekends. Having a bilingual staff September 1989 through July, California Department of Parks person enables the reserve to par- 1992. The Office of Ocean and and the Management Authority; ticipate in teacher training work- Coastal Resource Management and incomplete facilities develop- shops in Mexico-Ensenada (OCRM) noted as accomplish- ment. The reserve is responding to through cooperation with pro ments: construction of the visitor OCRM's list of Necessary Ac- esteros, a bi-national conservation center, and development plans for tions and Program Suggestions. organization, and Tijuana as a an interpretive and exhibits pro- member of PROBEA (proyecto gram; completion of a restoration In FY92, the reserve relied on bioregional educacion ambiental). plan to restore intertidal habitats $160,000 in federal funding, and Tijuana River Reserve also par- lost to sedimentation; milestone in FY93, on $110,000. 67 0 0 0 '0 D .^ ip3r 0 Q I Cl) 0- ON @c 1@ 0 C-onnectic Connecticut Coastal Management Program onnecticut's Depart- Connecticut has a two- the construction of mosquito con- ment of Environmental Protection tiered coastal management bound- trol drainage ditches. (DEP) is the state's lead agency ary. The inner tier, with stricter Connecticut's Office of Long Is- for implementing the Connecticut regulations covering most activi- land Sound Programs, through the Coastal Management Program. ties, extends landward to a 1,000 Connecticut Coastal Management DEP's Office of Long Island Sound foot setback from either the mean Program, worked with the fon-ner Programs (OLISP) administers high water mark, the inland bound- Department of Health's Mosquito .Connecticut's Coastal Manage- ary of tidal wetlands, or the inland Control Unit to explore alternative ment Program. OLISP carries out limit of the coastal flood zone, techniques for mosquito control. coastal management at the state whichever is farthest inland. The solution that has been adopted level through the permitting pro- Within the second tier, the state is open marsh water management, ces s for its core authorities. OLISP manages major state and federal which recreates surface pools and monitors coastal development ac- activities that affect the coastal ponds and reestablishes tidal flush- tivities and compliance with zone. This tier extends to the in- coastal permit requirements, and land boundary of the coastal mu- The Connecticut coastal enforces the program. nicipalities. The seaward bound- program earned ary of the coastal program matches federal approval Coastal management at the the state's jurisdiction in Long Is- in September 1980. local (municipal) level in Con- land Sound. necticut is carried out through a ing in the wetland. Doing so re- municipal coastal site plan review PROGRAM stores marsh habitat for mosquito process. OLISP staff provide tech- ACCOMPLISHMENTS larvae predators and leads to an nical assistance and oversight to improved, more natural tidal marsh the municipalities in reviewing Wetlands Protection and condition. Roughly 15,000 acres coastal site plans and developing Restoration: Historically, one of of previously ditched tidal wet- municipal coastal management the major causes of wetland deg- lands in Connecticut are now un- plans and harbor management radation in Connecticut, before der open marsh water manage- plans. their protection in 1969, had been ment and are slowly reverting to their natural state. Aj A new wetlands restora tion unit, with specialized staff and wetland equipment, was es- tablished within the Department of Environmental Protection at the initiative of OLISP staff. Both the V@ pit staff and equipment came from the former Department of Health Services mosquito control unit, which was in danger of being dis- banded due to budgetary con- straints. Before that happened, OLISP got the unit transferred to JAL DEP where they now devote all 70 Connecticut Coastal Management Program their effort to marsh restoration. Harbor Management: beneficial ways. OLISP staff re- Nearly 1,000 acres of tidal wet- Nineteen of Connecticut's coastal viewed an application to the Fed- land have been restored in Con- communities are now developing eral Energy Regulatory Commis- necticut during the past ten years, or implementing harbor manage- sion for relicensing the Greenville approximately 150 acres of which ment plans, as allowed for in Dam and Tenth Street Hydropower have been restored in the past two Connecticut's Harbor Manage- Project on the Shetucket River in years. ment Act of 1984. Nearly every Norwich. While the application town has different purposes for proposed a fish passage to allow Connecticut is the first adopting these plans, but some anadromous fish to migrate, the state in the country to use funding common reasons are to see that application did not propose miti- from the federal Inten-nodal Sur- moorings are allocated and admin- gation for adverse impacts on rec- face Transportation Efficiency Act istered efficiently and equitably, reational boaters who use the (ISTEA) for tidal wetland protec- to manage dredging and dredge Shetucket River. Through nego- tion and restoration. As highway spoil disposal, to improve public tiations with the applicant, OLISP and railway improvements are succeeded in getting a canoe por- made in the state, the state is ac- tage installed for boaters, in addi- cessing ISTEA funds to restore tion to the fish passage. wetland sites that were impacted in the past by highway or railroad Directed Research for corridors or to mitigate sites that Management: Using its Long Is- might be newly affected. land Sound Research Fund, OLISP has sponsored a wide range of Public Access: OLISP has n be directly ap- research that ca made a strong attempt during the plied for managing the Sound's last two years to provide public resources. One example is the re- access through the permitting pro- cently completed study of the ef- cess by conditioning permits fect of transportation infrastruc- whenever feasible. In one case, ture on sedimentation in three of for example, after reviewing a state Connecticut's coves. The study Department of Transportation pro- arose from a concern that trans- posal to replace an existing bridge access, to balance the needs of portation restrictions, especially over the Quinnipiac River with a recreational boating and local railroad embankments, had altered larger lift span bridge, OLISP shellfishermen, to maintain the the quality and quantity of sedi- placed conditions on the permits character of the harbors, to pro- ments in the three coves. The study to require public access. The vide ininimum standards for moor- concluded that transportation in- project, as revised, will provide a ing tackle, and to improve water frastructure was not the cause of public fishing pier and a separate quality, among others. OLISP changing long-term sedimentation parking facility near the bridge. must review and approve each plan rates, that upland development and The original project proposal made before a municipality can officially sea level rise may be more impor- no provision for public access. adopt one. tant factors, and that there had been no change in sediment qual- The coastal program relied on Federal Consistency: ity. This, the first scientific docu- $1,026, 000 in federalfunds OLISP uses federal consistency mentation on this matter, has po- in FY92 and aggressively to ensure that federal tentially saved the state millions $1,013,000 in FY93. projects use coastal resources in of dollars in transportation im 71 Connecticut Coastal Management Program provements which would have had SIGNIFICANT little impact on sedimentation rates PROGRAM CHANGES Did you know? or quality, During the biennium, 000' The Connecticut River is Elevated nitrogen levels, a OLISP incorporated its Long Is- the only major river on the United critical issue for the water quality land Sound license plate program States' east coast without a ma- of Long Island Sound, is the sub- into the Connecticut Coastal Man- jor port at its mouth. Approxi- ject of several management re- agement Program. To date the state mately 70% of the freshwater dis- search studies. These projects in- has sold over 28,000 Long Island charged into the Long Island clude studies of nitrogen sources Sound plates, raising over $1.5 Sound comes from the Connecti- and movement within the Sound, million for coastal management, cut River. and studies that have identified including restoration projects in 00" One-third of important watershed management Long Island Sound, research, pub- Connecticut's population, goals for tributaries to the Sound. lic access and public education. roughly 1 million people, live OLISP staff researched the SUMMARYOF along its coast. historic distribution of eelgrass, a EVALUATION FINDINGS 0' Twenty-five million species of submerged aquatic veg- people, or 10% of the U.S. popu- etation, and discovered that eel- No evaluation of lation, live within 50 miles of grass no longer grows in the cen- Connecticut's Coastal Manage- Long Island Sound. tral or western part of Long Island ment Program was conducted dur- 0' Over 6 million people a Sound- once part of its historic ing the reporting period. The latest year visit beaches on Long Is- range. The Long Island Sound Re- evaluation site visit took place Nov. land Sound. However only 36% search Fund is now sponsoring 29 through Dec. 3, 1993. of Connecticut's coastline on studies to establish baseline infor- Long Island Sound is sandy mation on eelgrass and the spe- beach but almost 40% of that is cies' water quality needs. under public ownership. Connecticut has imple- A W1 mented a $15 million no-net-in- crease in nitrogen policy which provides funding to retrofit 14 seage treatment plants from A Greenwich to Branford to re- @, 05? Z move nitrogen from their efflu- ent. As a result of these upgrades, the state expects a 25 % reduction in nitrogen discharge from these plants, based on 1990 levels. Harbor seals have re- turned to Connecticut as a resi- dent species in Long Island Sound for the first time in a quar- ter century. 72 e e0\ NO\ (1) 6eco ;=04 ,x@ @@ 00-,CPoII 0Ve 04 @\O@, '9@ \A'S. oll N.1-10e @ecae 0 @DE pOO'N @ec rmmm@ (D Delaware NERR -@SDel( 73 Delaware Coastal Management Program he entire state of Delaware, by addressing both agricultural and Inland Bays. The coordination from its inland boundary to the urban nonpoint sources of pollu- project combines cost sharing and limit of its territorial waters, has tion. As elements of this project, installation of agricultural best been designated as the coastal zone. Delaware's Coastal Management management practices (BMPS) by Delaware's Coastal Management Program is planning and imple- private landowners, agricultural Program gives the Delaware Bay, menting the "We Care" approach and development oriented tech- InlandBays, andoceancoasts spe- developed in the Inland Bays area nology transfer, and developing cial zoning protection from indus- of Sussex County, retrofitting ex- sediment and stormwater manage- trial development. isting stormwater facilities for water quality enhancement, and Delaware joined the ranks Delaware's Department of mapping groundwater recharge offederally approved coastal Natural Resources and Environ- areas in the watershed. This project programs in August 1979. mental Control (DNREC) imple- will aid an ongoing, cooperative ments the Delaware Coastal Man- effort between the Delaware Geo- agement Program (DCMP) as a logical Survey and Department of ment regulations. The state also networked program under the Natural Resources and Environ- designed education activities to Coastal Zone Act, the Beach Pres- mental Control to map groundwa- spread state information on reduc- ervation Act, and various water ter recharge areas in the St. Jones ing nonpoint source pollution. quality and tidal wetlands protec- watershed. tion programs. DNREC's Division Cumulative and Second- of Soil and Water houses Nonpoint Source Pollution ary Impacts: Delaware's Coastal Delaware's Coastal Management -Inland Bays: Delaware also in- Management Program is con- Program. stituted a comprehensive water- cemed with assessing the impacts, shed approach for controlling both cumulative and secondary, Other programs tie into the nonpoint source pollution for the of population growth and urban state's efforts to manage its coast. Under EPA's National Estuary Program, the state is developing programs to address water quality 7.-" '40V "Or and resource management issues in the Delaware Bay and the Dela- Tt ware Inland Bays. DNREC's In- land Bays Recovery Initiative and other agency-wide programs fo- cus on protecting the Inland Bays as well. PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS NonpointSource Pollution T -St. Jones Watershed: Delaware has designed a project to reduce nonpoint source pollution flowing into the St. Jones River watershed 74 Delaware Coastal Management Program development around the coast on a managing Delaware's coastal re- The findings also identi- watershed basis. To this end, the sources: sediment and stormwater fied some necessary actions for DCMP is working closely with the control; estuarine conservation; Delaware's program to address. Dover City Government, Kent wetland restoration; public out- The state must: review and update County, other State agencies, and reach; and grants management. its program document; reassess its area landowners, to complete a federal funding strategy to fo- comprehensive sediment and cus limited resources on high stormwater management plan for priority coastal management the Dover/Silver Lake/St. Jones issue; finalize draft regulations Watershed through the section 309 to implement the Delaware Enhancement Grants Program. Coastal Zone Act of 197 1; and Rather thanjust treating the symp- fpw revise its federal consistency toms, Delaware is using a "health procedures to conform to h maintenance approach" for devel- CZMA regulations. The DCMP has addressed these actions. oping this plan. Delaware will de- rive much of the plan from find- 131 ings and predictions about the im- pacts of various land use scenarios on the watershed, made through computer modelling. The state is using EPA's Storm Water Man- agement Model (SWMM Version 4.2) with ARC/INFO geographic information system functions and graphics. The coastal management program will modify, accurately calibrate and verify EPA's model with detailed quantitative data. SUMMARYOF EVALUATION FINDINGS Final evaluation findings, issued September 27, 1992, show that DNREC is satisfactorily ad- hering to programmatic require- ments. The evaluation documented five areas in which the DCMP has made significant improvements in The state received $777,000 infederalfundingfor FY92 @-dhw& f4t, and $876,000for FY93. AF "M IiAj Enw 11"'1314 '1001, 75 Delaware National Estuarine Research Reserve he Delaware National Es- The Delaware Reserve tuarine Research Reserve features full range tidal wetlands The reserve encompasses 8,600 (DNERR), the newest of the re- dominated by saltmarsh cordgras s acres, with open bay water; search reserve system, consists of and salt hay, open water of creek, 3,800 acres land and wetlands; two components: the Lower St. river, and bay areas, and buffered 1,000 acres river and creek Jones River and the Upper Black- by freshwater wooded fringe, waters, and 3,800 acres of bird Creek, which are managed by farmlands and meadows. The re- Delaware Bay waters. the Delaware Department of Natu- serve is endowed with a rich pre- ral Resources and Environmental history and a historic I 8th century funding at a cost of $938,000. Control. The Lower St. Jones River plantation setting. Numerous spe- Federal funds through NOAA may Component in Kent County, is only cies of birds, reptiles and mam- match thesse state grants when six miles from downtown Dover. mals make their home at the re- other key lands become available It encompasses 699 acres of tidal serve including the snowy egret for purchase. marshes, tidal creeks, open water and great blue heron, bald eagle and uplands. The Upper Blackbird and slack duck, white perch, weak- Facilities: The State of Creek Component is in New Castle fish, killifish and more. The St. Delaware and NOAA have com- County about 26 miles from Jones River segment also contains mitted $175,000 to design the on- Wilmington. Its 212 acres consist spawning horseshoe crabs relished site Education and Research fa- primarily of brackish tidal wet- by migratory shorebirds. One pair cility as a commitment towards lands, open water and wooded up- of nesting bald eagles have taken the operation of the reserve. lands, 20 miles from the Lower St. up residence in the Upper Black- Jones area. bird Creek segment of the reserve. Delaware used $260,000 of its State Greenway funds to- PROGRAM wards the construction of envi- ACCOMPLISHMENTS ronmental/cultural trails, board- walks, education stations, and a Management boat launch on the reserve in order Plan: Draft and final to further link the implementation management plans of multiple facets of the reserve's Ito- and environmental mission. impact statements were developed for RESEARCHAND the reserve during the MONITORING PROGRAMS biennium. Since designation, the Land Acquisition: Delaware NERR began to moni- By taking advantage tor and inventory plant and ani- of market opportuni- mal species, and cultural and his- ties, Delaware pur- torical resources within the re- chased 910 acres of serve. fee simple lands and conservation ease- The reserve has acquired 66% ment within the pro- of the total 8,600 acres posed reserve bound- 24% is under state control. ary using 100% state 76 Delaware National Estuarine Resear ch Reserve Delaware joins national reserve system The Delaware National favorably received by the public support to meet the reserve's con- Estuarine Research Reserve and landowners within the pro- servation needs. (DNERR) became the 22nd re- posed boundaries. serve of the National Estuarine In just the first year, Research reserve System on July The reserve staff, with aid DNERR staff secured $252,000 21,1993. from Delaware's Conservation through the Greenways. Program Districts, helped nearby landown- in Delaware to plan and construct Even in this short time, ers create landowner associations a marsh boardwalk. the program has already demon- for each component to bring strated a commitment to work landowner's concerns to the state. The 1,300-foot boardwalk with local interests and resource- will be used for interpretative fulness in acquiring state fund- The associations, which purposes. A 33,000-square-foot ing for reserve projects. elect different officers each year, NERR Education and Research have been involved in the devel- Center at the St. Jones Compo- The state's commitment opment of the Final Environmen- nent is in the architectural draw- to keep surrounding local inter- tal Impact Statement and Draft ing stage. est groups and citizens involved Management Plan, as well as the and informed throughout the re- Final Management Plan for the The State of Delaware serve designation process entire reserve. These associations plans a formal designation cer- smoothed the process. As a re- may even become "friends of the emony for the reserve in the sult, the Delaware Reserve was reserve," providing volunteer spring of 1994. As the reserve moves into EDUCATIONAND These programs will also the operating mode, staff will OUTREACH PROGRAMS be designed to instill an environ- monitor water resources and the mental/cultural ethic geared to- reserve's contributing watershed; Also since designation, the ward encouraging beneficial hu- protect, restore and rehabilitate Delaware NERR began to develop man use of estuarine resources. resources; and conduct research education and outreach programs, studies to determine resource re- defining goals for those programs SUMMARYOF sponse to induced activities in the that fit the site's management plan. EVALUATION FINDINGS controlled environment of the re- Education services will be NOAA did not conduct an evalua- serve. designed to facilitate information tion during FY92 or FY93. exchange between estuarine re- searchers and the coastal users and decision makers. Education and The reserve received $100,000 outreach activities will target adults The reserve lies within in federal funding during who can, in turn, develop the Virginian FY92 and $110,000 in FY93. children's awareness of human biogeographic region. uses, misuses, conservation, and protection of estuarine resources. 77 \e 0@0 GOOS .00 @\'@5\\Y C,\--@\ \AOII - 09@od O\CI e Z@@ CY e'O CY OK 0 @ese *e. @zo ,,c,e Apalachicola NERR e Rookery Bay NERR 79 Florida Coastal Management Program he Florida Coastal Man- PROGRAM marina siting plans; establish, by agement Program (FCMP) is a net- ACCOMPLISHMENTS rule, a process for resolving dis- worked program comprised of 26 putes regarding the designation of State laws and their implementing ELMSHILegislation: With spoil disposal sites; and study and regulation. The CZM boundary in- CZMA funds, Florida supported prepare recommendations on cludes the entire state and its terri- the third Environmental Land Man- coastal management funding. torial waters. Eleven separate agement Study Committee (ELMS FCMP and IMC staff are now agencies administer these laws and 111) study and recommendations. working to complete all of these regulations, with the Department In 1993, legislation was passed assigned tasks. of Community Affairs' Office of which implemented many of the Coastal Management, designated Public Access: Florida is as the lead agency in charge of The state coastal program using section 309 enhancement prograrnimplementation. Day-to- was approved by NOAA grant funds to develop the author- day administration rests primarily in September 1981. ity to require public access to state- with the Department of Commu- funded beach restoration projects. nity Affairs (DCA) and the De- The state will have the authority to partment of Environmental Pro- ELMS III study recommendations. impose conditions on the projects tection (DEP) - formerly the Among other things, the legisla- to ensure that provisions are made Department of Environmental tion defined the state's coastal high for public access. Regulation and the Department Of hazard area as the area inundated Natural Resources. The DCA and by a Category I storm; and directed Public Outreach and Par- DEP coordinate their activities the IMC to: establish a county- ticipation: In 1992, the Governor under a memorandum of under- based, prioritized program for ac- re-established the Citizens Advi- standing (MOU), which was quiring coastal properties; develop sory Committee on Coastal Re- signed in 1981 and recently up- and implement a public outreach source Management (CAC), and dated in order to formalize their strategy for the FCMP; develop reappointed its membership. The working relationship and better co- and implement a pilot coastal wa- legislature also adopted legisla- ordinate Florida's approach to ter quality improvement program; tion to make the Chairperson of coastal management. A Florida identify incentives to encourage the CAC a voting member of the Coastal Resources Interagency counties to adopt county-wide IMC. To directly expand its public Management Committee (IMC), which includes the heads of all ic,o@;,t o u@'r'ism has become an issue for coastal managers. FCMP agencies and the chairper- son of the Florida Citizen Advi- sory Committee on Coastal Re- 4"WL'L."W." .-.dog IIL@ sources Management (CAC), for- mulates and coordinates policy and resolves disputes for the FCMP. The CAC, whose members are appointed by the Governor, pro- vides ongoing public input into T the program. The Governor's Of- fice of Planning and Budget (OPB) assists the DCA with federal con- sistency reviews. 80 Florida Coastal Management Program outreach efforts, the DCA hired a impacts of the March 13, 1993 vation goals for which the state full-time publication specialist. winter storm and develop recom- bought the land, and to address With this help, the FCMP has pro- mendations for mitigating impacts local government concerns about duced new fact sheets on the pro- of future storm events. The IMC removing so many acres from lo- gram, the IMC, and the CAC; tech- Winter Storm Task Force is com- cal tax rolls. The ad hoc committee nical bulletins on various sources prised of IMC agencies and other concluded that portions of the land of technical assistance and fund- state, federal, and local represen- were, surplus to the state's needs ing programs; and a quarterly tatives, with staff support provided and recommended that the state newsletter. study all of south Walton Im rovements to IN County - to determine P the area's conservation and Cooperative Agreement development needs. The Management and Admin- study, funded by the state istration: The 11\4C adopted i(",, W legislature, is ongoing. the Florida Coastal Action Plan in March 1992 to set SIGNIFICANT funding priorities for t e PROGRAM CHANGES FCMP. Florida adopted rules (9M-1 F.A.C.) gov- In April, 1992 the erning the administration state legislature passed of state coastal zone ation transferring legis managment funds. The lead agency responsibili- state is also revising rules ties and program adminis- to improve how the State tration from the Depart- applies for, evaluates and disburses by the FCMP. The task force con- ment of Environmental Protection federal funds. In October 1993, ducted public meetings in Dixie, (DEP) to the Department of Com- the IMC adopted the revised Levy, and Taylor Counties to seek munity Affairs (DCA). The legis- Coastal Action Plan for 1994-96, public input and comment.and has lation placed the FCMP in the which more clearly specifies pri- worked to resolve issues that would DCA's Office of the Secretary. ority issue areas. require state action in the rebuild- Florida submitted the legislation ing process. The task force identi- as aprogram change, whichOCRM To acquaint the public with fied 17 issues and made recom- approved in 1992. Since then the new state coastal zone manage- mendations, adopted by the IMC, state has hired an Executive Direc- ment subgrant application proce- and forwarded to the Governor tor for the FCMP, and hired 15 full- dures, FCMP staff conducted 15 and Cabinet. time staff members to work on public workshops during FY92 and administering the coastal manage- FY93. The FCMP is working with Point Washington Land ment. program. five regional agencies to organize Purchase: At the request of the workshops on a variety of coastal Governor and Cabinet, the IMC Florida also revised its in- related issues. established an ad hoc committee teragency operating agreement. to determine whether the state which establishes the State's re- HazardMitigation-IMC needed all of the approxi- sponsibilities and procedures for Winter Storm Task Force: At the matelyl8,000 acres of land pur- Federal Consistency Review. The request of the Govemor,the IMC chased from the Resolution Trust new operating agreement was ex- created a task force to evaluate the Corporation to achieve the conser- ecuted on June 14, 1993. 81 Florida Coastal Management Program agreement designates the DCA as program to enhance the ability of consistency reviews; and improv- the state agency responsible for the lead agency to adequately ad- ing public involvement in the issuing all consistency concur- minister the approved FCMP; implementation of the FCMP. All rences or objections, except where strengthening the policy formula- necessary actions related to the the DEP has an analagous state tion and coordination function of 312 evaluation have been accom- permit; in those cases, DEP could the IMC; providing for better plished by the state. issue a consistency determination. evaluation of the effectiveness of The findings also noted ac- SUMMARYOF Florida's coastal program complishments in the state's: use EVALUATION FINDINGS received $2,387,600 of CZM funds to assist the devel- in federalfunding in FY92 opment of watershed management Final evaluations findings, and $2,388,600 in FY93. plans as part of the Surface Water issued in June, 1992, indicated that Improvement Management pro- the state was not fully adhering to gram; development of a comput- the provisions of the federally ap- implementing the FCMP; improv- erized program to facilitate fed- proved FCMP. These findings con- ing financial assistance allocation eral consistency review; and spon- tained several necessary actions and management; clarifying and sorship of the successful "Navi- for the state to address including: documenting the procedures used gating the Nineties" conference relocating and fully staffing the by the State to conduct federal that attracted 300 participants. Florida takes charge of on-siote sewage disposal Through the CZMA en- prepared a report for the gover- vent the spread of communicable hancement grants program, nor and legislature concerning on- diseases, degradation of water Florida is addressing the cumula- site sewage disposal systems on quality, and contamination of tive impact of the use of on-site lots platted before 1972. Florida's coastal resources. sewage disposal systems in coastal program is also testing dif- coastal development. ferent technologies for alternative Chapter 1013-6, Florida on-site sewage disposal. Administrative Code, which The state used enhance- implements Chapter 381, provides ment funds to develop legisla- Florida's regulations on permitting standards, many of tion which expands its regula- management of on-site sewage which are designed to set a mini- tory authority over septic systems. disposal systems were incorpo- mum level of protection. With this expanded authority, the rated into the FCMP with NOAA's state will consider the environ- approval in December 1993. The incorporation of these mental quality of coastal waters regulations into the FCMP will and resources, as well as the pub- These regulations include provide a more uniform, compre- lic health consequences in man- Chapter 381 / F.S. and Chapter IOD- hensive management of on-site aging and siting on-site sewage 6, F.A.C. Chapter 381 gives the disposal systems and their disposal systems. Department of Health and Reha- asssociated impacts, protect the bilitative Services the authority to surface and ground waters that As part of this project, the permit the installation and con- serve for public drinking and rec- coastal program has adopted struction of on-site disposal sys- reation, and protect marine and memoranda of understanding be- tems, which include septic tanks, estuarine organisms from con- tween relevant agencies, estab- package sewage plants, and alter- tamination by reducing nutrient lished an advisory committee, and native systems, in order to pre- and pathogen loadings. 82 Apalachicola National Estuarine Research Reserve he Apalachicola National Estuarine Research Reserve and surrounding drainage basin con- tain barrier islands, as well as es- tuarine, riverine, floodplain, and In" upland environments. Among the habitats within these environments are beaches, oyster bars, salt and fresh marshes, forested flood- plains, and sandhills. Within the reserve, 1162 species of vascular plants have been identified. More A Ai@ than 1300 species occur in the Apalachicola drainage basin; of these, 103 are listed as threatened. The reserve also houses the largest stand of tupelo trees in the world, which supports a $500,000 a year honey production industry. The Apalachicola basin is The reserve sponsors education tours for students learning about science a rich in species diversity. It has the coastal ecosystems. highest species density of amphibilans and reptiles in all of face, more than 180 species of fish quarters is a 3,300 square foot North America, north of Mexico. have also been documented in the facility containing office space, a Counting subspecies, 47 species reserve, and through research, the research and teaching laboratory, of amphibians and 87 species of reserve has doubled, to 362 spe- and an auditorium with 100-per- reptiles can be found in the basin. cies, its list of marine mollusks son seating capacity. An annex The reserve also boasts 315 spe- found within the reserve and adj a- houses office and lab space for the cies of birds within its boundaries cent portion of the Gulf of Mexico. reserve's research staff. - 100 species of which nest at the site and 21 of which are listed as Apalachicola Bay, with its PROGRAM threatened or endangered. rich species diversity, is one of the ACCOMPLISHMENTS Apalachicola NERR is home to most productive estuaries in the fifty-seven species of mammals, Northern Hemisphere. Over 90 During the biennium, the including the threatened Florida percent of all oysters harvested in staff drafted a management plan black bear, endangered West In- Florida, and over ten percent of the for the reserve, updating the plan dian manatee, and Indiana and nation's crop, come from waters that was put in place when the gray bats. Under the water's sur- within the Apalachicola Bay Re- reserve was designated in 1979. serve. Federal funding granted the Florida's Department of T reserve with $110,000 for Environmental Protection man- Most of the reserve's 193,758 operation in FY92 and ages the reserve, and employs its acres is state-owned, $100,000 in FY93. 11 person staff. The reserve's head- submerged land. 83 Apalachicola National Estuarine Research Reserve RESEARCH AND ity monitoring; correlating bio- Research Reserve was conducted MONITORING PROGRAMS logical components of water during the biennium. The next quality with river flow and up- evaluation is scheduled for Sep- The reserve provides sup- land development; commercial tember 1994. port for visiting scientists. During and recreational fishery manage- the biennium, the reserve contin- ment; and food chain research. ued an ongoing study of on-site Reserve hei-h-tens disposal systems on St. George EDUCATIONAND 9 island to determine whether the OUTREACH PROGRAMS students'science systems are adequate or whether a appreciation centralized sewage treatment sys- The Apalachicola Bay tem is needed for the island. Ef- NERR provides its audiences forts are also underway to collect with a variety of methods to learn Minority and underprivi- about estuarine ecology in a natu- leged elementary students in the ral setting. On-site educa- Apalachicola Bay area may have tion opportunities include gained a greater appreciation for hands-on exhibits, cultural the resources of the reserve over experiences, an audio-vi- the summer of 1993. J sual lending library, slides and audio-visual presen- Approximately 90 fourth t ations, a guest lecture se- through sixth graders from the ries, interpretive field trips three local elementary schools and hikes into river, bay, spent three days at the reserve as and barrier island habit part of a 12-day summer school ats, teacher workshops, and program on math, science and training to certify oystermen. computers. baseline information on contami- Among its off-site educational nants in the sediments and on sedi- opportunities, the reserve offers In two sessions, one in mentation rates within the reserve. classroom curriculum materials, late June and another in early travelling displays, slide and au- July, students explored the re- The reserve's two research dio-visual presentations, and serve, spending one day on an staff members worked on 28 re- publications such as newsletters island, one day on the river flood search projects during fiscal years and brochures. Among its publi- plan and the final day at the re- 1992 and 1993. With respect to six cations, the reserve developed a serve center. of the projects, research staff are field trip activity guide for the the principle investigators; on the reserve through its education pro- Students experienced remainder, they provide research gram, which targets an audience hands-on environmental activi- support. The reserve's Priority re- ranging from Pre-K through ties, such as wastewater treat- search topics include water qual- adult. ment and monitoring. The pro- SUMMARYOF gram, funded by an education grant to the local public school The reserve was designated EVALUATION FINDINGS system, is the first of its kind for in 1979 in the Louisiana the reserve. biogeographic region. No evaluation of the Apalachicola National Estuarine 84 Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve he Rookery Bay Reserve PROGRAM pleted the installation of a new features pristine mangrove forests ACCOMPLISHMENTS modular office building in 1993, surrounding shallow bay waters. funded by NOAA. The upland buffer consists of pine In 1993 the State of Florida flatwoods and dry-zone scrub. acquired 2,300 acres on Key Is- The reserve staff revised Bottle-nose dolphin thrive in land, the largest remaining the site's management plan during Rookery Bay's shallow waters, as unbridged barrier island in Florida 1993, and conducted apublic meet- does the manatee. Red, white and for inclusion within the reserve. ing on the revised plan. Approval black mangroves make up the The purchase represents the cul- of the management plan is ex- reserve's pristine forests, which pected in early 1994. are home to the white ibis. The state has continued to acquire land, The reserve was designated in RESEARCH AND adding to the reserve's area. The 1978 in the Western Indian MONITORING PROGRAMS reserve staff is employed by the biogeographic region. Florida Department of Environ- Research activities include mental Protection - the state mangrove restoration and moni- agency responsible for managing mination of three years of negotia- toring, water quality monitoring, the site. tions between the State of Florida habitat mapping, and wetland stud- and the owners. ies. Rookery Bay NERR has one @,UA 'A, 0AS is", r he land will in- of the largest state-supported re- search progra crease the possibil ins in the system. ity for public envi- Research activities include stud- ronmental educa- ies on the impacts of mosquito tion, increased re- control pesticides on non-target search, and of estuarine species, recovery of man- course, improved groves from the impacts of Hurri- protection of the cane Andrew, restoration of man- land. Efforts are grove ecosystems, and the effects 'w'p,g 51 underway to ex- "Pr pand the reserve's In FY92, the reserve operated On boundaries to in- ffj using $110,000 infederalfunds clude this island. and in FY93, using $190,000. In 1993, the state of Florida of eutrophication on phytoplank- spent $20 million, ton and mangrove communities. Arm""*. with another The reserve is home to the second $750,000 in fed- oldest long-term monitoring plots eral money, to ac- for mangrove forests anywhere in quire over 3,000 the world. Through its monitoring AR acres for the re- program, the reserve measures es- @RF including tuarine water quality and surveys serve Key Island. The re- the number of wading birds and serve also com- manatees. 85 Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Reserve, CZM collaborate to educate coastal users In a spirit of cooperative MIN resource management, the state's Coastal Management Program picked up on the Coastal Resource Management Workshop Series of- fered by the Rookery Bay Reserve. Eli Reserve staff members co- 4t ordinated the original series, ar- ranging for experts to voluntarily EDUCATIONAND and hosted an annual Catch speak to groups of 30-40 people on 0 UTREA CH PR 0 GRAMS Release Fishing Tournament as topics ranging from land acquisi- a fund-raiser and fisheries con- tion to pesticide use and oil spill The Rookery Bay Reserve servation event. response. has one of the most accomplished education programs in the Reserve A non-profit organiza- The free workshops tar- System. Programs include high tion, The Conservancy, Inc., geted local and regional planning school field trips, in-class lectures owns and operates an interpre- and permitting agents and environ- and demonstrations, career days, tive center within the reserve. mental industries. To give partici- science fairs, and teacher work- Through a cooperative agree- pants a clear picture of the topics, shops. Extending its education and ment The Conservancy and the the day-long programs were di- outreach efforts to adults, the re- reserve share resources to reach vided into two segments: technical serve developed a brochure for a wide range of target audiences discussion and field trips. "locals" entitled "Keep It Clean" which informs the public on how The reserve has devel- The program, which has run to manage households in an envi- oped a popular series of educa- six workshops a year since 1989, ronmentally sensitive manner. The tion courses and weekend semi- has proven so useful that the state's reserve also conducts coastal zone nars for the adult public, on top- Coastal Management Program will management seminars for resource ics ranging from Inshore Fish- expand the series, sponsoring work- decision-makers at the state and ing and Birdwatching to Gulf shops at five additional sites. The local levels. Coast Cooking. new spotss include Apalachicola Reserve, Florida Keys National The Friends of Rookery SUMMARYOF Marine Sanctuary, the Environ- Bay, Inc., a volunteer non-profit EVALUATION FINDINGS mental Protection Agency's Indian organization for the reserve, has River National Estuary Program, a sponsored a quarterly bird census, An evaluation of the community college in Tampa, and Rookery Bay Reserve was con- a university in Jacksonville. The Most of the reserve's 8,400 ducted in 1993. Final evalua- extension program begins early in acres is state-owned land. tion findings are pending. 1994. 86 Pp @ 000\ ?, 61 m 60c, \,\&N oo N !@-p 00 @-3 - @.e 0 rmm@ c- G\-\ 0 509 eO@ ,@Zoc@ c4o 0 (1) 0 Qu@ -7@Sapelo Island NERR 87 Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve he Sapelo Island National Es- tuarine Research Reserve is located in the midst of an estuary where the . ..... currents of Doboy bN@ Sound and t e Duplin River me t. The reserve e compasses ecolo- gies typical of the Carolinian biogeo- graphic region, which stretches from North Caro- lina into upper Florida, and incor- porates a coastline characterized by vast expanses of tidal salt marshes protected by a buffer of barrier mocks scattered throughout the salt PROGRAM islands. Sapelo Island is the fourth marsh and beach areas and a ACCOMPLISHMENTS largest of a string of 1.3 barrier healthy beach and dune system islands along the Georgia coast. fronting the Atlantic Ocean. The Management and Staffing: greatest portion of the reserve is In the summer of 1993, adminis- The Sapelo Island NERR comprised of extensive belts of tration of the Sapelo Island Re- contains about 2,300 acres of up- salt marsh, which hosts a wealth of serve was transferred from the land forest inhabited predomi- inhabitants. Smooth cordgrass Wildlife Resources Division of the nantly by stands of southern hard- (Spartina alterniflora) provides Georgia Department of Natural Re- woods (particularly live oak), pure some 90 percent of the salt marshes sources to the Parks and Historic on the reserve. At low tide, mem- Sites Division. At the same time, a bers of the diverse salt marsh com- new Reserve Manager was em- The reserve includes the entire munity come to feed and repro- ployed to coordinate the educa- Sapelo Island, in the duce in and around the marshes tional, interpretive, research and Carolinian biographic region. along the exposed river and creek monitoring activities of the Sapelo banks. The Duplin River, which Island NERR. A new Education flows through the heart of the re- Coordinator was hired at the end stands of pines (long leaf and serve, serves as a nursery ground of 1993. The Department of Natu- loblolly), white-tailed deer, wild for the development of juvenile ral Resources also appointed new turkey and other wildlife. The re- shrimp, menhaden, Atlantic blue members to the reserve's Advi- T serve also contains a network of crabs, sea trout, sea bass, oysters, sory Committee in 1993. This com- oak, cedar and palm upland ham- clams and other marine life. mittee represents various disci- Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve or more scientific publications address the general ecology and system energetics of the Sapelo Island Reserve's salt marshes. M01 During the biennium, OCRM funded a study on the settlement of oyster larvae in an area over time and space to deter- mine recruitment pattern at sev- 777 eral sites within the reserve. Com- bined with pathological and ga- F-7 metogenic studies of spat and adult oysters, as well as hydographic data recorded at each site, the da- tabase established by this study plines and public interest groups search at the reserve. The Marine will provide management agen- on a local, regional and state level. Institute, also within the reserve, cies with the biological informa- is now in its 40th year of research tion necessary for the establish- LandAcquisition: In 1992, on Sapelo Island, employing seven ment of effective fishery and re- the reserve bought the Sapelo Is- full-time scientists and over 60 source management guidelines. land lighthouse tract on the south visiting scientists. Through the Ma- end of the Island, with partial fund- rine Institue, scientists have stud- OCRM also provided ing from OCRM. This purchase ied the many facets of salt marsh funding to upgrade weather sta- added 205 acres of tidal salt marsh and barrier island ecology, includ- tions and Hydrolab Data Sonde and oak and pine hammock land ing microbial processes, bio- III units for the Marine Institute's to the reserve, as well as an his- geochemistry, and the population network, which will greatly aid toric brick lighthouse built in 1820 dynamics of the salt marsh and the reserve's monitoring program. and abandoned. other estuarine environments. With this state-of-the-art equip- Most of the Marine Institute's 600 ment, the Sapelo Island Reserve Designated in 1976, 1,1!T the reserve now covers 6,110 5 M acres, giving the site a 100% complete acquisition status. E 'il@'4@,@, @PTI RESEARCH AND MONITORING PROGRAMS The reserve attracted a va- riety of estuarine research projects funded by universities, state and federal agencies. Scientists from the University of Georgia Marine Institute conduct most of the re- 89 Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve can more effectively gather data at pesticides in water, oysters and special gro up activities, and pub- fixed depths from the bottom of sediments annually. Over the next lic tours offered three days a week. the Duplin River, and investigate two years, the Marine Institute the long-term differential between will compile a comprehensive eco- The education program water mass at the bottom and near logical characterization profile for sponsored slide talks, films, and the river's surface. OCRM fund- the reserve using OCRM funding. guided tours of the Reserve. ing replaced older weather moni- OCRM provided the reserve with toring equipment with Onmidata funds to develop three videos systems, including barometric Sapelo Island Reserve relied which examine the value of wet- pressure sensors and electronic on $110,000 in federal lands in fishery production, the sensors to improve the reliability funding during FY92 and role of tides in estuarine produc- of tide height data collection. $109,000 in FY93. tivity, and the reserve's efforts to monitor and assess the health of As part of Georgia's con- the estuarine environment. tinuing monitoring efforts and as EDUCATIONAND part of its shellfish program, the 0 UTREA CH PR 0 GRAMS Georgia's Department of Coastal Resources Division of Natural Resources acquired a mod- Georgia's Department of Natural During the biennium, the em, new 65-foot ferry vessel, the Resources conducts bi-monthly Sapelo Island Reserve developed Annemarie, in 1993 to transport water sampling at four different detailed plans to expand its educa- island residents and commuters to sites within the reserve. Georgia's tional programs and public rela- the mainland, and take visitors to Environmental Protection Divi- tions outreach efforts. More than the reserve. The reserve nows plans sion collects over 22 6,000 visitors toured the reserve to establish a new mainland visi- physichemical parameters each during the biennium as part of the tors interpretive center, upgrade quarter and samples metals and reserve's school outreach program, and expand the existing interpre- WOMEN ag!" A WR "All @fi g", gov 90 Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve tive center on the Island, and de- ner fully consistent with the goals sign an interpretive nature trail at and objectives of the reserve sys- Sopeto Islond the site. In 1992 and 1993, the tem and was not fully adhering to monitors chonge reserve actively participated in the the reserve's management plan. nationwide National Geographic through GIS Kids Network outreach program, Major concerns identified with two local schools taking an in the evaluation were: shortfalls With NOAA/OCRM fund- active role. Special ecological, in facility development, staffing, ing, the Marine Institute began de- natural history, cultural history and the education program and pro- veloping Geographic Information archaeological tours are conducted gram visibility; the lack of advi- System (GIS) analysis techniques, which will help document land use regularly on the reserve. sory committee meetings; issues patterns and changes in the Sapelo surrounding the adjacent commu- Island Reserve. SUMMARYOF nity and Marine Institute, and EVALUATION FINDINGS grants and timber management. Other reserves or barrier is- The state has made considerable land systems may find Sapelo's GIS analysis a useful prototype. Research- A routine program evalua- progress since the evaluation. The ers are combining GIS analysis, re- tion was conducted in December state transferred reserve manage- mote sensing, global positioning sys- 1992 with final evaluation find- ment responsibility to the Parks tem satellite surveys and photogram- ings issued in May 1993. The find- and Historic Sites Division, hired metric techniques to compare histori- ings highlighted program accom- a new reserve manager, commit- cal land use and land cover data to plishments in purchasing the his- ted to developing a mainland and current conditions on the reserve. toric lighthouse tract and a new on-island interpretive center, and So far, the system has docu- ferry, and establishing a task force hired both a part-time research mented alterations in the salt marsh to determine restoration of reserve coordinator and a full-time educa- caused by agricultural diking experi- property and examine timber prac- tion coordinator. Having made ments from the 1800s and early 1900s, as well as shifting plant communities tices on the island. However, the such progress since the evalua along the coast due to beach erosion. evaluation found that the Depart- tion, OCRM b6lieves that the state ment of Natural Resources was is re-establishing its firm commit- Researchers can overlay an not operating the reserve in a man- ment to the Reserve Program. original photo mosaic onto a digital elevation model to create a three di- mensional perspective of the area. The GIS model is valuable to scientists and resource managers in evaluating possible impacts of up- land management practices on down- stream marshlands and evaluating proposed coastal management sce- narios to make ecologically sound management decisions. -1-1 All 91 I . . . ..k 0 I. : -. G). ... , 0 % I - '-. %L.. (&@- @ Q 5@) .... I. ll@ 0 0 (@.i 'Ile Z7 0 w -10 %- I Guam Guam Coastal Management Program he entire island of Guam Management Program sits on the comprehensive Master Plan, which and the territorial waters which Development Review Committee. will include elements such as land surround it are included in the Several other territorial agencies use, community design, and con- coastal zone. To manage these that make coastal resource man- servation and development poli- areas, the Territory created the agement decisions are networked cies. Guam's Coastal Management Guam Coastal Management Pro- into the coastal program to ensure Program has a central role in the gram (GCMP)- anetworked pro- that coastal decisionmaking master planning effort and is de- gram - with the Bureau of Plan- throughout the territory is consis- veloping the Geographic Informa- ning acting as the lead agency. tent with the territory's coastal tion System mapping and database Coastal policies and authorities policies. These networked agen- system for that effort. Data stored set forth in Executive Order Num- cies include Guam's Environmen- in the system will include lot lines, bers 78-20, 21, 13, and 37; the tal Protection Agency, the Public topography, and boundaries of Comprehensive Planning En- Utility Agency of Guam, and the limestone forests and the seashore abling Legislation; and the Terri- Departments of Agriculture, Pub- reserve. Guam's database will pro- torial Seashore Protection Act lic Works, Parks and Recreation, vide information on zoning, land - Commerce, and Public Health and use, lot size, infrastructure avail- The Territory of Guam received Social Services. ability, and endangered species or federal approval on its coastal habitat. program in August 1979. PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS Public Access: Guam's Coastal Management Program is govern the management of coastal Comprehensive Land Use working to improve public access resources. The seven-member Ter- Planning: Guam is developing a to inland sites, important ritorial Land Use Commission (TLUC), ap- pointed by the Governor, makes Guam's CZM program is responding to the territory's rapid development by designing a comprehensive master plan to guide the growth. land use decisions throughout the ter- ritory, with the Department of LandManagement A acting as staff to the commission ..... .... . The Development Review Commit- tee (DRC), estab- lished by Execu- tive Order No. 90- 09, provides an in- ter- governmental review of all projects submitted T UNN to the TLUC. A representative of Guam's Coastal 94 Guam Coastal Management Program viewplanes, historic sites, and other document has not been revised. less traditionally addressed areas After incorporating these regula- and access for physically disabled tory changes through the program Earthquake cuts persons to all areas through a pub- change process, GCMP staff will lic access project. This two-year update the program document to coastal project involves a survey of public reflect these changes. The new conference short needs and expectations, identifi- document will be published and cation of existing and potential made available to the public. An earthquake measuring access sites, and constraints to ac- 8.1 on the Richter scale cut short the cess development. To implement SIGNIFICANT 11th annual Pacific Basin Coastal the plan, Executive Orders and PROGRAM CHANGES Zone Management Conference, other regulatory tools will be de- hosted this year by Guam. veloped as needed. Guam's Coastal Manage- ' The earthquake shook the ment Program did not submit any island on Sunday, August 8, just as Analysis ofPast TLUCAc- program changes during the bien- the opening reception for the confer- tions: Guam's coastal program will nium. ence - originally scheduled for Aug. analyze all TLUC actions for the 8-11, 1993 - was about to begin. period from 1987 through 1992 to SUMMARYOF Ironically, the theme of this identify patterns in requests, ap- EVALUATION FINDINGS year's conference was hazards in the provals, and zone changes; condi- coastal zone. tions on approved permits; appli- The final evaluation find- Conference participants con- cations involving wetlands; im- ings issued October 29, 1992, in- ducted an abbreviated version of the pacts of approvals on public ac- dicate that the territory is imple- conference on the afternoon of cess; approvals in hazard areas; menting and adhering to the pro- Aug. 9 in a building without electric- approvals on sites over Guam's visions of its approved coastal ity or running water and toured the sole-source aquifer; and number management program. Findings island to survey the damaged coast- of acres taken out of agricultural cited accomplishments in improv- line. zoning. This analysis will be used ing the land use review process for In addition to the 8.1 earth- to identify shortcomings, strengths, projects that require clearance quake of Aug. 8, Guam also recently and weaknesses in the review and from the Territorial Land Use suffered from hits of typhoons Yuri, permitting process and to develop Russ, and Omar. recommendations for improving the system to better protect natural The Guam coastalprogram resources while ensuring an ad- operated using $565,200 equate response to human com- in federalfu nding during F Y92 information program. Evaluation munity needs. and $586,200 during FY93. findings recommended that the state improve monitoring and en- Updated Program Docu- forcement activities, upgrade par- ment: Although new laws, rules, Commission; developing a geo- ticipation in wetlands issues, ana- regulations, and executive orders graphic information system to cata- lyze the coastal management net- have been adopted and approved log and assess natural and cultural work, update the program docu- as changes to the Guam Coastal resources; implementing a Recre- ment, and improve coordination Management Program since its ation and Water Use Management with federal agencies. approval in 1978, the program Plan; and expanding the public 95 xio ocj\ ?@o oo qe \\el Waimanu Valley NERR 97 Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program he Hawaii Coastal Zone PROGRAM while allowing for intelligent and Management (CZM) Program de- ACCOMPLISHMENTS safe development along the shore, pends primarily on statutory pro- and to address the erosion prob- visions that direct state agencies Hazard Protection: The lems of currently developed areas and county governments to con- Office of State Planning, through of the coasts. The report found duct their permitting and non-per- a federal program administration that, since 1928, approximately mitting activities in compliance grant, completed a report entitled eight to nine miles - close to 15 with the coastal policies estab- Beach Management Plan with percent - of the sandy shorelines lished in the Hawaii Revised Stat- Beach Management Districts - The studied on Oahu have disappeared utes. The Office of State Planning report was conducted in order to or been harmed by shoreline stabi- (OSP) is the lead agency for the develop recommendations to lization structures. Beach loss has Hawaii Coastal Zone Management preserveundeveloped beaches accelerated due to a combination Program. of factors such as sea-level rise and hardening of the shoreline. The report recommended Beach Management Districts (BMDs) as an alternative to individual hard control structures. Hazard Protection: The Office of State Planning is nearing completion of its study on the vi- ability of beach nourishment from offshore sand sources. As part of this study, OSP is reviewing the procedures, permits, and environ- mental assessment requirements associated with offshore sand min- ing and beach nourishment.This study will produce recommenda- tions for streamlining and improv ing the regulatory regime for beach nourishment. The state is also try- ing to understand the physical P roperties of the offshore sand bodies. To do this, OSP is compil- ing existing information on sand deposits off Oahu. Natural Resource Protec- tion: The Office of State Planning received a technical assistance award to study the environmental damage from Hurricane Iniki, which hit the Island of Kauai on 98 Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program Sept. 11, 1992. Immediately fol- vulnerability of life and property mentation changes from the 1990 lowing the storm, there was an from future hurricanes and tropi-- and 1991 Hawaii legislative ses- opportunity to capture valuable cal storms. The state is using a sions. Also, the state's revised data for determining the extent of participatory hazard mitigation Hawaii Coastal Zone Management damages to the marine environ- planning approach involving a Program document was submitted ment and the physical processes wide range of federal, state and and approved. that caused the damages, and to county government officials, leg- correlate the findings with the me- islators, architects and engineers, SUMMARYOF teorological events and supratidal and environmentalists. The Office E VA L UA TION FINDINGS patterns during that period. The of State Planning is convening a final report was completed Sept. Hazard Mitigation Policy Advi- No evaluation of Hawaii's 30,1993. sory Group, with interest groups Coastal Zone Management Pro- 6 Nl@@ . ..... .. lop P . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... ....... l", W 777? 41 hl "77 77" 'N Hazard Protection: With representatives, to participate in gram was conducted during the combined section 309 enhance- and serve as an advisory commit- biennium. The next evaluation is ment grant funds and section 306 tee for the project. This project is scheduled for February 1994. program administration funds, being conducted by the University Hawaii is completing a Hazard of Hawaii and consultants. Mitigation project. This project The program received will include recommendations on SIGNIFICANT approval in September 1978, preferred mitigation options and PROGRAM CHANGES and operated using $840,000 proposed language for enforce- in federal funds in FY92 and able coastal natural disaster miti- In 1993, NOAA approved $837,000 in FY93. gation policies to reduce Hawaii's numerous routine program imple- 99 Waimanu Valley National Estuarine Research Reserve he Waimanu Valley Na- archeological surveys reveal that found within the reserve as is tional Estuarine Research Re- significant cultural remains at the Hawaii's only native terrestrial serve (WVNERR) covers almost reserve have been well preserved. mammal, the endangered an entire valley-stream system on 'ope'ape'a (Hawaiian bat). the northeast windward coast of The valley's volcanic ori- the Island of Hawaii, known as gin and isolation have created a The watershed and adja- the Big Island. cent wetlands in Waimanu Val- ley, one of the state's more pristine Waimanu Valley repre- The valley's volcanic origin and aquatic systems, serves as the sents the insular biogeographic isolation have created a niche reserve's principal resource. This region and can best be described for many unique species diverse system features an as a drowned river valley with ofp1ants and animals embayment, a limited estuary some tidal influence at the mouth within the reserve. (where tides bring salt water into of the stream. Geologically, the the mouth of the stream), wet- island chain is young, which niche for many unique species of lands, streams and tributaries, wa- means its estuaries have not de- plants and animals within the re- terfalls and springs. veloped as much as the more ma- serve. These unique species are tureestuaries of theeasternUnited derived from native species, as This system contains the States. well as non-native species brought last undiverted stream on the is- by Polynesians and by later set- land. The falls and springs de- Wairnanu Valley's shore- tlers. Two endangered bird spe- velop from an equally pristine up- line uniquely features steep slopes, cies, the 'io (Hawaiian hawk) and land watershed, which is part of rising as high as 465 meters (1,529 the 'a'o (Newell's sheerwater) are the state Puu. 0 Umi Natural Area feet). Access is somewhat re- stricted. Weather permit- ting, the valley can only be reached by boat, helicopter, or a seven-hour hike from "T, the nearest valley. Waimanu Valley T was occupied for many cen- turies, although probably in- termittently. The valley S@ stream was formally di- verted for agriculture, and scientists have uncovered the remnants of residences built on Hawaiian temple ruins. The valley has re- mained largely uninhabited T except for occasional hunt- ers and campers since 1946, when the resident population was destroyed by a tsunami. Primary 100 Waimanu Valley National Estuarine Research Reserve Reserve. The reserve's aquatic sys- Valley NERR did not have an ap- core component of the reserve is a tem is impaired by non-native proved final management plan. prerequisite for NOAA approval plants and animals like the Tahi- Reserve managers need such a plan of the management plan. tian prawn, Chinese catfish, ferral to guide reserve operations and pigs and mosquito fish. resource management, research Finally, the reserve does and education efforts. Although not employ enough staff members PROGRAM management plans were not pro- to adequately implement the op- ACCOMPLISHMENTS gram requirements when Waimanu eration, education, research, re- Valley was designated, all other source management and protec- The state published a bro- reserves in the national program tion components for the reserve. chure describing the resources of have complied with the current The reserve manager administers the reserve, visitor rules, health rule. the reserve, as well as the Hawaii precautions, and other hazards. Natural Area Reserve Program, Thebrochure is available to camp- Moreover, the state has not from Honolulu, on the island of ing permit applicants, accompa- developed a suitable strategy to Oahu, which means that the man- nied by material on leptospirosis ager can only devote part-time and camping guidelines. The 3,600-acre site, attention to reserve management from a remote location. Two NERR supported designated in 1976, studies were completed during the is considered In accordance with Sec- last two years. One study includes geologically young. tions 312 (c)(1) and 315 (f)(2) of a description of the physical struc- the CZMA, OCRM imposed in- ture of the estuary system, its bio- adequately protect a key 200-acre terim sanctions on the Waimanu logical communities and the life parcel of land within the reserve Valley NERR until the state ad- history of the fish communities in owned by the Department of Ha- dresses program inadequacies the estuary. The other, a compre- waiian Home Lands. The ability to identified in the final evaluation. hensive archeological survey, provide adequate control over this identified the archeological sur- face sites within the reserve and concluded that several buried cul- tural sites remain undocumented. Waimanu ValliteW requests SUMMARYOF to leave reserve system EVALUATION FINDINGS The final evaluation find- On Oct. 21, 1993, the Sanc- OCRM has prepared a re- tuaries and Reserves Division of sponse to the state's request for ings for the Waimanu Valley OCRM received a letter from the withdrawal of Waimanu Valley NERR concluded that the state is State of Hawaii Department of Land from the National Estuarine Re- not fully adhering to National Es- and Natural Resources requesting search Reserve System advising the tuarine Research Reserve goals that Waimanu Valley be removed Governor of Hawaii of the proce- and NOAA regulations in three from the National Estuarine Re- dure for withdrawing the reserve significant areas. search Reserve System. from the national program. OCRM found that 17 years after designation, the Waimanu 101 @c,eco C .aCP @\ @ze oc *- 0@@ 00 0\0 ,\ N\Cal O@@ 0 \10 @Oql 0 rmm@ ? @A I 0 rmm@ @M@ -E@i 103 Louisiana Coastal Resources Program ouisiana's coastal zone grants the Department of Natural coastal wetlands restoration pro- boundary encompasses all or part Resources the authority to assess gram. The program was enacted of 19 parishes -roughly 5.8 mil- fines to recover abatement or miti- in 1989 to combat the significant lion acres - and extends to the gation costs, during the 1993 Leg- coastal wetlands loss, which the limit of state waters. Through the islative session. The administra- Corps of Engineers estimate to be Louisiana State and Local Re- tive fine system will allow more 40 to 50 square miles annually. sources Management Act of 1978, efficient enforcement of Louisiana adopted a state compre- the state established a comprehen- Louisiana's Coastal Management hensive restoration plan, and us- sive regulatory program, called Program by providing ing funds from the state Restora- the Coastal Use Permit program, administrativfe as well as judicial tion Trust Fund (roughly $25 mil- through which the state directly remedies for violations of the pro- lion in FY92 and FY93) is funding regulates any use or activity within gram in many cases. Administra- numerous wetlands restoration the coastal zone that has a direct tive fines and mitigation costs will projects called for in the plan. Since and significant impact on coastal also generate revenues for pro- 1989, 22 major restoration projects waters. gram administration and local and have been completed, including state restoration projects. wetlands shoreline stabilization, The Department of Natu- water diversion and hydrologic ral Resources/Coastal Manage- State Wetlands Restora- management, and vegetative ment Division (DNR/CMD), des- tion Program: Louisiana contin- plantings of wetland species. ignated as the lead agency, imple- ued to refine and implement its ments the Louisiana Coastal Re- sources Program (LCRP) and ad- ministers the Coastal Use Permit program. Parishes are authorized, but not required, to develop Local Lai, Jt" LI, AL. Coastal Programs (LCP) and if an .......... LCP is approved by Coastal Man- agement Division, the Parish may then regulate certain uses of local concern. Currently, eight Parishes have adopted local coastal pro- grams. The Coastal Management Division has designated two spe- cial management areas - the Loui- siana Offshore Oil Port and the Marsh Island Wildlife Refuge. PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS Improved Enforcement L Capabilities: The CMD drafted, Coastal restoration experts collect disguarded Christmas trees each season and was instrumental in from hundreds of local citizens and use the trees in a unique recycling passing,Act 194, which establishes project: as erosion barriers. an administrative fine system and 104 Louisiana Coastal Resources Program The Department of Natu- The draft rules will require com- nels provide important economic ral Resources' Office of Coastal pensatory mitigation for any per- benefits to the state, they also cause Restoration and Management is mitted development activity that significant wetland loss directly coordinating the state restoration impacts coastal wetlands, provide (through dredging and dredge efforts with Federal efforts pro- for the establishment of mitiga- material disposal) or indirectly vided for in the Coastal Wetlands tion banks, and includes exemp- (through erosion and salt water Planning, Protection, and Resto- tions from the mitigation require- intrusion). Through the efforts of ration Act, commonly known as ments for certain activities which the Department of Natural Re- the Breaux-Johnson Act. DNR has have an overriding public interest. sources, the legislature enacted Act participated on the Coastal Wet- Public notice forthe proposedrules lands Planning, Protection, and will be published in January Louisiana received $2,114,000 Restoration Task Force which is 1994- the first step in the formal in federalfunding during FY92 also completing a comprehensive rulemaking process. Upon com- and $2,297,400 during FY93. plan for the state and has approved pleting the rulemaking, 29 projects totalling $80 million Louisiana's Coastal Management in federal funds. Division will submit the legisla- tion and rules to OCRM as a pro- 637 in 1991 to strengthen the While finding it difficult gram change for approval and in- coastal programs guidelines for to establish cause and effect rela- corporation into the LCRP. the management of dredge mate- tionships, Louisiana is encouraged rial for beneficial purposes, such that coastal wetlands loss appears Dredge Material Disposal as bank stabilization and wetland to be decreasing from the Corps' Plans: Louisiana's coastal zone creation. estimate of 40 to 50 square miles has nearly 3,000 acres of naviga- per year in 1989 to 25 to 30 square tion channels. While these chan- DNR is authorized and di- mile per year in 1993. rected to develop long term dredge On Aug. 1, 1980, material disposal plans for each State Mitigation Legisla- the Louisiana coastal channel or canal more than one tion: CMD staff have drafted rules management program mile in length and/or when there is to implement Act 1040, a coast- receivedJederal approval. dredging of five hundred thousand wide Wetlands Mitigation Law. cubic. yards or more of any water bottom or wetland. In 1992, DNR developed short term plans for all 'jf- ten major navigation channels in the coastal zone and will develop 3 7 long term plans for the channels in 1993-1994. Once the plans are developed, they will be promul- gated as regulations by DNR and submitted as a program change under the section 309 enhance- ment grant program. Enhancement Grant Projects: In 1992, the LCRP de- veloped a section 309 Assessment 105 Louisiana Coastal Resources Program and Strategy for addressing prior- Finally, the CMD will in- ity needs in three enhancement ar- corporate the long term manage- Ten years of eas: cumulative and secondary im- ment of dredged material plans, progress: joint pacts, wetlands, and hazards. Un- developed pursuant to Act 637, as der the 1993 coastal zone manage- a program change into LCRP regu- public notice ment award, Louisiana's Coastal lations. agreement Management Division is evaluat- ing coastal uses and existing laws, Public Awareness: Using August 1993 marked the regulations, and policies to deter- CZM funds, the Louisiana Coastal tenth anniversary of the Joint mine if uses currently exempt from Resources Program is now devel- Public Notice agreement be- the authority of the state's coastal oping a comprehensive public in- tween Louisiana's Coastal Man- program have adverse cumulative formation and outreach strategy to agement Division and the New impacts on coastal waters and wet- determine how best to increase Orleans District Corps of Engi- lands. The CMD will then change public awareness about neers. the LCRP regulations to incorpo- Louisiana's coastal area, its value rate the assessment's findings and and the goals of the coastal pro- During this 10-year his- develop methodologies to manage grain. Once the strategy is devel- tory, the Joint Public Notice has these cumulative and secondary im- oped, the CMD anticipates dedi- improved coordination, reduced pacts through the permitting pro- cating a total of $20,000 to $60,000 costs to participating govern- cess. per year for the program. ment agencies, and allowed for faster permit processing time. 07 SIGNIFICANT In 1992, the Department PROGRAM CHANGES of Environmental Quality's (DEQ) Office of Water also joined 3Ln!BwjJ116 2.1@@' Permit Simplification: The the joint Public Notice agree- state adopted a Coastal Use Per- ment. mit-General Permit (CUP-GP9) which reduces permitting time for This expanded agree- marinas and boat slips that are ment further streamlines the built in upland areas and which state's permitting process by en- meet the conditions of the general abling applicants to send only permit. The State submitted CUP- one permit application to the GP9 to OCRM as a program Coastal Management Division chan e and OCRM approved it for processing of Section 404 and 9 Section 10 permits by the Corps for incorporation into the Louisi- of Engineers (New Orleans Dis- ana Coastal Management Program. trict), for a Coastal Use Permit Using 309 funds the CMD by the state Coastal Management is also identifying hazard-prone SUMMARYOF Division, and for a 401 Water areas in the coastal zone and de- EVALUATION FINDINGS Quality Certification by DEQ's velop a methodology to evaluate Office of Water. and incorporate hazard mitigation No evaluation was con- considerations in the review and ducted during the biennium. The analysis of each coastal use permit next evaluation of the Louisiana application. Coastal Management Program is scheduled for March, 1994. 106 e\-\, e@@ 09 @\O\ (1) 00 OS K\@@ 0 06\1@ 0@@ & CO '9@od e e rmm@ N\C-) G\-\ 0 \@e Oe @ I Wells NERR (a 107 Maine Coastal Management Program aine's Coastal Pro- gram (MeCMP) consists of a net- "U work of 13 State Laws that are jointly administered by the State lit and local governments. The State iPir N 4 V" Planning Office (SPO) is the lead 414 state agency for the MeCMP. The Maine Department of Environ- mental Protection (DEP) is the primary regulatory agency for most of the MeCMP's core au- thorities. The State's coastal boundary extends landward to the C inland boundary of all coastal towns, townships on tidal waters and includes all coastal islands. The seaward boundary extends seaward to the outer limit of the ennium, Maine's coastal program gram used its program implemen- U.S. territorial sea. The state's continued to implement the tation (section 306) funds to con- coastal program includes a Gu- Growth Management Act (GMA) tinue the Comprehensive Plan- bernatorial Executive Order that of 1988 despite some obstacles. ning Program, and once again requires all state agencies to com- Maine's legislature passed the Act build the momentum lost. Since ply with the policies of the state's to address rapid land development, the program's inception, 233 mu- coastal program. especially in the state's coastal nicipalities state-wide have re- area where the most growth was ceived grants to prepare plans and Major coastal issues in reported. The Act allows for local 50 have received grants to imple- Maine include: growth manage- growth and development, but di- ment the plans. Sixty-three of the ment, water quality, public access, rects growth in a more organized 233 are coastal towns; 19 of these and cumulative and secondary and environmentally sound man- have received implementation impacts of development. The state ner. In December 1991, Maine's grants. Using coastal and state has engaged in various efforts to legislature repealed the law; it re- funds, 20 to 30 grants will become address these and other critical instated the law in April 1992, but available to municipalities for coastal issues. Some of these ef- with less vigorous provisions. planning and implementation. forts are described below. Under the revised Growth Man- agement Act, communities that Local Code Enforcement PROGRAM want to regulate land use must Program: During the biennium, ACCOMPLISHMENTS base their ordinances on compre- Maine's Department of Economic hensive plans that are consistent and Community Development Implementing the Growth with the Act. Plans and ordinances (DECD) used coastal funds to de- Management Act: During the bi- mustbe completed by Jan. 1, 2003. velop a successful Training and Certification Program for local The state coastalprogram After steps were taken to cod e enforcement officers M operated using $1,796,467 weakened the Act and reduce fund- (CEOs). The Growth Manage- in federalfunds during FY92 ing for its implementation, ment Act also requires that each and $1,906, 000 in FY93. Maine's Coastal Management Pro- town hire a certified CEO and that 108 Maine Coastal Management Program the state develop a program for training workshops, and paid for wise. In submitting a PBR appli- training and certifying local CEOs. the production of training manuals cation, the applicant agrees to abide The certification and training pro- for each session and for adminis- by enforceable standard conditions gram that the state developed re- tering the examinations. The state developed by DEP for specific ac- quires that CEOs take several ex- believes that the training program tivities. aminations on various elements of has led to equitable enforcement local and state regulatory pro- of Maine's coastal laws and regu- The PBR program has al- grams., including shoreland zon- lations, increased professionalism, ready reduced DEP's pen-nitting ing, zoning/land use, site develop- and fostered environmental aware- load. The agency has faced ex- ment, building standards, and in- ness in the towns through the ternal and external plumbing. All CEOs. To date, over 1,200 per- The Maine coastal program CEO's must have completed the sons have attended one or more of receivedjederal approval appropriate examinations and been the training workshops offered in September 1978. certified by December 1993. So through the program. far, the program has certified 304 individuals statewide in one or Permit by Rule - Simpli- treme pressure to process permits more of the areas. Most of Maine's fting Government Procedures: and to do so in an environmentally 147 coastal towns now employ cer- Maine's Department of Environ- sound fashion. A consultant's tified local CEOs, approximately mental Protection created a Per- study on the program's effective- 60 percent of all coastal communi- mit-by-Rule (PBR) program from ness found that there is about a 70 ties. Some towns share a CEO. its efforts to streamline the regula- percent compliance rate (for 450 tory process under the National study sites) under the PBR pro- Advanced training and cer- Resources Protection Act (NRPA). gram - compliance is highest in tification is also available on top- Under this program, selected ac- the southern part of the state where ics ranging from "legal issues and tivities with minor impacts gain DEP staff monitors compliance. enforcement techniques" to flood- automatic approval 14 days after plain management. Coastal man- DEP recieved the application, un- Citizen Participation in agement funding supported the less applicants are notified other- Water Quality Monitoring: De- spite 20 years of work to reduce coastal water pollution, one quar- ter of Maine's productive shell- fish beds are closed due to bacte- rial contamination. Recognizing that citizen action at the local level is the key to clean water, Maine's Coastal Program, through its Shore Stewards Partnership Program, has been working with 13 citizen moni - toring programs in coastal waters from Kittery to the St. Croix estu- ary. The program focuses on solv- ing local water quality problems at t local level. Over 200 volun- he teers completed an intensive train- 0_01 11 0, 4" ing program, enabling them to test f"S , __ 0 a 109 Maine Coastal Management Program local marine waters for tempera- ture, salinity, turbidity, dissolved Estuary project fosters cooperation oxygen, pH, and fecal coliform. to protect water quality Up and down the Maine coast, volunteers working with local of- Cumulative and second- resource issues, and to reach ficials and state enforcement au- ary impacts of development has agreement on how the river's re- thorities are abating water quality become a priority issue for Maine sources can be used in such a way problems. To date, the Partner- in its strategy under the section that the river continues to con- ship has attracted roughly $37,500 309 Enhancement Grants Pro- tribute to the local economy and in corporate donations, founda- gram. The state has designed a improve the area's quality of life tion support, and individual con- demonstration project to address for years to come. To accomplish tributions. The Partnership's con- cumulative and secondary im- these goals, Maine's coastal pro- tributions brought the project's pacts on a regional management gram will support efforts to in- total annual budget to about basis, without creating another ventory and monitor the natural $115,000 - a small budget, but layer of bureaucracy. systems of the estuary's water- one which has produced tremen- shed; identify threats to water dous results for the state of Maine. The Damariscotta River quality, health of the fisheries and In addition to support Estuary Project is a regional man- other natural systems; develop, ing volun- agement initiative bringing to- with input from residents and teer monitoring, funds donated to gether seven towns that have re- their town governments, recom- this project are also distributed cently developed local compre- mendations for regional land and through mini-grants for water qual- hensive plans and that share a water management that sustain ity related educational projects for common resource, the the use and promote thoughtful students and adults. Mini-grants Damariscotta River estuary. A stewardship of the River and wa- have supported slide shows, trav- local steering committee directs tershed; continue to educate the elling displays and public forums the three-year project and in- regional community on how to for adults and curriculum devel- cludes representatives of town balance conservation with natu- opment on shellfish, marine de- governments, people whose live- ral resource use; and encourage bris, water quality and "commu- lihood depends on the river, local public participation in all aspects nity links to the sea" for eighth business and conservation orga- of the project. nizations, and other interested grade through Kindergarten. citizens. The management ap- Other statewide coastal proach used in designing this management efforts can draw project will target coastal water- from information gathered sheds as basic management units through the Damariscotta River and reallocate state technical and Estuay Project. Descriptions de- financial resources on a regional veloped for the estuarine and Right: Salmon aquaculture, a growing level. marine habitats in the Damariscotta River have already industry, provides alternativesfor over- The Project's two goals played a key role in developing a fishing coastal areas. are: to encourage cooperation statewide estuarine and marine Far right: Navy shipyard. among citizens sharing the habitat classification scheme. The Damariscotta River Estuary on state expects that this project will yield many more benefits. 110 Maine Coastal Management Program SUHMARYOF EVALUATION FINDINGS Did you know? Final findings for the 0' Maine's coastal program porting a lasting network of skilled evaluation conducted in June 1993 director has served as Chairman citizen stewards. The environmen- cited several areas of accomplish- of the Coastal States' Organiza- tal monitoring being performed ment by the state, including: de- tion (CSO) during the past two by citizens under the Shore Stew- velopment and implementation of years, in addition to overseeing ards Partnership Program is an a successful Code Enforcement Maine's vast web of coastal and excellent example of the useful- Officer Training and Certification other related issues. ness of citizen stewards. Program, which has resulted in 01 Working with the Cana- 0' Maine was among the certification of more than 30 ,0 than Department of Environment, nation's first states to formally in- CEOs; improvements in coordi- the Gulf of Maine Council on the corporate sea level rise provisions nation initiatives involving the Marine Environment produced into environmental regulations. Maine Coastal Management Pro- the first in a series of "State of the Maine did so through the state's gram and its catalyst role for initi- Gulf" reports. The series will Sand Dune Rules, which are ating and sponsoring a variety of present current information on el- among the strictest in the nation. discussions on marine policy re- ements of the Gulf of Maine eco- The Rules impose restrictions on lated issues, sponsoring the Gulf system, initially on its water qual- where structures may be sited in of Maine Program, and serving as ity, in a style geared to the general sanxd dune areas that the state the region's advocate for the pro- public. has identified as vulnerable to gram since its inception. storm damage. No construction 0' Increasingly, coastal resi- may occur on, or seaward of, a The evaluation findings dents are looking for ways to be- frontal dune or in the V-zone, also noted some areas for improve- come more effectively involved in which are areas subject to wave ment-, including public relations coastal stewardship on a year action or a one percent, or greater, round basis. Maine's Shore Stew- chance of flooding in any given and public education on the state's ards Partnership Program, estab- year. Furthermore, the state pro- complex resource management lished by the Maine coastal pro- hibits projects likely to be dam- laws, technical assistance to local gram, offers that opportunity by aged from changes in the shore- governments, and assessment of directing public and private re- line within 100 years. key program issues and priority sources toward building and sup- funding elements. 10i A6. 040- 7 Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve he Wells Reserve is nestled lized several historic buildings, In 1992, Laudholm Trust in York County, in the town of including the barn, now used as completed a successful capital Wells, on the southern coast of education facility. Another build- campaign, raising more than $6 Maine with the historic Laudholm ing was converted into a research million to support the reserve. The Farm calling the property home. laboratory, dedicated by the Gov- Trust also received an award for The reserve's diverse natural fea- ernor. Coastal Leadership at NOAA's tures create an ecosystem unique First Annual Excellence Awards to the region, with undeveloped Using volunteer support, Ceremony for its philanthropic ef- marshes and transitional upland a Maine Conservation Corps crew forts supporting the reserve. fields and forests along two con- constructed an elevated boardwalk trasting watersheds, the Little crossing the ocean dune at Networking: Wells Re- River estuary and the Webhannet Laudholm Beach. The reserve also serve manager takes an active role River estuary. Two endangered collaborated with the Town of not only in the site's management, species - the piping plover and Wells to restore an overwashed but also in promoting and support- least tern - nest within the re- area of Laudholm Beach. ing the entire National Estuarine serve, and seven plant species re- Reserch Reserve System through cently expanded the list of state Staffing: During the bien- his position as vice-president of protected species that thrive at the nium, the reserve increased its the National Estuarine Research reserve, bringing the total to ten. staff to eleven and hired a full- Reserve Association. The manager time research coordinator. The also served broader research and The Wells Reserve Man- Wells Reserve Management Au- management needs as a member agement Authority, a state agency, thority, a state agency primarily of the Corporation of the Bermuda makes management decisions composed of other state and fed- Biological Station for Research, guiding the reserve. A private-non- eral agencies owning land within Inc., a governor- appointed mem- profit organization, the Laudholm the reserve, issued regulations ber of the Marine Research Board Trust, raises funding to support guiding public use of the reserve and as a member of the Marine the reserve's programs and match and adopted a personnel policy Policy Committee of the Land and federal grants to the reserve. manual for reserve employees. Water Resources Council; the PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 4 V , Facilities: Wells Reserve dedicated its newest trail to former Sen. Edmund Muskie during a cer- emony attended by Sen. Muskie and Madeline Albright, U.S. Am- bassador to the United Nations. N. The reserve's seven mile trail sys- tem is still the longest trail system in Maine outside of Acadia Na- tional Park. With funding from OCRM, the Wells Reserve stabi- 112 Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve M gllrg "- 0 IFIN ' 5, Open Space, Wetlands, and Natu- .11, P ral Habitat Task Group of the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recre- ation Plan; and the Wells Harbor @,,,R, E;@ Management Plan Committee. Wells Reserve also sponsored the semi-annual meeting of the New England Estuarine Research S oci- 7,, a 01 ety and hosted two meetings of the 10 Regional Association for Research on the Gulf of Maine. Habitat Protection: Piping plovers, federally listed as endan- gered species, and least terns, on the state's endangered species list, in a former seasonal wooded wet- The reserve also became an asso- were recorded nesting on land. ciate member of the Regional As- Laudholm Beach in the reserve for sociation for Research on the Gulf the first time in twenty years. The RESEARCHAND of Maine, an international organi- Wells Reserve staff cooperated MONITORING PROGRAMS zation of scientists focusing on with National Wildlife Refuge per- regional marine and coastal re- sonnel to post and patrol the area During the biennium the search. and worked with Maine's tern/ reserve's research coordinator be- plover group to erect protective came an adjunct professor with Wells Reserve's research nest enclosures. the University of New coordinator successfully organized a group of more than 60 dedicated Habitat Restoration: The Protecting 1,600 a @res, volunteers to participate in the reserve consulted with the Army U reserve's water quality monitor- Corps of Engineers on a proposed the reserve now holds ing project. The volunteers sur- study to remedy adverse ecologi- 100% acquisition status. veyed the shoreline of the reserve's cal damage caused by the 1962 estuaries and tributaries, measured dredge of Wells Harbor. The Corps Hampshire's zoology department water and air temperature, and col- proposed isolating the dredge dis- and at Antioch College of New lected samples to record E. coli posal area (formerly a saltmarsh) England. She also participated in levels, chlorophyll, phytoplankton, with a moat for wildlife habitat workshops and lectures at Bowdoin salinity, and dissolved oxygen. enhancement. The Reserve Man- College, the University of Rhode These measures are taken twice a agement Authority research com- Island and Massachusetts Sea month at a minimum of twelve mittee recommended that the Grant College and served on a sub- sites on the reserve. Corps of Engineers also consider committee of that organization to impacts to beaches and other es- help develop a workshop on Gulf Using data from the re- tuarine habitats at Wells. In an- of Maine habitats. Through her serve, the research coordinator other project, the U.S. Fish and academic affiliations, reserve staff presented a paper discussing how Wildlife staff planned to restore were able to teach graduate courses an impounded salt marsh responds wetlands on the reserve by plug- in Ecological Research Methods to restored tidal flow at a Coastal ging a ditch to raise the water table and Marine Ecology at the reserve. Wetlands Ecology and Manage 113 Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve w ment Symposium hosted by Na tional Marine Fisheries Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, Sea Grant, and the National Ag Audubon Society at Louisiana lill' T 20"Ri PKI State University. She also pre- 141 sented the research at annual meet- ings of the American Society of Limnology and Oceanography and T Society of Wetland Scientists. The reserve has served re- searchers from several New En- gland institutions during the past two years. Researchers from the University of New Hampshire and University of Boston collected me- teorologic and hydrologic data at the reserve to construct a water budget for Wells Bay. Also, re- searchers from the Southern Maine Medical Center collected data on the prevalence and viability of Lyme disease at the reserve. Gradu- ate students performed censuses of deer and wading birds on the reserve and documented biologi- EDUCATIONAND Members of the education cal changes brought on by restored OUTREACH PROGRAMS staff served on the Gulf of Maine tidal flow to a salt marsh. Council's Public Education and The reserve's award win- Participation Committee, Maine's ning outreach educational pro- Shore Steward Trust, and the The reserve received $142,920 gram, designed to bring hands-on Wells-Ogunquoit school districts in federal funding estuarine environmental education Science Curriculum Revision in 1992 and into kindergarten through sixth Committee. The staff also co-di- $123,830 in 1993. grades, instructed more than 4,000 rected a science and mathematics students in eight school districts academy for the State Systemic in New Hampshire and in Maine. Initiative funded by the National During 1992, the reserve The staff presented the outreach Science Foundation to enhance expanded its computerized map- program at the Gulf of Maine science instruction statewide. ping system by digitizing the Marine Educators and the National marshes as part of a research Marine Educators conferences, During the biennium, the project on salt pannes. Wells staff and the National Science Teach- reserve offered in-depth teaching also surveyed the biology of sea- ers Association meeting. of estuarine habitats and processes sonal wetlands on the reserve. through summer "Junior Re 114 Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve searcher" programs for children 9 Reserve staff also trained week series of evening seminars to 11 years old and "Advanced volunteer docents, who guided entitled "On the Edge" presenting Junior Researcher" programs for natural history tours for 5,000 visi- information on sustainability of children ages t 1 to 13. The reserve tors. During 1992 alone, 30,000 the coastal environment. Both also participated in a state educa- people visited the reserve, and seminars offered continuing edu- tion program that enabled two 7,000 visited the annual Laudholm cation credits to participants. MERIT high school students to Nature Crafts Fair and viewed spe- work at the reserve's research fa- cial exhibits on education, re- During the biennium, the cilities to gain a greater under- search, and volunteer programs of Wells Reserve gained widespread standing of research techniques. the Wells Reserve. recognition. The Voice ofAmerica The reserve also sponsored a sum- radio program broadcast an inter- mer course on coastal ecology for An education subcommit- view with the reserve manager on teachers and the public and sup- tee produced a new interpretive the program's European segment. ported a state education program slide program which is being used The New York Times featured the that allowed 60 teachers to im- to inform civic groups about the prove math and science instruc- reserve and to recruit new volun- tion skills through first-hand ex- teers. The reserve produced a re- Wells Reserve perience with scientists conduct- port that analyzed development was designated in 1984 ing research. and interpretation of its interpre- in Wells, Maine, tive trails. called the Acadeian During the fall and spring biogeographic region. of 1992, Wells staff and volun- During the biennium, edu- teers conducted 20 fourth-grade cation staff collaborated with the programs at the reserve involving state Department of Environmen- reserve on the front page of its nearly 1200 pupils. A corps of 30 tal Protection in promoting Na- Sunday travel section. The docents was trained to lead the tional Wetlands Month, and coop- reserve's outreach program was program. The spring programs erated with the Wells Harbor Com- highlighted on a Portland televi- were given in cooperation with mittee to coordinate a beach clean- sion station's Color Me Green en- staff from the Rachel Carson Na- up observing Earth Day. vironmental series and was fea- tional Wildlife Refuge. tured in weekly cable television In 1992, through information spots. Wells also the support of the gained recognition in quarterly Maine Humanities newsletters to the Laudholm M@i Councils, the reserve Trust's 3,200 members who sup- R, produced a 7-week port the reserve throughout the serie 'MI h s of evening United States and in four foreign seminars entitled "Do countries. Fish Pay Taxes?" �r. which discussed en- SUMMARYOF vironmental trends in EVALUATION FINDINGS the Gulf of Maine re- gion. In 1993, the re- No evaluations were con- serve produced a 6- ducted during the biennium. 115 @10 00 ?@o x o@' cl e'0\ m e 6\ @ e e *e c O@G .,e e \\Y @"S Chesapeake Bay-MD NERR 117 Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program aryland's16 PROGRAM formation for use in the 1994 coastal counties and Baltimore ACCOMPLISHMENTS threshold review of Maryland's City are included in the state's coastal nonpoint program devel- coastal zone boundary. Through Coastal Nonpoint Pro- opment. the coastal program, Maryland gram: The Coastal and Watershed controls development in a "Criti- Resources Division has taken the Growth Management: In cal Area" which comprises tidal lead in coordinating the develop- 1992, Maryland passed the Eco- lands and waters of the Chesa- ment of Maryland's coastal nomic Growth, Resource Protec- peake Bay to the head of tide and nonpoint program, required by tion, and Planning Act which re- all lands within 1,000 feet of mean section 6217 of the 1990 Coastal quires all local governments to high water or from the landward include "sensitive areas" elements edge of tidal wetlands. The 1984 The Maryland coastal program in their comprehensive plans, and Maryland General Assembly en- receivedjederal approval to ensure that local development acted the Chesapeake Bay Critical in September 1978. ordinances are adhering to the Area Protection Act; the Critical comprehensive plans. The sensi- Area Commission later promul- Zone Act Reauthorization Amend- tive areas elements must address gated regulations to implement the ments. Coastal program staff and the protection of steep slopes, Act. The Critical Areas law and staff from several networked agen- streams and their buffers, 100- criteria were incorporated into cies analyzed Maryland's current year floodplains, and endangered Maryland's Coastal Zone Man- nonpoint source authorities and and threatened species habitats. agement Program by amendment compared them to the management The Coastal and Watershed Re- on July 27, 1987. All of the local measures developed under section sources Division coordinated with coastal communities have devel- 6217(g) of the CZMA. CWRD staff the Office of Planning to produce oped land use plans for the Critical are synthesizing this and other in- the guidance document, Area as mandated by the Critical Areas legislation. Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program (MCZMP) is networked, using existing state laws and authorities to manage coastal resources. State agencies implementing the program are bound through Memoranda of Un derstanding with the Coastal and Watershed Resources Division of the Department of Natural Re- sources (DNR), which serves as the lead agency for program fund- ing and administration. Networked agencies include the Departments of the Environment, Agriculture, Housing and Community Devel- is explore the Chesapeake -ill ajoiia edueatioil plpjecl beiweeii the opment, and Transportation, and steite, the comir.yand the National Esittarine Research Reserve. M the Office of Planning 118 Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program "Preparing a Sensitive Areas Ele- Resources Advisory Committee to coastal zone management grant, ment for the Comprehensive discuss coastal program priorities monitoring state and federal legis- Plan. " Staff also participated in and to review and rate specific lation, and recommending courses workshops and public meetings projects considered for coastal of action to state and local officials on sensitive areas protection and management funding. on specific environmental issues assisted with the preparation of facing Maryland's coasts. sensitive areas definitions and land Coastal and Watershed use guidelines for state agencies Resources Advisory Committee: SIGNIFICANT to follow during the design and The Coastal and Watershed Re- PROGRAM CHANGES construction of projects that are sources Advisory Committee intended for state use or manage- (CWRAQ is a long-standing fo- The state is working on a ment. rum for local government officials revised program document which, and private citizens to participate along with several authorities not Increased Coordination: in and influence the direction of yet incorporated into Maryland's Maryland's most recent 312evalu- Maryland's coastal program. Re- coastal program, will be submit- ation findings found that the lead cently, the Advisory Committee ted to OCRM for review and ap- coastal zone management agency has taken an active role on such proval as a program change. should work to increase the issues as the review of Maryland's MCZMP's visibility and improve SUMMARYOF its interagency coordination ef- Maryland's coastal program EVALUATION FINDINGS forts. In response, the Coastal and Watershed Resources Division operated using $2,290,000 No evaluation of the Mary- meets regularly with representa- in federalfunding in FY92 land Coastal Zone Management tives from state agencies and mem- and $2,330,000 in FY93. Program was conducted during the bers of the Coastal and Watershed biennium. The next evaluation is scheduled for June 1994. Maryland requires tributary strategies to protect Chesapeake Bay The 1987 Chesapeake Bay (nitrogen and phosphorus) in the taries. Maryland officials, with Agreement, signed by the Gover- Bay by the year 2000, based on considerable public input, are pre- nors of Maryland, Virginia, Penn- 1985 levels. Amendments to the paring nutrient reduction strate- sylvania, the Mayor of the District Agreement, signed in August gies which will include both point of Columbia, the administrator of 1992, mandate the development and nonpoint source controls. the U.S. Environmental Protection and implementation of strategies When completed, the strategies Agency, and the Chairman of the to reduce nutrient enrichment of will be presented to the Governor Chesapeake Bay Commission, the Bay's tributaries, thus decreas- and will be implemented by state calls for a comprehensive plan- ing the flow of nutrients into the and local agencies whose activi- ning and resource management main stem. ties affect the Chesapeake Bay - As program to restore the health and an element of the strategies, Mary- productivity of the Chesapeake CWRD staff are actively land is using section309 Enhance- Bay. A major element of the Agree- involved in the multi-agency ef- ment Grant funds to strengthen ment proposed a 40 percent re- fort to develop strategies for the state's approach toward the duction in the level of nutrients Maryland's Chesapeake Bay tribu- management of marine sewage. 119 Chesapeake Bay, Md., National Estuarine Research Reserve he Chesapeake Bay Na- the East Coast. Jug Bay also pro- At the Jug Bay Compo- tional Estuarine Research Reserve vides healthy spawning habitat for nent, reserve staff and Anne in Maryland has three components: striped bass and serves as a haven Arundel County personnel worked Monie Bay, located within the Deal for over 100 bird species. with an architect to develop plans Island Wildlife Management Area for an annex to an existing visitors in Somerset County about 50 miles PROGRAM center. The existing structure was southwest of Ocean City, Md.; ACCOMPLISHMENTS undersized for the program needs. Otter Point Creek on the upper The annex was designed to con- western shore of the Bay, 17 miles Facilities: For the last two tain exhibit space, an office, and a northeast of Baltimore; and Jug years, Maryland's Chesapeake Bay volunteer's conference and plan- Bay, on the Patuxent River flow- Reserve has been working with ning room. In the plan, the original ing into the Bay from the West personnel from the Otter Point exhibit space will become a sorely only 20 miles southeast of Wash- Creek and Jug Bay Components needed conference room. Anne ington, D.C. on two separate facility develop- Arundel County also planned other ment projects. Staff from Harford interior modifications to the exist- Comprised of tidal creeks, County, where the Otter Point ing structure to accommodate the open estuarine waters, salt marshes Creek Component is located, have annex. Construction began in Feb- and pine forest, the 3,400 acre been working with an engineering ruary 1993 and was completed in Monie Bay Component is rela- and architectural firm to design a July 1993. The annex is open and tively pristine and isolated. Monie reserve Visitors Center that is to currently in use. Bay is a haven for resident and be located in Harford County. Pre- migratory bird populations, includ- liminary plans are for a more than The Volunteer Coordina- ing herons, egrets, ibises, and a 7,000-square-foot building tor, working at Jug Bay Compo- wide variety of waterfowl species. which will house an auditorium nent, continued to work on the Blue crabs, white perch, oysters, and conference room, an exhibit draft of the volunteer guidebook blue fish and other important area, offices, discovery room, li- being developed for Jug Bay Com- aquatic populations are also found brary, and a wet lab. Plans should ponent. Reserve and Jug Bay staff in Monie Bay. The Otter Point be finalized by late winter 1994, coordinated on supplying text, Creek Component includes 700 barring any unforeseen obstacles. acres of tidal freshwater marsh, two ponds, open water and up- lands. With approximately 400 acres of wetland, this component is one of the few large freshwater tidal marshes in the Chesapeake A@ 'V1_S1___,,_@, Bay region that remains in a com- paratively natural, undisturbed state. The Jug Bay Component covers 700 acres, 250 of which are a broad shallow embayment of the Patuxent River, and contains one of the largest stands of wild rice on In FY 93, the reserve received -,z;- 41- $109,000 in federal support. 120 Chesapeake Bay, Md., National Estuarine Research Reserve editing drafts, and devising the RESEARCHAND outings for reserve supporters in- concept of a field-sized guide MONITORING PROGRAMS cluding: a brainstorming session/ which would contain facts about picnic to develop education pro- the cultural, biological and natu- A study of habitat alter- gram ideas and a bus trip tour of ral history of the Jug Bay area. ation in the tidal freshwater wet- the Monie Bay Component. lands of Otter Point Creek is being Reserve staff have been conducted by Dr. Grace Brush of Reserve staff have been working with the Monie Bay Com- Johns Hopkins University. Dr. working primarily with the Jug ponent Site Manager to find the Brush will be collecting informa- Bay Component to develop a right niche for the reserve at Monie tion from the Jug Bay Component teachers' curriculum guide. The Bay. Future trail development into and comparing the tidal estuarine guide will contain materials and the component, since it is most system with the non-tidal estua- activities for estuarine science in easily accessed by water, is being rine system at Old Woman Creek the classroom and on the reserve. discussed. Its inaccessibility is NERR. In addition, Dr. Thomas what makes Monie Bay Compo- Jones of Salisbury State Univer- Teachers'workshops took nent most attractive to research- sity is studying the nutrient se- place at each component to test ers. Nearby university professors questering capabilities of marsh proposed activities and solicit have been conducting the field plants and sediments at all three feedback on teachers'needs in es- work aspects of their classes in the Components of the reserve. The tuarine education. marshes of Monie Bay Compo- nent. NOAA funding has also been The education and site provided to these same scientists manager at the Otter Point Creek to conduct research in this com- Component worked through ponent. Harford County public schools to provide in-the-field and class- . ..... ... .... Other accomplishments room programs in estuarine sci- include: further development of ence. Hikes, canoe trips, week- the trail network at the Otter Point end marsh clean-ups and inter- Creek Component; the design, pretive programs became a valu- construction, and installation of able part of the manager's out- two fiberglass interpretive signs reserve continues to use student reach effort. at the Jug Bay Component; facili- interns to research, collect, and tating the travel of component site monitor land use change and envi- SUMMARYOF managers to attend conferences of ronmental data. EVALUATION FINDINGS the National Estuarine Research Reserve Association; and devel- EDUCATIONAND A program evaluation site oping a volunteer support group OUTREACH PROGRAMS visit was conducted in September for Otter Point Creek Component. 1993. Findings, currently being Current reserve activities drafted, are scheduled for publi- include adult field lectures, dis- cation in early in 1994. Chesapeake Bay, Md., covery programs for children, Reserve, in the Virginian marsh monitoring studies, guided region, was designated nature hikes, scheduled school With 4,820 acres, Chesapeake in two parts, one in 1985 group trips, and canoe trips. Re- Bay, Md., Reserve is and one in 1990. serve staff also organized several 98% complete. 121 122 ,\10 C,\c 3 000 61, 04 .5e e0 XNO 6\\e e(be Waquoit Bay NERR E@@Waquoi 123 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program assachuse s coastal zone spans 1,500 miles from the New Hampshire to the Rhode Island borders and three 'ZTT miles offshore, extending 100 feet 7_1 inland, past major roads and rail- ways, to cover up to a half mile of coastal waters and salt marshes. R,e@N?,4@ fi@v The coastal zone includes the area from Cape Cod to Martha's Vinyard and Nantucket. Given this extensive coastline, the state faces pressing coastal issues, including public access, coastal erosion, nonpoint source pollution, critical area planning, and ocean resource management issues. Y The Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program (MCZMP) finds primary legal au- PROGRAM The Governor of Massa- thority in the Act Relative to the ACCOMPLISHMENTS chusetts and the Adminstrator of Protection of the Massachusetts EPA approved the Buzzards Bay Coastline, passed in 1983, although Program Integration/Co- Comprehensive Conservation the Wetlands Protection Act, the ordination: Massachusetts has suc- Management Plan, developed by Wetlands Restriction Act, and the cessfully coordinated its coastal, the MCZMP, in April 1992. Mu- Ocean Sanctuaries Act and other program with relevant federal nicipalities and environmental or- Commonwealth authorities also agencies, including the U.S. Envi- ganizations around the Bay now play key roles in supporting the ronmental Protection Agency's implement this plan. To date, EPA state's coastal program. In all, state (EPA) National Estuary Program has awarded pollution prevention agencies use 27 policies to guide and with NOAA's National Ma- funding to the towns of Bourne, program implementation. Massa- rine Sanctuary Program and Na- Wareham, and Plymouth to adopt chusetts' Executive Office of En- tional Estuarine Research Reserve the Buttermilk Bay Nitrogen Man- vironmental Affairs (EOEA) is Program to expand the MCZMP's agement District, developed and designated as the role in managing coastal resources. proposed through the Buzzards Commonwealth's lead agency for For example, Massachusetts' Bay Project. The MCZMP worked program funding, with EOEA's coastal program now administers with the Buzzards Bay Project and Coastal Zone Management Office the Buzzards Bay and Massachu- the Town of Wareham to desig- responsible for daily program ad- setts Bays National Estuary Pro- nate the town as a no-discharge ministration. grams and became the state's des- area - the first such EPA desig- ignated agency to cooperate in de- nation on the east coast. The M veloping and designating NOAA's MCZMP also nominated Waquoit The state's coastalprogram Stellwagen Banks National Ma- Bay, site of the National Estuarine receivedfederal approval rine Sanctuary. Research Reserve, for designation in April 1978. as a no-discharge area. 124 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program Upon request, the service will also comment to resource agencies on the regulatory merits of a project. However, the coastal program staff does not perform technical or ad- vocacy work for any projects, al- though these staff members are available for technical assistance and consultation on most coastal activities. The PAS also mails out information sheets on state regula- tions, applicable policies, a list of contacts within the environmental . ..... agencies, and any other support- ing materials that may be helpful to applicants. The key to PAS's success has been the service's close coordination with other state agen- cies on project reviews. Massachusetts' coastal coastal states in other regions to program also worked aggressively conduct similar sessions. Barrier Beach Protection: with OCRM prior to the Septem- In May 1992, the MCZMP, the ber 1993 designation of the The Federal Emergency Audubon Society and the Asso- Stellwagen Bank National Marine Management Agency (FEMA), re- ciation for the Preservation of Cape Sanctuary. The MCZMP requested quested that the MCZMP's haz- Cod sponsored a symposium on and received joint-agency status ards coordinator, participate on the barrier beach conservation which for the Stellwagen Bank Sanctu- Federal Hazards Mitigation and prompted change in the way Mas- ary and co-authored the Environ- Assessment Team for several af- mental Impact Statement and Man- fected states in the New England Federalfunds provided agement Plan for the sanctuary. Region. O'Connell, a coastal ge- $1,784,000for the coastal ologist, provided invaluable assis- program in FY92 and Coastal Hazards: The tance to FEMA on storm assess- $1,856,000 in FY93. MCZMP hosted a coastal hazards ment and mitigation efforts. workshop in March 1993 in re- . . sachusetts manages its coastline. sponse to impacts from Hurricane PermitAdvisory Services: In response to issues raised at the Bob in 1991 and the nor'easters of The MCZMP established a permit symposium, a Barrier Beach Task 1991 and 1992. Technical and man- advisory service, PAS, to advise Force was established, which in- agement staff from New Jersey, applicants on permitting require- New York, Michigan and New merits and procedures within cludes representatives from fed- England coastal programs partici- Massachusetts's coastal zone. A eral, state and local government pated in the workshop, which in- provides information on permits, agencies and private industry. The cluded presentations from each of project application review meet- taskforce has been charged to study these eight states on coastal haz- ings, and the state's regulatory pro- the issues and develop guidelines ards and mitigation efforts, The granis and serves as a referral ser- for managing and stewarding bar- rier beaches, particularly empha- workshop's success prompted vice for coastal project contacts. sizing the relationship between 125 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program human activity and endangered barrier beach stewards, both state species. and local, to take bolder steps to- Did you know? ward maximum protection for Draft guidelines, which these fragile barrier beaches. The have been completed, promote guidelines, now in final draft, also Massachusetts's coastal proactive beach management, serve as a reference tool to local program director has served as while recognizing that some beach and state managers in preparing the chairman of the Massachu- management issues must be indi- barrier beach management plans. setts Bay and Buzzards Bay Na- vidually negotiated between local tional Estuary Programs and as government and state agencies. Recommendations of the the Governor's representative on The guidelines contain a set of task force also resulted in a state the Gulf of Maine Council on the Environment. 00' The MCZMP served as the Secretariat for the Gulf of Maine Council and Working Group Pro- gram from July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. The Secretariat handles day to day planning and work elements for the Gulf of Maine Program, and organizes and conducts the Council's meet- ings; and working group sessions. Massachusetts is the only coastal state so far to reque st an expansion of the management 57 7 area recommended byNOAA and EPA under the section 6217 na-- tional Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program. NOAA and EPA approved the state's request to expand the 6217 program's management area to include ar- eas covered by the Massachusetts Bay and Buzzard Bay National Estuary Programs. "Recommended Management requirement that state and local 000- EPA's Administrator rec- Measures" that can be applied to agencies prepare barrier beach ognized the towns of Bourne, any proposed use of barrier management plans for public re- Wareham and Plymouth by giv- beaches. Task force members rec- view by local conservation com- ing them awards for adopting the ognize, however, that in many missions. This review ensures that Buttermilk Bay Nitrogen Manage- cases these management measures barrier beach management plans ment District developed and pro- represent the minimum level of are consistent with the state's Wet- posed by the Buzzards Bay Project. protection recommended to meet lands Protection Act and other rel- environmental protection stan- evant local wetlands protection by- dards. The task force encourages laws or ordinances. Massachu 126 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program T'TRAMPh'13 4 Rapid response spurs Al. recovery from storms In the onslaught of a director of the Massachusetts J?, coastal storm, local, state, and fed- Coastal Zone Management Pro- eral emergency operations person gram, and other top government nel must react as quickly and deci- officials. Using that information, sively as the storm itself to save officials determine whether to pe- lives and property from disaster, tition for a presidential declara- and protect the environment. tion of disaster, to declare a state of emergency, or to take other ap- To help emergency per- propriate action. Immediate dam- sonnel in these critical moments, age reports are essential for the Massachusetts's Coastal Zone Governor to make such a determi- Management Program organized nation. a Rapid Response Storm Assess- setts Coastal Zone Management ment Team (RRSAT). The team's In December 1992, a presi- Program's Assistant Director mission is to quickly obtain accu- dential disaster declaration was chairs the task force. rate and concise preliminary in- issued for the Massachusetts coast- formation on coastal storm dam- line following a major coastal Federal Consistency Ac_ age, both during and immediately storm. The data compiled by the tivities: During the report period, following a coastal storm event. RRSATeam helped justify the di- MCZMP used the federal consis- saster declaration and provided tency process to review three The MCZMP's Emergency information to aid hazard mitiga- Operations Headquarters then tion measures during the "repair major activities in the state coastal summarizes all preliminary dam- and recovery process." zone: a federal waterfront devel- age assessments and relays that opment project, designations of information immediately to the Response team members federally operated marine disposal Governor, Massachusetts Emer- also provide technical assistance sites, and interstate review of a gency Management Agency offi- to communities and other state wastewater treatment plant. cials, Secretary of the Executive and federal agencies involved in Through the consistency review Office of Environmental Affairs, emergency management efforts. process, Massachusetts negotiated I significant improvements on each 11, K'111,@,,@i. project. Each case is described in the federal consistency section of this report. SUMMARY OF EVALUATION FINDINGS No evaluation of the Mas- sachusetts Coastal Zone Manage- ment Program was conducted dur- ing the biennium. The next pro- '5 gram evaluation is scheduled for June 1994. 127 Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve aquoit Bay Na- tional Estuarine Research Reserve includes areas of intense, moder- ate and low human impact in the towns of Falmouth and Mashpee in Barnstable County. The z@K reserve's boundary encompa 2,250 acres spanning the open water and marshes of Waquoit Bay, adjacent upland fields and forest, and public recreational areas of z South Cape Beach State Park Washburn Island. Waquoit Bay NERR provides a haven for the Piping Plover, federally listed as a threatened species, the endangered Roseate Tern, and other rare spe- cies. In only one other place in the Commonwealth besides Waquoit into a watershed action plan, de- RESEARCHAND Bay has the endangered S andplain veloped by the Waquoit Citizens MONITORING PROGRAMS Gerardia been confirmed to grow. Action Committee, focusing on discharge and nitrogen loading af- In related activities, the re- PROGRAM fecting the Bay. serve worked closely with Land ACCOMPLISHMENTS Margin Ecosystem Research An Intermunicipal Com- (LMER) scientists to develop a Facilities: Massachusetts mittee, composed of representa- computer model designed for lo- recently released $250,000 to reno- tives of the town boards from cal planners to determine nitrogen vate the interior of the Swift Estate Falmouth, Mashpee and Sandwich, loading levels in area watersheds. Main House beginning in Fall has been meeting at the reserve to Ultimately, the reserve will train 1993. When renovated, the Main respond to the plan. The planners to use this model. The House will feature a conference Intermunicipal Committee has LMER project, "Coupling of Wa- room, exhibit space and reserve submitted a "No Discharge Zone" tershed and Coastal Waters in offices. application to the U.S. Environ- Waquoit Bay," is supported by a mental Protection Agency (EPA) 4-year grant jointly funded by Resource Protection: to eliminate boating discharges into NOAA, the National Science Waquoit Bay's Resource Protec- the Bay. Citizens for the Protec- Foundation and EPA. The project tion Subcommittee, composed of tion of Waquoit Bay, the reserve's studies how changes in land use town and state officials withjuris- support organization, collaborated over time affect groundwater nu- diction in Waquoit Bay, devel- with the Association for the Pres- trients and how these effects influ- oped a Resource Protection Sum- ervation of Cape Cod and the ence the health of Waquoit Bay. mary which examined resource Intermunicipal Committee to dis- protection issues, regulations and cuss developing an "overlay" dis- Waquoit Bay Reserve staff regulatory gaps, and offered rec- trict approach for reducing nitro- are working with the EPA on two ornmendations for filling the gaps. gen loading in the Bay. EPA demonstration projects. In These recommendations evolved 1992 the Waquoit Bay Watershed 128 Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve became one of eight sites in the EDUCATIONAND tions regarding reserve educa- country designated as a National OUTREACH PROGRAMS tional products, such as the Wa- Demonstration Project Site for Ad- tershed Awareness curriculum. vanced Onsite Waste Water Treat- The reserve is also in- ment Systems. As such, the re- volved with the Massachusetts De- Federalfunds provided $ in serve will receive approximately partment of Education and the F Y92 and $ in FY93 for reserve $200,000 in technical advice and Towns of Falmouth, Boume and operations, education and technology through EPA's Small Mashpee in the Partnerships Ad- research. Flows Clearinghouse to install and vancing Leaming in Mathematics monitor onsite denitrification sys- tems. Having established a strong SUMMARYOF role in research and monitoring in EVALUA TION FINDINGS the watershed, the reserve will serve as project manager for this Final evaluation findings effort. The reserve is also work- were issued in January 1992. Ac complishments of the program in- ing with EPA to test an ecological risk assessment methodology, cluded: developing a large volun- which looks at several stressors, teer corps; creating and actively including nitrogen loading and involving the Resource Protec- other chemicals, boating and ag- tion Subcommittee; facilitating riculture, to determine the prob- the flow of information from re- ability of impact to human, bio- searchers to coastal policymakers logical and ecological health. and the public; renovating the Toxic plumes from the Massa- Swift Estate, and providing edu- chusetts Military Reservation, cational and interpretive opportu- where at least 50 toxic sites have nities. The evaluation recom- been identified, head down the wa- and Science (PALMS) Project. mended that the state commit fund- tershed directly toward the reserve. Designated the "museum partner" ing to the education coordinator The Waquoit Bay watershed is of this team, the reserve reaches position and other staff at the re- one of five demonstration sites in out to any nature center or reserve serve. The findings also recom- the country and represents a coastal with exhibits, to train teachers in mended that the state develop a watershed ecology and related top- long-term acquisition plan, con- ics, and offers the use of Waquoit duct a study of the cumulative The Waquoit Bay Reserve was Bay Reserve classroom facilities. impacts of docks, piers and boat- designated in 1988 The reserve's educational and in- ing on marine resources; and im- in the Northern Virginian terpretive outreach activities prove fiscal administration in Bos- biogeographical region. reached over 9,000 people during ton. In response to the last recom- fiscal years 1992 and 1993. An mendation, the Department of En- watershed. The Research Advi- estimated 30,000 people also used vironmental Management selected sory Committee has developed a South Cape Beach, within the re- a full-time grants management technical review procedure for re- serve, for recreational purposes staff member in Boston to im- serve documents, and is focusing during this period. Education sub- prove fiscal management and ad- on the need for a scientific net- committee members continue to ministration of federal grants to work across Cape Cod. review and make recommenda- the reserve and to other Common- wealth programs. 129 130 0 1@ 0 :;@ C) 11 U :;@v 9@ 10 51 9.- 0 T-', Q:, 0,:) % 0 1 @@q 0 0 M, ichigan Michigan Coastal Zone Management Program he Michigan Coastal Man- As the lead agency, the ture, require most small structures agement Program (MCMP), ap- Michigan Department of Natural to be readily moveable, require a proved in 1978, covers 3,200 miles Resources (DNR), Land and Wa- double'setback for large structures, of Great Lakes shoreline along ter Management Division establish a recession rate update Lake Michigan, Lake Huron, Lake (LWMD) administers the MCMP. procedure, add 15 feet to some Superior and Lake Erie. Featuring The LWMD also issues perm its setback requirements, and add two large peninsulas and touching under the Great Lakes Submerged seven communities to the list of four of the five Great Lakes, Lands Act, Shorelands Protection flood risk communities. To imple- Michigan's coastline is geographi- and Management Act, Sand Dunes ment the new rules, Michigan's cally unique. The state coastal Protection and Management Act, Coastal Management Program program'sjurisdiction extends into Inland Lakes and Streams Act, contacted communities with High to the border of Canada's Province Goemaere-Anderson Wetland Risk Erosion Areas to notify them of Ontario and the states of Minne- Protection Act, and the Underwa- of the one-year period for amend- sota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana ter Salvage Act. ing their zoning to conform with and Ohio. The inland boundary of the revised rules, to offer assis- the coastal zone includes resources PROGRAM tance with zoning ordinance revi- that affect the coastal zone and ACCOMPLISHMENTS sions and to provide model ordi- sand dunes, wetlands, and coastal nance language. The amendments lakes - all of which are signifi- Amendments to provide Michigan's Department cant coastal features. Shorelands Protection and Man- of Natural Resources with a man- agement Act rules: In May 1992, date to further protect its high haz- the Michigan Natural Resources ard and flood risk areas in The Michigan Coastal Commission approved amend- Michigan's coastal zone. Management Program, ments to the Great Lakes approved in 1978, covers 3,200 Shorelands Protection and Man- Sand Dunes Program: In miles of Great Lakes shoreline. agement Act regulations, which 1989, passage of the Sand Dunes constitutes part of Michigan's Protection and Management Act Coastal Management Program. greatly broadened the DNR's au- The amendments clarify the defi- thority to regulate activities in nition of a readily movable struc- OVA 4@1 132 Michigan Coastal Zone Management Program Critical Dune Areas. The Act, gram administration funds. Great Lake plant species which which sunsets in 1995, calls for a Leelanau County funding revised may be threatened by increased joint legislative study committee its outdated Comprehensive De- coastal development. to report issues relating to the ef- velopment Plan. The Leelanau. fectiveness of the DNR's adminis- General Plan project is a citizen- Adopt-A-BeachlBeach tration of the Sand Dunes Act to based effort to plan and manage Sweeps Program: Michigan was the legislature. LWMD staff have growth in a way that provides pro- one of the first Great Lakes states assisted the committee by provid- tection for sensitive coastal re- to become active in the national ing information for their report to sources in the Leelanau Peninsula. effort to clean up beaches. The the legislature. Eleven townships, three villages, MCMP used coastal management and several hundred citizens have funds to develop, print, and dis- Coastal Litigation Support participated in the development of seminate beach clean-up materi- Services: The MCMP funded a the General Plan. als to the public and to facilitate full-time attorney, in response to a the implementation of a Great NOAA evaluation, to initiate plain- Funded through the CZM Lakes Beach Clean-up along tiff actions and to provide litiga- program, other related projects Michigan's beaches. tion and support services on be- created and implemented an agri- half of the Great Lakes Shorelands cultural preservation plan using Shipwreck Management: Section in the LWMD. Before the purchase and traii sfer of devel- Michigan's coastal management opment rights; prepared a docu- program funded several projects ment entitled "Biodiversity of to further develop video mosaic NOAA supported Michigan's Michigan's Great Lakes Islands", imaging technology as a way of coastal program with which the state used in developing documenting shipwrecks and other $2,014,000 in FY92 and Michigan DNR's island manage- submerged resources. With CZM with 2,388,600 in FY93. ment policy; and surveyed endemic funds, video imaging technology funding this position, the LWMD A W_ received limited support from the Department of the Attorney Gen- W." Em eral because of staff shortages in A, the Attorney General's office. By using coastal management fund- ing to support an attorney, the DNR has been able to become more proactive in enforcing its coastal statutes through the Attorney General's office. Growth Management: Michigan's Coastal Management Program funded several projects to manage growth in northern lower Michigan using a combina- tion of section 309 Enhancement Grant funds and section 306 pro- 133 Michigan Coastal Zone Management Program documented the Edmund rently has nine designated Under- three historic vessels, participate Fitzgerald and the F.T Barney. water Preserves which provide rec- in and print the Great Lakes Re- The state also funded two seasons reational diving opportunities gional Underwater Resources Con- of field investigations and prepa- while protecting historic cultural ference proceedings, and develop ration of detailed maps of the resources. interpretive exhibits on the U.S. sunken schooner, the Alva Bradley. Life Saving Service. The MCMP As related projects, Michi- has also worked with NOAA and Using CZM funds, two lo- gan worked to develop and under- the City of Alpena on the designa- cal communities inventoried sub- water interpretive trail, restore tion of the Thunder Bay Underwa- merged cultural re- ter Preserve in Lake Huron as a sources to identify re- National Marine Sanctuary. sources that are not now protected through the Section 306A Low-cost state's established under- Construction Projects: During water preserve program. the reporting period, Results will determine Michigan's coastal manage- whether the communities ment program continued to will seek preserve desig- spend approximately a third of nation. Michigan cur- V its section 306 funds on section 306A, low-cost construction projects. These projects pro- vide for urban waterfront res- toration, increased public access, resource protection, and historic preservation. Community involve- ment in the coastal program is greatly enhanced through local grants. Section 306A funds serve 41it"N he catalyst for coastal commu- ast R N @@F, nities to improve or re-evaluate lmul @,R the use of their waterfronts. Sev- eral communities have reported that using low-cost construction grants has increased private in- vestment in waterfront areas. Federal consistency: Af- ter almost two decades of debate with the Corps of Engineers over the Corps' operation of the Sault hll, Ste. Marie Locks, Michigan's DNR reached an agreement with the Corps and other federal agen- cies which will study the environ- mental effects of fixed closing and 134 opening dates of the locks. Michigan Coastal Zone Management Program Management Act into law; passed amend- ments to the "Under- ,01N am"M N , , 0: 1 water Salvage Act" UM " , 22 HIR, which formally created 1#13 "'I"W @rgffi Mi! Eff"i, I T@i4'1 r the Underwater Pre R, serve Committee; and that the MCMP devel- "ORRi"W3, N111"'I"R oped policy on marina development and drafted amendments to the Shorelands Protec- tion and Management Act. The evaluation rM, also recommended some actions toward Rl- str 011 en , 402 gthening the pro- gram even further in @0 11", M -["",R'N -.1%x-10N1VWM some areas. NOAA Michigan's Coastal Management SIGNIFICANT recommended that the MCMP hire Program has long maintained that PROGRAM CHANGES additional field staff, particularly the opening and closing of the for enforcement, use federal funds locks for navigation during the The MCMP did not submit to support an attorney in the Gen- winter months should be based on any program changes during the eral Attorney's office whose time environmental criteria rather than reporting period. is dedicated to the Land and Water on a set date. Vessel traffic through Management Division, clearly ex- the connecting channels of the SUMMARYOF plain and document its federal con- Great Lakes under ice conditions EVALUATION FINDINGS sistency procedures, work on pro- can have significant impacts on cedures for determining that a per- coastal wetlands, fisheries habitat NOAA issued final evalu- mit application is complete, and and shoreline structures. ation findings in March, 1992, for increase technical assistance, par- the review period from August ticularly for soil erosion and sedi- After lengthy negotiations, 19 88 to July 1990. Overall, NOAA mentation officials and for local the Michigan DNIR, Corps of En- found the Michigan Coastal Man- governments implementing the gineers, U.S. Coast Guard, and agement Program to be effectively state's coastal management-related U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service implementing its approved pro- laws. The MCMP has worked to have agreed to a combined com- gram. The evaluation cited many address these recommendations. mitment of up to $250,000 per accomplishments of Michigan's year in money, staff and equip- Coastal Management Program. ment to conduct two years of moni- Among them, NOAA noted that NOAA approved Michigan's toring studies to determine if there the state signed amendments to coastal managment are adverse environmental impacts the Sand Dunes Protection and program in -1978 caused by lock-related winter navi- gation. 135 136 d@@ I- rm@ &?@Oql I Go oc-)\ P, . @@P . ( S '0 r - rmm@ C/@ con I - rmm@ C/@ C/@ r -rm@ I - 'I ol cl@ @-9970=-- TI 137 Mississippi Coastal Program he Mississippi Coastal Pro- ing that such decisions are consis- aquaculture facilities. The rules gram (MCP) is based in large part tent with the program's goals. The provide criteria for siting and op- on the Mississippi Coastal Wet- BMR assures that decisions made erating these facilities. The BMR lands Protection Law, and the by other State and Federal agen- is currently finalizing monitoring Mississippi Marine Resource cies are consistent with the MCP. requirements to submit to the Mis- Council enabling legislation. The While the primary management sissippi Commission of Wildlife, Department of Wildlife, Fisheries technique is direct state permitting Fisheries and Parks for adoption. and Parks/Bureau of Marine Re- authority, Mississippi has desig- sources (BMR) is the lead agency nated several ports and beaches Coastal Preserves Pro- that administers the major portion Special Management Areas gram: MCP is developing a coastal of this networked program. (SMA's). Special management preserve program that will iden- Mississippi's coastal zone bound- area plans have been developed ary encompasses three coastal for most beaches and the Port of The statejoined the ranks of counties and all coastal waters, Pascagoula. federally approved coastal although regulatory j uri sdiction is programs in September 1980. generally more limited in scope. PROGRAM Collectively, three "coastal pro- ACCOMPLISHMENTS gram agencies"- the DWFP (Bu- tify and prioritize estuarine eco- reau of Marine Resources), the Development of Net Pen systems, develop and implement Department of Environmental Aquaculture Regulations: In re- an acquisition program to acquire Quality (Office of Pollution Con- sponse to proposals to establish a priority ecosystems, and develop trol and Office of Land and Water large scale pen-net aquaculture management plans for the acquired Resources), and the Department operation outside and in the Mis- preserve parcels. During the bien- of Archives and History-are re- sissippi Sound, the MCP devel- nium, the MCP, in conjunction sponsible for managing coastal re- oped, adopted and implemented with the Mississippi Heritage Pro- sources, monitoring decisions that comprehensive permitting rules gram, characterized twenty major affect the coastal area, and insur- and regulations to address marine estuarine systems (1,500 acres) along the coast in the Bangs Lake area in order to determine their In Mississippi, coastal managers usefederalfunds to increase the public's eligibility for land acquisition and access to the coast. set priorities for acquisition. Once acquired, management plans for the areas will be developed. 77177 Citizens GuideforProtect- ing Wetlands: MCP, in conjunc- MV tion with The Nature Conservancy, IN, 2,i;;;i; ug developed and published a "Citi- zens Guide to Protecting Wetlands in Mississippi. " The guide explains wetlands definitions, functions and values, state and federal laws regu lating wetlands and the permitting process. The guide also identifies proactive roles that the public can 138 Mississippi Coastal Program play in permitted and unpermitted 0 activities as well as its role in The sta e, e ps co nate two beach and wetland cleanups annually. enforcing state and Federal wet- lands laws. Wetlands Mitigation Guidelines: Mississippi's Coastal 17 -% Program developed wetlands miti- "N' gation guidelines for wetlands permitting, which allow the pro- '194 gram to make regulatory decisions that would avoid, minimize, re- store, or compensate for adverse impacts. The guidelines also es- tablish criteria for compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable < adverse impacts from permitted projects. Mississippi's guidelines are similar to those issued by the law was also conducted to deter- low cost construction projects to U.S. Environmental Protection mine responsibilities and authori- provide or enhance public access Agency and Army Corps of Engi- ties, and cost estimates for remov- in coastal Mississippi. These neers but are more comprehen- ing the structures. Mississippi's projects included the construction sive. The state is also developing Coastal Program is in the process of nature trails, least tern viewing standards for evaluating the suc- of identifying alternative funding platforms and a boat launch. The cess of compensatory mitigation sources to remove other structures. MCP also developed non-indus- projects. trial construction standards for Public Trust Tidelands: water access and shoreline protec- Derelict Structure Survey: The Mississippi Public Trust Tide- tion facilities. These standards, In response to threats to public lands Act of 1990 requires that used by local governments receiv- health and safety and navigation projects which are proposed on ing 306A funds, guarantee mini- posed by abandoned piers, pil- lands subject to the ebb and flow mum environmental impact and ings, vessels, fishing shacks, and of tides must first obtain a public quality construction. other structures, the MCP con- trust tidelands lease from the Sec- ducted a survey of derelict struc- retary of State's office. Under pro- Cumulative and Second- tures. The survey's results in- visions of the Act, a majority of ary Impacts: With funding through cluded: locating, describing, and leasing revenues are directed to the CZMA section 309 enhance- mapping the location and owner- the Bureau of Marine Resources ment grant program, Mississippi's ship, where possible, of all such for preservation, conservation, ac- coastal program is addressing the near shore derelict structures in quisition, education, public access, cumulative impacts of septic sys- Harrison, Hancock, and Jackson and public improvement projects. tems on coastal waters. Working counties. A legal analysis of state with the Department of Health, Low Cost Construction the Bureau of Marine Resources The state received $579,333 Projects: Using section 306A re- will develop guidelines for the infederalfunds in FY92 source management improvement location, design, and operation of and $728,000 in FY93. funds, the BMR conducted nine on-site disposal systems (septic 139 Mississippi Coastal Program systems) whichwill consider a are subject to the state's wet- broader range of impacts than tra- lands regulations. ditional public safety concerns. These guidelines are intended to SIGNIFICANT be incorporated into the state sep- PROGRAM CHANGES tic regulations. No program changes Improvements to the were submitted during the Coastal Wetlands Use Plan: The biennium. Bureau of Marine Resources is also using section 309 enhance- SUMMARYOF ment grant funds to revise and EVALUATION FINDINGS update the state's wetlands use plan to take into consideration uses, An evaluation of the such as dockside casinos, that were Mississippi coastal program not envisioned at the time of pro- was conducted in April 1993. gram development. The BMR is Final evaluation findings are also using enhancement funds to scheduled for release in De- clarify which uses have an indirect cember 1993. impact on wetlands and therefore Mississippi coastal managers restock oyster shells to replenish oyster reefs to increase , oyster harvests. Docksid-a- gambling brings new challenge to mississippi"s coast Mississippi's newest in- The casinos are an eco- food processing facilities. Further, dustry, dockside gaming and ca- nomic boom to a rather weak improvements have been limited sino development, has already economy. Mississippi's Gulf Coast to minor shoreline modifications created significant positive and gaming market is expected to gen- and reconfiguration, dredging for negative impacts on the Missis- erate an annual revenue of $56.1 access and flotation. This is ex- sippi coastline. Legalized million to $71.6 million and create pected to change as prime sites dockside gambling was enacted thousands of new jobs, primarily are taken up and the casinos move by the Mississippi legislature in for local residents. Some of the into more pristine back bay areas. 1991. Since then, seven casino op- casinos are netting as much as erations have opened in two of $500,000 per day in revenue. For- The major impact to date the three coastal counties that ap- tunately, to date, the impacts to is the displacement of the com- proved the referendum (eight are coastal resources from casino de- mercial seafood industry, prima- licensed and approved by the velopment have been limited. rily the commercial shrimp fleet. Gaming Commission); and nine- Most casino development has Many seafood industry facilities teen applications have been filed, taken place in previously im- (fuel, ice, storage, supplies and many of which are expected to be pacted areas on sites of deterio- mooring) as well as some process- opened by late 1993 or mid 1994. rated boat yards and obsolete sea- ing facilities, have sold property to casino developers. 140 05 00 e \41 0\-\e '?@04 \AC5 @e @ecoe ,e ec @@Great Bay NERR 141 New Hampshire Coastal Management Program "Af he New Hampshire Coastal Program (NHCP) is a networked program based on a series of State In 1993, 15, 000 laws and implementing regulations pounds of debris administered by various state agen- were collectedfrom New Hampshire cies, boards and commissions. The -a-Now shores. Office of State Planning, as the _X lead agency, has responsibility for F111 implementing the program. Other k important networked agencies in- elude the Department of Environ- mental Services Water Supply and 41 Pollution Control Division and HN X, Wetlands Bureau, the Fish and Game Department, the New Hamp- shire Port Authority, and the De- partment of Transportation. The Council on Resources and Devel- opment (CORD), an interagency boundary is defined as 1,000 feet 800 volunteers participating. New board comprised of key state agen- from the mean high water, or to the Hampshire's Coastal Program has cies, is responsible for coordinat- limits of the Wetland Board's ju- cooperated extensively with the ing State policies and resolving risdiction over tidal waters, de- Odiorne Point Seacoast Science agency conflicts in the coastal zone. pending on the area. The boundary Center and recently funded educa- around Great Bay extends inland tional programs for middle and New Hampshire used the to identifiable features, such as high school students, the general segmented approach in designing roads, which in most cases are public, and environmental day its coastal program. The first phase, more than 1,000 feet from the camps. As part of this cooperative approved in June 1982, included shoreline, and to the limits of the effort, fall tidepool slide presenta- Wetlands Board's jurisdiction tions and studies in upland habitat, The coastal program, federally along estuarine rivers. Seaward, mammals, and freshwater ponds approved in June 1982 and the boundary includes all coastal took place. The program has also September 1988, received waters within the three-mile limit funded permanent sea tank exhib- $639,667 infederalfunds FY92 of the state's jurisdiction. its at the center in order to educate and $601, 000 in FY93. the public about coastal and ma- PROGRAM rine issues. Coastal issues are regu- ACCOMPLISHMENTS larly featured in the New Hamp- the Ocean and Harbor Segment shire Coastal Program's Tidelines which encompasses the Atlantic Public Education & Out- newsletter, Ocean shoreline, Hampton Estu- reach: New Hampshire's Coastal ary, and the Portsmouth Harbor Program has taken the lead on co- Wetlands Preservation and portion of the New Hampshire ordinating New Hampshire's Restoration: New Hampshire is coast. Phase two, approved in 198 8, Coastweeks events, including the actively involved in wetlands pres- included all remaining areas under state's Coastal Cleanup and Adopt- ervation and restoration and is rec- T tidal influence located near the a-Beach programs. The 1993 ognized as having a strong and Great Bay estuary. New Coastweeks celebration was the equitable program. New Hamp- Hampshire's inland coastal zone most successful to date, with over shire regulates every square foot 142 New Hampshire Coastal Management Program of wetland in the state and moni- pre-restoration assessment of sedi- chase of handicapped accessible tors compliance on all projects in ments and vegetation. Data gained play equipment. Pierce Island Park the coastal program communities through this project may be in- is the first municipal playground through its wetlands inspectors. valuable for management and res- in the Portsmouth metropolitan The Environmental Law Institute toration decisions. area with equipment accessible to recently presented New Hampshire disabled children. with a National Wetlands Award Natural Resource Protec- in recognition of the state's strin- tion: Using coastal zone manage- SIGNIFICANT gent yet efficient permit review ment funds, the City of Portsmouth PROGRAM CHANGES program. and the Town of Rye produced a watershed management plan for No program changes were The NHCP, in conjunction the Berry's Brook Watershed. submitted during the biennium. with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Ser- Located in both communities, vice, is actively involved in a show- Berry's Brook is a unique 5.9 SUMMARYOF case wetlands restoration project square mile coastal ecosystem E VA L UA TION FINDINGS at Awcomin Marsh near Rye Har- comprised of a 6.2 mile long stream bor. Portions of this marsh have with associated freshwater wet- OCRM conducted an been cut off from tidal influence lands, an estuary and tidal marsh. evaluation site visit in September since 194 1, when berms were con- The watershed contains several 1993, and will issue final evalua- structed. The area has also been rare plant species, over 1000 acres tion findings in early 1994. used as an Army Corps of Engi- of forested wetlands, and a spawn- neers dredge spoil disposal site. ing ground forbrown trout. Berry's As a result, the site has been in- Brook has clearly suffered from vaded by a noxious weed, impacts due to development and Did you know? Phragmites australis, and other may be suffering from nonpoint freshwater and brackish species. source pollution. The watershed 001- Only about 12%, or 18 management plan for Berry's miles, of New Hampshire's coast- New Hampshire's Coastal Brook recommended implement- line is on the Atlantic ocean. The Program is committed to a long ing a combination of regulatory remaining 113 miles is tidal coast- term restoration of this site: it is and non-regulatory management line primarily located in the Great removing the berms and spoil strategies to ensure long-term pro- Bay estuary. Of the 18 miles along material and reintroducing tidal tection of the watershed's water the Atlantic coast, 78% is in public flooding to the area. Spoil material and wetland resources. ownership. on a portion of the site has been 0' The Great Bay National removed and the program has at- Public Access: To increase Wildlife Refuge has been formed tempted to recreate the original public enjoyment of a previously , tidal creek patterns. Phase I has underutilized waterfront park in from the six-mile portion of the old Pease Air Force Base that bor- been met with quick success, and Portsmouth, New Hampshire's dered the Great Bay Estuary. This vegetative changes are already Coastal Program funded improve- undeveloped area is prime habi- noticeable. ments to Pierce Island Park. This tat for Bald Eagles, who winter funding enabled the construction there from December through The NHCP has also funded of a handicapped accessible walk- March. a long-term program to monitor ing path, installation of interpre- vegetative changes scientifically tive signs around the park, general by conducting soil analyses and a clean-up of the site, and the pur- 143 Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve tretching fifteen miles Nearly one-half of Great 3,000 feet of shoreline along the from the coast at New Castle, New Bay is exposed at low tide, with bay fronts the 50 acre site. The Hampshire, to the upper Great Bay most of the intertidal being Sandy Point Interpretive Center is in southeastern New Hampshire, mudflat. Typical of northern New also being preparted for a Spring the Great Bay estuary mixes tidal England estuaries, the bay hosts a opening, with help from the Great ocean waters with the freshwater variety of marine plant communi- Bay Research Reserve Advisory inflow of the Winnicut, Sqamscott ties, eighteen rare or endangered Board, which has recently been and Lamprey Rivers. The Great plant species, and five rare or en- activated. Bay reserve itself protects nearly dangered animal species. New 4,500 acres of tidal waters and Hampshire's Department of Fish The Great Bay Reserve was mudflats and about 48 miles Of and Game manages the reserve. designated in 1989 and shoreline. Within the five hun- received $120,000 for FY92 dred fifty acres of upland in the PROGRAM and $190,000 for FY93. reserve, the estuary's environment ACCOMPLISHMENTS ranges from salt marsh and tidal creeks to islands, woodlands, and Facilities: Construction of Management Planning: The re- open fields. All of Great Bay lies the 4,000 square foot Discovery serve is actively involved in estab- within the reserve, as do the small Center at Sandy Point is to be lishing a 1, 1 00-acre National Wild- channel from the Winnicut River completed for a Spring, 1994, dedi- life Refuge at the former Pease Air and large channels from the cation. This major project will fea- Force Base, to be managed by the Squamscott and Lamprey Rivers, ture a classroom, bookstore, in- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. A that meet in the center of the bay door and outdoor exhibits, and a preliminary management draft to form a channel connecting to 1,600 foot boardwalk that draws plan has been completed and is out Little Bay at Adams Point. visitots out to the saltmarsh. Over for review. The reserve is continu- ing to work closely with the New Hampshire Depart- ment of Environmen tal Services, the U.S. Coast Guard, and lo- cal industry in devel oping an Area Re- sponse Plan for oil spill planning. A draft Wildlife Rehabilita- Rl@ tion Plan, also devel- @,rg r, 1+ oped by the Reserve, 1. "MR is under review by the Fish and Game De- partment. Using a historic gundalow, reserve specialists explain coastal history to visiting students. IN 144 Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve V, F, F, Raising the sail of the reserve's historic gundalow became a unique event to celebrate Coastweeks '93. p1r, to learn more about each other and Hunters gather to hear duck callers at Duckers'Day, an activity sponsored by their shared environment. Hun- the reserve tofoster understanding between coastal users and environmentalists. dreds of people visited the festival and were treated to displays of art and local history, retriever shows, RESEARCHAND EDUCATIONAND yard sales, fishing lessons, duck MONITORING PROGRAMS OUTREACH PROGRAMS boat skulling and falconry. The reserve also brought a touch tank The reserve is successfully The reserve continued to and showed off the Piscataqua implementing its year-round wa- expand its educational efforts by Gundalow boat used to transport ter quality monitoring program giving presentations for school goods on the Bay 250 years before through the University of New children and adults, providing edu- trains. Ducker's Day sponsors Hampshire's Jackson Lab. The Lab cational workshops for teachers, hope that the festival promotes is cataloging all existing water presenting booths and displays at understanding between hunters quality data, back to 1970 and local Earth Day and Ducker's Day and the general public, as well as maintaining three permanent celebrations, tours, and other lec- teaching people about reserve re- baseline monitoring stations. tures. New publications will be sources. released soon; others proved so The reserve is also work- popular that they are in reprint. SUMMARYOF ing with the University of New EVALUATION FINDINGS Hampshire's Sea Grant Program, To support the Piscataqua which sponsors the Great Bay Gundalow Project, the reserve re- A routine program evalu- Watch, a citizen-based water qual- cently sponsored its third annual ation of the Great Bay NERR was ity monitoring program, to coordi- Ducker's Day festival, bringing conducted in September 1993. Fi- nate the Bay Watch's activities together hunters and the general nal evaluation findings are due for with Jackson Lab's monitoring public at a historic farm in Durham release in early 1994. program. 145 0 1-- (D 0 ; 4- I L " Lo- : @ -i 0 0 ;0@ -Z 0 (@ @e "0 Qz@, 0.1- 4 (;@, -91. -_j r--@Q :e- New - jersc New Jersey Coastal Management Program ew Jersey's Coastal ing New Jersey's Coastal Man- ies management, public access, and Management Program (NJCMP) agement Program in the Meadow- water use planning. The NJCMP is administered by the Office of lands. is already developing a public ac- Land and Water Planning (OLWP) cess guide for Bamegat Bay based within the Department of Envi- PROGRAM on recommendations of the public ronmental Protection and Energy ACCOMPLISHMENTS access action plan. (DEPE). Several core laws form the state's basis for regulatory Estuarine Ecosystem Man- Hazards Management: In control in the coastal zone, includ- agement: New Jersey's Coastal July 1993, New Jersey passed ing the Coastal Area Facility Re- Management Program took the amendments to its Coastal Area view Act (CAFRA), the Wetlands lead in developing a comprehen- Facilities Review Act (CAFRA). Act of 1970, the Waterfront De- sive land use and environmental Originally adopted in the 1970s, velopment Law, and the Riparian managementplan fortheBamegat CAFRA contained a major loop- statutes. The NJCMP couples Bay area. Bamegat Bay is a 75 hole that required only those fa- regulatory responsibilities cilities containing 25 or more housing units and commer- with a coastal land-use plan- ning function through direct cial development with 300 state control. or more parking spaces to obtain a permit from the Department of Environmen- New Jersey's coastal 01" boundary extends from the tal Protection and Energy. New York border to the Raritan As a result, about 50 percent Bay landward up to the first of the development in the 3,` @T @:l A@- ',i coastal zone proceeded with- road or property line from P ou t state or NJCMP review. mean high water; from the Raritan Bay south along the The important amendments Atlantic shoreline up to the Dela- square mile estuarine ecosystem to CAFRA require a permit for ware Memorial Bridge varying that supports densely vegetated any development on a beach or from one-half to 24 miles inland eelgrass, shellfish beds, finfish dune, and within 150 feet inland of (1,376 square miles of land area); habitats, nesting grounds for the the beach or dune. With these north along the Delaware River to endangered least tem, and an over- amendments, the state will signifi- Trenton landward to the first road wintering site for American black cantly improve its oversight of de- inclusive of all coastal wetlands; ducks and Atlantic brant. Located velopment within the coastal zone, and includes a 3 1 -mile square area between a developing suburban particularly for meeting hazard in the northeast comer of the state upland area to the west and a bar- management requirements, and bordering the Hudson River under rier island system to the east, the begin to address the cumulative thejurisdiction of the Hackensack Bay is subject to intense fishing , and secondary impacts of numer- Meadowlands Development Com- recreational uses, and nonpoint ous small developments. New mission, the state's designated source pollution from changing Jersey's coastal program is pre- body responsible for implement- and intensifying land uses. The paring regulations to implement "WatershedManagementPlanfor the CAFRA amendments. The program received Barnegat Bay, " finalized in June $2,114, 000 in federalfunding 1993, includes action plans for Water Quality: New N for FY92 and $2,115,000 public education, sensitive areas Jersey's Coastal Management Pro- in FY93. acquisition and protection, fisher- gram funded two studies address- 148 New Jersey Coastal Management Program Federal approval came in two parts: the BaylOcean Shore Critical Statewide Concern. The 24, 1992, concluded that New Jer- Segment in September 1978 NJCMP is now reviewing the en- sey is adhering to its approved and the Consolidated Program tire coastal planning process to coastal management program. in September 1980. ensure compatibility between the New Jersey's coastal program SDRP and the state's Rules on made major accomplishments by ing stormwater runoff and Coastal Zone Management. updating the state's coastal pro- nonpoint source pollution: gram document, and strengthen- Stormwater Management in the SIGNIFICANT ing policies related to high rise NewJerse y Coastal Zone, and Lim- PROGRAM CHANGES structures, large scale develop- iting NPS Pollution from New ment, farmland conservation, Development in the New Jersey As part of an on-going re- shellfish beds and submerged veg- Coastal Zone. These studies ex- organization of New Jersey's etation. The findings suggested amine innovative techniques New DEPE, the NJCMP has been that New Jersey could improve its Jersey could incorporate into its moved to the Office of Land and program by improving enforce- regulatory program to control Water Planning within the Envi- ment, increasing inter-agency co- stormwater and nonpoint source ronmental Regulation Element. operation with local governments, pollution, and evaluate the suit- The reorganization sought func- and simplifying state environmen- ability of land development re- tional chang. The Land Use Regu- tal laws and regulations. lated management measures for latory Program now handles all coastal water resources. Recom- state permits, and the Enforcement mendations from these studies will Element conducts all enforcement become part of New Jersey's ef- activities. forts to develop their section 6217 Did you know? Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Con- OCRM approved a num- 01 Nearly 40 percent of New trol Program, a statewide nonpoint ber of minor changes and incorpo- Jersey ocean waters have fishery source pollution rated them into the NJCMP` as limitations of some sort imposed routine program implementations as the result of water quality State Plan Consistency: In during the reporting period. problems. June 1992, New Jersey adopted Among them were changes to rules the State Development and Rede- on coastal resources and develop- 28 percent of New Jersey velopment Plan (SDRP)- a state- ment (N.J.A.C. 7:7E - 1. 1 et seq.) shellfish program acreage is con- wide master plan that will channel and changes to the rules governing demned for shellfishing due to development to preserve impor- the Hackensack Meadowlands De- either high levels of bacteria or tant natural resources and mini- velopment District. NOAA and the the presence of other pollutants. mize the adverse impacts of devel- NJCMP are also discussing !he 0' The New Jersey opment pressures. New Jersey's possibility of incorportating revi- Pinelands, a 1.1-million-acre re- coastal program worked closely sions to New Jersey's outer conti- serve, is composed of contigu- with local governments and other nental shelf coastal policies into ous forest, wetlands, agriculture, state agencies to compare local, the coastal program. and controlled development. regional and state agency plans The area is known for unique affecting the coastal area, and de- SUMMARYOF natural and physical character- velop the coordinated state plan EVALUATION FINDINGS istics and extensive, high qual- for New Jersey's coastal area. The ity water resources. The State Development and Redevel- The final evaluation find- Pinelands was designated an In- opment Plan designates New ings for the period August I ternational Biosphere Reserve by Jersey's coastal area as an Area of through August 1991, issued Feb. the United Nations. 149 019 OC, ,e q,ec TT@Htudson River NERR 151 New York Coastal Management Program ew York's coast is the ary, state consistency require- report entitled "Now andfor the fourth longest in the nation, total- ments, and coordination process Future: A Vision for New York's ing 3,200 miles. Over 12.6 million gives New York's 250 coastal lo- Coast, " the Governor's Task Force people, or 72 percent of New cal governments the option to es- on Coastal Resources recom- York's population lives and works tablish Local Waterfront Revital- mended revising New York's in the cities and towns along coastal ization Programs (LWRPs) which Coastal Management Program to waters, creating a strong need for address local needs and objectives reflect demographic, environmen- effective management of the state's in accordance with NYSCMP poli- tal and economic trends, local pri- coastal resources. To manage this cies. Over 100 local governments orities, and the need for conserva- coastal area, New York state iden- are now participating in the LWRP tion and development in each tified five distinct coastal regions: process. New York coordinates coastal region. In response to the Great Lakes, St. Lawrence River, state agency actions with the report, the NYSCMP developed Hudson River estuary, New York coastal program through the the first regional coastal manage- City (with an approved Waterfront WRCRA and SEQRA. The ment program for Long Island Revitalization Program), and Long Coastal Erosion Hazards Area Act Sound (LISCMP). The RCMP pro- Island. The state's coastal bound- grants authority for the state to set poses policies and standards which ary is generally 1,000 feet from the uniform setback requirements in address the unique needs and pri- shoreline, but includes areas of coastal high hazard areas. orities in Long Island Sound, and particular concern which extend identifies outstanding coastal natu- the boundary up to 10,000 feet in The New York coastalprogram ral resource areas and areas for some places. earnedfederal approval concentrated development. The in September 1982. program will assist state, federal The Department of State and local governments in setting (DOS), through its Division of PROGRAM priorities for public investment on Coastal Resource's and Waterfront ACCOMPLISHMENTS a regional basis. New York's De- Revitalization, administers the partment of State (DOS) antici- New York Coastal Management Regionalizing the Coastal pates submitting the LISCMP to Program (NYSCMP) and coordi- Management Program: In a 1991 OCRM in early 1994 to incorpo- nates state activities and pro- grams essential to the .... .. .. . . NYSCMP's implementation. The NYSCMP was established pursuant to the Waterfront Re- vitalization and Coastal Re- sources Act (WRCRA) and is supported by a number of other state laws, the State Environ- mental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), the Coastal Erosion Hazards Areas Act, and the Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands Acts. The NYSCMP, with its N coastal policies, coastal bound- 152 New York Coastal Management Program rate it into the NYSCMP. DOS plans to begin preparing the next regional coastal manage- mentprogram in January 1994 for the Long Island Sound South Shore Estuary, as man- dated by the New York State Legislature in 1993. Coastal Hazards: Fol- lowing the December 1992 nor'easter which caused over $250 million in property dam- age along the Long Island, Westchester and New York mgpo",kia City shoreline, New York's Governor established a Coastal Erosion Task Force to develop short-term and long-term recom- vide immediate engineering re- accessibility of the waterfront. To mendations and action plans for sponses to overwash and inlet implement the plan, the City, in addressing continuing flood and breaching. The report's second conjunction with DOS staff, ex- erosion damage. "Emergency Re- volume, which addresses the need tensively revised its zoning regu- sponse to Coastal Storms, Vol. I of and strategyoptions foraproactive lations. The revisions introduce the Final Report, " submitted to approach to long-term manage- mandatory public access and open the Governor on Sept. 1, 1993, ment of coastal hazards, is being space on the shoreline, and require makes recommendations for ad- finalized. Both reports direct the public access and visual connec- NYSCMP's coastal hazard activi- tions to the waterfront. Design stan- Federalfunding provided ties over the next several years. dards will reduce the height and $2,554,600 in FY92 bulk of structures on the water- for program operation and PublicAccess: Completion front. The zoning changes will also $2,547,680 in FY93. of the New York City Compre- ensure opportunities to site water hensive Waterfront Plan will lead dependent uses. New York City to substantial increases in public enacted these changes in late 1993. dressing short-term impacts of se- access along New York City's vere coastal storms. The report shorefront. The plan proposes new Coastal Habitat Protec- recommends, among other strate- links to reconnect neighborhoods tion: One of New York Coastal gies, creating a Critical Erosion with the waterfront, and recom- Management Program's stated Response Team which would re- mends more than 100 new or im- policies requires that, "significant port to the scene of critical erosion proved public spaces and 40 sites coastal fish and wildlife habitats immediately after major storm where public access would be a will be protected, preserved events and evaluate the erosion mandatory component of new de- and ... restored so as to maintain sites to determine the necessary velopment. The plan also recom- their viability as habitats." In Au- mitigation measures. The Re- mends that the City rezone over gust 1992, the Department of State sponse Team would also stockpile 500 acres of land, with careful designated 14,790 acres of signifi- materials, enabling the state to pro- guidelines to protect the scale and cant coastal fish and wildlife habi- 153 tats in the New York City coastal New York Coastal Management Program Scenefrom Hudson River P,_ "M "A, INV A iw Z U area. As a major resource protec- New York designated sce- New York is adhering to its ap- tion step in one of the most urban- nic areas of statewide significance proved coastal management pro- ized coastal areas in the world, in Albany, Rensselaer, Greene, gram. Cited as major accomplish- these designations are unique. The Ulster, Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, ments, the NYCMP created the designations protect the least tern, Rockland and Westchester coun- Governor's Task Force on Coastal piping plover, diamondback terra- ties, and submitted those designa- Resources in 1989, provided sub- pin, upland sandpiper, striped bass, tions for incorporation into the stantial technical assistance to lo- shortnose sturgeon and snowy NYCMP as a program change. cal governments in developing egrets, among other species. Local Waterfront Revitalization The state also designated Programs, and aggressively used SIGNIFICANT significant coastal fish and wild- Federal and state consistency as a PROGRAM CHANGES life habitats along New York City's tool to preserve and protect the shoreline and incorporated those state's coastal resources. As areas OCRM approved several habitats into the coastal manage- for improvement, the findings rec- of New York's Local Waterfront ment program. Those habitats fall ommended that the NYCMP de- Revitalization Programs as rou- within Richmond, Kings, Queens, velop a comprehensive public ac- tine program implementation Bronx and New York counties. cess plan, establish Special Area changes during the reporting pe- Management Plans for critical ar- riod. Revitalization programs were SUMMARYOF eas, and provide greater incen- approved for the Villages of EVALUATION FINDINGS tives to local governments for par- Ossining, Piermont, Croton-on- ticipation in the Local Waterfront Hudson, Port Chester, and Nyack; Final evaluation findings Revitalization Program. The next the Towns of Penfield and Hamlin; for the period July 1987 through evaluation of New York's Coastal and the Cities of Albany, Beacon November 1990, were issued Oc- Management research needs. and Kingston. tober 11, 199 1, and concluded that 154 Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve he Hudson River Reserve 100) is a large complex of fresh- PROGRAM includes four natural areas that water tidal marshes, swamps, and ACCOMPLISHMENTS span 100 miles of the tidal vegetated shallows that occupy two Hudson's 152-mile length, repre- large coves bordered by mixed de- Staffing: Three permanent senting the estuary's wide range ciduous forests on islands and up- reserve staff positions were cre- of salinity conditions and habitats. lands. Stockport Flats (RM 125) is ated during the biennium, two of Tidal freshwater wetlands are the a mosaic of mudflats, subtidal shal- which are state-funded. Previously reserve's most unusual habitat. lows, emergent freshwater tidal the reserve was operated by two Emergent marshes and submerged marshes, and vegetated dredge federally-funded staff on a con- shallows fuel both the detrital and spoil islands. The reserve's shal- tractual basis. phytoplankton food chains, and lows also serve as spawning and provide habitat for fish, turtles, nursery grounds for many species Management Plan: The crustaceans, waterfowl, and wad- of fish. Hudson River reserve's Final ing birds. Piermont Marsh, a brack- Management Plan was completed ish tidal wetland bordered by shal- The New York Department in January, 1993. This plan stipu- lows, is located on the west shore of Environmental Conservation lates that the reserve develop four of the Tappan Zee, 25 river miles manages the reserve in coopera- north of Manhattan (RM 25). Iona tion with four state and interstate The reserve operated using Island, located at the southern gate agencies that own or regulate $110,000 in federal funds in to the Hudson Highlands at RM Hudson River Reserve land. Rep- both FY92 and FY93. 43, is comprised of rocky, forested resentatives of these agencies and uplands surrounding tidal marshes NOAA comprise the reserve's that vary in salinity from fresh to Steering Committee. individual site management plans brackish. The Tivoli Bays (RM (SMPs) to provide more detail about public ac- cess and resource gz "ap,@ management ini- tiatives. SMPs were drafted for Stockport Flats _V and the Tivoli Bays. Facilities: Renovation of a nineteenth cen- tury dwelling at the Nutten Hook portion of Stockport Flats was completed in February, 1993. Using Federal 77 and private de- velopmentfunds, 155 Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve toric structures, and natural fea- movement and distribution pat- Under the Tibor T. Polgar tures. A caretaker was hired to terns and sediment pollution lev- Fellowship Program, the reserve maintain buildings and traits with els. Researchers use radionuclide sponsored 16 research projects on assistance from volunteers. Iden- dating techniques on core samples many aspects of estuarine ecol- tifying ways to increase handicap to estimate historic and recent sedi- ogy, including physical, biologi- accessibility to the site became a mentation rates and patterns. cal and chemical characterizations, focus for reserve staff. Analyses of dioxins, furans, heavy studies of ecosystem processes, metals, and PCBs will be per- exotic species control, nonpoint RESEARCH AND formed. source pollution, and exchanges MONITORING PROGRAMS between tidal wetlands and the Large-scale vegetation main stem of the Hudson River. The reserve's four sites maps (1"=200") were completed represent many of the natural ar- for tidal wetlands within the re- EDUCATIONAND eas and the broad range of 0 UTREA CH PROGRAMS salinities found in the estu- )101, P ary, as well as the wide varia- Hudson River Reserve tion in the density of develop- hosted the annual National Es- ment surrounding the estu- J@ tuarine Research Reserve Sys- ary. The site provides many tem Workshop in 199 1, which excellent opportunities for re- featured working sessions on search related to coastal man- key research, monitoring, edu- agement issues. cation, resource management and administrative topics for Monthly water sam- 75 state and Federal staff pling of tributary and tidal within the NERR System. waters, which began as the first phase of the reserve's Together, the Hudson water quality monitoring pro- River and Old Woman Creek gram, was expanded to in- NERRs developed a pilot clude storm events. Sampling project identifying innovative sites were established in wa- educational uses of remote tersheds of the Tivoli Bays sensing techniques, with the using a geographic informa- 17 assistance of the Cornell Labo- tion system developed at Yale ratory for Environmental Ap- University. Water sampling plications of Remote Sensing. will continue to monitor trends in serve. These maps help detect past Case studies linking land use and water quality and to track impacts and future changes in plant com- stream water quality will be pre- of watershed development and munities, impacts of sediment ac- sented at a professional develop- nonpoint source pollution. cumulation, and erosion at the re- ment workshop for NERRS edu- serve sites. Vegetation maps also cators in November, 1993. A new NOAA-funded enable researchers to accurately study, in collaboration with the indentify field sites suited to their The reserve conducted Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute specific research needs. nearly 100 tidal wetland programs and the Environmental Protection for the general public and elemen- Agency, is focusing on sediment tary, secondary and high school 156 Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve tv, students at the four reserve sites. staff completed a program bro- quisition in the Stockport Flats/ Hudson River staff also presented chure in November, 1992. Nutten Hook andTivoliBays com- demonstrations and activities, ca- ponents and effective on- and off- reer days, seminars, and lectures SUMMARYOF site education programs. The re- illustrating estuarine processes on EVALUATION FINDINGS serve has also begun to lay the a wide variety of topics affecting foundation for a solid research and the Hudson River. A program evaluation of monitoring program. The reserve the Hudson River NERR was con- enjoys strong public support and The reserve received three ducted in May 1992. Final evalua- awareness. private grants to develop a com- tion findings documented program prehensive teacher training pro- accomplishments including the Recommendations for im- gram. A variety of professional classification ofthree full-time pro- provement targeted the following: development workshops have al- compliance with the schedule ready been offered, some in coop- Designated in 1982, listed in Hudson River NERR's eration with the Bank Street Col- the reserve now protects Final Management Plan for com- lege of Education and a regional 4,800 acres pleting all four Site Management consortium of environmental edu- 95% complete - Plans by January 1995; continued cation providers in the mid-Hudson in the Virginian efforts in providing handicapped Valley. Supplementary informa- biogeographic region. access to programs and facilities; tion and educational materials have work with OCRM to develop a been developed for participating plan for a comprehensive site pro- teachers. fessional staff members within the file of the Hudson River reserve's New York State Civil Service sys- four components; and improved The reserve produced and tem, a state-funded research management of financial assis- distributed a poster celebrating coordinator's position (and since tance awards through more timely 1993 National Estuaries Day ac- the evaluation, state-funded Re- completion of projects and sub- tivities in the Hudson River. The serve Manager position), land ac- mission of performance reports. 157 Go 0q, I cI> cd, 0@0 G @e(be \AO (b North Carolina NERR 159 North Carolina Coastal Management Program orth Carolina's Coastal sensitive resource areas. In the tie into the development of North Management Program (NCCMP) plan, wetlands will be categorized Carolina's nonpoint source pollu- is based primarily on the state and prioritized by ecological sig- tion program which will address Coastal Area Management Act nificance which will help the state water quality issues through a wa- (CAMA). The lead agency forpro- identify primary wetland restora- tershed-basin planning approach. gram funding and adminstration tion and creation sites. The plan is the Division of Coastal Man- will also establish a monitoring Natural Resource Protec- agement (DCM), within the De- program to assess trends in wet- tion: North Carolina is complet- partment of Environment, Health lands loss, restoration and creation, ing its acquisition of almost 800 and Natural Resources, while a and the effectiveness of the state's acres of the Buxton Woods mari- Govemor-appointed Coastal Re- wetlands regulatory program. The time forest which will be preserved sources Commission adopts rules information will also provide a as part of the North Carolina and policies for the program. The basis for improving wetland poli- Coastal Reserve. Both federal and inland boundary of North cies in local land use plans. state funds were used to acquire Carolina's 20 counties form the this unique natural area. Buxton program's coastal zone bound- Woods is the largest maritime ary. Within the coastal counties, forest on North Carolina's coast. areas of environmental con- It also harbors the greatest con- cem-tidelands, beaches, dunes, centration of mammals and rar and coastal waters - have been e plant species on the Outer designated and are managed by Banks of North Carolina. DCM through direct permitting authority. Outside of the critical Hazards Protection: The areas, all state and federal agency state continues to implement its actions are reviewed for their Cumulative and Secondary oceanfront management pro- consistency with the goals and Impacts: North Carolina's coastal gram which mandates setbacks for policies of the NCCMP. Further, resources face threats from the ef- construction along the oceanfront the coastal counties are required, fects of increased population and through CAMA, to develop land development in the coastal zone. Did you know? use plans which are used to guide Over the past two years, the state growth and to make permit and has used the Enhancement Grants 100- North Carolina has 300 consistency decisions throughout miles of coastline. There are more the state's coastal zone. Program to address the cumula- than 4,000 miles of shoreline in- tive impacts of growth in the cluding estuaries, rivers, and bays. PROGRAM coastal zone by undertaking sev- ACCOMPLISHMENTS eral initiatives. North Carolina will 12% of land in the coastal use a geographic information sys- area is preserved in federal parks Wetlands Protection: tem to compile information on and wildlife areas. The 12% com- population, coastal resources, and prises 721,000 acres out of a total North Carolina continues as a development on a watershed basis of 6,000,000 acres of land area in leader in protecting wetland re- to track development pressureson the state's 20-county coastal zone. sources in the coastal zone. Under the CZMA section 309 Enhance- sensitive resources. The informa- No' The Albemarle/ Pamlico ment Grants Program, the state is tion system will enable the state to Sound Estuary system is the identify and designate critical ar- nation's second largest estuarine N developing a Wetlands Conserva- tion Plan that will provide crucial eas where cumulative impacts are system, behind the Chesapeake data for the management of these most significant. These initiatives Bay. 160 North Carolina Coastal Management Program shoreline, and prohibits the use of its own coastal management pro- The state received $1,508,000 erosion control structures such as gram protection standards. in federally fu nding for FY91 - jetties and revetments. The effec- 92, $1,891, 000 for FY92-93, tiveness of these oceanfront man- SIGNIFICANT and $1,914,600for FY93-94. agement regulations were twice PROGRAM CHANGES put to the ultimate test during the sources Commission meetings, biennium; first, in October 1991, OCRM approved several and improving communication and by a major Nor'easter storm-the rule changes that North Carolina coordination between the Division "Halloween Storm," and second, submitted for incorporation into of Coastal Management and the in August 1993, by Hurricane its coastal management program. Albemarle/Pamlico Estuary Study. Emily. The state believes that the The most significant of these hazards program, and setback pro- changes is a rule that addresses Governor visions and construction standards special needs for shoreline stabili- in particular, played a large part in zation along the barTier islands. designates 1994 as preventing storm damage to North The rule allows the use of erosion it Year of the Coast" Carolina's coast. control structures to protect his- toric sites of national significance Governor James B. Hunt, NOAA approved North and regionally significant commer- Jr-, has issued an Executive Order Carolina's coastal program cial navigation channels. The pro- that declares 1994 "The Year of in September 1978. gram change provided a narrow the Coast" in North Carolina. exception to the state's existing The Executive Order es- Ocean Resource Planning: policy that prohibited erosion con- tablished a governor-appointed North Carolina began developing trol structures on the oceanfront. Coastal Futures Committee made an Ocean Resources Management up of 15 local representatives in- Plan that will be used to develop SUMMARYOF terested in the future of 'the North new state policies directed at ocean EVALUATION FINDINGS Carolina coastal program. resources and their use. The state formed an Ocean Resources Task Final evaluation findings The committee will meet Force comprised of state, federal, issued Nov. 1, 199 1, found that the monthly in 1994 to review the ef- and local representatives, scien- state is adhering to the require- fectiveness of the first 20 years of tists, and user groups to focus on ments of the NCCMP. The evalu- implementation of the North the issues and identify policy ation noted several program ac- Carolina's Coastal Management needs. complishments which include im- Program. provements to the state's federal The committee will ulti- Federal Consistency: consistency computer tracking mately present its recommenda- North Carolina continues to ag- system, providing public access, tions at a conference in which lead- gressively use the federal consis- continued acquisition of Buxton ers in coastal management from tency review process. The state Woods, and expanded resource several states will convene. has increased its coordination with protection to include inland pri- the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers mary nursery areas. Areas identi- State agencies and envi- (Corps) district office in fied for improvement include com- ronmental organizations, includ- Wilmington to review Corps na- munication among the Division's ing the North Carolina National tionwide permits. This coordina- district offices, more training for Estuarine Research Reserve, are planning an array of activities to tion allows the state to review the local permit officers, providing full heighten awareness and appre- Corps permits for consistency with public participation at Coastal Re- ciation for coastal issues. 161 North Carolina National Estuarine Research Reserve our components along Several species found in the re- PROGRAM North Carolina's coast make up serve, including the nesting log- ACCOMPLISHMENTS the North Carolina National Es- gerhead and green sea turtles and tuarine Research Reserve: Zeke's seabeach amaranth, listed as threat- During the past two years Island, 1,165 acres in Brunswick ened under the Federal Endangered North Carolina NERR's 3-person and New Hanover counties; Species Act. staff firmly established themselves Masonboro Island, 4,974 acres in in their positions located in New Hanover County; Rachel North Carolina's Depart- Wilmington and Beaufort. Pro- Carson, 2,625 acres in Carteret ment of Environment, Health and gram staff combined NOAA funds County, and Currituck Banks, 960 Natural Resources, which man- with generous assistance from acres in Currituck County. ages the sites, worked with NOAA Cape Fear Community College and Currituck Banks is the only site to revise the reserve's manage- the University of North Carolina representing the Virginian biogeo- ment plan in 1990. The plan in- at Wilmington (UNCW) to con- graphic region; the other three sites cludes policies for research, edu- struct a 2,000-square-foot research represent the Carolinian region. cation and compatible recreational and educational facility. The build- The four sites depict an array of uses. Feral horse populations on ing was completed in 1992 and habitats and communities with Rachel Carson and Currituck moved to UNCW property on the ocean beaches; dunes; grassy flats; Banks, off-road- vehicles on mainland near Masonboro Island. maritime shrub thickets and for- Currituck Banks and Zeke's Is- The reserve's research specialist ests; intertidal ponds; salt, brack- land, and dredge material deposi- has an office in this facility; the ish and freshwater marshes; inter- tion on Rachel Carson and reserve coordinator works out of tidal mud and sand flats; oyster Masonboro Islands were also ad- the UNCW Center for Marine Sci- bars; submerged aquatic plant dressed in the plan as management ence Research; whereas the edu- beds, and subtidal communities. issues. cation specialist occupies a leased office within the North Carolina Maritime Museum in Beaufort. During the biennium, the state acquired another four per- cent of Masonboro Island to bring the reserve's acquistion status to 99 percent complete. North Caro- The res rve relied on $129,000 in federa I funding in FY92 and $109,000 in FY93. lina now owns over 85 percent of the island. The Society for Masonboro Island, a local non- profit organization, helped the State Property Office acquire the F additional land by contacting and negotiating with owners of remain- 162 ing tracts. North Carolina National Estuarine Research Reserve RESEARCHAND namics in the Zeke's Island Re- ten by Dr. Gail Jones of the Uni- MONITORING PROGRAMS serve; Kathy Reinsel's (Duke Uni- versity of North Carolina at Chapel versity) Biology of Fiddler Crabs Hill, Project Estuary for middle The third year of a phased at the Rachel Carson Estuarine school and Sound Ideas for el- monitoring program began at Reserve Component, and Bob Masonboro Island and Zeke's Is- Miltner's (UNCW) Fish feeding The reserve was designated land. Biological, physical and habits in the Masonboro Island in two parts, first in 1985 chemical data acquired through Estuary. and second in 1991, and monitoring will be used to de- in two biogeographic regions: velop site profiles. This project EDUCATIONAND Virginian and Carolinian received tremendous assistance 0 UTREA CH PROGRAMS from a University of North Caro- lina at Wilmington graduate stu- The reserve's education ementary level students. Activi- dent and three summer interns. specialist developed a number of ties also included litter pickups educational activities for school and an estuarine art contest. Each year several research groups and the public. Over 8,000 proposals were submitted for fund- people participated in field trips, SUMMARYOF ing consideration. In all, two outreach programs and other re- EVALUATION FINDNGS projects were accepted for federal serve activities during the bien- funding: Dr. Charles Peterson's nium. A monthly lecture series A section 312 program (University of North Carolina) evaluation was conducted in May 1993. Final evaluation findings study of Relative habitat value of two seagrass species: Implica- % documented program accom- 9 tionsforglobalwarmin atRachel 44 plishments, including the addi Carson and Dr. Richard Wetzel tion of two state-supported, full- I time staff members, continued (Virginia Institute of Marine Sci ence) and Dr. Robert Christian's land acquisition, designation of (East Carolina University) study the Masonboro Island component and location of reserve staff to the coast. Due to increased staff vis- At 9,724 acres, the reserve ibility, the reserve enjoyed a has reached a 99% growth in public support and @4_ complete acquisition status. awareness. Recommendations for improvement included: securing state funding for an education co- of Sediment-water nutrient ex- ordinator; adding a position for change in estuarine sediments of A Currituck Banks, the most north- different trophic status on ern component; strengthening educational and interpretive pro- Currituck Banks and Masonboro Island. grams at all four components; and was presented at the North Caro- developing a strategy and timeline Other studies conducted at lina Maritime Museum. The re- for completing a North Carolina the reserve received funding from serve hosted four teacher work- National Estuarine Research Re- non-federal sources, such as Ken shops to train instructors in using serve site profile. Swain's (UNCW) Sediment dy- estuarine curriculum guides writ- 163 0 b1;3s 1-- "0 C) 0,:@ 1 0 a 0 , -^ 0 ,- 0 0 ;@ 0 b 4@) "a 0 @x -:@ P- - %- 0 @p ;::,k. 0 0 0 (11 Q@ @A 0 0 Northern Mari Northern Marianas Coastal Resources Management Program he entire land area of the agencies make permit decisions. lication of the Shoreline Access 14 Northern Mariana Islands and Those agencies are: the Depart- Guide to Saipan. surrounding territorial waters ments of Natural Resources, Pub- makes up the Commonwealth's lic Works, and Commerce and La- Brown Tree Snake Preven- coastal zone. Regulations govern- bor, the Division of Environmen- tion Program: The Common- ing the Northern Mariana Islands tal Quality, the Historic Preserva- wealth of the Northern Mariana Coastal Resources Management tion Office, and the Common- Islands, like many other Pacific Program set up a two-tiered per- wealth Utilities Corporation. Islands, faces a continuing threat mit program, which distinguishes of ecological invasion from the between the most sensitive of the brown tree snake. Once estab- islands resource areas and less sen- The program receivedfederal lished, the snakes can cause ir- sitive areas. Activities occurring approval in September 1980. reparable harm to native popula- within the four areas of particular tions of birds and small mammals, concern (APCs) - shoreline, la- many of which are endangered on goon and reef, wetlands and man- PROGRAM CNMI. The Coastal Resources grove, and port and industrial - ACCOMPLISHMENTS Management Office has developed require a permit. Outside the Ar- an innovative campaign to prevent eas of Particular Concern, only PublicAccess: To educate the introduction of these ecologi- activities which are deemed to be residents and visitors on various cal invaders. Components of the 6@major sitings" require a permit. coastal recreational opportunities program include: a widespread found in Saipan, the CRMO used public education campaign aimed An Executive Order origi- coastal management funding to at prevention, eradication and re- nally established the Northern support the development and pub- porting; close cooperation with Mariana Islands Coastal Resources . I ..... Management Pro gram (CRMP) in 1980. In 1983, the Commonwealth en- acted the Coastal Re- sources Management Ilk Act to codify the poli- Ip, cies and use pniorl- ties of the CRMP. The Coastal Re- sources Management Office (CRMO) in the Office of the Gov- ernor administers the Commonwealth's coastal program. The CRMO and six other Commonwealth T 166 Northern Marianas Coastal Resources Management Program NOAA approved changes to the construction crews to conduct in- ment statutes as they relate to Coastal Resources Management spections of incoming heavy coastal development in the COM- Program's regulations. The equipment; and, coordination monwealth. To more effectively changes outline requirements for among the other CNMI and Fed- manage coastal resources located submitting Major Siting Applica- eral agencies having responsibili- within high-risk, hazard-prone ar- tions, require erosion control and ties for natural resource protection eas, the study will identify changes drainage plans, and require that throughout the Commonwealth. that can be made to the statutes' all documents be submitted to the objectives and policies. program office in english units. The coastalprogram operated Zoning Law: In 1992, the SUMMARYOF using $529,333 in commonwealth's legislature EVALUATION FINDINGS federalfunds during FY92 passed the Saipan Zoning Law. and $587,000 in FY93. The zoning program now regu- The final evaluation find- lates shoreline building setbacks ings, issued in February, 1992, and building heights, previously indicated that the commonwealth Hazard Protection: Using regulated by the CRMO. of the Northern Mariana Islands a CZMA section 309 Enhance- was not fully adhering to its ap- ment grant, CNMI has begun to SIGNIFICANT proved coastal management pro- study the objectives and policies PROGRAM CHANGES gram. OCRM indicated a specific of its coastal resource manage- concern that the Commonwealth During the biennium, is not fully implementing and en- forcing key program components of its Coastal Permit process. In addition, NOAA indicated seri- ous problems with monitoring and enforcement, appeals, grants man- agement and Federal consistency reviews. Mandatory recommen- dations contained a schedule of actions that must be implemented in order to bring the Coastal Re- sources Management Program into full adherence with the na- tional program.The CNMI has ful- filled the actions set forth in this schedule. Previous Page: Bird Island off Saipan 17@ gk Left: Preserving cultural heritage is a component of Northern Marianas coastal management 167 0\ XNO'-@ e \--\C' 0-4 d@\ 0ee q0s \@ 0@@ @ecae 0 0\@ V19 0 rMMq \", 11 I\ 0 1@0\P . "MMq ( -j 11111M rM 0 Old Woman Creek NERR 0 7 169 Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve Id Woman Creek, lo- ened, endangered, or identified as PROGRAM cated at a drowned stream mouth species of special concern, includ- ACCOMPLISHMENTS that drains into Lake Erie, is the ing the American bald eagle, sharp- smallest reserve in the National shinned hawk, eastern fox snake, Program Coordination: Estuarine Research Reserve Sys- and the spotted turtle. The reserve Reserve staff worked closely with tem, and the system's the only also functions as an important the Ohio Department of Natural example of a Great Lakes fresh- nursery and spawning area for Resources staff in developing water estuary. Habitats within the Lake Erie forage fish. Ohio's Coastal Zone Management reserve include remnant Program, and Sept. 22-23, 1993, embayment marshes, mudflats, Ohio's Department of hosted the annual Great Lakes Re- swarnp/riverine forests, barrier Natural Resources, Division of beach and oak/hickory upland for- Natural Areas & Preserves, man- The reserve received $70,000 in ests that surround the estuary's ages the Old Woman Creek Na- federalfunding in FY1992 and open waters. tional Estuarine Research Reserve. $90,000 in FY 1993, with The reserve's management plan, another $15,749 in FY 1993 for Hundreds of species of al- approved in 1983, is now being aerial photography. gae, vascular plants, invertebrates, revised and managers, in revising mammals, fishes, and birds dwell the plan, may incorporate two sat- gional meeting of NOAA's coastal in the reserve's many habitats. ellite estuarine wetlands into zone management state program Several of these species are threat- Ohio's reserve program. managers from Indiana, Michi- gan, Pennsylvania and Ohio. .4 VW V"K ''49 wft@ LW 170 Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve RESEARCHAND OEPA biologists will continue to ED UCA TION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS collect samples of fish and insects 0 UTREA CH PROGRAMS over the next three years. Thirteen research projects During the past two years, and four ecological monitoring In June 1992, Pennsylva- the reserve staff have undertaken a projects have been initiated during nia State University began moni- broad array of education and out- this biennium. Among the topics toring the baseline characteristics reach programs, reaching practic- were: development of protein of benthic organic matter and sur- ing wetland scientists and coastal biomarkers and assessment of tu- face-associated microbial commu- management professionals as well mor frequency in wild fish popu- nities at Old Woman Creek. This as high school and college stu- lations; wetlands sedimentation; crucial study will provide the dents. The reserve's programs also ability of wetlands to reduce pol- baseline information needed to focused on both local cultural re- lutants; ecology of algae in four make future management decisions sources and state-wide natural re- Lake Erie estuaries; effect of ze- about living resources at the re- source initiatives. bra mussels on the consumption of serve. In the summer of 1993 re- zooplankton by selected fish spe- serve staff embarked on the next In the fall of 1992, Old cies; and nitrogen dynamics in the stage of monitoring toward devel- Woman Creek staff began work- sediments of the estuary. oping a site profile for the reserve. ing with Cornell University's When complete, this project will Laboratory for Environmental Ap- The Old Woman Creek wa- be used to formulate and imple- plications of Remote Sensing tershed was chosen by the Agri- ment an expanded reserve moni- (CLEARS) on a two-year project cultural Stabilization and Conser- toring plan. called "Development of Aerial vation Service (ASCS), Ohio De- Photography, Mapping Skills and partment of Natural Resources, and :_@@ . . . . . . . . . Tools to Enhance NERRS Educa- the Erie County Agricultural Ex- tion Programs." The National tension Service as a demonstra- Aeronautics and Space tion site for studying the effect of Administration's Lewis Research selected a ricultural management Center aided in conducting aerial 9 practices, with the goal of improv- photography of both the Old ing water quality within the water- Woman Creek and Hudson River shed. The reserve monitoring pro- gram is involved with sampling and testing for this project. *4`14 4E "E "E "E "E The Old Woman Creek estuary represents the Lower Great Lakes biogeographic region 0 Throughout the summer . . . . . . . . . . and early fall of 1993, the Ohio % Environmental Protection Agency J" used the Old Woman Creek estu- ary as a collection site for its long- term Lake Erie water quality study. 171 Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve (New York) NERRs. This is one attended. The reserve hosted a field vival. A color poster and interpre- of the first education projects trip in conjunction with this con- tive brochure were also produced funded entirely by NOAA that ference. by this project. supports education/interpretive projects benefiting the entire In 1992, reserve staff Reserve staff and visiting NERR system. This project trains taught two "Development and the college faculties organized and other reserve education coordina- Environment" workshops for 50 taught a 2-credit hour course en- tors in remote sensing techniques, regional realtors. titled, "Wetlands Ecology of Lake so that the coordinators may study Erie" for twenty students from land use changes and the effects In both 1992 and 1993, the Bowling Green State University. of such changes on estuarine eco- reserve hosted Ohio's "Coast systems; to promote the use of Weeks" kickoff ceremonies and Recently, regional educa- aerial photos and maps in reserve "National Estuaries Day" activi- tors have initiated "Project education programs for teachers ties. Over 100 interested citizens Oceanus" for gifted high school and resource managers; and to and local, state, and regional students from Hancock County, enhance the ability of reserve edu- coastal decisionmakers took part Ohio. This project will allow stu- cators to provide technical assis- in these events each year. dents to conduct comparative eco- tance to coastal managers. system studies between the Old During this biennium, re- Woman Creek NERR, Rookery The reserve was invited serve staff completed a new ar- Bay NERR, and the Florida Keys as an exhibitor at the 4th Intema- cheology exhibit depicting the National Marine Sanctuary. tional Wetlands Conference chronology of American Indian (INTECOL) at Ohio State Uni- occupation of the Old Woman SUMMARYOF versity in September 1992. Over Creek estuary from 10,000 years EVALUATION FINDINGS 700 wetland scientists and educa- ago to recent times. The exhibit tors from throughout the United emphasizes the importance of lo- No evaluation of the Old States and 56 foreign countries cal natural resources to Indian sur- Woman Creek NERR was con- ducted during the biennium. D,e% Alurserve, interagency team study serves coastal manneyernent '7 What can tumors in At the site, the team is ex- carcinogenic compounds that re- bullhead catfish teach coastal amining the blood chemistry and sult from dredging operations. managers? liver pathology in brown bullhead catfish populations. The liver tu- Researchers also hope to Dr. Paul Baumann form mor frequency may indicate the develop biomarkers for tumors the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- impact, of dredging on the ani- in fish populations. Biomarkers, vice and a team of researchers mals'health. elements in an animal's blood- from Ohio State University, the stream that indicate tumors, al- Canada Centre for Inland Wa- Specifically, the study low for early tumor detection ters, and the Smithsonian Insti- looks at animal health after ani- and are quicker, more accurate, tute are using Old Woman mal tissues absorb the breakdown and less expensive than tradi- Creek NERR to find the answer. products of petroleum and related tional methods of surgically re- moving tissue from the animal. 172 Odoclc@ oc3v\c" e NNOO 0@ \ACI ?@O n e co\O @ec c')O c ,e,e South Slough NERR 173 Oregon Coastal Management Program regon manages its coastal resources as part of a state- wide program for coordinated land use planning. A networked pro- ;C@ 4", gram, Oregon's Coastal Manage- ment Program is based on the Or- La egon Land Use Planning Act (Act), regulations for 19 statewide plan- -j, ning goals, local comprehensive land use plans that are consistent *;_" Oil with the statewide goals, and stat- 711 utes and rules governing the state's 'a netw orked agencies. The Act des- 4 ignated the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) and its staff, the Depart- ment of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), as the lead Energy, Agriculture, and Envi- Ocean Resources Manage- agency for administering Oregon's ronmental Quality are the ment: Oregon is currently drafting Coastal Management Program program's principal networked a Territorial Sea Plan - a major (OCMP). LCDC can adopt goals agencies. Oregon's Coastal Man- ocean resources initiative. The and guidelines to provide direc- agement Program defines the Terrirorial Sea Plan will be based tion for the program and the local state's coastal zone boundary as on the issues and recommenda- comprehensive plans. Oregon's the watershed from the crest of the tions of the Oregon Ocean Re- Division of State Lands, and the Coast Range mountains seaward sources Management Plan, an ad- Oregon Departments of Fish and to the three-mile jurisdictional visory and guidance document Wildlife, Forestry, Transportation, boundary of state waters. completed in 1991, and will ad- dress other emerging issues. The PROGRAM effort to develop the Plan is now Recent evidence suggests ACCOMPLISHMENTS focusing on Oregon's rocky inter- that major subduction. zone earth- tidal areas, which are suffering quakes occur along the Oregon Public Access: DLCD damage from increasingly heavy coast every 300 to 500 years on continues its strong commitment tourist traffic. The rocky shores the average and that the last ma- to increase public access through- management program and other jor quake probably occurred out the state. Section 306A Re- components of the Territorial Sea about 350 years ago. Damage source Management Improvement Plan will be based on mandatory, from such an event would result Grants contributed to many joint enforceable policies. To coordi- not only from groundshaking but state/local public access efforts, nate state ocean policy and pre- also from earthquake-induced including four in fiscal year 1992 pare the Plan, Oregon has estab- liquefaction, landsliding, subsid- and three in fiscal year 1993. lished a permanent ocean resources ence, and tsunamis. The Oregon DLCD also annually updates its planning and management body Coastal Management Program is 0 currently considering policy and section 306A "Field Guide," - the 23-member Ocean Policy planning implications for this which presents a photograph, map, Advisory Council (OPAC). The evidence. and description for each project DLCD coordinates the OPAC's under section 306A. work. 174 Oregon Coastal Management Program Coastal Hazards: Public Education: Oregon SIGNIFICANT Oregon's Coastal Management is developing a Communications PROGRAM CHANGES Program undertook several haz- Strategy for Coastal Stewardship ards initiatives during the bien- - a master plan for coordinating OCRM approved two sig- nium. A policy working group, and unifying messages from fed- nificant program changes during representing different interests and eral and state agencies to the pub- the reporting period: the Lane perspectives, has been working to lic. In Oregon, as in many other County Comprehensive Plan and define coastal hazard issues and states, public educational and in- the Periodic Review Amendments problems, formulate and evaluate terpretive materials have been de- to the City of Yachats Compre- alternative solutions, and recom- veloped by numerous agencies and hensive Plan- mend preferred alternatives. The entities without benefit of an over- group is focusing mainly on poli- all master plan. The result is a The Oregon program, cies related to beach erosion, flood- hodge-podge of communication approved by NOAA in May 1977, ing, and upland development. strategies, ranging from excellent received $1,173,667 in federal to poor, with overlap, gaps, and fundingfor FY92 and $1,061,886 The state has also begun even contradictory messages. The for FY93 working to develop new standards Oregon Coastal Management Pro- for geotechnical reports on pro- gram and Oregon Sea Grant are SUMMARYOF posed building sites and to de- supporting the development of an EVALUATION FINDINGS velop a methodology for invento- interrelated communications effort that will enable all agencies to Final evaluation findings deliver a consistent, coordinated issued in July 1993 indicate that The Oregon Coastal message to the public. Different Oregon is successfully implement- Management Program is acting communications strategies will ing and enforcing its federally-ap- to save the state's rocky inter- also be tested to determine which proved coastal management pro- tidal pools, which are being seri- are most effective in increasing gram. DLCD is taking a leadership ously damaged through over- visitor knowledge and promoting role in coastal issues, coordinating use and uninformed use by tour- personal stewardship. with other State agencies, and as- ists. The OCMP, through its sup- suring the opportunity for full par- porting role to the Ocean Policy Wetlands Assessment ticipation by the public and other Advisory Council, is develop- Methodology: With support from interested parties. The findings rec- ing policies and regulations to DLCD, the Division of State Lands ommended that the state improve protect these areas. Among the (DSL) is developing a methodol- the participation of other state agen- policies proposed are restricted access to specific sites to protect 09Y to assess the functions and cies in the local plan periodic re- habitats, and using public edu- values of wetlands. State agen- view process; develop ways of cation, information, and aware- cies, local governments, and pri- improving protection of non-es- ness programs. vate landowners will use this meth- tuarine coastal wetlands; enhance odology to evaluate wetlands. By public outreach; and work with the using this methodology, Oregon Department of Environmental rying areas subject to dune under- will improve its wetlands program Quality to provide additional sup- cutting. Oregon is also mapping in both quantitative and qualita- port for developing the state's sec- hazards to show the combined ef- tive assessment. tion 6217 Coastal Nonpoint Pollu- fects of both chronic and cata- tion Control Program. strophic hazards affecting Oregon's coast. 175 South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve outh Slough was the first chairs the South Slough Manage- The research and education pro- designated National Estuarine ment Commission - a 7-member grams are also supported by in- Research Reserve. The site is one voting commission appointed by terns from colleges and universi- of eleven shallow tidal inlets of the the governor to: 1) oversee the ties around the country and by an Coos Estuary in Coos Bay, Or- operations of the reserve and pro- advisory committee. A large vol- egon. Encompassing approxi- vide policy guidance to reserve unteer staff and the non-profit mately 25 percent of the South staff; 2) uphold the statute creat- "Friends of South Slough, Inc." Slough drainage basin, the reserve ing the reserve; and 3) uphold the provide support to the reserve. includes a variety of habitats, in- policies of the State Land Board. cluding upland forests, freshwater marsh, mudflats, salt marsh, and open water. At least 22 commer- cially important fish species re- side in the estuary and the reserve's extensive eelgrass beds attract waterfowl migrating along the Pacific Flyway. VV, The South Slough estuary has been altered dramatically since its development in the mid 1850s. Like most estuaries on the west coast, a large portion of its coastal AA wetlands are diked agricultural lands. Now the reserve's most prominent feature is its extensive array of dikes, many of which have .. ...... .... ... . been breached naturally at various times in the recent past. Some re- main intact. South Slough NERR is managed by Oregon's Division of State Lands, the staff agency of the State Land Board which includes the Governor, Secretary of State, and State Treasurer. The Director One non-voting federal represen- PROGRAM of the Division of State Lands tative also sits on the Commis- ACCOMPLISHMENTS sion. The first reserve in the Management Plan: South national system, The permanent staff of the Slough National Estuarine Re- South Slough NERR South Slough NERR includes the search Reserve is at a pivotal point was designated 1974 manager, assistant to the manager, in its evolution. The reserve has S in the Columbian research coordinator, education co- completed most of the goals out- biogeographic region. ordinator, maintenance foreman, lined in its first management plan and public service representative. drafted in 1984. Reserve and 176 South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve OCRM staff have completed a for- ing the past two years. A 3,500 Since many of South mal draft revision of the reserve's square foot farmhouse, purchased Slough's facilities are operating at original management plan which in 1992 with the Tracy Property, or near capacity, environmental reflects substantial development was converted to a field science carrying capacity is addressed in of reserve management and pro- station for the tidelands restora- facilities and trail planning in the grams over the past nine years, as tion projects. Buildings, roads and revised management plan. well as changes and growth in the trails are operating at nearly full National Estuarine Research Re- capacity. Following recommenda- The reserve operated using serve System. The revised man- tions in the facilities plan, inap- $168,000 in federal funds agement plan incorporates a new propriate buildings are being de- in FY92 and $109,000 regional emphasis for all aspects molished. Necessary roads have in federal funds in FY93. of the reserve's operations. While been graded and graveled, ditched retaining its own activities, the re- and drained. All unnecessary roads RESEARCH AND serve will build stronger ties with are closed and in the process of MONITORING PROGRAMS the larger educational and scien- natural revegetation. The trail sys- tific community. Reserve staff tem is being upgraded to allow for The reserve has completed have also become involved with handicap accessibility to major its inventory and assessment of coastal resource management ini- portions of the study trail. Routes habitat conditions within freshwa- tiatives throughout Oregon. are being developed for an addi- ter streams, marshes and riparian tional new system on the North areas. This information will be Facilities: South Slough Creek drainage. Construction will combined with similar data from reserve staff brought the reserve's begin as the existing system be- tidal lands and upland forest habi- facilities program to maturity dur- gins to exceed capacity. tats when preparing the commu- nity profile of the site which is OF underway. The community profile will describe the primary habitats and communities that occur within estuarine tidelands, riparian areas and upland forests and provide the framework for a long-term moni- toring program. During the biennium, graduate students researched the correlation between inundation period and coastal wetland pro- ductivity in the reserve, the recov- ery of eelgrass populations and communities of bottom-dwelling invertebrates following removal of commercial oyster stakes, and sea- sonal changes in the abundance, distribution, and population size and structure of dense beds of bur- rowing ghost shrimp as they re 177 South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve D ileserve plans Winchester Tidelands restoration With support from a reserve, once were highly pro- significance of the research, the NOAA development grant, South ductive estuarine channels, restoration efforts at South Slough Slough NERR sponsored an in- mudflats and saltmarshes. They NERR are gaining nationwide at- tense three day workshop in June were since altered by dikes to tention. 1993 to finalize a strategy for re- channel water to agricultural habilitating the Winchester Tide- lands, resulting in lost habitat for In support of the plan lands. anadromous fish, invertebrates, adopted by the Advisory Com- mammals, shorebirds and migrat- mittee, South Slough has com- The workshop brought to- ing waterfowl. pleted a private contract with gether the Winchester Tidelands Menasha Corporation to establish Restoration Project (WTRP) Ad- The project seeks to restore precise benchmark elevations visory Committee, a group of ex- tidal circulation and estuarine within tideland portions of the perts in wetland restoration, es- functions by removing dikes and reserve. tuarine ecology, botany, tidal hy- tide gates. As a control for the drology and wetland regulation, experiment, researchers will com- Further, Menasha Corp. and representatives from state and pare the success of artificially fa- provided the instrumentation and federal agencies and private in- cilitated wetlands restoration with satellite communications needed dustry. the series of wetlands in the re- to complete the on-site topo- serve whose dikes breached natu- graphic surveys within several of The South Slough's re- rally at various times in the recent the saltmarsh restoration sites. search coordinator and a wetland past. planner on contract co-authored The reserve is now look- an article describing the restora- The entire series of diked ing to the National Fish and Wild- tion project's goals and objectives, wetlands in the reservewill there- life Foundation, the US. Fish and which was published in the U.S. fore become part of a larger re- Wildlife Service, and Oregon Department of Interior periodical search initiative which will pro- Community Foundation- Park Science (Vol. 13 (4), Fall, 1993). vide valuable insights into the ef- Katherine Bisbee Fund for financ- fectiveness of wetland restoration ing to carry out restoration of the The Winchester Tide- efforts thorughout the entire Pa- Winchester Tidelands. lands, a key component of the cific Northwest. Because of the spond to ecological variation. Small Business Administration, EDUCATIONAND Through an interagency agree- Oregon Department of Forestry, OUTREACH PROGRAMS ment with the University of Or- local nurseries and private forestry egon Institute of Marine Biology, crews to purchase and plant 4,700 The reserve's work in edu- the reserve has gained a tempo- cation and outreach during the bi- rary Research Assistant to work The reserve's acquisition ennium has brought new media on projects with South Slough. status stands at 100% offerings to completion and has complete, protecting diversified the reserve's role in South Slough Reserve em- 4,700 acres. regional networks. Among the barked on a cooperative effort to reserve's new media products is a re-establish a diverse coastal for- coniferous and deciduous trees widely shown, award-winning est at the Slough. The Hidden within a 15-acre plot along the video, "Tide of the Heron". The Creek Tree Planting Program was Hidden Creek watershed trail. The reserve published a general trail set up as a cooperative venture planting will take place in May brochure, the national brochure for between the reserve, the U.S. 1994. the National Estuarine Research 178 South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve Reserve System and put together institute of Marine Biology, among and monitoring programs; and ex- the soon-to-be published Hidden others. panding the education program. Creek Trail and Ten-Minute Trail brochures. Local newspapers ran SUMMARYOF The findings recom- a series of 52 illustrated articles EVALUATION FINDINGS mended changes to improve the featuring Oregon's estuaries. Ten program, including: developing illustrations from the series were Final evaluation findings strategies to maintain the reserve's displayed publicly in Salem. South were issued in March 1992 for the core research, education, and re- Slough reserve also sponsored a period June 1986 through Decem- source protection mandates despite photography contest highlighting ber 1991. The evaluation con- the projected budgetary cuts; co- estuaries; three winners will be cluded that the State of Oregon is ordinating more closely with awarded a one-person show in operating and managing a strong OCRM and its contractor to com- 1994. Sixteen public media sites, reserve program and is adhering to plete a revised management plan; such as newspapers and public li- the federally approved reserve considering creation of volunteer braries, have requested sets of the management plan and tasks con- coordinator and land steward po- illustrated articles. South Slough tained in financial assistance sitions in the reserve's staffing reserve also sponsored a piloted awards. strategy, and securing full state entry of the NERR system into funding for the research coordina- National Geographic's "What's in Among the accomplish- tor and public service representa- our Water" program. Approxi- ments identified were: strengthen- tive. The findings also suggested a mately3000 schoolchildren, adults ing administrative frameworks; more proactive role for the South and families are served by such improved staffing at the reserve; Slough Management Commission; direct programming each year. An improved networking in the com- streamlined communication with additional 30,000 are served OCRM; improved monitoring annually through the reserve's of visitor use and determina- trails and interpretive c nter. tion of carrying capacity; and linkages between improved South Slough staff the reserve education and re- continue to increase their role search programs. in education and outreach in Oregon. As well as serving on Recommendations in the several boards and commit- ifia evaluation findings have been tees, reserve staff actively par- incorporated into the revised ticipated in regional projects, management plan. The plan among them developing a By core sampling at the reserve, coastal and identifies a land steward and statewide wetlands education reserve managers can explore the history and volunteer coordinator as criti- strategy plan, and a Wetland health of ecosystem through sedimentation cal goals of reserve staffing; studies, contamination levels, and the existence Institute for teachers. As part of underground life. coordinates the research, edu- of a regional network, the staff cation and management pro- conferred with and provided ex- grams to achieve maximum re- pertise to the Oregon Coast munity; complete acquisition of source protection; and places em- Aquarium, Oregon Coast Recre- all property within the reserve phasis on off-site programming to ational Atlas, Umpqua (R iver) Dis- boundary; implementing a trail increase the Reserve's influence e covery Center, the Coastal Rivers system and facilities masters plan; and minimize environmental im- Scenic Loop Tour, and the Oregon enormous growth in the research pacts of increased visitor use. 179 180 0 -0 %0 Q 610 (11 %- @@ -6 ,!a () 0 U - Q. .,-. i@je % 15;1 T--A 0 ?-0 :@5( -4-1 U/I :@@- ;z P.ennsylva Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Program ms le ' 'eissociated with marinas is among the ennsylvania's coastal zone t source pollution control program. lies within three coastal counties n on the Delaware estuary Bucks, 1: Philadelphia, and Delaware and in Erie County on the shore of Lake Erie. On the 57-mile stretch of coastline along the Delaware - W-MM estuary, the coastal zone vanes 777,w from one-eighth mile in urban ar- eas like Philadelphia to over three and one-half miles in Falls Town- 6, ship, Bucks County. On the 63- 17, mile coast of Lake Erie, the coastal zone runs from 900 feet within parts of the City of Erie to more than three miles in Harbofcreek Pennsylvania derives the This move may facilitate coordi- and North East Townships. coastal program's policy structure nation of the state's nonpoint from existing state laws, includ- source pollution control program, To manage this diverse ing the Dam Safety and Encroach- since the Division of Nonpoint coastline, Pennsylvania estab- ments Act, the Floodplain Man- Source Management is in the same lished a coastal zone management agement Act, the Clean Streams bureau. program (PCZMP) in 1980 as a Law, and the Air Pollution Con- networked program operating un- trol Act. As part of their program In an effort to make'per- der the Department of Environ- development, the state developed mitting processes within the Bu- mental Resources (DER). The a new piece of legislation for the reau of Dams and Waterway Man- DER serves as the state's lead program: the Bluff Recession and agement more efficient and to re- agency for implementing, admin- Setback Act of 1980. Based on duce permit processing time, reor- istering, and enforcing the coastal that law, eight Erie County coastal ganization planners transferred program. DER's Division of municipalities administerbluff set- permitting responsibilities to re- Coastal Programs (DCP) is respon- back ordinances with funding sup- gional offices. sible for monitoring and evaluat- port from the state program. ing activities related to coastal zone Coastal Nonpoint Pollu- management and ensuring com- PROGRAM tion Control Program: Pennsyl- pliance with the program's en- ACCOMPLISHMENTS vania added a new staff member in forceable policies. However, this September 1993 to work exclu- networked program relies on other LeadAgency Reorganiza- sively on the section 6217 Coastal agencies to comply with those tion: When the Department of En- Nonpoint Pollution Control Pro- policies, and an Executive Order vironmental Resources reorga- gram. To prepare for 6217 mea- provides the authority needed to nized in 1992, the former Division sures, the state completed an ini- ensure this compliance. of Coastal Zone Management was tial inventory and analysis of ex- renamed the Division of Coastal isting authorities, as well as a de- Commercialfishing in Programs (DCP) and moved to tailed schedule of tasks and a Pennsylvania is confined almost the Bureau of Land and Water timeline to complete those tasks. P entirely to Lake Erie Conservation (formerly Bureau of The state also passed the Nutrient and its tributaries. Water Resources Management). Management Act, which may be- 182 Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Program come a strong element of the and bluff recession. In place since Pennsylvania has also ini- coastal nonpoint pollution control 198 1, SAR has brought strong lo- tiated projects to increase the program. The Act, administered cal support for the state coastal public's access to Lake Erie's by the State Conservation Com- management program. shore. Among these projects, the mission, requires concentrated state is looking at defining the animal operations to develop and Cumulative and Secondary limits of the public trust along the implement nutrient management Impacts: Through enhancement plans. grants funding, Pennsylvania's More than 40 percent of the coastal program is studying the nation's population lives Boundary Changefor Wet- impact of boating in Presque Isle within a day's ride land Protection: Through the sec- Bay on Lake Erie. Coastal pro- of the Delaware Estuary. tion 309 Enhancement Grant Pro- gram managers will use the con- gram, Pennsylvania moved for- clusions of this developing study shoreline, upgrading the public ward with plans to redefine the to determine the best management access policy from encouragement coastal zone boundary, which strategy for the Bay. to enforceable, and assuming au- would increase the protection of a thority to keep shoreline access vast number of wetlands. The state Lake Erie Projects: In ad- areas open to the public. proposes shifting the boundary fur- dition to amending the Bluff Re- ther inland and including all hy- cession and Setback Act and the PermitReview: During the drologically connected wetlands Presque Isle Bay boating impact biennium, the PCZMP addressed in the coastal area. analysis, Pennsylvania has under- the problem of permit review back- taken and completed several other log and worked to streamline per- Coastal Hazard Mitiga- projects for Lake Erie's shoreline. mit reviews. Managers increased tion: Also under the Enhancement Presque Isle State Park is creating the coastal program's scope of Grant Program, Pennsylvania is authority in wetland permit re- working to amend the Bluff Re- A. view by negotiating a letter of :g cession and Setback Act to restrict agreement with the Pennsylvania construction on the bluff face. This Bureau of Dams and Waterway change would reduce the risk of Management. Under the agree- injury and property damage, as ment, the PCZMP gained addi- well as decrease erosion on the tional opportunities to review wet- bluff face. land permits and apply conditions to these permits. To further protect people and property from coastal hazards, Wetland Monitoring and Enforcement: Pennsylvania con- the state has a companion program to the Bluff Recession and Set- tinues to monitor coastal wetlands back Act as part of the policy on digital topographic maps of the for violations using aerial photog- coastal hazards. This free service, peninsula, and is removing sev- raphy interpreted by coastal pro- called the Site Analysis and Rec- eral non-indigenous species from gram staff. Aerial monitoring suc- ommendation (SAR) service, of- specific sites in the park. The City cessfully enabled the state to spot fers help through site evaluation of Erie will soon begin construc- wetland violations, delineate wet- and constructive recommendations tion of a bayfront bikeway, which lands, and determine wetland loss to evaluate erosion problems and will increase low-impact public overtime. The Division of Coastal to educate coastal land owners on access to Lake Erie's shoreline. Programs shares the information the processes of shoreline erosion 183 on wetland losses with state and Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Program federal enforcement agencies to phates, and Secchi depth and other program - from Solid Waste encourage restoration or mitiga- human impacts on the estuary. Re- Management regulations to Dam tion activities. sults are distributed to decision Safety and Waterway Manage- makers to assist in sound manage- ment regulations, the PCZMP VolunteerMonitoring Pro- ment of coastal zone resources. wetlands policy, and other minor gram: During FY93, Pennsylva- The Delaware Riverkeeper Net- administrative changes. Changes nia expanded its Delaware work complements other monitor- to the Dam Safety and Waterway Riverkeeper Network Volunteer ing programs, such as those con- Management regulations (Title 25 Monitoring Program by ten sites, ducted by the Delaware River Ba- PA Code Chapter 105) established bringing the total to 34. The Dela- sin Commission. an "exceptional value" wetland ware Riverkeeper Network began category to provide additional pro- as a volunteer citizen monitoring SIGNIFICANT tection to wetlands. program in the fall of 1990 to PROGRAM CHANGES provide a trend analysis of water SUMMARYOF quality conditions at various sites Amendments to Wetlands EVALUATION FINDINGS in the estuary. Volunteers currently Regulations: Through a routine monitor water quality at sites program implementation change N o evaluation of throughout the Delaware River, submitted in October 1993, man- Pennsylvania's Coastal Zone testing for dissolved oxygen, pH, agers incorporated changes in poli- Management Program was con- water temperature, nitrates, phos- cies and regulations into the coastal ducted during the biennium. Pennsylvania strengthens wetlands protection Pennsylvania revised the be replaced within the same wa- for additional categories 'of struc- wetlands regulations in Chapter tershed or within the designated tures or activities that do not sig- 105 of Title 25 PA Code, which boundaries of the state coastal nificantly affect life, health, prop- governs implementation of the zone area where the loss occured. erty, or the environment. The Dam Safety and Waterway Man- changes also simplified applica- agement Act. By doing so, the People wishing to alter tion procedures and set fees to state took steps to increase pro- wetlands must now submit an en- better reflect the state's costs for tection for Pennsylvania wetlands vironmental assessment to DER processing applications and ad- of "exceptional value," consid- for permit applications, ministering the wetlands pro- ered the state's most environmen- unpermitted structures or any ac- gram. tally significant wetlands. tivities in wetlands and waters of exceptional value. The Depart- Although some environ- Recent changes to Chap- ment of Environmental Resources mental advocates may not view ter 105 will benefit wetlands in can deny a wetlands permit to any these changes as major, the other ways. The regulations now applicant who continually violates amendments do increase wetland require a higher than one-to-one the state's environmental laws. protection and replacement, a mitigation acreage ratio when the benefit to the entire coastal pro- mitigation is intended to replace Changes to Chapter 105 gram. The revised regulations lost functional value or respond also streamlined the permitting also facilitate the state's permit- to a wetland violation. The regu- process in two ways. The state can ting process and better focus lations also require that wetlands now waive permit requirements DER's resources. 184 0 ol dXG N NO o eP \'@5 r CY K@' mol \,\o o e OCO @ecae @0@0 e C, ec Jobos Bay NERR 185 Puerto Rico Coastal Management Program he Puerto Rico Coastal Two other com- Management Program (PRCMP) monwealth agencies was created to manage the signifi- Play important roles in cant land and water activities oc- coastal management: curring in territorial waters and in the Environmental a land area extending approxi- Quality Board and the mately 1,000 meters inland from Regulations and Permit r mean high tide. The common- Administration. The En- wealth set up the coastal manage- vironmental Quality ment program as a networked pro- Board assesses environ- 7, gram and incorporated the coastal mental impact state- m management plan into the ments and adopts and Islandwide Land Use Plan. The monitors pollution con- Department of Natural Resources trol standards and regu- (DNR) and Planning Board act as lations. The Regulations the primary planning and permit- and Permits Administra- ting agencies in Puerto Rico's tion administers build- ing and use permits as coastal zone. As the lead agency, DNR is responsible for managing well as minor zoning the commonwealth's natural re- changes in urban areas. sources and activities in the mari- pared and adopted the Pinones time zone, territorial waters, and PROGRAM Special Planning Area (SPA) man- submerged lands. The Coastal ACCOMPLISHMENTS agement plan in 1992 and the Management Office (CMO) within Tortuguero SPA management plan DNR coordinates daily adminis- Natural Resource PrOtec- in 1993. The PRCMP also set up a tration of the coastal program. The tion: The Planning Board and DNR 5-year schedule to complete the Planning Board, which is part of have made notable progress in des- remaining SPA management the Office of the Governor, holds ignating 20 of 28 natural reserves. plans. broad regulatory power and land Among these, the Cuevo del Indio use planning responsibility in natural reserve was designated in Sedimentation andErosion Puerto Rico. The Planning Board April 1992 and the Cibuco Swamp Control: An interagency agree- controls all land uses through gen- natural reserve was designated in ment for sedimentation and ero- eral controls over subdivisions, February 1993. sion control (the Puerto Rico CEST residential and agricultural uses, Program) was signed in Septem- industrial projects, commercial Maritime Regulations: In ber 1993 by Puerto Rico's DNR, centers, and hotels, and by adopt- December 1992, DNR adopted the Planning Board, Regulations and ing zoning district maps. Maritime Zone regulations which Permit Administration, Environ- govern the activities permissible mental Quality Board, U.S. Envi- in the commonwealth tidelands, ronmental Protection Agency's territorial waters, and submerged Region 11 office, the Agricultural The program was federally lands. The regulations establish Extension Service, the Puerto Rico T approved in September 1978 criteria for granting concessions Department of Agriculture, the Soil and operated with $1,113,400 for coastal activities and uses. Conservation Service Caribbean in federalfunds during FY 92 Area Office, and the and 1,125,667 during FY93. Special Area Manage- Commonwealth's 17 Soil Conser- ment: The Planning Board pre- vation Districts. The agreement 186 Puerto Rico Coastal Management Program Puerto Rico adopts maritime zone regulations Department of Natural expansions and repairs on struc- lands and offshore areas. The regu- Resources Secretary Santos tures with a concession; and dis- lations also advance a public Rohena Betancourt approved new posal of solid and liquid wastes. policy mandating the conserva- maritime zone regulations as one tion of natural resources as well as of his last acts before departing Titled "The Regulation for development and use for the gen- with the outgoing gubernatorial Use, Surveillance, Conservation, eral benefit of the community. The administration. The regulations and Administration of the Terri- regulations are further intended empower the Department of torial Waters, the Submerged to preserve and maintain cultural Natural Resources (DNR) to fully Lands Beneath Them, and the resources. address the plaguing issue of Maritime Zone," the rules include harmful nonconforming uses in special provisions for existing ac- Since the inception of the maritime zone, by either im- tivities and structures located in Puerto Rico's Coastal Manage- proving them to protect natural natural reserves and other special ment Program, DNR staff mem- resources, access, health and planning areas. The regulations bers have prepared numerous safety or removing them. also vest authority in DNR to grant drafts of the regulations, none of franchises, leases, and permits and which gained final approval. The regulations, adoped to collect fees and duties. Dec. 30,1992, established criteria Thus, adoption of the regu- and mechanisms to grant autho- Deriving legal basis from lations represents significant ad- rizations and concessions for fu- 19th century Spanish and 20th cen- vancement for the coastal pro- ture construction, repairs, expan- tury American traditions, the gram. All of the DNR staff who sions and demolitions; existing Maritime Zone Regulations gov- worked on this project deserve structures that do not have a con- ern permissible activities in the special recognition for this cession from the DNR; existing Commonwealth's public tide- achievement. establishes an interagency com- Rico's hazard mitigation plan, as tain inspection and enforcement mittee to implement the sedimen- is required following a disaster issues in Puerto Rico. tation and erosion control regula- declaration by FEMA. tions when they are adopted and a SIGNIFICANT companion manual of standards Federal consistency: Five PROGRAM CHANGES and specifications. The agreement federal consistency appeals were also spells out the responsibilities decided during the biennium. In No program changes were of the committee and of each Par- all five cases, the Secretary of submitted during the biennium. ticipating agency in implementing Commerce declined to override the CEST Program. the Planning Board's objections. SUMMARYOF See the earlier chapter on federal EVALUATION FINDINGS Coastal Hazards: Puerto consistency for details of these Rico's Natural Hazards Planning cases. Two other consistency ap- No evaluation of Puerto Program participated in the Fed- peals are pending. Rico's Coastal Zone Management eral Emergency Management Program was conducted during the Agency's (FEMA) response to a Enforcement: The Regu- biennium. However, an evalua- disaster declaration in January, lations and Permits Administra- tion site visit was conducted in 1992 from flash flooding follow- tion and the Department of Natu- December 1993, and final evalua- ing a low pressure tropical depres- ral Resources signed an inter- tion findings are due for publica- sion. The Natural Hazards Plan- agency agreement to resolve cer- tion in 1994. ning Program also updated Puerto 187 Jobos Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve he Jobos Bay National Es- PROGRAM The reserve incorporates 2,883 tuarine Research Reserve includes ACCOMPLISHMENTS acres of state-owned land 15 offshore islets known as Cayos along the south central coast Caribe, and the mangrove forest of Puerto Rico's Department of Puerto Rico. Mar Negro, with its complex sys- of Natural Resources recently tem of lagoons, mud salt flats, and signed a Memorandum of Under- channels. The reserve also includes standing which affirms the long- ED UCA TION AND sand beaches, coral reefs, seagrass term commitment on the part of OUTREACH PROGRAMS beds and territorial waters. the Commonwealth and the Fed- eral governments to manage the The reserve's education It is believed that fifty or site as a National Estuarine Re- program focuses on teacher train- so West Indian Manatees that for- search Reserve. Jobos Bay reserve ing workshops- coordinated age within Jobos Bay and the Mar also completed a visitor center and through the Sea Grant College Pro- Negro and Caribe Islets represent research facility. gram of the University of Puerto the second largest manatee popu- Rico and tours for school lation in Puerto Rico. Hawk's bill groups. sea turtles are also indigenous to the seagrass beds of Jobos Bay. -R, SUMMARYOF EVALUATION FINDINGS The reserve received$]] 0, 000 in federalfunding both F i n a I MW FY 1992 and FY 1993. evaluation find- ings were issued Puerto Rico's Department in February 1993 of Natural Resources (DNR) em- for the period ploys the reserve staff, who now from May 1989 manage the site through the Coastal through Febru- Management Office, The DNR ary 1992. Rec- Ranger Corps and legal staff also ommendations provide support to the reserve. addressed the need to complete a management plan for the site, de- velop use regulations for the re- serve, resolve boundary concerns, Mwl develop research and monitoring 77- 7 44, 4, programs, and complete the Visi tor Center. The Jobos Bay Reserve was designated in 1987 in the Caribbean Sea biogeographic region. @ko\ coo @Os@N 6 @@Oq' 0\ T- @\00 @ \Cj O'@N e Ae e@\-\\ 60 C/@ d(f voo, G@@\ @zes 0 0'@ e\\ eo@ @M@ 0 * e @ec u Ci C) vmc@ \:@Narragansett Bay NERR 189 Rhode Island Coastal Management Program he Rhode Island Coastal Program requiring owners of ac- gation for all unavoidable impacts Management Program regulates tivities that are on, in, or over pub- to wetlands. Wetlands that will be development in the coastal waters, lic trust areas of the coastal zone to permanently lost or altered must 200 feet inland from a coastal fea- compensate the public for private be replaced through restoration of ture, such as wetlands and bluffs, uses. The Dock Registration Pro- a historical wetland or creation of and certain coastal uses through- gram sets up a system for register- a new wetland at a site approved out the state. Rhode Island's ing all docks, whether permitted by the Council. Wetlands replaced Coastal Resources Management or unpermitted, and brings them must be of equal or greater area Council (CRMC), which adminis- into the submerged lands lease and ecological value than those ters the coastal program, created system. One novel aspect of the lost. Also, mitigation projects, to Special Area Management Plans program is that all docks will have the maximum extent practicable, for the Salt Ponds area, Providence to display "license plates" show- must take place before or at the Harbor and the Narrow River. ing that the dock is registered. same time as the wetlands alter- Twenty-one coastal local govern- ation and must be on-site. ments participate in the program The Rhode Island on a voluntary basis, developing coastalprogram earned Section 309 Enhancement local harbor management plans. federal approval in May 1978. Strategy Revisions: In 1992, the CRMC revised their original Strat- Rhode Island's Coastal Manage- egy developed for the section 309 ment Program is based on the Wetlands Mitigation Enhancement Grants Program. Coastal Resources Management Policy: Rhode Island's adoption The Council's revised the strategy Act of 197 1, which created the of CRMC wetlands mitigation to improve coordination with its CRMC. The CRMC administers regulations was another significant other ongoing planning initiatives. Rhode Island's program through accomplishment under the �309 The Strategy, which received a direct permitting. The state recently Enhancement Grant Program. higher ranking with the changes, enacted its Comprehensive Plan- These regulations codify the focuses on public access and spe- ning Act, which now requires mu- Council's policy of achieving no cial area management planning. nicipal planning and zoning to be net loss of wetlands acreage or consistent with the Rhode Island function as a result of coastal de- Pawcatuck Estuary andIn- Coastal Management Program. velopment. Under the new regula- terstate Management Program: In tions the Council must require miti- cooperation with the state of Con- PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS @Jntfortnatiohftom citizen @:nmonztoqng,aids ,Yincoastal de@6@i6n- t Dock Registratione Pro- gram: As part of the Submerged Lands Lease Program being devel- ...... .... RVI, oped under the � 309 Enhancement Grant Program, the CRMC adopted I':! regulations for what they have termed the Dock Registration Pro- gram. The CRMC found that they had to get a handle on existing private docks before they could institute a Submerged Lands Lease AA 190 Rhode Island Coastal Management Program Council's permit processing time, Coastal Program Funding which has enabled the Council to process more administrative ac- Total 306 6217 309 tions over the last two years. FY 92 $800,000 $600,000 $46,000 $154,000 Stormwater Management FY 93 $786,000 $595,000 $46,000 $145,000 Regulations: The Council adopted comprehensive storinwater man- agement regulations which imple- ment some of the section 6217 necticut, the CRMC completed and approved in 1990. To date, eight management measures within the adopted an interstate special area of the twenty-one coastal towns Council's jurisdiction. The new management plan for the have developed plans; five more regulations require applicants to Pawcatuck River Estuary andLittle are in the final stages. submit storinwater management Narragansett Bay. The Plan ad- plans which demonstrate that the dresses a broad array of issues Public Access: Over the proposed activity will result in the from water quality, habitat resto- past two years, the CRMC has removeal of at least 80 percent of ration and protection, to recre- continued its work to designate the average annual total suspended ational uses, public access, and public access rights-of-way. To solid loadings. The CRMC, in con- interstate coordination. To coor- date, the Council has investigated junction with Rhode Island's De- dinate the management strategy, 290 potential sites and designated partment of Environmental Man- the Plan sets up an interstate notice 195 sites. The Council has also agement, also developed the procedure, interstate Memoranda increased public access by placing Rhode Island Stormwater Design of Agreement, coordinated review conditions on the permits it issues. and Installation Standards for large-scale projects, a In 1992, through a permit condi- Manual. This manual, designed to Pawcatuck River Bi-State Com- tion placed on the Manchester complement the Rhode Island Soil mission, and other mechanisms. Street Station, Narragansett Elec- Erosion and Sediment Control tric will provide approximately $20 Manual, contains applicable Best Harbor Management million for waterfront public ac- Management Practices and re- Planning: To deal with the grow- cess improvements, including a quirements for stormwater man- ing demand for water-related ac- three acre waterfront park with agement plans. tivities and the accompanying con- walkways, shoreline improve- flicts, the CRMC instituted a com- ments, a boat launching ramp, and Marina Certification Pro- prehensive harbor management a fishing pier. gram: The CRMC created a vol- planning program in 1988. untary program which allowed Through this program, the CRMC Permit Simplification: In marinas to apply for marina certi- requires coastal communities to 1990, the CRMC instituted a new fications. Marinas are required to establish use priorities for their form of CRMC permit or assent submit a surveyed plan which harbor areas. The Council then called a "Finding Of No Signifi- clearly defines the main perimeter gives each community the flex- cant Impact (FONSI)." The FONSI and all upland facilities. This al- ibility to identify its most pressing allows the Council to expedite its lows the CRMC to establish and relevant planning issues and review for minor activities such as baseline data on all facilities to develop a consensus vision. The re-shingling and roofing a house. present at each marina, which in first harbor management plan was The new process has reduced the turn facilitates the review of fu- ture projects. 191 Rhode Island Coastal Management Program Marina Pumpout Require- ments: In December 1992, CRMC Researchers study adopted requirements that new ma- core samples - taken from a closed rinas and marina expansions of 50 military base -for boats or more must install a ma- P contamination levels rine pumpout facility. Also, mari- to determine the nas which expand by more than 25 health of the ecosystem. percent: of their previously ap- 14 proved capacity must install a ma- rine pumpout facility if the 25 per- cent increase will expand the marina's capacity by more than 25 boats. Marinas which already have sufficient pumpout facilities are exempt from the new requirements. changes to the CRMC regulations CRMC permit procedures, However, the regulations do allow into Rhode Island's Coastal Man- strengthened enforcement author- the CRMC to impose other appro- agement Program in 1991 and ity and capabilities, new permit priate mitigation requirements. 1993. The most significant requirements for wetlands protec- changes: new authority for CRMC tion, increased public outreach ef- Denitrification Task members or staff to issue warn- forts, and completion of an inter- Force: The CRMC and the Rhode ings when they witness a viola- state management plan for the Island Department of Environmen- tion; additional setbacks from a Pawcatuck River Estuary and a tal Managment's Division of buffer zone in certain cases to pro- public access guide. Groundwater and Individual Sew- tect the ecological integrity of the age Disposal Systems created a buffer; new or expanded marina The findings identified ar- Denitrification Task Force, to im- facilities requirements to mitigate eas for program improvement, in- prove governmental coordination, water quality impacts; and add a cluding: public education about examine ways to streamline the new aquaculture policy that re- CRMC procedures and require- regulatory process, and to find quires aquaculture leaseholders to ments, training for Council mem- ways to incorporate denitrification post a performance bond for bers, update of the CRMC book of requirements into the respective cleanup or removal upon termina- regulations and the federal consis- regulatory programs. From these tion or expiration of the lease. tency procedures, additional en- efforts, the CRMC has made sev- These changes have improved the hancements to monitoring and en- eral program changes to stream- efficiency and effectiveness of forcement capabilities, inter- line the pen-nit process for repairs Rhode Island's Coastal Manage- agency communication and coor- to onsite sewage disposal systems ment Program. dination, training for local offi- and adopted denitrification re- cials about the coastal manage- quirements for a specified region SUMMARYOF ment program and emerging of the Salt Ponds Special Area EVALUATION FINDINGS coastal issues, general public out- Management Plan. reach on coastal issues, coordi- Final evaluation findings, nated coast-wide public access ef- SIGNIFICANT issued on April 19, 1993, covering forts, interagency coordination on PROGRAM CHANGES the period from May 1989 through water quality certifications, and June 1992 cited the following as financial assistance award and re- OCRM incorporated major accomplishments: improved porting requirements. 192 Rhode Island Coastal Management Program Rhode Island, Connecticut complete interstate management agreement to protect Pawcatuck River estuary Rhode Island and Con- the policy and management Subsequent to the Plan's, necticut completed their three year framework to improve coordina- adoption, the Rhode Island CRMC effort to develop the Pawcatuck tion. The plan did so by setting up issued a contract for monitoring River Estuary and Little several coordination mechanisms, water quality in the estuary. The 1 Narragansett Bay Interstate Man- including an interstate notice pro- monitoring program will collect agement Plan in July 1992. Pre- cedure, interstate Memoranda of data on dissolved oxygen, water'! pared as a cooperative venture Agreement, coordinated review temperature, and salinity, and between.the two states, the Inter- for large-scale projects, and a compare it to previous year's data. state Management Plan was Pawcatuck River Bi-State Com- By monitoring water quality! funded by Coastal Zone Manage- mission. trends in the estuary, state and ment Act interstate and implemen- local agencies can continually im- tation grants. The Interstate Manage- prove management of the estua- ment Plan also specified several rine resources through future de- Rhode Island and Con- management regulations and ini- cision making. necticut enlisted the help of many tiatives for each issue of concern. interested people through a For example, the plan included The CRMC also contracted citizen's advisory committee, policies that state and local gov- out for aerial photography to iden- which assisted in developing a list ernments should: establish con- tify submerged aquatic vegetation of issues reflecting the public's sistent minimum standards for beds within the estuary. This in- @ concerns about the estuary. The stormwater management; require formation has been passed on to, committee identified water qual- the two states, the University of I ity, habitat protection and resto- Rhode Island and the University! ration, recreational uses, public Better coordination allows of Connecticut- Avery Point so these different agencies to access, open space, the protection that it can be used in future stud- implement consistent of scenic values, and interstate co- management policy les and decision-making. ordination as central issues. The states studied these issues in more Finally, by including the' depth, by collecting data on past and promote the restoration of entire Pawcatuck River estuary and current land use and devel- wildlife habitats within the estu- within its Management Plan's opment trends, water quality sta- ary; improve the use at existing boundaries, the Long Island tus, critical wildlife habitats, and commercial boat ramps to increase Sound Study may effectively co- recreational use patterns and con- the amount of small boat access; ordinate and implement recom- cluded with findings about the and protect and increase physical mendations in the Pawcatuck management of resources and and visual public access through River and Little Narragansett Bay uses of the estuary. adoption of common policies and Management Plan - recommen- standards. dations such as allowing dredged The states also found that material spoils from Rhode project review lacked effective co- Rhode Island's Coastal Re- Island's marinas to be disposed ordination among various review- sources Management Council within the New London Open- ing agencies at all levels of gov- adopted the Interstate Manage- water disposal site. This allow- ernment across state boundaries. ment Plan on July 14, 1993. In ance is important to Rhode Island Better coordination would allow Connecticut, the Plan has been since the state's marinas need these different agencies to imple- implemented through the Depart- dredging, but no open water dis- ment consistent management ment of Environmental posal options now exist within policy - the interstate manage- Protection's regulatory programs Rhode Island's waters. ment planning process provided and through municipal plans. 193 Narragansett Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve panning 2,200 acres of land Narragansett Bay Reserve. A de- Reserve staff released deer on Prudence, Patience, and Hope sire to increase the organization's management regulations for the Islands, and 2,750 acres of water efficiency prompted this move. 1993/94 season. The regulations adjoining the islands, the encourage a higher take of deer Narragansett Bay NERR sits in Narragansett Bay NERR this season to reduce the herd's the geographic center of keeps growing. The reserve re- risk from Lyme Disease, protect Narragansett Bay, only twelve cently incorporated South Park, a biodiversity and improve the over- miles from Newport, Rhode Is- state-owned facility into reserve all health of the herd. Deer hunting land. Diverse aquatic and terres- boundaries, and in the process has historically been allowed in trial habitats, providing nesting gained significant new facilities. the reserve's upland areas and con- The park came equipped with forrns with federal regulations gov- The Narragansett Bay overnight accommodations for re- eming habitat manipulation. Reserve, designated in 1980 searchers, operational piers and in theVirginian biogeo- floating docks, a garage and work- RESEARCH AND graphic region, now protects shop complex, a naturalist kiosk MONITORING PROGRAMS 4,950 acres. and nature trails. Research at the reserve has sites for numerous species of birds, The reserve also acquired grown in recent years. By 1992, 10 are harbored on the islands. Soft- 454 acres in the center of Pru- research projects were underway, shell clams, quahogs, lobster, dence Island which was owned by two of which were completely striped bass, black-back flounder the Heritage Trust of Rhode Is- funded by NOAA; only three were and sea trout thrive in the reserve's land. This property is a key piece ongoing before 1992. Brown Uni- tidal deepwater. On an occassional in linking the north and south ends versity, the University of Rhode winter day, harbor seals haul them- of Prudence Islands with a con- Island, the Department of Envi- selves out of the water to rest on tinuous green corridor stretching ronmental Management, and the the reserve's exposed offshore the length of the island. University of Connecticut were rocks. On the islands, visitors can use an extensive trail system to The reservatrains, teachers in estuarine science using hands-on activities. reach the reserve's major ecologi- cal features. Since its creation in 1980, the reserve has been man- 0 aged by the state's Department of Environmental Management. M @2'-R! Y 110 PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 'M! During the last two years, the Department of Environmental Management expanded the Divi sion of Fish and Wildlife to in- clude estuarine resources. This V new division, headed by Chief David Broden, is responsible for managing and operating the 194 Narragansett Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve some of the institutions conduct- EDUCATIONAND SUMMARYOF ing research at the reserve during OUTREACH PROGRAMS EVALUATION FINDINGS this period. Research included studies of fish habitat use, assess- SavetheBayis anon-profit A routine program evalua- ments of the Prudence Island habi- conservation organization that co- tion conducted in December, 1992, tat, assessments of ecological risk ordinates its activities with the re- determined that the State was op- of the former Prudence Island land- serve. Save the Bay completed erating and managing the reserve fill on the biota of Nag Creek, and successful workshops to train satisfactorily and adhering to the a comparison of ecology of five teachers, involving them in on- reserve's management plan. Final types of marsh systems and atmo- the-water sampling of the reserve's Evaluation Findings commended spheric depositions of chemical waters, studying the Coggeshall the State for its progress in three contaminants. Cove salt marsh, and orientating areas: the reserve's land acquisi- them, through the reserve staff, on tion and boundary expansion, the reserve's education program, and the reserve's research and moni- toring efforts. Following recom- mendations, the state will update the reserve management plan; de- velop educational materials such as boundary maps and markers for use by the reserve visitors; im- prove the reserve Center's over- night accommodations for visit- ing researchers and add basic labo- ratory equipment at the Center. A, The State will also establish a pro- g am to involve interested state r and local government agency de -makers and researchers in cision developing research priorities and disseminating the research results. Working with the Pru- the history and natural history of The recommendation also called dence Conservancy,the reserve's the Narragansett Bay NERR. The on the state to allocate adequate on-site manager developed a suc- reserve also offered a family re- staffing to manage the reserve. cessful volunteer monitoring pro- search cruise as part of the gram that focuses on water quality Governor's Narragansett Bay Day. monitoring and meteorology on Both activities have increased vis- Prudence Island. Results from the ibility for the reserve. In 1993, meteorology monitoring are being the Narragansett Bay Reserve written in a format that will edu- operated on a budget with cate reserve visitors. $110,000 in federal funds. 195 GOOS 9@04 &e SO\3 Og 0\-" 401-1 \A01, A e @.cel c 1;b @\ -\0 (be @,c,e \AO MOO @ ,e ec North Inlet-Winyah Bay NERR ACE Basin NERR 197 South Carolina Coastal Management Program outh Carolina's coastal zone encompasses eight counties that contain "critical areas" - tide- lands, coastal waters, and beaches ffig and dunes. The South Carolina Coastal Council (SCCC) manages activities in these critical areas through direct permitting author- ity and by holding certification authority in the eight coastal coun- ties outside the critical area. The :@2 council also ensures that direct federal actions and permits, as well as the actions and permits of other A state agencies are consistent with the state's coastal program. The South Carolina Coastal Council (SCCC) derives authority to direct hazards by implementing the 198 8 hazardous coastal areas. the state's coastal management Beachfront Management Act and program from the South Carolina the 1990 Amendments to the Act. Wetlands Protection: Coastal Zone Management Act Of The Act, as amended, regulates South Carolina continues to ag- 1977. Fourteen appointed mem- construction on the oceanfront via gressively use the federal consis- bers make up the SCCC, with mem- setback requirements. tency provisions to protect fresh- bers serving on specialized com- water wetlands in the eight coastal mittees. A central issue in the Act's counties. In contrast to other implementation has been whether coastal states, South Carolina re- As a result of state agency the Council's regulation of the fused to certify the U.S. Army restructuring in the 1993 legisla- beach critical area could result in Corps of Engineers' nationwide tive session, the Coastal Council an unconstitutional "taking." In permit#26. This refusal allows the will become a part of the State's Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal SCCC to review even small pro- Department of Health and Envi- Council, the state Supreme Court, posed wetlands alterations for con- ronmental Control in July 1994. on remand from the U.S. Supreme sistency under SCCC's wetland Court, ruled that the 1988 Act had protection standards. South Carolina has 187 miles temporarily taken Lucas' property. of coastline, A special permit process provided Cumulative and Second- including estuaries, bays, in the 1990 Amendments allows ary Impacts: Using a section 309 rivers, and creeks. property owners, such as Lucas, to enhancement grant, South Caro- build structures seaward of the lina is developing a shellfish man- baseline in limited circumstances. PROGRAM Approved in September 1979, ACCOMPLISHMENTS The 1990 Amendments the state received seem to insulate the Council from $1,334,000 in FY91-92; Hazards Protection: South future takings challenges, while $1,787,800 in FY92-93, and S Carolina continues to be a leader maintaining a progressive man- $1,767,800 in FY93-94. in mitigating the effects of coastal date that prohibits development in 198 South Carolina Coastal Management Program -WIMIr,'' "RIA 7 M10 agement plan that will help strengthen state provisions that 4- protect shellfish from the cumula- tive impacts of permitted activi- ties. In its assessment, the state is % "y concentrating on two primary W sources of water quality problems: =111* stormwater runoff and faulty sep- Ilk tic tanks. The state is also a pioneer g in the treatment of stormwater run- off from bridges and golf courses. Also under the Enhance- Approximotel'v 504,000 acres ofcoastal marshes are under thejurisdiciioii ofthe SCCC. ment Grants Program, South Caro- lina is monitoring the effective- ness of stormwater "best manage- SIGNIFICANT Management Program. Several re- ment practices" required in the PROGRAM CHANGES finements to the state's enforce- state's Guidelines for Stormwater able policies were also submitted Management. Results of the moni- During this biennium,1990 to OCRM and approved as pro- toring effort will be used to revise Amendments to the Beachfront gram changes. One change de- the Guidelines, which will later be Management Act were submitted fined a 3-yeartime period in which adopted as regulations into the and approved for incorporation critical area delineations (where state's program. into the South Carolina Coastal the SCCC has direct permitting authority) are valid. This change South Carolina shows leadersh' is intended to make anyone using IP a subdivision plot aware that the in coastal protection critical line drawn on the map may be out of date after three years. South Carolina continues States presented their to lead the nation in advocating coastal hazards management pro- SUMMARYOF protection of the oceanfront from grams and exchanged ideas on E VALUATION FINDINGS coastal hazards. In July 1993, the how state programs can protect state hosted a Coastal Hazards their shorelines from coastal haz- The most recent evalua- Conference attended by state ards. tion of the South Carolina Coastal coastal hazards staff from the Southeast Atlantic and Gulf Coast The South Carolina Management Program was con- states, Massachusetts and Puerto Coastal Council was celebrated ducted in November 1993. Evalu- Rico. Federal and regional repre- as the premier coastal zone man- ation findings will be issued in sentatives from the Federal Emer- agernent agency at OCRM's 20th 1994. gency Management Agency, Anniversary awards celebration. along with legislative staff from The Council was chosen to re- Capitol Hill, were on hand to dis- ceive the Excellence in Coastal Forty percent of the state cuss the latest developments in Zone Management award for its coastline is held in trust as legislation reforming the National leadership and progressive ap- parks or wildlife preserves; Flood Insurance Program. proach to managing the coastal 50% is developed, and zone and coastal resources. 10% is undeveloped. 199 ACE Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve he Ashepoo-Combahee- Carolina Coastal Council serves functional subcommittees were Edisto (ACE) Basin NERR, lo- as the fiscal agent in acquiring also organized and participated in cated about 45 miles south of funds from NOAA and provides setting goals for the reserve. Charleston, S.C., is one of the most surveillance and enforcement to diverse and pristine estuaries on ensure compliance with the coastal PropertyAcquisition: The the East Coast of the United States. management program. reserve used a combination of An array of maritime forests, tidal funds from NOAA, private dona- swamps, marshes and associated PROGRAM tions, Memoranda of Understand- uplands provide valuable habitat ACCOMPLISHMENTS ing, and National Coastal Wet- for seventeen rare or endangered lands Acquisition funds to acquire species and over 500 species of Management Plan: The Ashe Island (1,722 acres), Beet birds, mammals, reptiles, amphib- Final Management Plan for the Island (1,686 acres), and Otter Is- ians and plants. The area is used ACE Basin NERR was completed land (3,232 acres). With six of the mainly for wildlife and forest man- and approved during this bien- ten islands proposed for acquisi- agement, limited farming, and nium. The reserve was designated tion now included in the reserve, commercial and recreational fish- on Aug. 27, 1992, with a designa- the site now preserves 10,521 ing. Cooperation among landown- tion ceremony on Oct. 3, 1992. acres. During 1993, the managers ers and private and public agen- also made significant progress on cies has resulted in a multifaceted Program Staffing: Staff for acquiring a field station for on- initiative to protect and enhance the reserve, including the reserve site research and education. Staff critical wetlands and uplands in manager, research coordinator, members placed signs at key loca- the ACE Basin. education coordinator, and reserve tions throughout the reserve to biologist, was immediately as- delineate boundaries. South Carolina's Wildlife sembled and began molding the and Marine Resources Department site into a functional research re- manages the reserve. The South serve. An advisory committee and i@@ tP P H A A, 5M 4 P-1 1, Mul A Z@N 4@4 200 ACE Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve AM W. RESEARCHAND MONITORING PROGRAMS _0W 111r, Managers designed a phased monitoring program for 9 ACE Basin Reserve with a site characterization, a long-term monitoring program, and an analy- sis of water quality and quantity data to provide a better under- standing of the estuary's re- sources. As part of the site charac- terization, reserve staff collated existing data for the area and used digital cartographic databases. The South Carolina Water Resources Commission used the state's geo- Sen. Fritz Hollings visits the reservefor the opening of a new visitor's center. graphic information system to es- tablish a multi-layered database and decapod crustaceans to assess EDUCATIONAND changes in species composition OUTREACH PROGRAMS and biomass across time and space The reserve relied on $50,000 in the system. With the help of The reserve adopted a in federal funding for FY92 South Carolina's Department of hands-on approach to educating and $109,000 for FY93. Health and Environmental Con- students, teachers and the general trol, the reserve also analyzes in- public in the field. During the bi- formation on water quality, stream ennium, the reserve initiated a pro- for ACE Basin at a scale of flow and fecal coliform. gram of educational cruises en- 1:24,000 from orthophotographs. titled "A Coastal Adventure" Spatially referenced data layers The reserve and South include soils, wetlands, land use Carolina's Water Resources Com- The reserve was designated and land cover, environmental mission completed ajoint research in 1992 in Charleston, S.C., permits, historic and archaeologi- project, compiling data on the cur- the Carolinian cal sites, timberlands, water qual- rent wetland cover in the ACE biogeographic region. ity, flood zones, geology, mining, Basin reserve. This effort repre- statewide rivers assessment, threat- sented part of a large-scale project ened and endangered species habi- to evaluate long-term data sets in onboard the 50-foot RN Anita. tats, high quality natural areas, fish- recommending a public policy On the 2-hour outing, students con- eries, water use and evaluation. process to address natural resource duct sampling using a variety of values. The databases generated techniques and procedures used In order to obtain better from this project will provide a by marine scientists, collect es- information on biological produc- foundation for future research that tuarine organisms, and discuss the tivity in the reserve, reserve staff focuses on how natural processes general ecological concepts and initiated a trawl survey in the tri- and human activities in plant com- life histories of those estuarine river system. In the survey, data munities can change landscape organisms. Teachers collect speci- are collected monthly on fishes characteristics. mens for their classroom labora 201 ACE Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve staff published a semi-annual Carolina's geological formation, tories and aquaria and are given newsletter entitled ACE Basin so that they better understand the post-visit written materials to en- Current Events. The staff also de- relationship between historical de- hance the field experience. signed a self-guided tour of the velopment of coastal areas and site's buffer areas, published in economic trends,with current land The "Marsh Classroom Driving the ACE Basin. use patterns and the environmen- Adventure , another of the tal concerns that arise from coastal reserve's field-learning experi- To expand educational Out- development. reach, reserve staff worked with the South Carolina Dept. of Edu- SUMMARYOF With 135,000 acres, cation to include ACE Basin in the EVALUATION FINDINGS the reserve is 60% complete. South Carolina Maps curriculum materials. These materials, used at No evaluations were con- several grade levels, are designed ducted during FY92 and FY93. ences, gives teachers an additional to orient students with South hands-on experience with many biological and ecological con- cepts. The program prepares in- structors to use the marsh as an outdoor classroom. The reserve supplies each Marsh Classroom participant with a training manual for the program. ri 44Q ACE Basin reserve staff RE-1 also took the reserve's outreach efforts outdoors, giving tours and outings in the ACE Basin to the Wildlife Society, the National Audubon Christmas Bird Count, local bird watchers clubs, South Carolina Garden Clubs, Sierra Club, Marine Educators Associa- tion, Boy Scouts, and other orga- nized groups. These activities took place as part of the state's PRO Coastweeks celebration and Na- tional Estuaries Day. A special tour of the reserve is given aboard a 46-foot pontoon boat, which can reach the shallows and shores of the outer barrier islands. To keep the public abreast of issues facing the basin, reserve 202 North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve n Georgetown County, an institution established to per- ordinator, a temporary research co- S.C. - with the crowded beaches petually preserve and conserve the ordinator, a research technician and of Myrtle Beach 30 miles to the environmental value of the site. filled secretarial positions. With south and the city bustle of Charles- Through a long-term agreement, the addition of a senior research ton 50 miles to the north - lies a the Baruch Institute manages the scientist as a permanent, full-time haven for the creatures of two tidal wetlands and conducts re- research coordinator, the reserve massive estuaries. Threatened and search and education programs to staff will be at full strength. endangered species, from sea inform the community on marine turtles to least tems to bald Marine Lab Dedi- % 11 t7a W eagles, call the North Inlet- cation: A community Winyah Bay National Es Celebration led by Sena- Ernest (Fritz) tuarine Research Reserve tor or home. The high salinity tidal A%@ it". Hollings and top marshes and creeks of the NOAA officials in May Reserve's northern half, the 1993 marked comple- tion a 19,000-square- North Inlet estuary, and the brackish waters of Mud foot marine research B ay, a section of the Winyah laboratory of the Uni- Bay estuary in the southern versity of South Caro- half, create a rich, diverse lina, which also serves ecosystem. In fact, reserve as headquarters for the resources range from tidal reserve. The new and transitional marshes to Aim Baruch Marine Field oyster reefs and intertidal Laboratory replaced flats and from coastal is- buildings lost to Hurri- land forests to open water- "M cane Hugo in 1989 and ways. The reserve even sup- re-established state-of- ports a spectacular natural the-art field research fa- feature: the Pumpkinseed @7 cilities next to one of Island bird rookery, the most thoroughly the largest nesting sites for studied estuaries of its wading birds in the entire size in the world. Visit- southeast United States. science. The Institute works with ing scientists, students and the re- the South Carolina Coastal Coun- serve staff can take advantage of Since this site was set aside cil, the state coastal management the lab's modem equipment, cur- for research and education in Au- agency, to protect and operate the rent databases, and high-capacity gust 1992, the University of South reserve. running sea water system. Carolina's Belle W. Baruch Insti- tute for Marine Biology and PROGRAM Management Planning: Coastal Research has managed and ACCOMPLISHMENTS The Institute prepared a Final En- operated the reserve. The site in- vironmental Impact Statement for cludes both state-controlled navi- Program Staffing: In the the reserve in May 1992 to show gable waters and lands owned by first year of operation, the reserve the impact that Federal manage- the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, hired a manager, an education co- ment may have on the site's mul- titude of environmental resources. 203 North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve In October 1992, a Final Manage- AV ment Plan was published, estab- lishing the boundaries and details the research and education activi- ties which guide reserve manage- ment. Reserve managers also formed an advisory committee representing the diverse natural, public, and economic interests in W4 the estuaries, which met in Febru- ary and September of 1993. J., RESEARCHAND 0@ MONITORING PROGRAMS Research and monitoring needs for the reserve took top pri- ority in the early stages of the program. Collaboration between many faculty and staff wfio have been conducting research in North Inlet Estuary for up to 20 years yielded recommendations for a long-term research and environ- mental monitoring program. Re- serve researchers continued to managers -and scientists with a serve research that compares the regularly collect physical data on yardstick to measure and watch relatively pristine North Inlet to the water's chemistry, using a com- the health of the North Inlet- the disturbed Winyah Bay Estu- puterized meteorological station Winyah Bay ecosystem, and pos- ary, which shows the effects of and submersible monitoring sys- sibly, of the coast itself. coastal development on watershed tems, specifically looking at con- ecology. centrations of nutrients, organics, The data grows as reserve chlorophyll, and sediments, and scientists scour databases of his- In 1993 alone, scientists the water's biological populations, toric and current information, cre- and students found North Inlet- including zooplankton, nekton, ated by academic, local, state and Winyah B ay Reserve ideal for over benthos, plants, and birds. Such federal agencies, searching for his- 40 research projects. Although monitoring efforts provide reserve toric contaminant levels and the most studies at the site are not known physiological conditions of supported by reserve funds, re- important species. By assessing serve staff participate in many. The North Inlet-Winyah Bay these environmental -health fac- Through this research, the reserve Reserve, designated in 1992, tors, the reserve can concentrate gains the information necessary to is located in Georgetown, on research efforts that are cost- achieve the program's goals. For S.C., part of the Carolinian effective and beneficial to instance, cur-rent studies at the site biogeographic region. decisionmakers. For example, may tell how contaminated sedi- coastal managers benefit from re- ments affect fish feeding; how 204 North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve sending freshwater and nutrients segments of the public to the na- ther, the reserve sponsored work- from the land into an estuary af- ture, goals, and research activities shops to give teachers the infor- fects the life in that tidal system; of the North Inlet-Winyah Bay mation and material to bring the what happens when fish and other Reserve in layman's terms. Visit- estuary into their classrooms. Re- estuary animals disturb pollutants ing community groups received serve educators worked closely that settle in estuary mud; how illustrated slideshows and toured with the South Carolina Board of contaminants entering an estuary the facilities and habitat. The re- Education and local school boards impact the ability of some animals serve even sponsored an "open to heighten visibility of the re- to detect their food, and how pes- house" to give people a chance to serve program. The education sub- ticides move up the food chain, interact with scientists and see committee of the reserve's advi- from plants to fish, birds and hu- marine organisms first-hand from sory committee planned a strategy mans. a microscope. for communicating reserve goals, information, and resources to the Special programs for public. At 9,080 acres, youngsters proved especially the reserves has already popular and an effective way to reached 100% instill an understanding and a re- The reserve operated using acquisition status. spect for environment, particularly $70,000 in federal funding estuarine ecosystems. The Nature during FY92 and for Young Explorers and Coastal $117,000 during FY 93. Ecology Classes for Children EDUCATIONAND courses, given over the summer of OUTREACH PROGRAMS 1993, provided structured educa- As part of the plan to en- tional experiences. Yet reserve hance coastal education and out- A spectrum of educational educators were not satisfied with reach, the reserve developed a trav- programs, courses, field trips, lec- reaching only these few children. eling display, exhibits for the head- tures, and meetings introduced all Taking the concept one step far- quarters lobby, slide shows, and printed materials. Staff members also initiated a volunteer program by sponsoring an organized Marsh J2 Litter Sweep and encouraging vol- unteers to participate in construc- 6K tion of a salt marsh boardwalk. Interpretive signs and field study programs will be developed dur- ing the construction to explain important sites along the walk. SUMMARYOF EVALUATION FINDINGS No evaluation of the North Inlet-Winyah B ay NERR was con- ducted during the biennium. 205 I 206 C/@ XTO @\ON 0 0 oc-) @ 0@ @ \ \C &S @@Oq rmmm@ . ,a\d@ K\ % elc\ 0qO, dop C/@ 0 rmm@ L70,11 ;=04 0 rmm@ 0 o4e:@@. a a* rmc@ 207 Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Program a small island system, As the lead agency, DPNR PROGRAM the entire Territory of the Virgin exercises direct territorial control ACCOMPLISHMENTS Islands is part of the coastal zone. in administering the VICZMP. The To manage and balance the re- Department approves or denies all Vessel MooringlHarbor sources of this system, a compre- earth change permits and minor Management: In November 1992, hensive coastal zone management coastal zone management permits the Virgin Islands adopted com- program was established under the and enforces the implementation panion regulations to "The Moor- Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Man- of the major and minor coastal ing and Anchoring of Vessels and agement Act of 1978. The Virgin permits, including conditions Houseboats Act." The regulations Islands Coastal Zone Management placed on those permits. DPNR provide the necessary guidelines Program (VICZMP), boused in the also processes all building, plumb- to implement and enforce the Act. Department of Planning and Natu- ral Resources (DPNR), directly The U.S. Virgin Islands Habitat Protection: In Feb- manages development activities on coastalprogram received ruary 1992, President Bush signed the offshore islands and cays and federal approval in June 1979. into law an act designating Salt within the first tier of the program's River as a national historical park two-tierboundary structure, which ing, and electrical permits. Major and ecological preserve. Among is a relatively narrow coastal strip CZM permits are issued by a five- its many unique features, Salt River on the three major islands. The member Coastal Zone Manage- contains the largest remaining program accomplishes this through ment Committee appointed by the mangrove forests in the U.S. Vir- a comprehensive system of major Governor for each of the three gin Islands and includes a variety and minor coastal zone manage- major islands. Together, the three of tropical marine and terrestrial ment (CZM) permits. A separate committees constitute the Coastal ecosystems. There is also evidence set of laws and permits control Zone Management Commission, of human habitation by the Taino, activities within the second tier, which promulgates rules and regu- Caribs, Dutch, African, French, which includes the interiors of the lations and provides policy direc- Spanish, and English. Salt River is three major islands. tion and leadership on coastal man- the only documented site in the agement issues. United States where Christopher Columbus landed. This is the first RD X national park to be managed by federal (National Park Service) and local governments through ajoint commission. To date, no funds .. . ....... have been appropriated for imple- A mentation. R@N`Mi u F Areas of Particular Con- cern: In September 1993, the 'E, Coastal Zone Management Com- mission approved planning docu- ments and boundary maps for 18 Areas of Particular Concern and Areas for Preservation and Resto- iapidhk@@a ration (APCs). The maps and plans 208 Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Program were completed over a two year period by DPNR with assistance from Island Resources Founda- tion, the University of the Virgin Islands, and Sea Grant, and sub- stantial input from the public. The plans and maps have been submit- ted to the Office of the Governor with a recommendation for desig- OR nation by the Virgin Islands Leg- islature as required by the Virgin SUMMARYOF mine the training needs of DPNR EVALUATION FINDINGS staff, CZM commissioners and BLUA members; consider insti- 'N OCRM issued final evalu- tuting a single-tier management ation. findings for the Virgin approach; expedite revisions to the ql, Islands on Jan. 20, 1992 for proposed subdivision ordinance; 'A' the period of March 1989 update standards and guidelines @vp through June 1991. Accom- for major and minor permits; im- plishments cited include: tech- prove implementation and enforce- istance provided by ment of the Virgin Islands envi- Islands Coastal Zone Management the coastal program in the wake of ronniental laws; review review the Act. Hurricane Hugo, general assis- composition and responsibilitiesof Coastal Hazards: In 199 1, tance provided to permit appli- the Board of Land Use Appeals as the VICZMP completed a major cants, and more specifically to the well as the technical and legal sup- study entitled "Hugo's Coastal public; and implementation of a port for the Board ; designate Ar- Impacts: Damage, Recovery, and civil fine system that improved eas ofParticular Concern and adopt Revival of the Territorial Park Sys- monitoring and enforcement. and implement management plans; tem." The study included damage and coordinate with territorial assessments for existing and po- As a result of its evalua- agencies of coastal zone manage- tential park sites caused by Hurri- tion, NOAA recommended that ment issues and initiatives. The cane Hugo; recovery recommen- the Virgin Islands fill all program VICZMP has taken steps to ad- dations; and land acquisition and vacancies expeditiously; deter- dress these recommendations. facilities options and costs. SIGNIFICANT Coastal Program Funding PROGRAM CHANGES 3061306A 309 6217 FY92: $441,000 $49,000 - No program changes were FY93: $489,333 $126,000 $42,000 submitted during the biennium. 209 210 X@@Geco So e coos @@Ol el ,ce e \, -e G\ I@Zec@ aC3 K,@a 4P Chesapeake Bay-VA NERR 211 Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program irginia's coastal zone in- ing the Bay. The strategies call for Public Access: Over the cludes all of Tidewater Virginia, evaluating nutrient problems in past two years, Virginia's coastal as defined in Virginia Code, and individual rivers and customizing program has helped to acquire 95 0 all coastal waters under Virginia solutions for the individual river acres of coastal property for pub- sovereignty, extending to the three basins. The six basins Virginia are: lic access and/or habitat protec- mile outer limit of Virginia's terri- the James, York and tion and helped to contruct nine torial waters. Eighty-seven juris- Rappahannock rivers, the smaller coastal access facilities using dictions - cities, counties, and coastal basins on the mainland and coastal management funds. towns - lie within the coastal the eastern shore, and the Virginia zone. Since Virginia's waters in- portion of the Potomac River. Habitat Protection: clude a large portion of the Chesa- Virginia's coastal program has peake Bay, and even more of the The tributary strategies are helped the state's Marine Re- state's land area affects the Bay, intended to improve water quality sources Commission create a Virginia is a major participant in and protect living resources in county-by-county permit inspec- the interstate effort to protect the Virginia's rivers, coastal areas and tion and compliance program. This Bay and its resources. the Chesapeake Bay by reducing became particularly significant as nitrogen and phosphorus coming the Commission gained legisla- The Virginia Coastal Re- from agricultural and urban land tive authority to issue civil charges sources Management Program uses and industrial and municipal and penalties for non-compliance. (VCRMP) networks existing state wastewater treatment facilities. laws and authorities. The program is implemented through monitor- Local En- ing and coordination with state vironmental Plan- agencies and local governments, ning Assistance: with the Department of Environ- Virginia's coastal mental Quality (DEQ) as its lead program devel- agency for administration. The oped and has be- VCRMP resides in DEQ's Divi- gun distributing a sion of Intergovernmental Coor- Permit Guide for dination. Business and In- 'A dustry. Program PROGRAM staff designed this ACCOMPLISHMENTS technical assis- tance guide to help Water Quality: Virginia, business and in- along with other Chesapeake Bay dustry develop '4: 77 states, has adopted a tributary ap- permit applica- proach designed to reduce excess tions, which ulti- nutrient loadings in the Bay. In mately will September, 1993, the Chesapeake streamline the per- Executive Council issued direc- mit process as tives supporting the program's called for in the 1@0 "Tributary Strategies" to speed CZMA. reduction of pollutants from both point and nonpoint sources enter- 212 Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program R 4,1PA" j; g Aff @11I coastol management prog seeks . . . . . ......... Wanl poflution reduction 01T As part of an agreement between Virginia, Maryland, F Pennsylvania the District of Co- lumbia and federal agencies, coastal management experts in Virginia are seeking ways to re- duce nutrient loadings in the tributary branches of the Chesa- peake Bay 40% by the Year 2000. To tackle nutrient prob- lems in the Virginia portion of the SIGNIFICANT The evaluation findings Potomac River, coastal managers PROGRAM CHANGES recommend that Virginia: as a part sponsored two tributary meetings of reorganizing the Council on the for local residents and are pro- No significant program Environment into the Department ducing a discussion paper on pos- changes were approved during the of Environmental Quality, place sible nutrient reduction methods. reporting period. the VCRMP within the Office of Managers plan three additional the Director to assure more effec- public meetings after the publica- SUMMARYOF tive implementation of the state's tion of the paper in late June. EVALUATION FINDINGS program; clarify Virginia's fed- Tributaries below the eral consistency procedures; in- Chesapeake Bay present a differ- Final evaluation findings, corporate the Chesapeake Bay Pro- ent problem for the nutrient re- issued September 3, 1992 indi- tection Act into Virginia's coastal duction project because of the cated that the Virginia is satisfac- program; develop procedures for hydrology of the area. torily implementing and enforc- Virginia's Marine Resources Com- Coastal managers are ing the VCRMP, addressing the mission to monitor compliance Coastal Zone Management Act's with wetlands, dunes, and sub- working with the U.S. Environ- coastal management needs, and aqueous permits; work with the mental Protection Agency's adhering to the terms and condi- State Water Control Board to Chesapeake Bay Program to de- tions of its financial assistance implement the Virginia Water Pro- termine nutrient reduction goals awards. Virginia's program made tection Permit regulations; and appropriate for these lower Vir- ginia rivers. accomplishments--.in-Ae-v-eloping submit several program changes and implementing new authorities to OCRM. Virginia's program has to levy civil fines for violations of worked to meet these recommen- In FY92 and FY93, thefederal the Wetlands and Subaqueous dations and required actions. government contributed Lands Act and strengthening the $2,323,000 and $2,292,000, Barrier Island Policy of the Coastal NOAA approved the respectively, to Virginia Primary Sand Dunes/Reaches Virginia coastalprogram coastalprogram operations. Guidelines. in September 1986. 213 Chesapeake Bay, VA, National Estuarine Research Reserve he Chesapeake Bay Na- gram, the reserve program can Outreach Exhibit: The re- tional Estuarine Research Reserve work to develop cooperative and serve completed a new traveling in Virginia has been established as complimentary programs. exhibit in November 1992. The a multiple component site, with exhibit has been displayed at pub- components representing the lower PROGRAM lic meetings on the reserve's ex- estuarine, the transition and the ACCOMPLISHMENTS pansion, the Virginia Marine Sci- tidal freshwater zones of each of ence Museum in Virginia Beach, the major river basins - James, Research Fellow: The first the Science Museum of Virginia York, Rappahannock, and National Sea Grant/SRD graduate in Richmond, and at the Virginia Potomac - and representing the fellowship was awarded to Mr. Wesleyan College in Norfolk. main stem of the Chesapeake Bay Chris Buzzelli, a Ph.D. candidate and its embayments. To date, the in the School of Marine Science of Volunteer Programs: state has designated four compo- the College of William and Mary. Virginia's Chesapeake Bay reserve nents extending from the Mobj ack/ Chris will pursue work on micro- has established a strong volunteer Seaford embayment at the mouth bial production in vegetated and program to support monitoring and of the York River to a tidal fresh- nonvegetated submerged bottoms research in the York River Com- water site on the Pamunkey River. at Goodwin Islands. Mr. Lawrence ponent. The reserve estimates that Libelo, another graduate student volunteers donated 3,684 hours These four components in the School of Marine Science, during this biennium serving the contain tidal salt and freshwater has been focusing on groundwater site. For EarthWatch, ten teams, marshes, submerged aquatic veg- effects in coastal areas, and much each with three to five volunteers, etation, upland forests, beaches, of this work has been also done on spent a week helping with the mud flats and open water habitats the Goodwin Islands Component. reserve's long-term marsh plant across a broad range of salinity levels. Goodwin Island, at the mouth of the York River repre- sents a polylialine salinity regime; Catlett Island, about 19 miles above the mouth of the York, represents a mesohaline regime; Taskinas Creek represents the oligohaline transition zone and Sweet Hall Marsh represents a tidal freshwa- ter regime. The Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) of the Col- lege of William and Mary, a major estuarine and coastal oriented ma- rine laboratory, manages Virginia's Chesapeake Bay NERR. Since the reserve's head- quarters is located with the princi- pal components of the Virginia Sea Grant Marine Advisory Ser- vice and Marine Education Pro- 214 Chesapeake Bay, VA, National Estuarine Research Reserve RESEARCHAND studies. Another team of volun- MONITORING PROGRAMS 49 different researchers from ten teers from the Alliance for the institutions tookpart in the projects, Chesapeake Bay collects water Virginia's Chesapeake which covered: oxygen produc- quality samples weekly from all of Bay reserve initiated a vigorous tion in submerged aquatic vegeta- the York sites to assist with the and growing research program on tion (SAV), water quality moni- reserve's monitoring program. the York River components, toring, associations betweeu oys- Teams of volunteers, totalling 240 funded by federal, state and pri- ters and submerged aquatic veg- individuals, have collected debris vate sources. Scientists interested etation; studies on bird, fish, and quarterly at the Goodwin Islands in using the reserve have success- crab populations; predator-prey re- and Catlett Islands, adding to what fully competed for federal funds lationships; reproductive ecology is now a three year record of ma- through OCRM. OCRM funded of sea grasses; and the use of re- rine debris from these components. two competitive awards for re- serves as control sites for pollu- Volunteers also continually con- search focused primarily in tion studies. duct a bird census program at all Virginia's Chesapeake Bay reserve four York River sites. sites through the national NERRS The two projects funded research program. through the National Estuarine Re- Resource Inventory: Re- search Reserve program are stud- serve staff completed a survey of ies on the interaction between oys- historic and prehistoric archaeo- ters and submerged acquatic veg- logical sites on the Catlett Islands etation and impacts on water qual and adjacent Timberneckfarm dur- ity, and nutrient exchange in SAV ing this blennium. This survey and the role of vegetated and non- became the basis for an archaeo- vegetated areas in the nitrogen '1,A14 11@11; logical and historic development cycle. Both are important processes plan for the area. in the estuarine ecosystem. Nomination Package for An endowment has been Designation: Working towards established to support undergradu- designation of additional compo- ate research grants for work at nents within the Chesapeake B sites within Virginia's Chesapeake Citi7ei estuary, the reserve completed a . . ......M Bay NERR. Any undergraduate in nomination package for expansion a Virginia public or private col- of the Chesapeake Bay NERR in Twenty-five diverse re- lege may receive these grants, Virginia into the Potomac, search or monitoring projects were which are not restricted to natural Rappahannock and Piankatank underway at the York River com- science majors. The first competi- River and forwarded the package ponents during the biennium. An- tive awards from this grant will be to the Governor's Office for state other three projects were being awarded in Fiscal Year '94. Funds and local agency review. conducted at potential sites in the from the endowment have already Potomac and Rappahannock Riv- supported a survey of amphibians ers. Among the projects were a and reptiles at a potential broad range of physical, chemical, Rappahannock River component, The reserve operated using andbiological studies of saltmarsh $110,00 in federal funding and estuarine processes and a study The reserve was designated in both FY92 and FY93. of the pre-colonial and colonial in 1991 in the Virginian archaeology of one site. At least biogeographic region. 215 Chesapeake Bay, VA, National Estuarine Research Reserve ment of State Parks, at the Computer Networking Brings Research Taskinas Creek Component in and Education to Virginia Schools both,1992 and 1993. In 1992, 1,300 people attended; 1,400 at- Feats of modern technol- available by the reserve via the tended in 1993. ogy link Virginia teachers to the network. The reserve also pro- The reserve supports in- state's Chesapeake Bay National vides suggestions on how the in- Estuarine Research Reserve. formation can be incorporated service and summer training for into classroom activities. teachers in network communica- The reserve uses two edu- tions, and the use of spreadsheets cational computer networks to These networks, part of a and other computer tools to ana- bring estuarine education to stu- national program called Learn- lyze and interpret data. Data on dents in kindergarten through ing Link, are available to all pub- water quality , bird census, plant 12th grade. lic schools and interested private distribution, and data from the schools throughout the state debris monitoring program are Through these networks, through a partnership with the now on the system. Reserve staff the reserve shares information Consortium for Interactive In- update water quality data files on research and monitoring con- struction. ducted at the reserve's four com- weekly and update other data files poinents. In Virginia, the State De- at appropriate intervals. partment of Education supports Teachers can incorporate the network, which is managed SUMMARYOF the data files, supporting text, by Public Broadcasting Station EVALUATION FINDINGS and graphic materials made WHRO. No evaluation of the conducted by an undergraduate ies Day celebration, held in con- Chesapeake Bay, VA., NERR was conducted during the biennium. from Mary Washington College junction with the Virginia Depart- The next evaluation is scheduled through a non-competitive grant. for June 1994. Boy scout coastal cleanup EDUCATIONAND 0 UTREA CH PR 0 GRAMS The Chesapeake Bay NERR in Virginia educates the general public through its news- letter "A Fair Bay" with 1500 sub- T scribers, a traveling exhibit, and presentations made by the reserve staff, and other initiatives. The reserve hosted Virginia's Estuar- Although the reserve protects 4,434 acres, managers hope to add three new components to the reserve. 216 e Tol"@ God \OP 1-1\'?@Oql @ e\ 6c, mol odl-@ \ACI -,e qec ese c .,e Padilla Bay NERR 217 Washington Coastal Zone Management Program ashington was the PROGRAM first state to receive federal ap- ACCOMPLISH- proval of a coastal management MENTS program. The Washington Coastal @-i A, Zone Management Program Wetlands (WCZMP) is based on the state's Protection: Ecol- Shoreline Management Act of ogy published Re- 1971, which established broad storing Wetlands in guidelines for the protection and Washington, A management of all the state's Guidebook for shorelands, marine waters, and cer- Wetland Restora- tain lakes, streams and wetlands. tion, Planning and Implementation. The state's Department of Acknowledging Ecology (Ecology) serves as the that the regulatory lead agency for Washington's or non-regulatory Coastal Program. This partially context of a resto- networked program involves mul- ration project may tiple state agencies, 15 counties, affect the process, the report de- related to wetland buffer use and and 36 cities. scribes the concepts and proce- effectiveness. Wetland Mitigation dures of wetland restoration which Banking discusses planning con- The state Shoreline Man- can be applied to both the creation sideration and general guidelines agement Act (SMA) provides the and enhancement of wetlands. for potential mitigation bank primary authority to plan and regu- Although this document focuses implementation. late the state's coastal zone. Cities primarily on the restoration of and counties play leading roles in freshwater wetlands, the inforrna- Coastal Hazards: Ecology managing shorelines. The state tion also covers estuarine systems. published two manuals to assist provides overview and support. owners and contractors in address- Local actions are guided by lo- Ecology also produced ing coastal erosion. Slope Stabili- cally-developed, state-approved three reports to assist efforts by zation and Erosion Control Using shoreline master programs the Washington State agencies and Vegetation describes general soil (SMPs). The coastal zone bound- local governments developing bioengineering practices using ary encompasses all 15 coastal policies and standards for a com- vegetation to control erosion and counties bordering Puget Sound prehensive wetlands protection help stabilize slopes. Vegetation and the Pacific Ocean. program. Wetland Mitigation Re- Management: A Guide for Puget placement Ratios: Defining Sound Bluff Property Owners fo- Equivalency summarizes and as- cuses on vegetation management sesses information on wetlands during site development with an The Washington Coastal mitigation in an effort to learn emphasis on reducing the hazard Program, federally approved in more about replacement ratios of surface and mass soil erosion. June 1976, relied on $2,448,000 necessary to offset losses in wet- Ecology also sponsored a series of in federalfunds during FY92 lands acreage and function due to technical bioengineering work- and $2,370,000 in FY93. filling and other wetlands impacts. shops, built mobile displays, and W Wetland Buffers: Use and Effec- produced brochures for specific tiveness summarizes information audiences such as highway engi- 218 Washington Coastal Zone Management Program neers and others to "market" the funds, matched by the local gov- tinuing to address coastal impacts concept of using natural vegeta- ernments, resulted, in three new through the Growth Management tion to control riverside erosion. access projects at the coast. Each Act and the Shoreline Manage- projectis handicapped-accessible. ment Act. Ecology began early to Public Trust: Ecology used assist the local governments to coastal management funding to Erosion Management: As ensure adoption of growth man- organize the Washington Public part of Washington's section 309 agement policies and regulations Trust Doctrine Symposium (No- coastal erosion management strat- that support and strengthen their vember 18,1992) andpublishpro- egy work task, Ecology completed SNLA, Plans. ceedings of the symposium as well three technical studies: an inven- as a videotape. Ecology provided tory and characterization of shore- funds to a professor at the Univer- line armoring devices; engineer- Rod Mack, program manager of sity of Washington Law School ing and geotechnical standards for the Washington Shorelines & whose work resulted in a Wash- shoreline erosion management; Coastal Zone Management ington Law Review Article, "The and physical effects of shoreline Program since 1975, retired Public TrustDoctrine and Coastal armoring. These studies provide Dec. 31, 1993, from the Zone Management in Washington the foundation for revising the Department of Ecology. State. Shoreline Management Act's poli- cies to guide shoreline armoring Orion Law Suit. Ecology Public Access: Ecology and the use of other stabilizing negotiated a settlement agreement continues to increase public ac- techniques. with the Orion Development Cor- cess in the coastal zone by funding poration transferring some 8, 000 local entities' projects through sec- Growth Management: acres to the Padilla Bay National tion 306A, low cost construction Through the CZMA Enhancement Estuarine Research Reserve. The funds. The $77,500 of federal Grant program, Ecology is con- purchase closed a 12-year legal conflict which included a major state Supreme Court decision re- affmning the right of the public to protect aquatic resources held in the public trust. Public Education: Ecol- ogy, along with public, private and corporate sponsors, organized and planned Coastweeks, an an- nual celebration of the coastal zone. During Coastweeks '92 and '93, some 31,000 and 43,000 people, respectively, attended more than 200 participatory shore- line activities including beach clean-ups, watershed tours, storm- drain stencilling, hazardous waste roundups. The CZM grant program payedfor planning, blueprints, and some construction of an oceanfront boardwalk that protects dunes while providing public access. 219 Washington Coastal Zone Management Program Shellfish Protection: State SIGNIFICANT PROGRAM SUMMARYOF grants to local governments, CHANGES E VAL UA TION FINDINGS matched with coastal zone funds, are successfully controlling Washington's coastal man- No evaluation was con- nonpoint pollution in watersheds agement program has completed a ducted during the biennium. The draining to shellfish growing ar- draft revision of its program docu- program was evaluated in Decem- eas. Burley Lagoon, closed to har- ment and is scheduled to submit ber 1993. Evaluation findings will vesting in 1981, was reopened. the final revised document this be issued in 1994. Four other commercial and recre- year. ational shellfish areas also re- opened or were upgraded during this period. Local grants allow counties to help the coast Where do federal dollars for coastal every year by the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- training. In return, volunteers commit to at management land? For the past 18 years, neers. This clean sand is used for building least 50 hours of service monitoring local some federal funds awarded tothe State of roads, docks, boat launches and public parks. beaches and education community members. Washington land in the hands of local gov- The space now used to store the massive Graduates from past Beach Watchers train- ernments for "grassroots" coastal projects. material, however, is scheduled to become a ing programs averaged more than 120 hours public park, forcing city planners to find a of volunteer service. In 1993, for example, the Wash- new home for the dredged spoils. With the ington State Department of Ecology's grant, city officials and an advisory group can Summer visitors to the Port Shorelands Program awarded 22 Coastal Zone develop a new action plan for material dis- Towsend Marine Science Center took free Management (CZM) grants totalling more posal and storage. guided beach tours with skilled naturalists, than $300,000 to support planning for water- thanks to a $5,340 CZM grant. The grant to front development, public access, and shore- The funds are also used to improve Jefferson County provided a series of educa- line resource protection in 14 counties. or add public facilities along the shore. The tional beach walks at the center, located in Department of Ecology awarded a $40000 Fort Worden State Park. Through these walks, The predominate theme for 1993 grant in 1992 to the Grays Harbor County visitors learned about local marine biology, grants was integrating shoreline management Chapter of Trout Unlimited to study and geology and hydrology, in addition to his- into the policy, planning and regulatory ac- build a picnic shelter, boat launch, and toric human uses and enviornmental regula- tivities required by the state's Growth Man- restrooms, creating the first handicapped- tion of the coast. agement Act. Under this theme, local gov- accessible facility on the Washington shore- ernments used grants to improve public ac- line. In 1993, the chapter received $15,000 The funds also aid researchers by cess to the shore; to integrate coastal man- top study the feasibility of adapting the facil- providing facilities. Port of Willapa Harbor agement administration; to restore fiverfronts, ity from a day to an overnight site. The 1993 planners received a $15,000 CZM grant to estuaries and eroded bulkheads; for construc- grant will be used to analyze costs and begin bring their vision of a marine research and IN, tion of boardwalks and coastal resource cen- preliminary engineering for an 18-unit over- education center to light. The center will ters; to map watersheds; to create manage- night vehicle facility, as well as studying the feature facilities for scientific studies of local ment plans; to update local coastal manage- impact of adding a nature trail with interpre- watersheds and estuaries, focusing on sus- ment plans - many written in the mid-70s - tive signs, a floating dock, permanent care- tainable management of the region's natural to meet the needs of modem shorelines, and taker quarters, a sewer system, and a public resources. The proposal shows an aquarium, much more. restroom and shower. interpretive exhiibits and meetings rooms similar to those of the Padilla Bay National A $20,000 CZM grant to the City In Island County, among the top Estuarine Research Reserve (see page 90 for of Everett, for example, may produce a model three fastest growing counties in the state, a more information on this unique site). for identifying and ranking disposal site se- $20,000 CZM grant will train 20 volunteers lection criteria for dredged material. The on environmental topics related to marine According to Rod Mack, the coastal Snohomish River channel, carrying 6 to 7 shorelines. The 7-week program, called Beach program's first manager, "these kinds of grants million tons of commerce annually, is dredged Watchers, provides more than 100 hours of help local governments meet our goals for the state's coastal program." 220 Padilla Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve stablished in 1980, un- PROGRAM reserve during the biennium, in- der the management of the Wash- ACCOMPLISHMENTS cluding one beachfront access site. ington Department of Ecology, the After evaluating selected agricul- Padilla Bay National Estuarine Re- The reserve's manage- tural lands adjacent to the estuary search ResGrve encompasses over ment plan is currently under revi- for purchase as a non-point pollu- 10,604 acres of estuarine wetlands, sion; an internal draft was recently tion research/demonstration farm, 100 acres of uplands, and nearly reviewed by cooperating agencies the reserve obtained an option to At 14,000 square feet of facility space. and committees. purchase the land. Located near Anacortes in Skagit County, Wash., the site contains Operations: The reserve one of the largest eelgrass concen- The reserve received $160,000 completed several tasks to enhance trations on the Pacific Coast and in federal funds in.FY92 operation. For example, managers supports a diverse collection of and $159,000 in FY93. completed an estuarine curricula invertebrates, fish, birds, and ma- for high school classes, prepared a rine mammals. The reserve is Land Acquisition: Settle- procedures and policy manual, and uniquely located adjacent to diked ment of the Orion dispute added initiated a Padilla Bay Watershed agricultural lands, surrounded by 8,004 acres of tidelands to the re- Study financed by state and county small urban centers, and border- serve. Several other tideland and government. The reserve also ini- ing an inland marine system used uplaind parcels were donated to the tiated a facility master plan, work- extensively for commerce and ur- @1@ @ @-11,z @ 41'r ban recreation. The surroundings make the site ideal for researching impacts of urbanization on an es- tuarine environment. The reserve implements major programs in research, edu- cation and interpretation, using on- site field, laboratory, classroom, and display resources. More than 25,000 citizens participate in these programs each year; outreach ef- -7@ forts reach several thousand more citizens. Cooperative programs in t volve state and regional universi- '14 V ties, 40 regional public school dis- tricts, and local, state, and federal agencies. State and federal fund- @04 ing of the reserve is enhanced AtIA, through support of a nonprofit corporation,the Padilla Bay Foun- dation. Advisory committees pro- vide guidance in research and edu- cation to the reserve. 221 Padilla Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve ing specifically to plan and design pended sediment flow from agri- tored nonpoint source pollution in more parking and handicap-acces- cultural fields in the watershed to the watershed. sible pathways at the interpretive Padilla Bay and the benefit that center. The Padilla Bay Founda- cover crops have on reducing that EDUCATIONALAND tion continued support of opera- flow of suspended sediments. OUTREACH PROGRAMS tional, educational, and research programs by funding internship, The reserve education and assistantships, and special projects. interpretation program includes in- Protecting 10,704 acres, The Texaco Corporation, through the reserve is 82% complete. house courses taught at the pre- the Foundation, funded the con- school through college level, cept design for a new exhibit at the teacher workshop, youth program, interpretive center. family programs, special group A research assistantship programs, adult workshops, guided RESEARCHAND programwas initiated with fund- tours, outreach programs, film se- MONITORING PROGRAMS ing from private, federal, and state ries, exhibits and aquaria, portable sources to study water quality in display; a newsletter/activity cal- The reserve continued to the Swinomish Slough, which endar, and brochures. develop baseline information on flows into Padilla Bay. More than the status of resources and pro- half a dozen students workezi on cesses in Padilla Bay. Through this project during the biennium. The Padilla Bay Reserve sediment toxicity measurements Other studies, conducted in coop- was designated in 1980 taken throughout the bay, a former eration with various state agen- in the Columbian landfil1just outside reserve bound- cies, examined the vegetative com- biogeographic region. aries was found to be highly toxic. munities on Hat Island, the drift of The reserve also determined sea- beach fill material, the effects of sonal and daily patterns of sus- herbicide on eelgrass, and moni- Two projects developed during the biennium have received national attention. The new film, Sefflement reached in Estuary!, won the second place Silver Screen Award at the 26th long-standing "'takings" diSpUte Annual U.S. International Film Festival. The Video Communica- tors Association awarded the new The lengthy legal dispute years of litigation, including two high school outreach program with between the Orion Corporation appearances before the Washing- the organization's prestigious "Ex- and the State of Washington over ton State Supreme Court and sev- cellence Award." an alleged "taking" of the eral county superior court trials corporation's property develop- and appeals. ment rights finally reached settle- SUMMARYOF ment. Along the way, courts up- EVALUATION FINDINGS held the state's coastal zone/ Through a mediated settle- shoreline management laws and No evaluation of the ment, 8,004 acres of tidelands were redefined the state's public trust Padilla Bay National Estuarine added to reserve ownership. This doctrine. Research Reserve was conducted mediated settlement closes twelve during the biennium. 222 e e Go P ocs con NKN 223 Wisconsin Coastal Management Program isconsin has 820 Commission, Department of In- Wisconsin's Coastal Management miles of coastline -156 miles dustry, Labor, and Human Rela- Program is building a Coastal along Lake Superior, 464 miles tions, Department of Transporta- Nonpoint Pollution Control Pro- along Lake Michigan, and 200 tion and others. gram on the expertise and estab- around Green Bay -in 15 coastal lished nonpoint program of the counties. All land from the water's The Governor's Executive Department of Natural Resources edge to the inland boundary of Order also established the Wis- (DNR). The WCMP provided these counties and water to the consin Coastal Management funding to the DNR for support state/international line make up Council (the Council), made up of staff and facilities to develop the Wisconsin's coastal zone. representatives from the legisla- section 6217 nonpoint source pol- ture, state agencies, local govern- lution control program. The DNR Wisconsin's Coastal Man- ments, the university, public and is using information and resource agement Program (WCMP), ap- tribal governments, with a Gover- management experience from the proved in 1978, is a networked nor-designated chairperson. The program which incorporates many rll.,:"@`,`@, 71 state laws and regulations. A . . .. A lo Governor's Executive Order des- ignated the Coastal Management Section in the Division of Energy and Intergovernmental Relations, under Department of Administra- tion, as the lead agency for pro- gram coordination, with policy direction given by the Wisconsin Coastal Management Council. Federal consistency review is done in coordination with the Depart- Educalion andpublic ment of Natural Resources. How- aivareness is aii imporicint ever, the DOA holds no direct statu- compollent oj'coaslal tory, regulatory or management RRY-F to implement authority Wisconsin's Coastal Management Program. Most of the core authori- Council oversees the program's Department's Priority Watershed implementation by providing Program, which is a voluntary cost- policy direction to the coastal pro- share nonpoint source program, to The Wisconsin coastal gram. The Council also acts as a comply with the requirements of program, designated in 1978, strong advocate for coastal re- section 6217. manages 820 miles of coastline. sources and their wise and bal- anced use. The DNR is analyzing the requirements of CZMA section ties are implemented by the De- PROGRAM 6217 in relation to the existing w partment of Natural Resources, ACCOMPLISHMENTS nonpoint program and the coastal although some authorities are program to identify actions needed implemented by the Department Coastal Nonpoint Pollu- for the final adoption of the pro- of Agriculture, the Public Service tion Control Program: gram. DNR staff are also compar- 224 Wisconsin Coastal Management Program ing the federal guidance manage- investigation for the entire county along with a curTiculum to teach ment measures to the current Best and allow local units of govern- the guide. The program will begin Management Practices used in ment to monitor and enforce their modestly, but will grow in phases Wisconsin and developing own septic ordinances. to educate and certify increasing nonpoint source pollution fact levels of regulators and consult- sheets to increase public aware- Wetlands Protection: ants. Along with this project, the ness and gain public support for Through the CZMA Section 309 state will track legislation for op- the program. Enhancement Grant Program portunities to -codify the wetland Wisconsin's Coastal Management certification requirement. Enhancement of the State Program is increasing the level of Shorelands- Wetlands Program: Wisconsin Wetland Inven - Working to address concerns from The Wisconsin coastal program tory: Since 1989, the WCMP has section 312 evaluations about de- operated using8O5.667 in provided funds to the Department ficiencies in monitoring and en- federalfunds during FY92 and of Natural Resources to update the forcement of core authorities of 899, 000 during F Y93. Wisconsin Wetland Inventory on the shorelands-wetlands program, a geographic information system. Wisconsin's coastal program has The goal of this ongoing effort is funded four "assistant water man- wetland protection and awareness to update and digitize the Wetland agement specialist" positions in in the state. As part of the en- Inventory for the coastal counties the coastal counties since 1991. hancement program, coastal pro- and enhance the local role in wet- The specialists have greatly im- gram staff are developing a man- land protection through adoption proved the level of service to local datory Wetland Professional Cer- of shoreland-wetland zoning ordi- units of government and the gen- tification Program for local, state, nances. eral public. The backlog of pend- and federal regulators and private ing permit applications has been consultants. A guide to wetlands WetlandsAwareness: As a significantly reduced, and im- and boundary delineation will be direct result of WCMP initiative, provements have been made in developed as part of this program, Governor Tommy Thompson pro- compliance monitoring and en- forcement and response time to requests for technical assistance. Monitoring and Enforce- ment: Working to address cumu- lative and secondary impacts (CSI) and nonpoint source pollution in its coastal zone, Wisconsin's coastal program provided funds under the 1992 grant to Oconto County to hire a staff person to investigate failing septic systems. Although this work began with a project funded in 1989, the project only reached a portion of the As o direct result qf WC14P initiative, Governor Tomin. Thompson county. This funding will enable proclaii.iied MaY 1993 as Wetlands Prolection Momh ill wiscomvin. Oconto County to complete the 225 Wisconsin Coastal Management Program claimed May 1993 as Wetlands continued to support waterfront along the coast and natural re- Protection Month in Wisconsin. redevelopment/low-cost construc- source protection infon-nation. Run concurrently with the National tion projects to provide much- Wetlands Month, this state effort needed access to the Great Lakes Trainingfor Prog ram Net- included the development and dis- coastline. Since 199 1, the program work: In response to Wisconsin's tribution of thousands of posters funded six low-cost construction most recent section 312 program and information to increase public projects, which have involved the evaluation, the WCMP has held awareness of the need for wetlands construction of waterfront walk- several training sessions for both protection. ways, fishing piers, promenades, the Coastal Management Council observation decks, and land ac- and networked groups to review To educate students about quisition for developing a water- the objectives and requirements of the natural function and value of front park. These projects have the state and national coastal pro- wetlands, Wisconsin's Coastal been highly successful in provid- grams, as part of an ongoing Wis- Management Program funded ing new or improved public ac- consin program development and "Project WULP"- Wetland Un- cess to the Great Lakes water- enhancement program. As con- derstanding Leading to Protection. front. tinuing education for the Council, Through Project WULP, curricu- they have invited representatives lum materials on the issue of wet- Public Access Guide: from other state coastal programs land preservation will be devel- Wisconsin's coastal program to learn how other coastal council oped, pilot tested, and produced. spearheaded a project to produce programs operate. The project will rely on both in- the Wisconsin Great Lakes Public door classroom and hands-on out- Access Guide providing informa- SIGNIFICANT door field experiences. tion on recreational areas and ac- PROGRAM CHANGES cess points along Lake Superior Low- Cost Constructionfor and Lake Michigan. The guide is a The WCMP submitted, Public Access: The Wisconsin high-quality glossy publication and OCRM approved, a request to Coastal Management Program has with maps of public access points incorporate changes to Chapters NR 322 and NR 347 into the pro- gram through a routine program fitfiu#d@, @sopported low-cost implementation (RPI) change. sO*qtion along Green Bay.. Changes to Chapter NR 3 22, Gen- eral Permit Program for Certain Water Regulatory Activities, sim- plify the permit process to reduce @A staff time. Chapter NR 347, Sedi- ampling and Analysis, ment S Monitoring Protocol and Disposal Criteria for Dredging Projects, was amended to shorten, simplify, and provide more guidance to appli- cants. Several rules changes, pro- mulgated pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, were 226 Wisconsin Coastal Management Program incorporated into the WCMP, in- cluding changes to Wisconsin Low productivity in bold eagles Chapters NR 102, 103, 105, 106, indicates contamination of ecosystem and 207. These changes affect water quality standards for wet- Wisconsin's coastal pro- Blood samples showed lands, water quality standards for gram sponsored a biological sur- that nestlings along the Lake Su- surface water, water quality-based vey of bald eagles to determine perior shoreline had moderately effluent limitations, and water the health and water quality of high levels of contaminants and quality anti-degradation. the Great Lakes ecosystem. lower productivity rates. Results also showed that nestlings along SUMMARYOF Researchers studied blood the shoreline of Green Bay have EVALUATION FINDINGS samples of nestlings along the the poorest reproductive rates Lake Michigan and Lake Supe- and the highest concentrations of rior shoreline to determine the contaminants of nestlings in Wis- OCRM issued final evalu- effects of contaminants in the consin. ation findings in August 1992 for Great Lakes on the bald eagle the review period of April 1991 population. through December 1991. OCRM found that Wisconsin progressed in certain areas of Shorelands Pro- gram implementation and enforce- plishes the same objectives; ad- actions. One of the two remaining ment, development of a draft as- here to federal consistency proce- actions will require a program sessment of the multi-year strat- dures in the WCMP and NOAA change, and program staff mem- egy, interagency coordination and regulations, and ensure that spe- bers are working on that change. public access. cific program changes are submit- The last action is part of a multi- ted to OCRM. Wisconsin's pro- year strategy which the WCMP is The findings also con- gram has made significant progress scheduled to complete by Septem- tained eight necessary actions in addressing these recommenda- ber 1998. which must be satisfied by tions by completing six of the eight Wisconsin's program in order to adhere to the federal program. The necessary actions require Wiscon sin to: provide adequate monitor- ing of Chapter 30 permits (wet- lands and waterways); complete adoption of local wetland ordi- nances and complete the Wetlands Inventory Update; complete the section 306 multi-year strategy; educate the WCMP networked groups on the proper scope of the WCMP; ensure that the Wiscon- sin Coastal Management Council fW fulfills its responsibilities; provide a DNR program liaison or submit a program change which accom- . .. .... . ... ......... .... . ..... 227 C4 rO (@eG 6ca oe dca c ,,e 0 \.\o GVO doca C,)E Nc) A(@@ -e6\\ca 0 229 APPENDIXA CZM Participation Status STATUS OF STATE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS Actual or Estimated Federal Approval Date By Fiscal Year Comment and Status Participating State End (end 9/30/93) 9/30/93 Alabama 1979 Approved Alaska 1979 Approved American Samoa 1980 Approved California BCDC (San Francisco) 1977 Approved CCC 1978 Approved Connecticut 1980 Approved Delaware 1979 Approved Florida 1981 Approved Georgia Pending Guam 1979 Approved Hawaii 1978 Approved Indiana Pending Louisiana 1980 Approved Maine 1978 Approved Maryland 1978 Approved Massachusetts 1978 Approved Michigan 1978 Approved Minnesota Pending Mississippi 1980 Approved New Hampshire Ocean and Harbor Segment 1982 Approved Great Bay Segment 1988 Approved New Jersey Bay and Ocean Shore Segment 1978 Approved Consolidated Program 1980 Approved New York 1982 Approved North Carolina 1978 Approved Northern Mariana Islands 1980 Approved Ohio Pending Oregon 1977 Approved Pennsylvania 1980 Approved Puerto Rico 1978 Approved Rhode Island 1978 Approved South Carolina 1979 Approved Texas Pending Virginia 1986 Approved Virgin Islands 1979 Approved Washington 1976 Approved Wisconsin 1978 Approved Non-participating: Illinois, Republic of Palau 230 APPENDIX B NERR Participation Status STATUS OF NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE PROGRAMS Actual or Estimated Federal Approval Date By Fiscal Year Comment and Status Participating Si End (end 9/30/93) 9/30/93 ACE Basin 1992 Approved Apalachicola 1979 Approved Chesapeake Bay- Maryland 1985; 1990 Approved Chesapeake Bay- Virginia 1991 Approved Delaware 1993 Approved East Coast Florida Pending Elkhorn Slough 1980 Approved Great Bay 1989 Approved Hudson River 1982 Approved Jobos Bay 1981 Approved Mullica River Pending Narragansett Bay 1980 Approved North Carolina 1982; 1991 Approved North Inlet- Winyah Bay 1992 Approved Old Woman Creek 1980 Approved Padilla Bay 1980 Approved Rookery Bay 1978 Approved Saint Lawrence River Pending San Francisco Bay Pending Sapelo Island 1976 Approved South Slough 1974 Approved Tijuana River 1982 Approved Waimanu Valley 1976 Approved Waquoit Bay 1988 Approved Weeks Bay 1986 Approved Wells 1984 Approved 231 APPENDIX C Program Mops The Coastal Zone. Management Program IN 1 NO Not Pictured Key N. Mariana Islands, Guam,% Approved Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, American Samoa Developing Program Palau 1Z Non-participating The National Estuarine Research Reserve System Padilla Bay, WA 5t. Lawrence River, NY 0 Woman Creek, OH Hpoqon River, NY Wells, ME 5outh 51ough, OF, reat Day, NH Waquoit Day, MA arragansett l3ay, RI Mullica River, NJ 5an Francisco [3ay, CA Delaware Elkhorn 51ough, CA 'Chesapeake Bay, Maryland @'Chesapeake Day, Virginia Tijuana River, CA North Carolina North Inlet/Winyah Day, 5C ACE Basin,5C 5apelo Island, GA Waimanu Valley, HI East Coast of Florida Weeks 5ay, AL Jobos Bay, PR Rookery Day, FL 0 DE516NATED 51TE5 Apalachicola Day, FL PROPOSED 511TEE, 1 232 APPENDIX Q Funding Allocation ITEMIZATION OF ALLOCATION OF FUNDS Breakdown ofAreas in Which Funds Were Expended (in thousands of dollars) Section 306 309 6217 315 305 Program Program Coastal Nonpoint NERRS Program Administration Enhancement Program Development State 1992 1993 1992 1993 1992 1993 1992 1993 1992 1993 Alabama 589 587 73 53 45 45 223 209 Alaska 2014 2015 401 342 100 100 American Samoa 476 501 186 65 42 42 California 2014 2015 463 475 100 100 383 486 Connecticut 746 727 230 236 50 50 Delaware 568 567 164 264 45 45 100 110 Florida 2014 2014 274 273 100 100 425 544 Georgia 210 160 135 200 Guam 480 501 43 43 42 42 Hawaii 710 707 80 80 50 50 108 90 Indiana 166 Louisiana 2014 2015 115 100 100 47 Maine 1546 1555 172 272 79 79 33 125 Maryland 2009 2004 182 226 100 too 175 213 Massachusetts 1354 1520 348 254 82 82 160 250 Michigan 2014 2015 274 100 100 Minnesota 294 Mississippi 536 535 150 43 43 New Hampshire 499 501 97 57 43 43 399 279 New Jersey 2014 2015 228 228 100 100 New York 2014 2015 441 433 100 100 117 160 North Carolina 1499 1493 317 347 75 75 190 109 Northern Marianas 988 42 86 Ohio 135 94 127 Oregon 844 821 277 188 53 53 168 109 Pennsylvania 726 723 198 98 50 50 Puerto Rico 1072 1011 107 54 54 90 90 Rhode Island 600 595 154 145 46 46 310 199 South Carolina 1327 1322 394 379 67 67 133 226 Texas 200 200 Virginia 1916 1964 313 228 100 100 195 110 Virgin Islands 489 501 126 138 42 42 408 Washington 1949 1950 400 321 99 99 Wisconsin 806 780 68 51 51 233 APPENDIX Coastal States'Section 309 Priority Needs ENHANCEMENTAREA Energy /Govn't Public Marine Ocean Facility STATE BY REGION Wetlands Hazards Access DebTis CS1 SAMPS Resources Siting North Atlantic Connecticut x x x x x Maine x x x x Massachusetts x x x x x New Hampshire x x New Jersey x x x x New York x x x x x Rhode Island x x x South Atlantic Delaware x x x x Maryland x x x x North Carolina x x x x South Carolina x x x x Virginia x x x x x Gulf Alabama x x x x Florida x x x Louisiana x x x Mississippi x x x Puerto Rico x x x x x Virgin Islands x x x x Pacific Alaska x x x x American Samoa x x x x California x x x x x CNMI x x x Guam x x x Hawaii x x x x x x Oregon x x x x Washington x x x x x Great Lakes Michigan x x x Pennsylvania x x x x Wisconsin x x x TOTALS 27 24 18 3 25 13 6 % of Eligible 93% 83% 62% 10% 86% 45% 21% 0% 234 APPENDIX F Projects of Special Merit Under Section 309 Enhancement Area State Project Funding/Yr I WETLANDS AL Expanded Subdivision Review $20,000 -'92 � Lowering threshold for subdivision permit review from 25 to 5 acres to ensure greater wetlands protection. � Amending regulations to apply wetlands criteria, stormwater regulations, and erosion control measures in areas outside the jurisdiction of the coastal program. AS Community-Based Wetlands Management $12 1,000 - '92 � Developing model village ordinances in two wetland areas that can be replicated in other communities. � Developing a geographic infon-nation system to support village- based wetlands management. � Developing special management area designation and manage- ment for six wetland areas. CA Port Wetlands Mitigation Project $50,000 -'92 - Providing an up-front analysis of wetland mitigation needs associated with the expansion of several of California's major ports. - Identifying mitigation needs and potential mitigation sites. - Analyzing existing regulatory mechanisms. CA Wetlands and Cumulative Impacts $77,000 -'92 � Developing performance standards to specify the functional value $87,000 -'93 of wetlands and to provide criteria for assessing the success of wetland restoration proposals � Creating wetland performance guidelines for adoption by the Coastal Commission or the Executive Director MA Revised Regulations for Sanitary Waste Disposal in Coastal $70,000 - '92 Wetlands Updating regulations on sanitary waste disposal in the coastal zone, addressing boat and recreational vehicle waste, pump out and storage, the use of alternative and innovative septic treatment systems, and the prohibition of cesspools in areas that can adversely affect coastal wetlands. NC Advanced Identification of Wetlands in a 11-ial County $75,000 -'92 Revising local land use planning guidelines to increase wetlands protection by providing a test in advance of actual revisions to the guidelines. NC Wetlands Functional Assessment and Categorization $45,000 -'92 - Developing methods to prioritize wetlands in protection classes as $ 70,000 -'93 a basis for creating wetlands protection policies in the state wetlands Conservation Plan, which categorizes wetlands by ecological significance. - Creating functional assessment maps for local land use planning and for determining priorities for wetlands restoration and creation efforts NH Coastal Wetlands Assessment Methodology $40,000 -'92 Developing a coastal wetlands assessment methodology, which would allow local officials and laypersons to determine the functioTis and values associated with tidal wetlands. 235 APPENDIX F Projects of Speciol Merit Under Section 309 Enhancement Area State Project Funding/)(r NY Tidal Wetlands Act Amendment $28,000 -92 � Developing further restrictions on use of tidal wetlands � Restricting upland activities that degrade adjacent wetlands � Extending regulatory jurisdiction in the Hudson River coastal region RI Formal Wetland Mitigation Policies $31,000 -'92 Developing formal policies for wetlands mitigation, resulting in a consistent and coordinated effort for restoring wetlands and critical habitats. CUMULATIVE AK Assessment and Control of CSI Impacts of Coastal Uses $ 95,000 - '92 AND SECONDARY on Fish Habitat of the Kenai River $114,000 - '93 IMPACTS (CSI) - Continuing the second year of a three-year project to study the CSI on vital recreational and commercial salmon fishery habitat - Developing policy changes to the State Coastal Management Program and new or revised local CZM policies CA Analysis of the CSI Impacts of NPS within the Periodic Review $114,000 - '93 Framework and Development of Interim Section 6217 Guidance � Assessing the long-tenn CSI of nonpoint source pollution in the Monterey Bay area I � Coordinating an array of coastal and water quality programs to address NPS needs for the Bay area � Creating interim guidance for implementing Section 6217 statewide CT Evaluation of Coastal Boundary for 6217 $150,000 -'92 � Determining what area needs to be managed to control the impacts $140,000 - '93 of nonpoint source pollution � Identifying any modifications necessary to the state coastal zone boundary DE Watershed Protection Strategies for the Dover/Silver Lake/St. Jones $100,000-'92 � Developing a watershed protection strategy for the restoration of $200,000 -93 degraded areas through improvements to stormwater management � Establishing a stormwater utility funded by user fees and landowner's matching fee based on pollutant contributions MA Draft Generic Environmental Impact Report on Small Docks $95,000 - '92 and Piers Defining the CSI of small docks and piers and associated activities in coastal waters. ME Coastal Islands Policy $35,000 -'92 Developing carrying capacities for Maine's coastal islands with extensive local education, participation, and involvement. MS Modification of State Septic Tank Requirements $ 90,000 -'93 � Linking the state coastal program with the state Department of Health to revise septic tank and health regulations � Developing a Memorandum of Understanding with the Dept. of Health 236 APPENDIX F Projects of Speciol Merit Under Section 309 Enhancement Area State Project Funding NC Development of Resource Impact Coefficients $ 75,000 -'93 � Developing resource impact coefficients � Estimating threshold values and carrying capacities for individual watersheds � Creating a simulation model to predict the cumulative impacts of future coastal development � Designating new critical areas within watersheds and developing enforceable policies for addressing CSI of growth and development PA Presque Isle Bay Management Plan $ 100,000 - '92 - Developing a management plan for Presque Isle Bay to avoid CSI of marinas and other boating activities on water quality, habitat, and public safety. - Determining the Bay's marina and boating capacity, types of restrictions needed and how they should be established, and what agency should implement and enforce them. VA Northampton County Conservation Easement Program $85,000 -'92 - Establishing a conservation easement to control inappropriate development and land use impacts. - Developing and applying a financial analysis model to illustrate to landowners that low-impact development can be an economical alternative to traditional subdivisions. HAZARDS ME Shoreline Erosion Management $ 95,000 -'93 � Preparing maps as the primary basis for developing a mandatory setback policy in coastal hazard zones � Revising core statutes of the coastal program NY Nor'easter Regulatory Modifications $ 84,080 -'93 - Improving the hazards management components of the coastal program - Creating.new standards for construction or improving structures in coastal hazard areas - Limiting state agency expenditures in coastal areas under the Coastal Barrier Resources Act - Requiring buyer notification when transferring property located in a coastal hazard zone OR All Hazards Mapping Project, Catastrophic Hazards $101,000 -92 Continuing the second phase of the state effort to develoo consistent $ 79,886 -93 maps of coastal areas showing relevant hazards to coastal develop- ment, including earthquakes and other catastrophic hazards RI Revised Barrier Beach Protection Policies for Salt Pond SAM Plan $ 6@,000 - '93 - Technically analyzing barrier beach erosion problems - Changing coastal policies to address deficiencies - Creating new shoreline protection policies and special area management plan policies for Misquarnicut Beach SC Beachfront Setback Methodology $215,000 -'92 - Refining methodology for determining beachfront setbacks. - Developing a model, transferable to other states, to establish erosion rates based on the total sediment budget for particular littoral cells. 237 APPENDIX F Projects of Special Merit Under Section 309 Enhancement Area State Project Funding SC Development of the Beach/Dune Critical Area $200,000 -'93 Computer-based and Local Zoning Ordinance Overlay � Creating a computer-based inventory of the jurisdictional setback line � Local government adoption of the beach overlay setback zone, which will be locally enforced. $179,000 - '92 WA Coastal Erosion Management Strategy $100,000 -93 � Continuing the second year of a comprehensive project to update the state policies that protects the shoreline from erosion � Determining the ecological effects of armoring � Developing alternative means of managing slope failure as alternative regulatory approaches � Changing the CZM administrative rules to include new model standards for erosion control, so that local government manage- ment plans can be updated to reflect the new provisions OCEAN RESOURCES MA Developing a Framework for an Ocean Management Program $ 7 1,000 - '93 � Developing a management framework for comprehensive ocean resources planning � Changing coastal policies to incorporate ocean management � Recommending changes to statutes and regulations related to ocean resource management OR Threatened and Endangered Species Protection $68,000 -'92 Focusing primarily on ways to protect marine mammals as part of developing a Territorial Sea Management Plan. PUBLIC ACCESS NY Regulations to Implement Chapter 791 of the Laws of 1992 $ 75,000 - '93 -Developing procedures to review all leases, easements and grants for use of lands that are now or were formerly underwater -Preparing regulations, guidelines, and strategies for harbor management plans by local governments RI Submerged Tidal Lands Leasing Program $78,000 - '92 � Developing policies and fee structure for public use of submerged tidal lands. � Setting up long-term program to use fees from docks, marinas, and other structures as a dedicated source of revenue to improve public access. VI Territorial Park System Planning $7 1,000 - '92 -Developing a Territorial Park System Mgt. Plan for all marine and $82,834 -'93 terrestrial parks to enhance public access to beaches and coastal resources -Implementing the plan through a Territorial Park Authority ENERGY & GOVT. FACILITY SITING AK OCS Consistency Review $78,000 - '92 � Resolving important issues regarding state review of OCS lease sales for federal consistency. � Developing and adopting a rational review process. 238 APPENDIX G NERR Regulotions DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE business hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) in room also provide for 100% Federal support for 12520, 1305 East-West Highway, Silver educational-interpretative activities that ben- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin- Spring, Maryland 20190. efit the entire System. Match requirements for istration site selection and land acquisition remain at III. Regulatory Issues 50%. The revisions make the regulations con- 15 CFR Part 921 form. A. General Background [Docket No. 910927-3012] 3. Definitions On July 23,1990 (55 FR 29940) NOAA RIN 0648-AB68 published interim-final regulations for con- The revisions add a definition for the tinued implementation of the National Estua- term "state agency". National Estuarine Research Reserve Sys- fine Reserve Research System Program pur- tem Program Regulations suant to section 315 of the Act, 16 U.S.C. 4. Increase in Acquisition Support 1461. Written comments were accepted until AGENCY. Office of Ocean and Coastal Re- September 21, 1990. On November 5, 1990, The Amendments increase the maximum source Management (OCRM), National Public Law No. 10 1 -508 was passed reautho- amount of Federal financial assistance that can Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and rizing the Program. Several changes to the be awarded for the acquisition of land and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), De- regulations are required as a result of the 1990 waters, or interests therein, for any one Na- partment of Commerce (DOC). reauthorization. In addition, for the reasons tional Estuarine Research Reserve from stated below, some of the revisions suggested $4,000,000 to $5,000,000. The revisions make ACTION: Final Rule. by the comments received on the interim-fi- the regulations conform. nal rule have been adopted. A summary of SUMMARY- This final rule revises the ex- the significant proposed changes to the in- 5. Change in Development Support isting interim-final rule for selecting, desig- terim-final regulations is presented below. On nating, operating, and funding National Es- July 17, 1992, NOAA published a proposed The regulations allow costs associated tuarine Research Serves to bring them into rule incorporating revisions required by the with the development of research, monitor- accord with requirements of the Coastal Zone Amendments and revisions suggested by pub- ing and education programs to be included as Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 lic comments received on the interim-final supplemental development costs and elimi- (the Amendments). In addition, it adopts some rule. Two public comments on the proposed nate the ceiling of $1,500,000 on financial as- of the revisions suggested by comments re- rule were received during the review period sistance which can be provided for develop- ceived on the interim-final rule dated July 23, which ended on August 31, 1992. The public's ment assistance directly associated with fa- 1990, and incorporates comments received on comments and NOANs response are set forth cility construction. the proposed rule published on July 17, 1992 in Section VI, Summary of Public Comments (57 FR 31926). and Responses. 6. Simplification of Operational Support FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CON- B. Final Rule The regulations reduce state and Federal TACT- paperwork burdens by combining support for June Cradick at (301) 713-3132. These regulations establish the routine monitoring and education activities DATES: Effective July 14,1993. Program's mission and goals and revise the with the annual non-competitive operations existing procedures for selecting, designating and management awards. Competitive awards SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and operating National Estuarine Research for special monitoring, research and educa- Reserves. tion projects continue as a separate activity. 1. Authority I . Changing the Name of the Program 7. Clarification of Site Selection This final rule is issued pursuant to the authority of section 315 of the Coastal Zone The name of the Program was changed The regulations clarify the process to be Management Act of 1972, as amended, 16 from the National Estuarine Research System followed by a coastal state which proposed U.S.C. 1461 (the Act). The National Estua- to the National Estuarine Research Reserve to reactivate an inactive site previously ap- rine Research Reserve System (the System) System by the Amendments. The revisions to proved by NOAA for development as an es- has been operating under interim-final regu- the regulations revise the Program name ac- tuarine sanctuary or National Estuarine Re- lations published July 23, 1990 (55 FR cordingly when it appears in the regulations. search Reserve. 29940). 2. Revision of Match Requirements 8. Resource Manipulation IL Availability of Comments The Amendments effectively reduce The regulations recognize the possibil- All comments received in response to the from 50% to 30% state, and were applicable, ity that in Reserve buffer areas long-term uses notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule private party match requirements for the fol- may have existed prior to designation which (57 FR 31926, July 17, 1992) are available lowing financial assistance award types: Op- should be allowed to continue. for inspection at the Office of Ocean and erations, research, monitoring, facility con- Coastal Resource Management during normal struction and education/interpretation. They 239 APPENDIX G Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 134, 7175193 9. Performance Evaluation quired for this rulemaking. The regulations possible consistent with the NOANs respon- set forth procedures for identifying and des- sibility to ensure that the objectives of the The Amendments emphasize the impor- ignating National Estuarine Research Re- National Estuarine Research Reserve System tance of public participation in the perfor- serves, and managing sites once designated. provisions of the Coastal Zone Management mance evaluation process. They also estab- These rules do not directly affect "small gov- Act are achieved, the rule refrains froin es- lish interim sanctions, including partial or full ernment jurisdictions" as defined by Public tablishing uniform national standards. Exten- withdrawal of financial assistance, and estab- Law No. 96-354, the Regulatory Flexibility sive consultations with state officials and or- lish a process for instituting such sanctions. Act, and the rules will have no effect on small ganizations have been held regarding the fi- The revisions make the regulations conform. businesses. Accordingly, when these regula- nancial assistance qualifications imposed. tions were proposed, the General Counsel of Details regarding awards of financial assis- TV. Summary of Comments on the Pro- the Department of Commerce certified to the tance have been discussed above under the posed Regulations and NOAA's Responses Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small heading "REVISION OF THE PROCE- Business Administration that these regula- DURES FOR SELECTING, DESIGNATING NOAA received two comments on the tions, if adopted, would not have a signifi- AND OPERATING NATIONAL ESTUA- proposed rule. A summary of those comments cant economic impact on a substantial num- RINE RESEARCH RESERVES" and are not and NOAXs response appears below. ber of small entities. repeated here. Comment: There is a need to recognize [C] Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. [E] National Environmental Policy Act. that manipulative uses occur within the core This rule contains collection of information NOAA has concluded that publication of this area of Reserves. Further, traditional uses is a requirements subject to Public Law 96-511, final rule does not constitute a major Federal more appropriate term to describe sport fish- the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which action significantly affecting the quality of the ing and hunting, rather than manipulative uses. have already been approved by the Office of human environment. Therefore, an environ- Response: NOAA is aware that manipu- Management and Budget (approval number mental impact statement is not required. lative uses occur within core areas of certain 0648-0121). Public reporting burden for the Reserves. However, given the purposed of the collections of information contained in this List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 921 Program, NOAA believes that some of these rule is estimated to average 2,012 hours per activities are inappropriate to be carried out response for management plans and related Administrative practice and procedure, in core areas. In response to the commenters' documentation, 1.25 hours for performance Coastal zone, Environment impact statements, concerns regarding the use of the term "ma- reports, and 15 hours for annual reports and Grants programs, Natural resources, Report- nipulative uses", the regulations have been work plans. These estimates include the time ing and recordkeeping requirements, Re- clarified to better explain the meaning of that for reviewing instructions, searching existing search. (Federal Domestic Assistance Cata- term. data sources, gathering and maintaining the log Number 11.420, National Estuarine Re- data needed, and completing and reviewing search Reserve System). V. Other Actions Associated With the the collection of information. Send comments Rulemaking regarding this burden estimate or any other' (Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog Num- aspect of these collection of information, in- ber 11.420 Coastal Zone Management Estua- [A] Classification Under Executive Or- cluding suggestions for reducing this burden, rine Sanctuaries) der 12291. NOAA has concluded that these to Richard Roberts, room 724, Department of regulations are not major because they will Commerce, 60 10 Executive Bldg., Rockville, Dates: June 17, 1993. not result in: Maryland 20852, and to the Office of Infor- (1) An annual effect on the economy of mation and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Man- W. Stanley Wilson, $ 100 million or more; agement and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. (2) A major increase in costs or prices ATTN: Desk Officer for NOAA. Assistant Administration for Ocean Services for consumers; individual industries; Federal, [D] Executive Order 12612. This rule and Coastal Zone Management. state, or local government agencies; or geo- does not contain policies which have suffi- graphic regions; or cient Federalism implications to warrant For the reasons set out in the preamble (3) Significant adverse effects on com- preparation of a Federalism Assessment pur- 15 CFR part 921 is revised to read as follows: petition, employment, investment, productiv- suant to Executive Order 12612. However, the ity, innovation or the ability of United States provisions of the rule setting forth what a state PART 921-NATIONAL ESTUARINE based enterprises in domestic or export mar- must do or agree to do in order to qualify for RESEARCH RESERVES SYSTEM kets. the various types of Federal assistance avail- REGULATIONS These rules amend existing procedures able under the rule has been reviewed to en- for identifying, designating, and managing sure that the rule grants the states the maxi- Subpart A-General national estuarine research reserves in accor- mum administrative discretion possible in the dance with the Coastal Zone Act Reauthori- administration of the National Estuarine Re- �921.1 Mission, goals and general provi- zation Amendments of 1990. They will not search Reserve System policies embodied in sions. result in any direct economic or environmen- the qualification requirements. In formulat- �921.2 Definitions. tal effects nor will they lead to any major in- ing those policies, the NOAA worked with �921.3 National Estuarine Research Re- direct economic or environmental impacts. affected states to develop their own policies serve System biogeographic classification [B] Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis. with respect to the use of National Estuarine scheme and estuarine typologies. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not re- Research Reserves. To the maximum extent �921.4 Relationship to other provisions of 240 APPENDIX Q NERR Regulotions the Coastal Zone Management Act and the �921.80 Application information. lyzed in the management plan, The Reserve Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. �921.81 Allowablecosts. management plan shall describe the uses and �921.82 Amendments to financial assistance establish priorities among these uses. The plan Subpart B-Site Selection, Post Site Selec- awards. shall identify uses requiring a state permit, as tion and Management Plan and Development well as areas where uses are encouraged or Appendix I to Part 921-Biogeographic prohibited. Consistent with resource protec- �921.10 General. Classification Scheme tion and research objectives, public access and �921.11 Site selection and feasibility. use may be restricted to certain areas or com- �921.12 Post site selection. Appendix H to Part 921-Ilypology of Na- ponents within a Reserve. �921.13 Management plan and environmen- tional Estuarine Research Reserves (d) Habitat manipulation for research tal impact statement development. purposes is allowed consistent with the fol- Authority: Section 315 of the Coastal Zone lowing limitations. Manipulative research ac- Subpart C-Acquisition, Development, Management Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. tivities must be specified in the management and Preparation of the Final Management 1461). plan, be consistent with the mission and goals Plan of the program (see paragraphs (a) and (b) of Subpart A-General this section) and the goals and objectives set �921.20 General. forth in the Reserve's management plan, and �921.21 Initial acquisition and development �921.1 Mission, goals, and general provi- be limited in nature and extent to the mini- awards. sions. mum manipulative activity necessary to ac- (a) The mission of the National Estua- complish the state research objective. Manipu- Subpart D-Reserve Designation and Sub- rine Research Reserve Program is the estab- lative research activities with a significant or sequent Operation lishment and management, through Federal- long-term impact on Reserve resources re- state cooperation, of a national systems (Na- quire the prior approval of the state and the �921.30 Designation of National Estuarine tional Estuarine Research Reserve System or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- Research Reserves. System) of estuarine research reserves (Na- tration (NOAA). Manipulative research activi- �921.31 Supplemental acquisition and de- tional Estuarine Research Reserves or Re- ties which can reasonably be expected to have velopment awards. serves) representative of the various regions a significant adverse impact on the estuarine �921.32 Operation and management: Imple- and estuarine types in the United States. Na- resources and habitat of a Reserve, such that mentation of the management plan. tional Estuarine Research Reserves are estab- the activities themselves or their resulting �921.33 Boundary changes, amendments to lished to provide opportunities for long-term short- and long-term consequences compro- the management plan, and addition of mul- research, education, and interpretation. mise the representative character and integ- tiple-site components. (b) The goals of the Program are to: rity of a Reserve, are prohibited. Habitat ma- (1) Ensure a stable environment for re- nipulation for resource management purposes Subpart E-Ongoing Oversight, Perfor- search through long-term protection of Na- is prohibited except as specifically approved mance Evaluation and Withdrawal of Des- tional Estuarine Research Reserve resources; by NOAA as: (1) A restoration activity con- ignation (2) Address coastal management issues sistent with paragraph (e) of this section; or identified as significant through coordinated (2) an activity necessary for the protection of �921.40 Ongoing oversight and evaluations estuarine research within the System; public health or the preservation of other sen- of designated National Estuarine Research (3) Enhance public awareness and un- sitive resources which have been listed or are Reserves. derstanding of estuarine areas and provide eligible for protection under relevant Federal �921.41 Withdrawal of designation. suitable opportunities for public education and or state authority (e.g., threatened/endangered interpretation; species or significant historical or cultural Subpart F-Special Research Projects (4) Promote Federal, state, public and resources) or if the manipulative activity is a private use of one or more Reserves within long-term pre-existing use (i.e., has occurred �921.50 General. the System when such entities conduct estua- prior to designation) occurring in a buffer area. �921.51 Estuarine research guidelines. rine research; and If habitat manipulation is determined to be �921.52 Promotion and coordination of es- (5) Conduct and coordinate estuarine necessary for the protection of public health, tuarine research. research within the System, gathering and the preservation of sensitive resources, or if making available information necessary for the manipulation is a long-term pre-existing Subpart G-Special Monitoring Projects improved understanding and management of use in a buffer area, then these activities shall estuarine areas. be specified in the Reserve management plan �921.60 General. (c) National Estuarine Research Re- in accordance with �921.13(a)(10) and shall serves shall be open to the public to the ex- be limited to the reasonable alternative which Subpart H-Special Interpretation and tent permitted under state and Federal law. has the least adverse and shortest term im- Education Projects Multiple uses are allowed to the degree com- pact on the representative and ecological in- patible with each Reserve's overall purpose tegrity of the Reserve. �921.70 General. as provided in the management plan (see (e) Under the Act an area may be desig- �921.13) and consistent with paragraphs (a) nated as an estuarine Reserve only if the area Subpart I-General Financial Assistance and (b) of this section. Use levels are set by is a representative estuarine ecosystem that is Provisions the state where the Reserve is located and ana- suitable for long-term research. Many estua- rine areas have undergone some ecological 241 APPENDIX G Federal Register, Vol, 58, No. 134, 7115193 change as a result of human activities (e.g., tion in the Reserve management plan. Fed- tuary-type areas of the Great Lakes and their hydrological changes, intentional/uninten- eral lands already in protected status may not connecting waters (see 16 U.S.C. 1453(7)). tional species composition changes-intro- comprise a majority of the key land and wa- (f) National Estuarine Research Reserve duced and exotic species.) In those areas pro- ter areas of a Reserve (see �92 1. 11 (c)(3)). means an area that is a representative estua- posed or designated as National Estuarine (h) To assist the states in carrying out rine ecosystem suitable for long-term re- Research Reserves, such changes may have the Program's goals in an effective manner, search, which may include all of the key land diminished the representative character and NOAA will coordinate a research and educa- and water portion of an estuary, and adjacent integrity of the site. Although restoration of tion information exchange throughout the transitional areas and uplands constituting to degraded areas is not a primary purpose of National Estuarine Research Reserve System. the extent feasible a natural unit, and which the System, such activities may be permitted As part of this role, NOAA will ensure that is set aside as a natural field laboratory to pro- to improve the representative character and information and ideas from one Reserve are vide long-term opportunities for research, integrity of a Reserve. Restoration activities made available to others in the System. The education, and interpretation on the ecologi- must be carefully planned and approved by network will enable Reserves to exchange in- cal relationships within the area (see 16 U.S.C. NOAA through the Reserve management formation and research data with each other, 1453(8)) and meets the requirements of 16 plan. Historical research maybe necessary to with universities engaged in estuarine re- U.S.C. 1461(b). This includes those areas determine the "natural" representative state search, and with Federal, state, and local agen- designated as National Estuarine Sanctuaries of an estuarine area (i.e., an estuarine ecosys- cies. NOAA!s objective is a system-wide pro- or Reserves under section 315 of the Act prior tem minimally affected by human activity or grain of research and monitoring capable of to enactment of the Coastal Zone Act Reau- influence). Frequently, restoration of a de- addressing the management issues that affect thorization Amendments of 1990 and each graded estuarine area will provide an excel- long-term productivity of our Nation's estuaries. area subsequently designated as a National lent opportunity for management oriented research. Estuarine Research Reserve. (f) NOAA may provide financial assis- �921.2 Definitions. tance to coastal states, not to exceed, per Re- (a) Act means the Coastal Zone Manage- �921.3 National Estuarine Research Re- serve, 50 percent of all actual costs or $5 mil- ment Act of 1972, as amended, 16 U.S.C. serve System Biogeographic Classification lion whichever amount is less, to assist in the 1451 et seq. Scheme and Estuarine Typologies. acquisition of land and waters, or interests (b) Assistant Administrator means the (a) National Estuarine Research Re- therein. NOAA may provide financial assis- Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services serves are chosen to reflect regional differ- tance to any coastal state or public or private and Coastal Zone Management or delegee. ences and to include a variety of ecosystem person, not to exceed 70 percent of all actual (c) Coastal state means a state of the types. A biogeographic classification scheme costs, to support research and monitoring United States, in or bordering on, the Atlan- based on regional variations in the nation's within a Reserve. Predesignation, acquisition tic, Pacific, or Arctic Ocean, the Gulf of coastal zone has been developed.The biogeo- and development, operation and management, Mexico, Long Island Sound, or one or more graphic classification scheme is used to en- special research and monitoring, and special of the Great Lakes. For the purposes of these sure that the National Estuarine Research education and interpretation awards are avail- regulations the term also includes Puerto Rico, Reserve System includes at least one site from able under the National Estuarine Reserve the Virgin Islands, Guam, the commonwealth each region. The estuarine typology system Program. Predesignation awards are for site of the Northern Marianas Islands, the Trust is utilized to ensure that sites in the System selection/feasibility, draft management plan Territories of the Pacific Islands, and Ameri- reflect the wide range of estuarine types within preparation and conduct of basic character- can Samoa (see 16 U.S.C. 1453(4)). the United States. ization studies. Acquisition and development (d) State agency means an instrumental- (b) The biogeographic classification awards are intended primarily for acquisition ity of a coastal state to whom the coastal state scheme, presented in appendix 1, contains 29 of interests in land, facility construction and has delegated the authority and responsibil- regions. Figure I graphically depicts the bio- to develop and/or upgrade research, monitor- ity for the creation and/or management/op- geographic regions of the United States. ing and education programs. Operation and eration of a National Estuarine Research Re- (c) The typology system is presented in management awards provide funds to assist serve. Factors indicative of this authority may appendix II. in implementing, operating and managing the include the power to receive and expend funds administrative, and basic research, monitor- on behalf of the Reserve, acquire and sell or �921.4 Relationship to other provisions ing and education programs, outlined in the convey real and personal property interests, of the Coastal Zone Management Act, and Reserve management plan. Special research adopt rules for the protection of the Reserve, to the Marine Protection, Research and and monitoring awards provide funds to con- enforce rules applicable to the Reserve, or de- Sanctuaries Act. duct estuarine research and monitoring velop and implement research and education (a) The National Estuarine Research projects with the System. Special education programs for the reserve. For the purposes of Reserve System is intended to provide infor- and interpretative awards provide funds to these regulations, the terms "coastal state" and mation to state agencies and other entities in- conduct estuarine education and interpretive "State agency" shall be synonymous. volved in addressing coastal management is- projects within the System. (e) Estuary means that part of a river or sues. Any coastal state, including those that (g) Lands already in protected status stream or other body of water having unim- do not have approved coastal management managed by other Federal agencies, state or paired connection with the open sea, where programs under section 306 of the Act, is eli- local governments, or private organizations the sea water is measurably diluted with fresh gible for an award under the National Estua- may be included within National Estuarine water derived from land drainage. The term rine Research Reserve Program (see Research Reserves only if the managing CIL- also includes estuary-type areas with measur- �921.2(c)). tity commits to long-term management con- able freshwater influence and having unim- (b) For purposes of consistency review sistent with paragraphs (d) and (e) of this see- paired connections with the open sea, and es- by states with a federally approved coastal 242 APPENDIX G NERR Regulations management program, the designation of a gible for the full complement of funding. Fi- the state and NOAA shall evaluate and select National Estuarine Research Reserve is nancial assistance application procedures are the final site(s). NOAA has final authority in deemed to be a Federal activity, which, if di- specified in subpart I. approving such sites. Site selection shall be rectly affecting the state's coastal zone, must (b) In developing a Reserve program, a guided by the following principles: be undertaken in a manner consistent to the state may choose to develop a multiple-site (1) The site's contribution to the biogeo- maximum extent practicable with the ap- Reserve reflecting a diversity of habitats in a graphical and typological balance of the Na- proved state coastal management program as single biogeographic region. A multiple-site tional Estuarine Research Reserve System. provided by section 1456(c)(1) of the Act, and Reserve allows the state to develop comple- NOAA will give priority consideration to pro- implementing regulations at 15 CFR part 930, mentary research and educational programs posals to establish Reserves in geographic subpart C. In accordance with section within the individual components of its multi- regions or subregions or incorporating types 1456(c)91) of the Act and the applicable regu- site Reserve. Multiple-site Reserves are that are not represented in the system. (see lations NOAA will be responsible for certi- treated as one Reserve in terms of financial the biogeographic classification scheme and fying that designation of the Reserve is con- assistance and development of an overall typology se for the in � 921.3 and Appendi- sistent with the state's approved coastal man- management framework and plan. Each indi- ces I and Il); agement program. The state must concur with vidual site of a proposed multiple-site Reserve (2) The site's ecological characteristics, or object to the certification. It is recom- shall be evaluated both separately under � including its biological characteristics, includ- mended that the lead state agency for Reserve 921.11(c) and collectively as part of the site ing its biological productivity, diversity of designation consult, at the earliest practicable selection process. A coastal state may propose flora and fauna, and capacity to attract a broad time, with the appropriate state officials con- to establish a multiple-site Reserve at the time range of research and educational interests. cerning the consistency of a proposed Na- of the initial site selection, or at any point in The proposed site must be a representative tional Estuarine Research Reserve. the development or operation of the Reserve. estuarine ecosystem and should, to the maxi- (c) The National Estuarine Research If the state decides to develop a multiple-site mum extent possible, be an estuarine ecosys- Reserve Program will be administered in close National Estuarine Research Reserve after the tem minimally affected by human activity or coordination with the National Marine Sanc- initial acquisition and development award is influence (see � 921.1(e)). tuary Program (Title III of the Marine Pro- made for a single site, the proposal is subject (3) Assurance that the site's boundaries tection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, as to the requirements set forth in � 921.33(b). encompass an adequate portion of the key land amended, 16 U.S.C. 1431-1445), also admin- However, a state may not propose to add one and water areas of the natural system to ap- istered by NOAA. Title III authorized the Sec- or more sites to an already designated Reserve proximate an ecological unit and to ensure retary of Commerce to designate discrete ar- if the operation and management of such Re- effective conservation. Boundary size will eas of the marine environment as National serve has been found deficient and uncor- vary greatly depending on the nature of the Marine Sanctuaries to protect or restore such rected or the research conducted is not con- ecosystem. Reserve boundaries must encom- areas for their conservation, recreational, eco- sistent with the Estuarine Research Guidelines pass the area within which adequate control logical, historical, research, educational or referenced in � 921.5 1. In addition , Federal has or will be established by the managing esthetic values. National Marine Sanctuaries funds for the acquisition of a multiple-site Re- entity over human activities occurring within and Estuarine Research Reserves may not serve remain limited to $5,000,000 (See � the Reserve. Generally, Reserve boundaries overlap, but may be adjacent. 921.20). The funding for operation of a mul- will encompass two areas: Key land and wa- tiple-site Reserve is limited to the maximum ter areas (or "core area") and a buffer zone. Subpart B- Site Selection, Post Site Se- allowed for any one Reserve per year (see � Key land and water areas and a buffer zone lection and Management Plan Develop- 921.32(c)) and preacquisition funds are lim- will likely require significantly different lev- ment ited to $100,000 per Reserve. els of control (see � 921.13(a)(7)). The term "key land and water areas" refers to that core � 921.10 General � 921.11 Site selection and feasibility area within the Reserve that is so vital to the (a) A coastal state may apply for Fed- (a) A coastal state may use Federal funds functioning or the estuarine ecosystem that it eral financial assistance for the purpose of site to establish and implement a site selection pro- must be under a level of control sufficient to selection, preparation of documents specified cess which is approved by NOAA. ensure the long-term viability of the Reserve in � 921.13 (draft management plan (DMP) (b) In addition to the requirements set for research on natural processes. Key land and environmental impact statement (EIS)), forth in subpart I, a request for Federal funds and water areas, which comprise the core area, and the conduct of limited basic character- for site selection must contain the following are those ecological units of a natural estua- ization studies. The total Federal share of this programmatic information: rine system which preserve, for research pur- assistance may not exceed $ 100,000. Federal (1) A description of the proposed site poses, a full range of significant physical, financial assistance for preacquisition activi- selection process and how it will be imple- chemical and biological factors contributing ties under � 921.11 and � 921.12 is subject to mented in conformance with the biogeo- to the diversity of fauna, flora and natural pro- the total $5 million for which each Reserve is graphic classification scheme and typology (� cesses occurring within the estuary. The de- eligible for land acquisition. In the case of a 921.3); termination of which land and water areas are biogeographic region (see appendix 1) shared (2)An identification of the site selection "key" to a particular Reserve must be based by two or more coastal states, each state is agency and the potential management agency; on specific scientific knowledge of the area. eligible for Federal financial assistance to es- and A basic principle to follow when deciding tablish a separate National Estuarine Research (3) A description of how public partici- upon key land and water areas is that they Reserve within their respective portion of the pation will be incorporated in to the process should encompass resources representative of shared biogeographic region. Each separate (see � 92 1. 11 (d)). the total ecosystem, and which if compro- National Estuarine Research Reserve is eli- (c) As part of the site selection process, mised could endanger the research objectives 243 APPENDIX G Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 134, 7115193 of the Reserve. The them "buffer zone refers the site selection principals (� 92 1.1 I(c)) and Reserve. to an area adjacent to or surrounding key land the following information: (b) The state is eligible to use the funds and water areas and essential to their integ- (1) An analysis of the proposed site(s) referenced in � 921.12(a) after the proposed rity. Buffer zones protect the core area and based on the biogeographical scheme/typol- site is approved by NOAA under the terms of provide additional protection for estuarine-de- ogy discussed in � 921.3 and set forth in ap- � 921.11. pendent species, including those that are rare pendices I and 11; or endangered. When determined appropriate (2) A description of the proposed site(s) � 921.13 Management plan and environ- by the state and approved by NOAA, the and its (their) major resources including lo- mental impact statement development buffer zone may also include an area neces- cation, proposed boundaries, and adjacent (a) After NOAA approves the state's pro- sary for facilities required for research and land uses. Maps are required; posed site and application for funds submit- interpretation. Additionally, buffer zones (3) A description of the public partici- ted pursuant to � 921.12, the state may begin should be established sufficient to accommo- pation process used by the state to solicit the draft management plan development and the date a shift of the core area as a result of bio- views of interested parties a summary of com- collection of information necessary of the logical, ecological or geomorphological ments, and, if interstate issues are involved, preparation by NOAA of an EIS. The state change which reasonably could be expected documentation that the Governor(s) of the shall develop a draft management plan, in- to occur. National Estuarine Research Re- other affected state(s) has been contacted. cluding an MOU. The plan shall set out in serves may include existing Federal or state Copies of all correspondence, including con- detail: lands already in a protected status where mu- tact letters to all affected landowners must be (1) Reserve goals and objectives, man- tual benefit can be enhanced. However, appended; agement issues, and strategies or actions for NOAA will not approve a site for potential (4) A list of all sites considered and a meeting the goals and objectives; National Research Reserve status that is de- brief statement of the reasons why a site was (2) An administrative plan including staff pendent primarily upon the inclusion of cur- not preferred; and roles in administration, research, education/ rently protected Federal lands in order to meet (5) A nomination of the proposed sites(s) interpretation, and surveillance and enforce- the requirements for Reserve status (such as for designation as a National Estuarine Re- ment; key land and water areas). Such lands gener- search Reserve by the Governor of the coastal (3) A research plan, including a moni- ally will be included within a Reserve to serve state in which the state is located. toring design; as a buffer or for other ancillary purposes; and (f) A state proposing to reactivate and (4) An education/interpretive plan; may be included, subject to NOAA approval, inactive site, previously approved by NOAA (5) A plan for public access to the Re- as a limited portion of the core area; for development as an Estuarine Sanctuary or serve; (4) The site's suitability for long-term Reserve, may apply for those funds remain- (6) A construction plan, including a pro- estuarine research, including ecological fac- ing, if any, provided for site selection and fea- posed construction schedule, general descrip- tors and proximity to existing research facili- sibility (� 921.11(a)) to determine the feasi- tion of proposed developments and general ties and educational institutions; bility of reactivation, This feasibility study cost estimates. Information should be pro- (5) The site's compatibility with exist- must comply with the requirement set forth vided for proposed minor construction ing and potential land and water uses in con- in � 92 1.11 (c) through (e). projects in sufficient detail to allow these tiguous areas as well as approved coastal and projects to begin in the initial phase of acqui- estuarine management plans; and � 921.12 Post site selection sition and development. A categorical exclu- (6) The site's importance to education (a) At the time of the coastal state's re- sion, environmental assessment, or EIS may and interpretive efforts, consistent with the quest for NOAA approval of a proposed site, be required prior to construction; need for continued protection of the natural the states may submit a request of funds to (7)(i) An acquisition plan identifying the system. develop the draft management plan and for ecologically key land and water areas of the (d) Early in the site selection process the preparation of the EIS. At this time, the state Reserve, ranking theses areas according to state must seek the views of affected land- may also submit a request for the remainder their relative importance, and including a strat- owners, local governments, other state and of the predesignation funds to perform a lim- egy for establishing adequate long-term state Federal agencies and other parties who are ited basic characterization of the physical, control over these areas sufficient to provide interested in the area(s) being considered for chemical and biological characteristics of the protection for Reserve resources to ensure a selection as a potential National Estuarine Re- site approved by NOAA necessary for pro- stable environment for research. This plan search Reserve. After the local government(s) viding EIS information to NOAA. The state's must include an identification of ownership and affected landowner(s) have been con- request of these post site selection funds must within the proposed Reserve boundaries, in- tacted, at least one public meeting shall be be accompanied by the information specified cluding land already in the public domain; the held in the vicinity of the proposed site. No- in subpart I and for draft management plan method(s) of acquisition which the state pro- tice of such a meeting including the time, development and EIS information collection, poses to use- acquisition (including less- place, and relevant subject matter, shall be the following programmatic information: than-fee simple options) to establish adequate announced by the state through the areas' prin- (1) A draft management plan outline (see long-term state control; an estimate to the fair cipal newspaper at least 15 days prior to the � 921.13(a) below); and market value of any property interest- which date of the meeting and by NOAA in the Fed- (2) An outline of a draft memorandum is proposed for acquisition; a schedule esti- eral Register. of understanding (MOU) between the state mating the time required to complete the pro- (e) A state request of NOAA approval of a and NOAA detailing the Federal- state role in cess of establishing adequate state control of proposed site (r sites in the case of a multi- Reserve management during the initial period the proposed research reserve; and a discus- site Reserve) must contain a description of of Federal funding expressing the state's long- sion of any anticipated problems. In select- the proposed site(s) in relationship to each of term commitment to operate and manage the ing a preferred method(s) for establishing ad- 244 APPENDIX G NERR Regulotions equate state control over areas within the pro- use restrictions, including appropriate govern- 15 days prior to the meeting. The state shall posed boundaries of the Reserve the state shall ment enforcement agencies; be responsible for publishing a similar notice perform the following steps for each parcel (9) If applicable, a restoration plan de- in the local media. determined to be part of the key land and water scribing those portions of the site that may (d) NOAA will publish a Federal Reg- areas (control over which is necessary to pro- require habitat modification to restore natu- ister notice of intent to prepare a draft EIS. tect their integrity of the Reserve for research ral conditions; After the draft EIS is prepared and filed with purposes), and for those parcels required for (10) If applicable, a resource manipula- the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), research and interpretive support facilities or tion plan, describing those portions of the a Notice of Availability of the draft EIS will buffer purposes: Reserve buffer in which long-term pre-exist- appear in the Federal Register. Not less than (A) Determine, with appropriate justifi- ing (prior to designation) manipulation for 30 days after publication of the notice, NOAA cation, the minimum level of control(s) re- reasons not related to research or restoration will hold at least one public hearing in the quired [e.g., management agreement, regula- is occurring. The plan shall explain in detail area or areas most affected by the proposed tion, less-than-fee simple property interest the nature of such activities, shall justify why national estuarine research reserve. The hear- (e.g., conservation easement) fee simple prop- such manipulation should be permitted to con- ing will be no sooner than 125 days after ap- erty acquisition, or a combination of these tinue within the reserve buffer; and shall de- propriate notice of the meeting has been given approaches]. This does not preclude the fu- scribe possible effects of this manipulation on in the principal news media by the state and ture necessity of increasing the level of state key land and water areas and their resources; in the Federal Register by NOAA. After a control; (11) A proposed memorandum of under- 45-day comment period, a final EIS will be (B) Identify the level of existing state standing (MOU) between the state and NOAA prepared by the state and NOAA. control(s); regarding the Federal-state relationship dur- (C) Identify the level of additional state ing the establishment and development of the Subpart C-Acquisition, Development and control(s), if any, necessary to meet the mini- National Estuarine Research Reserve, and ex- Preparation of the Final Management Plan mum requirements identified in paragraph pressing a long-term commitment by the state (a)(7)(i)(A) of this section; to maintain and manage the Reserve in ac- �921.20 General. (D) Examine all reasonable alternatives cordance with section 315 of the Act, 16 The acquisition and development period for attaining the level of control identified in U.S.C. 1461, and applicable regulations. In is separated into two major phases. After paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C) of this section, and conjunction with the MOU, and where pos- NOAA approval of the site, draft management perform a cost analysis of each; and sible under state law, the state will consider plan and draft MOU, and completion of the (E) Rank, in order of cost, the methods taking appropriate administrative or legisla- final EIS, a coastal state is eligible for an ini- (including acquisition) identified in paragraph tive action to ensure the long-term protection tial acquisition and development awafd(s). In (a)(7)(i)(D) of this section. and operation of the National Estuarine Re- this initial phase, the state should work to meet (ii) An assessment of the relative cost- search Reserve. If other MOUs are necessary the criteria required for formal research re- effectiveness of control alternatives shall in- (such as with a Federal agency, another state serve designation; e.g., establishing adequate clude a reasonable estimate of both short-term agency or private organization), drafts of such state control over the key land and water ar- costs, negotiation, adjudication, etc.,) and MOUs must be included in the plan. All nec- eas as specified in the draft management plan long-term costs (e.g., monitoring, enforce- essary MOUs shall be signed prior to Reserve and preparing the final management plan. ment, adjudication, management and coordi- designation; and These requirements are specified in �921.30. nation). In selecting a preferred method(s) for (12) If the state has a federally approved Minor construction in accordance with the establishing adequate state control over each coastal management program, a certification draft management plan may also be conducted parcel examined under the process described that the National Estuarine Research Reserve during this initial phase. The initial acquisi- above, the state control over each parcel ex- is consistent to the maximum extent practi- tion and development phase is expected to last amined under the process described above, the cable with that program. See �921,4(b) and no longer than three years. If necessary, a state shall give priority consideration to the �921.30(b). longer time period maybe negotiated between least costly method(s) of attaining the mini- (b) Regarding the preparation of an EIS the state and NOAA. After Reserve designa- mum level of long-term control required. Gen- under the National Environmental Policy Act tion, a state is eligible for a supplemental ac- erally, with the possible exception of buffer on a National Estuarine Research Reserve quisition and development award(s) in accor- areas required for support facilities, the level proposal, the state and NOAA shall collect dance with �921.31. In this post-designation of control(s) required for buffer areas will be all necessary information concerning the so- acquisition and development phase, funds considerably less than that required for key cioeconomic and environmental impacts as- may be used in accordance with the final man- land and water areas. This acquisition plan, sociated with implementing the draft manage- agement plan to construct research and edu- after receiving the approval of NOAA, shall ment plan and feasible alternatives to the plan. cational facilities, complete any remaining serve as a guide for negotiations with land- Based on this information, the state will draft land acquisition, for program development, owners. A final boundary for the reserve shall and provide NOAA with a preliminary EIS. and for restorative activities identified in the be delineated as a part of the final manage- (c) Early in the development of the draft final management plan. In any case, the ment plan; management plan and the draft EIS, the state amount of Federal financial assistance pro- (8) A resource protection plan detailing and NOAA shall hold a scoping meeting (pur- vided to a coastal state with respect to the applicable authorities, including allowable suant to NEPA) in the area or areas most af- acquisition of lands and waters, or interests uses, uses requiring a permit and permit re- fected to solicit public and government com- therein, for any one National Estuarine Re- quirements, any restrictions on use of the re- merits on the significant issues related to the search Reserve may not exceed an amount search reserve, and a strategy for research re- proposed action. NOAA will publish a notice equal to 50 percent of the costs of the lands, serve surveillance and enforcement of such of the meeting in the Federal Register at least waters, and interests therein or $5,000,000, 245 APPENDIX G Federol Register, Vol. 58, No. 134, 717 5193 whichever amount is less. ment plan may begin with NOAA!s approval. less-then-fee-simple interests acquired in (e) For any real property acquired in whole or part with Federal funds. �921.21 Initial acquisition and develop- whole or part with Federal funds for the Re- (g) Federal funds or non-Federal match- ment awards. serve, the state shall execute suitable title ing share funds shall not be spent to acquire a (a) Assistance is provided to aid the re- documents to include substantially the follow- real property interest in which the state will cipient prior to designation in: ing provisions, or otherwise append the fol- own the land concurrently with another en- (1) Acquiring a fee simple or less-than- lowing provisions in a manner acceptable tity unless the property interest has been iden- fee simple real property interest in land and under applicable state law to the official land tified as a part of an acquisition strategy pur- water areas to be included in the Reserve record(s): suant to � 921.13(7) which has been approved boundaries (see �921.13(a)(7); �921.30(d)); (1) Title to the property conveyed by this by NOAA prior to the effective date of these (2) Minor construction, as provided in deed shall vest in the [recipient of the award regulations. paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section; granted pursuant to section 315 of the Act, 16 (h) Prior to submitting the final manage- (3) Preparing the final management plan; U.S.C 1461 or other NOAA approved state ment plan to NOAA for review and approval, and agency subject to the condition that the des- the state shall hold a public meeting to re- (4) Initial management costs, e.g., for ignation of the [name of National Estuarine ceive comment on the plan in the area affected implementing the NOAA approved draft man- Research Reserve]; is not withdrawn and the by the estuarine research reserve. NOAA will agement plan, hiring a Reserve manager and property remains part of the federally desig- publish a notice of the meeting in the Fed- other staff as necessary and for other man- nated [name of National Estuarine Research eral Register at least 15 days prior to the agement-related activities. Application proce- Reserve]; and public meeting. The state shall be responsible dures are specified in subpart 1. (2) In the event that the property is no for having a similar notice published in the (b) The expenditure of Federal and state longer included as part of the Reserve, or if local newspaper(s). funds on major construction activities is not the designation of the Reserve of which it is allowed during the initial acquisition and de- part is withdrawn, then NOAA or its succes- Subpart D- Reserve Designation and Sub- velopment phase. The preparation of archi- sor agency, after full and reasonable consul- sequent Operation tectural and engineering plans, including tation with the State, may exercise the fol- specifications, for any proposed construction, lowing rights regarding the disposition of the � 921.30 Designation of National Estuarine or for proposed restorative activities, is per- property: Research Reserves mitted. In addition, minor construction activi- (i) The recipient may retain tide after (a) The Under Secretary may designate ties, consistent with paragraph (c) of this sec- paying the Federal Government an amount an area proposed for designation by the Gov- tion also are allowed. The NOAA-approved computed by applying the Federal percent- emor of the state in which it is located, as a draft management plan must, however, in- age of participation in the cost of the original National Estuarine Research Reserve if the clude a construction plan and a public access project to the current fair market value of the Under Secretary finds: plan before any award funds can be spent on property; (1) The area is a representative estuarine construction activities. (ii) If the recipient does not elect to re- ecosystem that is suitable for long-term re- (c) Only minor construction activities tain title, the Federal Government may either search and contributes to the biogeographi- that aid in implementing portions of the man- direct the recipient to sell the property and cal and typological balance of the System; agement plan (such as boat ramps and nature pay the Federal Government an amount com- (2) Key land and water areas of the pro- trails) are permitted during the initial acqui- puted by applying the Federal percentage of posed Reserve, as identified in the manage- sition and development phase. No more than participation in the cost of the original project ment plan, are under adequate state control five (5) percent of the initial acquisition and to the proceeds from the sale (after deducting sufficient to provide long-term protection for development award may be expended on such actual and reasonable selling and. repair or reserve resources to ensure a stable environ- activities. NOAA must make a specific deter- renovation expenses, if any, from the sale pro- ment for research. mination, based on the final EIS, that the con- ceeds), or direct the recipient to transfer title (3) Designation of the area as a Reserve struction activity will not be detrimental to to the Federal Government. If directed to will serve to enhance public awareness and the environment. transfer title to the Federal Government, the understanding of estuarine areas, and provide (d) Except as specifically provided in recipient shall be entitled to compensation suitable opportunities for public education and paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section, con- computed by applying the recipient's percent- interpretation; struction projects, to be funded in whole or in age of participation in the cost of the original (4) A final management plan has been part under an acquisition and development project to the current fair market value of the approved by NOAA; award(s), may not be initiated until the Re- property; and (5) An MOU has been signed between serve receives formal designation (see (iii) Fair market value of the property the state and NOAA ensuring a long-term �921.30). This requirement has been adopted must be determined by an independent ap- commitment by the state to the effective op- to ensure that substantial progress in estab- praiser and certified by a responsible official eration and implementation of the area as a lishing adequate state control over key land of the state, as provided by Department of National Estuarine Research Reserve; and water areas has been made and that a fi- Commerce regulations at 15 CFR part 24, and (6) All MOU's necessary for reserve nal management plan is completed before Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real management (ie., with relevant Federal, state, major sums are spent on construction. Once Property Acquisition for Federal and Feder- and local agencies and/or private organiza- substantial progress in establishing adequate ally assisted programs at 15 CFR part 11. tions/ have been signed; and state controll acquisition has been made, as (f) Upon instruction by NOAA, provi- (7) The coastal state in which the area is defined by the state in the management plan, sions analogous to those of �921.21(e) shall located has complied with the requirements other activities guided by the final manage- be included in the documentation underlying of subpart B. 246 APPENDIX G NERR Regulations (b) NOAA will determine whether the Acquisition awards for the acquisition of lands �921.33 Boundary changes, amendments to designation of a National Estuarine Research or waters, or interests therein, for any one re- the management plan, and addition of Reserve in a state with a federally approved serve may not exceed an amount equal to 50 multiple-site components. coastal zone management program directly percenturn of the cost of the lands, waters, (a) Changes in the boundary of a Reserve affects the coastal zone. If the designation is and interests therein or $5,000,000, which- and major changes to the final management found to directly affect the coastal zone. If ever amount is less. In the case of a biogeo- plan, including state laws or regulations pro- the designation is found to directly affect the graphic region (see Appendix 1) shared by two mulgated specifically for the Reserve, may be coastal zone, NOAA will make a consistency or more states, each state is eligible indepen- made only after written approval by NOAA. determination pursuant to �307(c)(1) of the dently for Federal financial assistance to es- NOAA may require public notice, including Act, 16 U.S.C. 1456, and 15 CFR part 930, tablish a separate National Estuarine Research notice in the Federal Register and an oppor- subpart C. See � 921.4(b). The results of this Reserve within their respective portion of the tunity for public comment before approving consistency determination will be published shared biogeographic region. Application pro- a boundary or management plan change. in the Federal Register when the notice of cedures are specified in subpart 1. Land ac- Changes in the boundary of a Reserve involv- designation is published. See �921.30(c). quisition must follow the procedures speci- ing the acquisition of properties not listed in (c) NOAA will publish the notice of des- fied in �921.13(a)(7), �921.21(e) and (f) and the management plan or final EIS require pub- ignation of a National Estuarine Research �921.81. lic notice and the opportunity for comment; Reserve in the Federal Register. The state in certain cases, a categorical exclusion, an shall be responsible for having a similar no- � 921.32 Operation and management: environmental assessment and possibly an tice published in the local media. Implementation of the management plan. environmental impact statement may be re- (d) The term "state control" in � (a) After the Reserve is formally desig- quired. NOAA will place a notice in the Fed- 921.30(a)(3) does not necessarily require that nated, a coastal state is eligible to receive Fed- eral Register of any proposed changes in Re- key land and water areas be owned by the state eral funds to assist the state in the operation serve boundaries or proposed major changes in fee simple. Acquisition of less-than-fee and management of the Reserve including the to the final management plan. The state shall simple interests (e.g., conservation easements) management of research, monitoring, educa- be responsible for publishing an equivalent and utilization of existing state regulatory tion, and interpretive programs. The purpose notice in the local media. See also require- measures are encouraged where the state can of this Federally funded operation and man- ments of � 921.4(b) and demonstrate that these interests and measures agement phase is to implement the approved � 921.13(a)(I 1). assure adequate long-term state control con- final management plan and to take the neces- (b) As discussed in � 92 1. 1 0(b), a state sistent with the purposes of the research re- sary steps to ensure the continued effective may choose to develop a multiple-site Na- serve (see also � 921.13(a)(7); � 921.21(g)). operation of the Reserve. tional Estuarine Research Reserve after the Should the state later elect to purchase an in- (b) State operation and management of initial acquisition and development award for terest in such lands using NOAA funds, ad- the Reserves shall be consistent with the mis- a single site has been made. NOAA win pub- equate justification as to the need for such sion, and shall further the goals of the Na- lish notice of the proposed new site including acquisition must be provided to NOAA. tional Estuarine Research Reserve program an invitation for comments from the public in (see � 92 1. 1). the Federal Register. The state shall be re- � 921.31 Supplemental acquisition and de- (c) Federal funds are available for the sponsible for publishing an equivalent notice velopment awards. operation and management of the Reserve. in the local newspaper(s). An EIS, if required. After National Estuarine Research Re- Federal funds provided pursuant to this sec- shall be prepared in accordance with section serve designation, and as specified in the ap- tion may not exceed 70% of the total cost of � 921.13 and shall include an administrative proved management plan, a coastal state may operating and managing the Reserve for any framework for the multiple-site Reserve and request a supplemental acquisition and/or one year. In the case of a biogeographic re- a description of the complementary research development award(s) for acquiring additional gion (see Appendix 1) shared by two or more and educational programs within the Reserve. property interests identified in the manage- states, each state is eligible for Federal fman- If NOAA determines, based on the scope of ment plan as necessary to strengthen protec- cial assistance to establish a separate Reserve the project and the issues associated with the tion of key land and water areas and to en- within their respective portion of the shared additional site(s), that an environmental as- hance long-term protection of the area for re- biogeographic region (see � 92 1. 10). sessment is sufficient to establish a multiple- search and education, for facility and exhibit (d) Operation and management funds are site Reserve, then the state shall develop a construction, for restorative activities identi- subject to the following limitations: revised management plan which, concerning fied in the approved management plan, for (1) Eligible coastal state agencies may the additional component, incorporates each administrative purposes related to acquisition apply for up to the maximum share available of the elements described in � 921.13 (a). The and/or facility construction and to develop per Reserve for that fiscal year. Share amounts revised management plan shall address goals and/or upgrade research, monitoring and edu- will be announced annually by letter from the and objectives for all components of the multi- cationfinterpretive programs. Federal finan- Sanctuary and Reserves Division to all par- site Reserve and the additional component's cial assistance provided to a National Estua- ticipating states. This letter will be provided relationship to the original site(s). rine Research Reserve for supplemental de- as soon as practicable following approval of (c) The state shall revise the management velopment costs directly associated with fa- the Federal budget for that fiscal. year. plan for a Reserve at least every five years, or cility construction (i.e., major construction ac- (2) No more than ten percent of the total more often if necessary. Management plan tivities) may not exceed 70 percent of the to- amount (state and Federal shares) of each revisions are subject to (a) above. tal project cost. NOAA must make a specific operation and management award may be (d) NOAA will approve boundary determination that the construction activity used for construction-type activities. changes, amendments to management plans, will not be detrimental to the environment. or the addition of multiple-site components, 247 APPENDIX G Federol Register, Vol, 58, No. 734, 717 5193 by notice in the Federal Register. If neces- able funds for that purpose, not requesting ness and understanding of estuarine ecosys- sary NOAA will revise the designation docu- promptly additional funds when necessary, tems and estuarine management issues. Spe- ment (findings) for the site. and evidence that adequate long-term state cial research projects may be oriented to spe- control has not been established over some cific Reserves; however, research projects that Subpart E - Ongoing Oversight, Perfor- core or buffer areas, thus jeopardizing the abil- would benefit more than one Reserve in the mance Evaluation and Withdrawal of Des- ity to protect the Reserve site and resources National Estuarine Reserve Research System ignation from offsite impacts. are encouraged. (7) Inadequate implementation of Re- (b) Funds provided under this subpart are � 921.40 Ongoing oversight and evaluations serve protection plan. Indicators of inadequate available on a competitive basis to any coastal of designated National Estuarine Research implementation could include: Evidence of state or qualified public or private person. A Reserves. non-compliance with Reserve restrictions, notice of available funds will be published in (a) The Sanctuaries and Reserve Divi- insufficient surveillance and enforcement to the Federal Register. Special research project sion shall conduct, in accordance with sec- assure that restrictions on use of the Reserve funds are provided in addition to any other tion 312 of the Act and procedures set forth are adhered to, or evidence that Reserve re- funds available to a coastal state under theAct. in 15 CFR part 928, ongoing oversight and sources are being damaged or destroyed as a Federal funds provided under this subpart may evaluations of Reserves. Interim sanctions result of the above. not exceed 70% of the total cost of the project, may be imposed in accordance with regula- (8) Failure to carry out the terms of the consistent with � 921.81(e)(4) ("allowable tions promulgated under 15 CFR part 928. signed Memorandum of Understanding costs"). (b) The Assistant Administrator may (MOU) between the state and NOAA, which consider the following indicators of non-ad- establishes a long-term state commitment to �921.51 Estuarine research guidelines herence in determining whether to invoke in- maintain and manage the Reserve in accor- (a) Research within the National Estua- terim sanctions: dance with section 315 of the Act. Indicators rine Research Reserve System shall be con- (1) Inadequate implementation of re- of failure could include: State action to allow ducted in a manner consistent with Estuarine quired staff roles in administration, research, incompatible uses of state-controlled lands or Research Guidelines developed by NOAA. education/interpretation, and surveillance and waters in the Reserve, failure of the state to (b) A summary of the Estuarine Research enforcement. Indicators of inadequate imple- bear its fair share of costs associated with Guidelines is published in the Federal Reg- mentation could include: No Reserve Man- long-term operation and management of the ister as a part of the notice of available funds ager, or no staff or insufficient staff to carry Reserve, or failure to initiate timely updates discussed in � 921.50(c). out the required functions. of the MOU when necessary. (c) The Estuarine Research Guidelines (2) Inadequate implementation of the are reviewed annually by NOAA. This review required research plan, including the moni- �921.41 Withdrawal of Designation will include an opportunity for comment by toring design. Indicators of inadequate imple- The Assistant Administrator may withdraw the estuarine research community. mentation could include: Not carrying out designation of an estuarine area as a National research or monitoring that is required by the Estuarine Research Reserve pursuant to and �921.52 Promotion and coordination of plan, or carrying out research or monitoring in accordance with the procedures of section estuarine research that is inconsistent with the plan. 312 and 315 of the Act and regulations pro- (3) Inadequate implementation of the mulgated thereunder. (a) NOAA will promote and coordinate required education/interpretation plan. Indi- the use of the National Estuarine Research cators of inadequate implementation could Subpart F-Special Research Projects Reserve System for research purposes. include: Not carrying out education or inter- (b) NOAA will. in conducting or sup- pretation that is required by the plan, or car- �921.50 General porting estuarine research other than that au- rying out education/interpretation that is in- (a) To stimulate high quality research thorized under section 315 of the Act, give consistent with the plan. within designated Research Reserves, NOAA priority consideration to research that make (4) Inadequate implementation of pub- may provide financial support for research use of the National Estuarine Research Re- lic access to the Reserve. Indicators of inad- projects which are consistent with the Estua- serve System. equate implementation of public access could rine Research Guidelines referenced in (c) NOAA will consult with other Fed- include: Not providing necessary access, giv- � 921.51. Research awards may be awarded eral and state agencies to promote use of one ing full consideration to the need to keep some under this subpart to only those designated or more research reserves within the National areas off limits to the public in order to pro- Reserves with approved final management Estuarine Research Reserve System when tect fragile resources. plans. Although research may be conducted such agencies conduct estuarine research. (5) Inadequate implementation of facil- within the immediate watershed of the Re- ity development plan. Indicators of inadequate serve, the majority of research activities of Subpart G- Special Monitoring Projects implementation could include: Not taking any single research project funded under this action to propose and budget for necessary subpart may be conducted within reserve �921.60 General facilities, or not undertaking necessary con- boundaries. Funds provided under this sub- struction in a timely manner when funds are part primarily used to support management- (a) To provide a systematic basis for de- available. related research projects that will enhance veloping a high quality estuarine resource and (6) Inadequate implementation of acqui- scientific understanding of the Reserve eco- ecosystem information base for National Es- sition plan. Indicators of inadequate imple- system, provide information needed by Re- tuarine Research Reserves and, as a result, for mentation could include: Not pursuing an serve management and coastal management the System, NOAA may provide financial aggressive acquisition program with all avail- decision-makers, and improve public aware- support for basic monitoring programs as part 248 APPENDIX G NERR Regulations of operations and management under � funds available to a coastal state under the Act. must contain back up data for budget estimates 921.32. Monitoring funds are used to support Federal funds provided under this subpart may (Federal and non-Federal shares), and evi- three major phases of a monitoring program: not exceed 70% of the total cost of the project, dence that the application complies with the (1) Studies necessary to collect date for a com- consistent with �921.81(e)(4) ("allowable Executive Order 12372, "Intergovernmental prehensive site description/ characterization; costs"). Review of Federal Programs." In addition, (2) development of a site profile; and (3) for- (c) Applicants for education/interpretive applications for acquisition and development mulation and implementation of a monitor- projects that NOAA determines benefit the awards must contain: ing program. entire National Estuarine Research Reserve (1) State Historic Preservation Office (b)Additional monitoring funds may be System may receive Federal assistance of up comments; available on a competitive basis to the state to 100% of project costs. (2) Written approval from NOAA of the agency responsible for Reserve management draft management plan for initial acquisition or a qualified public or private person or en- Subpart I - General Financial Assistance and development awards(s); and tity. However, if the applicant is other than Provisions (3) A preliminary engineering report for the managing entity of a Reserve that appli- construction activities. cant must submit as a part of the application �921.80 Application Information. a letter from the Reserve manager indicating (a) Only a coastal state may apply for �921.81 Allowable costs. formal support of the application by the man- Federal financial assistance awards for (a) Allowable costs will be determined aging entity of the Reserve. Funds provided preacquisition, acquisition and development, in accordance with applicable OMB Circulars under this subpart for special monitoring operation and management, and special edu- and guidance for Federal financial assistance, projects are provided in addition to any other cation and interpretation projects under sub- the financial assistant agreement, these regu- federal funds available to a state under the Act. part H. Any coastal state or public or private lations, and other Department of Commerce Federal Funds provided under this subpart person may apply for Federal financial assis- and NOAA directives. The term "costs" ap- may not exceed 70% of the total cost of the tance awards for special estuarine research or plies to both the Federal and non-Federal project, consistent with � 921.81(e)(4) ("al- monitoring projects under subpart G. The shares. lowable costs"). announcement of opportunities to conduct (b) Costs claimed as charges to the (c) Monitoring projects funded under this research in the System appears on an annual award must be reasonable, beneficial and nec- subpart must focus on the resources within basis in the Federal Register. If a state is essary for the proper and efficient adminis- the boundaries of the Reserve and must be participating in the national Coastal Zone tration of the financial assistance award and consistent with the applicable sections of the Management Program, the applicant for an must be incurred during the award period. Estuarine Research Guidelines referenced in award under section 315 of the Act shall no- (c) Costs must not be allocable to or in- � 921.51. Portions of the project may occur tify the state coastal management agency re- cluded as a cost of any other Federally-fi- within the immediate watershed of the Re- garding the application. nanced program in either the current or a prior serve beyond the site boundaries. However, (b) An original and two copies of the award period. the monitoring proposal must demonstrate formal application must be submitted at least (d) General guidelines for the non-Fed- why this is necessary for the success of the 120 working days prior to the proposed be- eral share are contained in Department of project. ginning of the project to the following address: Commerce Regulations at 15 CFR part 224 Sanctuaries and Reserves Division Ocean and and OMB Circular A-110. Copies of Circu- Subpart H-Special Interpretation and Coastal Resource Management, National JarA-110 can be obtained from the Sanctuar- Education Projects Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, 1825 ies and Reserves Division; 1825 Connecticut Connecticut Avenue, NW., suite 714, Wash- Avenue, NW., suite 714; Washington, DC �921.70 General ington, DC 20235. Applications for Federal 20235. The following may be used in satis- (a) To stimulate the development of in- Assistance Standard Form 424 (Non-con- fying the matching requirement: novative or creative interpretive and educa- struction Program) constitutes the formal ap- (1) Site selection andpost site selection tional projects and materials to enhance pub- plication for site selection, post-site selection, awards. Cash and in-kind contributions (value lic awareness and understanding of estuarine operation and management, research, and of goods and services directly benefiting and areas, NOAA may fund special interpretive education and interpretive awards. The Ap- specifically identifiable to this part of the and educational projects in addition to those plication for Federal Financial assistance project) are allowable. Land may not be used activities provided for in operations and man- Standard Form 424 (Construction Program) as match. agement under �921.32. Special interpretive constitutes the formal application for land ac- (2) Acquisition and development and educational awards may be awarded un- quisition and development awards. The ap- awards. Cash and in-kind contributions are der this subpart to only those designated Re- plication must be accompanied by the infor- allowable. In general, the fair market value serves with approved final management plans. mation required in subpart B (predesignation), of lands to be included within the Reserve (b) Funds provided under this subpart subpart C and �921.31 (acquisition and de- boundaries and acquired pursuant to the Act, may be available on a competitive basis to any velopment), and �921.32(operation and man- with other than Federal funds, may be used state agency. However, if the applicant is other agement) as applicable. Applications for de- as match. However, the fair market value of than the managing entity of a Reserve, that velopment awards for construction projects, real property allowable as match is limited to applicant must submit as a part of the appli- or restorative activities involving construction, the fair market value of a real property inter- cation a letter from the Reserve manager in- must include a preliminary engineering report, est equivalent to, or required to attain, the level dicating formal support of the application by a detailed construction plan, a site plan, a bud- of control over such land(s) identified by the the managing entity of the Reserve. These get and categorical exclusion check list or state and approved by the Federal Government funds are provided in addition to any other environmental assessment. All applications 249 APPENDIX G Federal Register, Vol, 58, No. 7 34, 717 51193 as that necessary for the protection and man- Appendix I to Part 921 - Biogeographic 23. Lake Ontario (including St. agement of the National Estuarine Research Classification Scheme Lawrence River.) Reserve. Appraisals must be performed ac- cording to Federal appraisal standards as de- Acadian Fjord tailed in Department of Commerce regulations 1. Northern of Maine (Eastport of the 24. Southern Alaska (Prince of Wales at 15 CFR part 24 and the Uniform Reloca- Sheepscot River.) Island to Cook Inlet.) tion Assistance and Real Property Acquisition 2. Southern Gulf of Maine (Sheepscot 25. Aleutian Island (Cook Inlet Bristol for Federal Land Federally assisted programs River to Cape Cod.) Bay.) in 15 CFR part 11. The fair market value of privately donated land, at the time of dona- Virginian Sub-Arctic tion, as established by an independent ap- 3. Southern New England (Cape Cod to 26. Northern Alaska (Bristol Bay to praiser and certified by a responsible official Sandy Hook.) Damarcation Point.) Of the state, pursuant to 15 CFR part 11, may 4. Middle Atlantic (Sandy Hook to Cape also be used as match. Land, including sub- Hatteras.) Insular merged lands already in the state's possession, 5. Chesapeake Bay. 27. Hawaiian Islands. may be used as match to establish a National 28. Western Pacific Island. Estuarine Research Reserve. The value of Carolinian 29. Eastern Pacific Island. match for these state lands will be calculated 6. North Carolinas (Cape Hatteras to by determining the value of the benefits fore- Santee River.) Billing Code 3510-08-M gone by the state, in the use of the land, as a 7. South Atlantic (Santee River to St. result of new restrictions that may be imposed John's River.) Appendix 11 to Part 921-T@pology of Na- by Reserve designation. The appraisal of the 8. East Florida (St. John's River to Cape tional Estuarine Research Reserves benefits foregone must be made by an inde- Canaveral.) pendent appraiser in accordance with Federal This typology system reflects significant appraisal standards pursuant to 15 CFR part West Indian differences in estuarine characteristics that are 24 and 15 CFR part 11. A state may initially 9. Caribbean (Cape Canaveral to Ft. not necessarily related to regional location. use as match land valued at greater than the Jefferson and south.) The purpose of this type of classification is to Federal share of the acquisition and develop- 10. West Florida (Ft. Jefferson to Cedar maximize ecosystem variety in the selection ment award. The value in excess of the Key.) of national estuarine reserves. Priority will amount required as match for the initial award be given to important ecosystem types as yet may be used to match subsequent supplemen- Louisianian unrepresented in the reserve system. It should tal acquisition and development awards for 11. Panhandle Coast (Cedar Key to be noted that any one site may represent sev- the National Estuarine Research Reserve (see Mobile Bay.) eral ecosystem types or physical characteris- also �921.20). Costs related to land acquisi- 12. Mississippi Delta (Mobile Bay to tics. tion, such as appraisals, legal fees and sur- Galveston.) veys, may also be used as match. 13. Western Gulf (Galveston to Mexi- Class I-Ecosystem Types (3) Operation and management awards. can border.) Generally, cash and in-kind contributions (di- Group I-Shorelands rectly benefiting and specifically identifiable Californian A. Maritime Forest- Woodland. That to operations and management), except land, 14. Southern California (Mexican Bor- have developed under the influence of salt are allowable. der to Point Conception.) spray. It can be found on coastal uplands or (4) Research, monitoring, education and 15. Central California (Point Concel)- recent features such as barrier islands and interpretive awards. Cash and in-kind con- tion to Cape Mendocino.) beaches, and biomes: tributions (directly benefiting and specifically 16. San Francisco Bay. 1. Northern coniferous forest biome: identifiable to the scope of work), except land, This is an area of predominantly evergreens are allowable. Columbian such as the sitka spruce (Picea), grand fir 17. Middle Pacific (Cape Mendocino to (Abies), and white cedar (Thuja), with poor �921.82 Amendments to financial assis- the Columbia River.) development of the shrub and herb leyera, but tance awards. 18. Washington Coast (Columbia River high annual productivity and pronounced sea- Actions requiring an amendment to the to Vancouver Island.) sonal periodicity. financial assistance award, such as a request 19. Puget Sound. 2. Moist temperate (Mesothermal) conif- for additional Federal funds, revisions of the erous forest biome: Found along the west approved project budget or original scope of Great Lakes coast of North America from California to work, or extension of the performance period 20. Lake Superior (including St. Mary's Alaska, this area is dominated by conifers, has must be submitted to NOAA on standard River.) relatively small seasonal range, high humid- Form 424 and approved in writing. 2 1. Lakes Michigan and Huron (includ- ity with rainfall ranging from 30 to 150 inches, ing Straits of Mackinac, St. Clair River, and and a well-developed understory of vegeta- Lake St. Clair.) tion with an abundance of mosses and other 22. Lake Erie (including Detroit River moisture-tolerant plants. and Niagara Falls.) 3. Temperate deciduous forest biome: 250 APPENDIX G NERR Regulations Figure I Sub-Art! intergrigolia and Saxilrage oppositifolia. This 26 National Estuarine Research Reserve System area can be divided into two main subdivi- 25 \ 24 Biogeographic Regions of the United States sions: Fjo,d 1. Low tundra: Characterized by a thick, spongy mat of living and undecayed vegeta- 19 tion, often with water and dotted with ponds when not frozen; and 20 Gre,at Lakes 2. High tundra: A bare area except for a Columbian 23 2 scanty growth of lichens and grasses, with 17 21 1 22 underlaying ice wedges forming raised po- 3 lygonal areas. @16 E. Coastal cliffs. This ecosystem is an 15 4 V ortant nesting site for many sea and shore Californian 5 irginian imp birds. It consists of communities of herba- 6 ceous, graminoid, or low woody plants 14 (shrubs, heath, etc.) on the top or along rocky 7 Carolinian faces exposed to salt spray. There is a diver- sity of plant species including mosses, lichens, it liverworts, and "higher" plant representatives. 29 12 27 Insular 13 We ILouisianian 10 11 9 Indl Group 11 - Transition Areas 28 A. Coastal marshes. These are wetland BILLING CODE 3510,09-C areas dominated by grasses (Poacea), sedges (Cyperacese), rushes (Juneaceae), cattails This biome is characterized by abundant, 3. Western areas: Adenostoma, (Typhaceae), and other graminoid species and evenly distributed rainfall, moderate tempera- arcotyphylos, and eucalyptus are the domi- is subject to periodic flooding by either salt tures which exhibit a distinct seasonal pattern, nant floral species. . or freshwater. This ecosystem may be subdi- well-developed soil biota and herb and shrub C. Coastal grasslands. This area, which pos- vided into: (a) Tidal, which is periodically layers, and numerous plants which produce sesses sand dunes and coastal flats, has low flooded by either salt or brackish water; (b) pulpy fruits and nuts. A distinct subdivision rainfall (10 to 30 inches per year) and large nontidal (freshwater); or (c) tidal freshwater. of this biome is the pine edible forest of the amounts of humus in the soil. Ecological suc- These are essential habitats for many impor- southeastern coastal plain, in which only a cession is slow, resulting in the presence of a tant estuarine species of fish and invertebrates small portion of the area is occupied by cli- number of seral stages of community devel- as well as shorebirds and waterfowl and serve max vegetation, although it has large areas opment. Dominant vegetation includes mid- important roles in shore stabilization, flood covered by edaphic climax pines. grasses (5 to 8 feet tall), such as Spardna, and control, water purification, and nutrient trans- 4. Broad-leaved evergreen subtropical trees such as willow (Salix sp.), cherry port and storage. forest biome: The main characteristic of this (Primus sp.), and cottonwood (Pupulus B. Coastal swamps. These are wet low- biome is high moisture with less pronounced deltoides.) This area is divided into four re- land areas that support mosses and shrubs to- differences between winter and summer. gions with the following typical strand veg- gether with large trees such as cypress or gum. Examples are the hammocks of Florida and etation: C. Coastal mangroves. This ecosystem the live oak forests of the Gulf and South At- 1. Arctic/Boreal: Elymus; experiences regular flooding on either a daily, lantic coasts. Floral dominants include pines, 2. NortheastfWest; Ammophla; monthly, or seasonal basis, has low wave ac- magnolias, bays, hollies, wild tamarine, stran- 3. Southeast Gulf-, Uniola; and tion, and is dominated by a variety of salt- gler fig, gumbo limbo, and palms. 4. Mid-Atlantic/Gulf; Spartina patens. tolerant trees, such as the red mangrove B. Coast shrublands. This is a transi- D. Coastal tundra. This ecosystem, which is (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove tional area between the coastal grasslands and found along the Arctic and Boreal coasts of (Avicennia Nitida), and the white mangrove woodlands and is characterized by woody spe- North Arnercia, is characterized by low tem- (Laguncularia racemosa.) It is also an impor- cies with multiple stems and a few centime- peratures, a shore growing season, and some tant habitat for large populations of fish, in- ters to several meters above the ground de- permafrost, vertebrates, and birds. This type of ecosys- veloping under the influence of salt spray and producing a low, treeless mat community tem can be found from central Florida to ex- occasional sand burial. This includes thick- made up of mosses, lichens, heath, shrubs, treme south Texas to the islands of the West- ets, scrub, scrub savanna, heathlands, and grasses, sedges, rushes, and herbaceous and ern Pacific. coastal chaparral. There is a great variety of dwarf woody plants. Common species include D. Intertidal beaches. This ecosystem shrubland vegetation exhibiting regional Arctic/alpine plants such as Empeturm nigrurn has a distinct biota of microscopic animals, specificity: and Betula nana, the lichens Cetraria and bacteria, and unicellular algae along with 1. Northern areas: Characterized by Cladonia, and herbaceous plants such as Po- macroscopic crustaceans, mollusks, and Hudsonia, various erinaceous species, and tentilla tridentata and Rubus chamaiemorus. worms with a detritus-based nutrient cycle. 7'@2 5 @ 24 thickets of Myricu, prunus, and Rosa. Common species on the coastal beach ridges This area also includes the driftline commu- 2. Southeast areas: Floral dominants in- of the high arctic desert include Bryas nities found at high tide levels on the beach. clude Myrica, Baccharis, and Iles. T he dominant organisms in this ecosystem 25 1 APPENDIX G Federol Register, Vol, 58, No. 734, 7115193 include crustaceans such as the mole crab Group III - Submerged Bottoms 2, Sheltered coast: Sand or coral barri- (Emerita), amphipods (Gammeridae), ghost A. Subtidal hardbottoms. This system is ers, built up by natural forces, provide shel- crabs ( Ocypode), and bivalve mollusks such characterized by a consolidated layer of solid tered areas inside a bar or reef where the eco- as the coquina (Donax) and surf clams rock or large pieces of rock (neither of biotic system takes on many characteristics of con- (Spisula and Mactra.) origin) and is found in association with fined waters-abundant marine grasses, shell- E. Intertidal mud and sandflats. These geomophological features such as submarine fish, and juvenile fish. Water movement is areas are composed of unconsolidated, high canyons and fjords and is usually covered with reduced, with the consequent effects pollu- organic content sediments that function as a assemblages of sponges, s6a fans, bivalves, tion being more severe in this area than in short-term storage area for nutrients and or- hard corals, tunicates, and other attached or- exposed coastal areas. ganic carbons. Macrophytes are nearly absent ganisms. A significant feature of estuaries in 3. Bay: Bays are larger confined bodies in this ecosystem, although it may be heavily many parts of the world is the oyster reef, a of water that are open to the sea and receive colonized by benthic diatoms, type of subtidal hardbottom. Composed of strong tidal flow. When stratification is pro- dinoflaggellates, filamintous blue-green and assemblages of organisms (usually bivalves), nounced the flushing action is augmented by green algae, an 'd chaemosynthetic purple sul- it is usually found near an estuary's mouth in rive discharge. Bays vary in size and in type fur bacteria. This system may support a con- a zone of moderate wave action, salt content, of shorefront. siderable population of gastropods, bivalves, and turbidity. If light levels are sufficient, a 4. Embayment:: A confined coastal wa- and polychaetes, and may serve as a feeding covering of microscopic and attached macro- ter body with narrow, restricted inlets and with area for a variety of fish and wading birds. In scopic algae, such as keep, may also be found. a significant freshwater inflow can be classi- sand, the dominant fauna include the wedge B. Subtidal softbottoms. Major charac- fied as an embayment. These areas have more shell Donax, the scallop Pecten, tellin shells teristics of this ecosystem are an unconsoli- restricted inlets than bays, are usually smaller Tellina, the heart urchin Echinocardium, the dated layer of fine particles of silt, sand, clay, and shallower, have low tidal action, and are lug worm Arenicola, sand dollar Dendrastter, and gravel, high hydrogen sulfide levels, and subject to sedimentation. and the sea pansy Renilla. In mud, faunal anaerobic conditions often existing below the 5. Tidal river: The lower reach of a dominants adapted to low oxygen levels in- surface. Macrophytes are either sparse or ab- coastal river is referred to as a tidal river. The clude the terebellid Amphitrite, the boring sent, although a layer of benthic microalgae coastal water segment extends from the sea clam Playdon, the deep sea scallop may be present if light levels are sufficient. or estuary into which the river discharges to a Placopecten, the Quahog Mercenaria, the The faunal community is dominated by a di- point as far upstream as there is significant echiurid worm Urechis, the mud snail verse population of deposit feeders including salt content in the water, forming a salt front. Nassarius, and the sea cucumber Thyone. polychaetes, bivalves, and burrowing crusta- A combination of tidal action and freshwater E Intertidal algal beds. These are hard ceans. outflow makes tidal rivers well-flushed. The substrates along the marine edge that are C. Subtidal plants. This system is found tidal river basin may be a simple channel or a dominated by macroscopic algae, usually thal- in relatively shallow water (less than 8 to 10 complex of tributaries, small associated loid, but also filamentous or unicellular in meters) below mean low tide. It is an area of embayments, rnarshfronts, tidal flats, and a growth form. This also includes the rocky extremely high primary production that pro- variety of others. coast tidepools that fall within the intertidal vides food and refuge for a diversity of fau- 6. Lagoon: Lagoons are confined coastal zone. Dominant fauna of these areas are bar- nal groups, especially juvenile and adult fish, bodies of water with restricted inlets to the nacles, mussels, periwinkles, anemones, and and in some regions, manatees and sea turtles. sea and without significant freshwater inflow. chitons. Three regions are apparent: Along the North Atlantic and Pacific coasts, Water circulation is limited, resulting in a 1. Northern latitude rocky shores: It is the seagrass Zostera marina predominates. In poorly flushed, relatively stagnant body of in this region that the community structure is the South Atlantic and Gulf coast areas, water. Sedimentation is rapid with a great best developed. The dominant algal species Thalassia and Diplanthera predominate. The potential for basin shoeling. Shores are often include Chondrus at the low tide level, Fucus grasses both areas support a number of epi- gently sloping and marshy. and Ascophylium, at the mid-tidal level, and phytic organisms. 7. Perched coastal wetlands: Unique to Laminaria and other Kelplike algae just be- Pacific islands, this wetland type found above yond the intertidal, although they can be ex- Class H - Physical Characteristics sea level in volcanic crater remnants forms as posed at extremely low tides or found in very a result of poor drainage characteristics of the deep tidepools. Group I - Geologic crater rather than from sedimentation. Floral 2. Southern latitudes: The communities A. Basin type. Coastal water basins oc- assemblages exhibit distinct zonation while in this region are reduced in comparison to cur in a variety of shapes, sizes, depths, and the faunal constituents may include freshwa- those of the northern latitudes and possesses appearances. The eight basic types discussed ter, brackish, and/or marine species. Example: algae consisting mostly of single-celled or below will cover most of the cases: Aunu's Island, American Samoa. filamentour green, blue-green, and red algae, 1. Exposed coast: Solid rock formations 8. Anchialine systems: These small and small thalloid brown algae. or heavy sand deposits characterize exposed coastal exposures of brackish water form in 3. Tropical and subtropical latitudes: The ocean shore fronts, which are subject to the lava depressions or elevated fossil reefs have intertidal in this region is very reduced and full force of ocean storms. The sand beaches only a subsurface connection in the ocean, but contains numerous calcareous algae such as are very resilient, although the dunes lying show tidal fluctuations. Differing from true Porolithon and Lithothamnion, as well as just behind the beaches are fragile and easily estuaries in having no surface continuity with green algae with calcareous particles such as damaged. The dunes serve as a sad storage streams or ocean, this system is characterized Halimeda, and numerous other green, red, and area making them chief stabilizers of the by a distinct biotic community dominated by brown algae. ocean shorefront. benthis algae such as Rhizoclonium, the min- eral encrusting Schiuzothrix, and the vascu- 252 APPENDIX G NERR Regulations lar plant Ruppia maritima. Characteristic finuity with streams. These formations are result of erosion and transport from the upper fauna which exhibit a high degree of ende- unique to island areas of volcanic orgin. stream reaches and organic decomposition. micity, include the mollusks Theosoxus C. Inlet type. Inlets in various forms are Just inside the estuary entrance, the bottom neglectus and Tcariosus. Although found an integral part of the estuarine environment contains considerable quantities of sand and throughout the world, the high islands of the as they regulate to a certain extent,. the ve- mud, which support a rich fauna. Mud flats, Pacific are the only areas within the U.S. locity and magnitude of tidal exchange, the commonly built up in estuarine basins, are where this system can be found. degree of mixing, and volume of discharge to composed of loose, coarse, and fine mud and B. Basin structure. Estuary basins may the sea. sand, often dividing the original channel. result from the drowning of a river valley 1. Unrestricted: An estuary with a wide 3. Rock: Rocks usually occur in areas (coastal plains estuary), the drowning of a unrestricted inlet typically has slow currents, where the stream runs rapidly over a steep glacial valley (fjord), the occurrence of an no significant turbulence, and receives the full gradient with its coarse materials being de- offshore barrier (bar-bounded estuary), some effect of ocean waves and local disturbances rived from the higher elevations where the tectonic process (tectonic estuary), or volca- which serve to modify the shoreline. These stream slope is greater. The larger fragments nic activity (volcanic estuary). estuaries are partially mixed, as the open are usually found in shallow areas near the 1. Coastal plains estuary: Where a mouth permits the incursion of marine wa- stream mouth. drowned valley consists mainly of a single ters to considerable distances upstream, de- 4. Oyster shell: Throughout a major por- channel, the form of the basin is fairly regu- pending on the tidal amplitude and stream tion of the world, the oyster reef is one of the lar forming a simple coastal plains estuary. gradient. most significant features of estuaries, usually When a channel is flooded with numerous 2. Restricted: Restrictions of estuaries being found near the mouth of the estuary in tributaries an irregular estuary results. Many can exist in many forms: Bars, barrier islands, a zone of moderate wave action, salt content, estuaries of the eastern United States are of spits, sills, and more. Restricted inlets result and turbidity. It is often a major factor in modi- this type. in decreased circulation, more pronounced fying estuarine current systems and sedimen- 2. Fjord: Estuaries that form in elongated longitudinal and vertical salinity gradients, tation, and may occur as an elongated island steep headlands that alternate with deep U- and more rapid sedimentation. However, if the or peninsula oriented across the main current, shaped valleys resulting from glacial scour- estuary mouth is restricted by depositional or may develop parallel to the direction of the ing are called fjords. They generally possess features of land closures, the incoming tide current. rocky floors or very thin veneers of sediment, may be held back until it suddenly breaks forth with deposition generally being restricted to into the basin as a tidal wave, or bore. Such Group H - Hydrographic the head where the main river enters. Com- currents exert profound effects on the nature A. Circulation. Circulation patterns are pared total fjord volume river discharge is of the subtrate, turbidity, and biota of the es- the result of combined influences of freshwa- small. But many fjords have restricted tidal tuary. ter inflow, tidal action, wind and oceanic ranges at their mouths due to sills, or 3. Permanent: Permanent inlets are usu- forces, and serve many functions: Nutrient upreaching sections of the bottom which limit ally opposite the mouths of major rivers and transport, plankton dispersal, ecosystem flush- free movement of water, often making river permit river water to flow into the sea. ing, salinity control, water mixing, and more. flow large with respect to the tidal prism. The 4. Temporary (Intermittent): Temporary 1. Stratified: This is typical of estuaries deepest portions are in the upstream reaches, inlets are formed by storms and frequently with a strong freshwater influx and is com- where maximum depths can range from 800m shift position, depending on tidal flow, the monly found in bays formed from "drowned" to 1200m while all depths usually range from depth of the sea, and sound waters, the fre- river valleys, fjords, and other deep basins. 40m to 150m. quency of storms, and the amount of littoral There is a net movement of freshwater out- 3. Bar-bounded estuary: These result transport. ward at the top layer and saltwater at the bot- from the development of an offshore barrier D. Bottom composition. The bottom tom layer, resulting in a net outward trans- such as a beach strand, a line of barrier is- composition of estuaries attests to the vigor- port of surface organisms and net inward lands, reef formations a line of moraine de- ous, rapid, and complex sedimentation pro- transport of bottom organisms. bris, or the subsiding remnants of a deltaic cesses characteristic of most coastal regions 2. Non-stratified: Estuaries of this type lobe. The basin is often partially exposed a with low relief. Sediments are derived through are found where water movement is sluggish low tide and is enclosed by a chain of off- the hydrologic processes of erosion, transport, and flushing rate is low, although there may shore bars or barrier islands broken at inter- and deposition carried on by the sea and the be sufficient circulation to provide the basis vals inlets. These bars may be either depos- stream. for a high carrying capacity. This is common ited offshore or may be coastal dunes that have 1. Sand: Near estuary mouths, where the to shallow embayments and bays lacking a become isolated by recent sea level rises. predominating forces of the sea build spits or good supply of freshwater from land drain- 4. Tectonic estuary: These are coastal other depositional features, the shore and sub- age. indentures that have formed through tectonic strates of the estuary are sandy. The bottom 3. Lagoonal: An estuary of this type is processes such as slippage along a fault line sediments in this area are usually coarse, with characterized by low rates of water movement (San Francisco Bay), folding or movement of a graduation toward finer particles in the head resulting from a lack of strong tidal exchange the earth's bedrock often with a large inflow region and other zones of reduced flow, fine because of the typically narrow inlet connect- of freshwater. silty sands are deposited. Sand deposition oc- ing the lagoon to the sea. Circulation whose 5. Volcanic estuary: These coastal bod- curs only in wider or deeper regions where major driving force is wind, is the major lim- ies of open water, a result of volcanic pro- velocity is reduced. iting factor in biological productivity within cesses are depressions or craters that have di- 2. Mud. At the base level of a stream near lagoons. rect and/or subsurface connections with the its mouth, the bottom is typically composed B. Tides. This is the most important eco- ocean and may or may not have surface con- of loose muds, silts, and organic detritus as a logical factor in an estuary as it affects water 253 APPENDIX G Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 734, 7115193 exchange and its vertical range determines the distribution and maintenance of many estua- extent of tidal flats which may be exposed and rine organisms. Based on salinity, there are submerged with each tidal cycle. Tidal action two basic estuarine types and eight different against the volume of river water discharged salinity zones (expressed parts per thousand- into an estuary results in a complex system ppt.) whose properties vary according to estuary 1. Positive estuary: This is an estuary in structure as well as the magnitude of river flow which the freshwater influx is sufficient to and tidal range. Tides are usually described maintain mixing, resulting in a pattern of in- in terms of the cycle and their relative heights. creasing salinity toward the estuary mouth. In the United States, tide height is reckoned It is characterized by low oxygen concentra- on the basis of average low tide, which is re- tion in the deeper waters and considerable ferred to as datum. The tides, although com- organic content in bottom sediments. plex, fall into three main categories: 2. Negative estuary: This is found in par- 1. Diurnal: This refers to a daily change ticularly and regions, where estuary evapo- in water level that can be observed along the ration may exceed freshwater inflow, result- shoreline. There is one high tide and one low ing in increased salinity in the upper part of tide per day. the basin, especially if the estuary mouth is 2. Semidiurnal: This refers to a twice restricted so that tidal flow is inhibited. These daily rise and fall in water that can be observed are typically very salty (hyperhaline), mod- along the shoreline. erately oxygenated at depth, and possess bot- 3. Wind/Storm tides: This refers to fluc- tom sediments. that are poor in organic con- tuations in water elevation to wind and storm tent. events, where influence of lunar tides is less. 3. Salinity zone (expressed ppt): C. Freshwater. According to nearly all a. Hyperhaline - greater than 40 ppt. the definitions advanced, it is inherent that all b. Euhaline - 40 ppt to 30 ppt. estuaries need freshwater, which is drained c. Mixhaline - 30 ppt to 0.5 ppt. from the land and measurably dilutes seawa- (1) Mixoeuhaline - greater than 30 ppt ter to create a brackish condition. Freshwater but less than the adjacent euhaline sea. enters an estuary as runoff from the land ei- (2) Polyhaline - 30 ppt to 18 ppt. ther from a surface and/or subsurface source. (3) Mesohaline -18 ppt to 5 ppt. 1. Surface water: This is water flowing (4) Oligohaline - 5 ppt to 0.5 ppt. over the ground in the form of streams. Local d. Limnetic: Less than 0.5 ppt. variation in runoff is dependent upon the na- B. pH Regime: This is indicative of the ture of the soil (porosity and solubility), de- mineral richness of estuarine waters and falls gree of surface slope, vegetational type and into three, main categories: development, local climatic conditions, and 1. Acid. Waters with a pH of less than volume and intensity of precipitation. 5.5. 2. Subsurface water: This refers to the 2. Circurnneutral. A condition where the precipitation that has been absorbed by the pH ranges from 5.5 to 7.4. soil and stored below the surface. The distri- 3. Alkaline: Waters with a pl4 greater bution of subsurface water depends on local than 7.4 climate, topography , and the porosity and permeability of the under lying soils and [FR Doc, 93-14753 Filed 7-14-93; 8:45 am] rocks. There are two main subtypes of sur- face water: Billing Code 3510-06-M a. Vadose water: This is water in the soil above the water table. Its volume with respect to the soil is subject to considerable fluctua- tion. b. Groundwater: This is water contained in the rocks-below the water table, is usually of more uniform volume than vadose water, and generally follows the topographic relief of the land being high hills and sloping into valleys. Group III - Chemical A. Salinity. This reflects a complex mix- ture of salts, the most abundant being sodium chloride, and is a very critical factor in the 254 APPENDIX H Program Contacts Alabama Manager Georgia Gene Anderson, Director Tijuana River NERR Duane Harris, Director Dept. of Econ. and Community 301 Caspian Way DNR, Coastal Resources Division Affairs Imperial Beach, CA 92032 1200 Glynn Ave, 1 Conservation 401 Adams Ave., Box 5690 (619) 575-3613 Way Montgomery, AL 36203-5690 Brunswick, GA 31523 (205) 242-8672 Mike Vasey, Coordinator (912) 264-7218 San Francisco Proposed NERR Thomas McAlpin, Manager San Francisco State Univ., Dept. of Fred Marland, Manager Weeks Bay NERR Biology Sapelo Island NERR 10936-B, U.S. Highway 98 San Francisco, CA 94132 PO. Box 19 Fairhope, AL 36532 (415) 338-1957 Sapelo Island, GA 31327 (205) 928-9792 (912) 485-2251 Connecticut Alaska Art Rocque, Assistant Commis- Guam Gretchen Keiser, Coordinator sioner Mike Ham, Manager Coastal Programs /Division of DEP, Long Island Sound Programs Coastal Programs, Planning Bureau Governmental Coordination /OMB 79 Elm St., P.O. Box 5066 P.O. Box 2950 431 N. Franklin, Box 110030 Hartford, CT 06102-5066 Agana, Guam 96910 Juneau, AK 99811 (203) 566-7404 (671) 472-4201 (907) 465-3562 Delaware Hawaii American Samoa Sarah Cooksey, Program Manager Douglas Tom, Manager Lelei Peau, Coastal Program Dept. of Natural Resources and CZM Program, Office of State Manager Environmental Conservation Planning Development Planning Office 89 Kings Highway P. 0. Box 3540 Gov't. of American Samoa Dover, DE 19903 Honolulu, HI 96811 Pago Pago, AS 96799 (302) 739-3451 (808) 587-2875 (684) 733-5155 Lee Emmons, Manager Peter Schuyler, Coordinator California Delaware NERR Waimanu Valley NERR Gabriella Goldfarb, 89 Kings Hwy., Box 1401 1151 Punchbowl Street Federal Programs Manager Dover, DE 19903 Honolulu, HI 96813 California Coastal Commission (302) 739-4403 (808) 587-0054 45 Fremont Street San Francisco, CA 94105-2219 Florida Indiana (415) 904-5200 Ralph Cantral, Administrator James Hebenstreit, Assistant Coastal Programs, Dept. of Com- Director William Travis, Deputy Director munity Affairs DNR, Division of Water San Francisco Bay Conservation 2740 Centerview Drive 402 W. Washington, Rm. 264 W and Development Commission Tallahassee, FL 32399 Indianapolis, IN 46204 30 Van Ness Ave, Suite 2011 (904) 922-5438 (317) 232-4164 San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 557-3686 Woodward Miley, Manager Louisiana 261 7th Street Terry Howey, Director Steven Kimple, Manager Apalachicola, FL 32320 Coastal Management Division/ Elkhorn Slough NERR (904) 653-8063 DNR 1700 Elkhorn Road P.O. Box 44487 Watsonville, CA 95076 Gary Lytton, Manager Baton Rouge, LA 70804 (408) 728-2822 Rookery Bay NERR (504) 342-7591 10 Shell Road Naples, FL 33942 (813) 775-8845 255 APPENDIX H Program Contacts Maine Minnesota Elizabeth Blair, Manager Dave Keeley, Manager Daniel Retka, Hydrologist Hudson River NERR Coastal Programs, State Planning Division of Waters, DNR Bard College Field Station Office 1201 E. Highway 2 Annandale-on-Hudson, NY 12504 State House Station #38 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 (914) 758-5193 Augusta, ME 04333 (218) 327-4416 (207) 287-3261 Daniel Palm, Project Manager Mississippi St. Lawrence River Basin Proposed NERR Jim List, Manager Jerry Mitchell, Acting Chief 317 Washington Street Wells NERR Dept. of Wildlife Conservation, Watertown, NY 13601 RR #2, Box 806 Coastal Mgt. Division (315) 782-2460 Wells, ME 04090 2620 West Beach Blvd. (207) 646-1555 Biloxi, MS 39531 North Carolina (601) 385-5860 Roger Schecter, Director Maryland Div. of Coastal Management Robert Beckett, Director New Hampshire P.O. Box 27687 DNR, Coastal & Watershed Re- David Hartman, Manager Raleigh, NC 27611 sources Division Coastal Programs/Office of State (919) 733-2293 500 Taylor Ave., Tawes Bldg. Planning Annapolis, MD 21401 2-1/2 Beacon Street John Taggart, Manager (410) 974-2784 Concord, NH 03301 North Carolina NERR (603) 271-2155 7205 Wrightsville Avenue Mary Ellen Dore, Manager Wilmington, NC 28403 Chesapeake Bay-MD NERR Peter Wellenberger, Manager (919) 256-3721 Thwes State Office Bldg., B-3, 580 Great Bay NERR Taylor Ave. 37 Concord Road Northern Mariana Islands Annapolis, MD 21401 Durham, NH 03824 Joaquin Villagomez, Administrator (410) 974-3382 (603) 868-1095 Coastal Resources Management Office Nauru Building Massachusetts New Jersey Saipan, CNMI 96950 Peg Brady, Director Steve Whitney, Assistant Director (670) 234-6623 Coastal Mgt Program/ Env Affairs DEPE, Land and Water Plannig 100 Cambridge Street 401 E. State St., 4th Floor Ohio Boston, MA 02202 Trenton, NJ 08625-0423 Mike Colvin, (617) 727-9530 (609) 292-1875 Coastal Mgt. Administrator Real Estate & Land Mgmt. Christine Gault, Manager Michael DeLuca, Project Manager 1952 Belcher Dr., Bldg. C-4 Waquoit Bay NERR Mullica River Proposed NERR Columbus, OH 43224 P.O. Box 92W Rutgers University, P.O. Box 231 (614) 265-6413 Waquoit, MA 02536 New Brunswick, NJ 08093 (508) 457-0495 (908) 932-6555 Eugene Wright, Manager Old Woman Creek NERR Michigan New York 2514 Cleveland Road, East Christopher Shafer, Chief George Stafford, Director Huron, OH 44839 Great Lakes Shorelands/DNR Coastal Resources /Waterfront (419) 433-4601 P.O. Box 30028 Revit. Lansing, MI 48909 162 Washington Street (517) 373-1950 Albany, NY 12231 (518) 474-6000 256 APPENDIX H Progrom Contocts Oregon South Carolina Washington Eldon Hout Wayne Beam, Executive Director Rodney Mack, Manager Dept. of Land Conservation & South Carolina Coastal Council Shorelands & CZM Program Development 1201 Main Street P.O. Box 47600 Coastal & Ocean Program Mgmt. Columbia, SC 29201 Olympia, WA 98504-6284 800 N.E. Oregon Street, #18 (803) 744-5838 (206) 407-7279 Portland, OR 97232 (503) 731-4065 Dennis Allen, Manager Terry Stevens, Manager North InletlWinyah Bay NERR Padilla Bay NERR Mike Graybill, Manager Baruch Marine Field Lab, Box 1630 1043 Bayview-Edison Road South Slough NERR Georgetown, SC 29440 Mt. Vernon, WA 98273 P.O. Box 5417 (803) 546-3623 206-428-1558 Charleston, OR 97420 (503) 888-5558 Michael McKenzie, Manager Wisconsin ACE Basin NERR Gary Gylund, Sr. Planning Analyst Pennsylvania P.O. Box 12559 Coastal Management Program James Tabor, Chief Charleston, SC 29412 101 E. Wilson St., Box 7868 CZM/Water Resources Mgmt. (803) 762-5062 Madison, WI 53707 P.O. Box 8555 (608) 267-7982 Harrisburg, PA 17105 Texas (717) 787-2529 Lore Hantske, Assistant Director Coastal Division, General Land Puerto Rico Office Jos6 Gonzales-Liboy, Director 1700 N. Congress St., Austin Bldg. Coastal Management Office Austin, TX 78701 P.O. Box 5887 (512) 463-5193 Puerta de Tierra, PR 00906 (809) 724-5516 Virgin Islands Joan Harrigan-Farrelly, Manager Anaisa Delgado, Manager Dept. of Planning & Natural Jobos Bay NERR Resources P.O. Box 1170 Nisky Center, Suite 231 Guayama, PR 00655 St. Thomas, VI 00802 (809) 864-0105 (809) 774-3320 Rhode Island Virginia Grover Fugate, Executive Director Anne DeWitt Brooks, Director Coastal Resources Mgmt. Council Coastal Programs, Dept. of Env. Stedman Building, Tower Hill Rd. Quality Wakefield, RI 02879 629 E. Main St., 6th Floor (401) 277-2476 Richmond, VA 23219 (804) 762-4317 Al Beck, Manager Narragansett Bay NERR Maurice Lynch, Project Manager Prudence Conservancy, P 0. Box Chesapeake Bay NERR 156 Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences Prudence Island, RI 02872 Gloucester Point, VA 23062 (401) 683-6780 (804) 642-7000 257 APPENDIX I Photogrophy Credits P. I Alaskan moose: courtesy of the Alaska Coastal Management Program, Division of Governmental Coordina- tion p. 2 Alabama dunefield: courtesy of Nathalie Peter, NOAA/OCRM p. 4 Beach erosion: courtesy of Nathalie Peter, NOAA/OCRM p. 5 Boardwalkfacing erosion: courtesy of Nathalie Peter, NOAA/OCRM p. 6 By the river: courtesy of the Delaware Coastal Management Program, Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control p. 7-11 All courtesy of the Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Program, Department of Environmental Re- sources p. 19-20 Public access: courtesy of the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program, Department of Administration p.23 Sandbagging: courtesy of the North Carolina Coastal Management Program p. 24 Coastal hazards: courtesy of Vickie Allin, NOAA/OCRM p.25 Sailing in Alaska: courtesy of the Alaska Coastal Management Program, Division of Governmental Coordina- tion p.26 Mother and child clamming: courtesy of the Delaware Coastal Management Program, Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Public shoreline: courtesy of the Washington Coastal Zone Management Program, Department of Ecology p. 27 All courtesy of the North Carolina Coastal Management Program p.28 Excellence awards: courtesy of NOAA photography p.30 Albemarle Sound: courtesy of the North Carolina Coastal Management Program p. 31 Elephant Seal: courtesy of South Slough NERR p.32 Wells mansion: courtesy of Wells NERR p.33 Kayaking at the North Carolina NERR: courtesy of the North Carolina Coastal Management Program p.34 Sunset: Apalachicola NERR p. 36-37 All courtesy of the Massachusetts Coastal Management Program, Executive Office of Environmental Affairs p.38 Education at the N.C. NERR: courtesy of the North Carolina Coastal Management Program p. 39 Touching starfish: courtesy of the New Hampshire Coastal Program Office ;'p. 40 Ecotourism: courtesy of the Florida Coastal Management Program, Department of Community Affairs Education: Washington Coastal Zone Management Program, Department of Ecology p. 41 Shoreline erosion: courtesy of Nathalie Peter, NOAAJOCRM p. 42 Beachfront development: courtesy of Leigh Handel, South Carolina Sea Grant p. 44-47 All courtesy of Nathalie Peter, NOAA/OCRM p. 50-51 All courtesy of the Alaska Coastal Management Program, Division of Governmental Coordination p. 54 Beach: courtesy of American Samoa Coastal Management Program p.58 Channel Islands: courtesy of Sandy Hammack, NOAA/OCRM p.59 San Francisco NERR: courtesy of Cheryl Graham, NOAA/OCRM p. 61 Tijuana River wetlands: Courtesy of Tijuana River NERR p. 62-63 All courtesy of Elkhorn Slough NERR p. 65-67 All courtesy of Tijuana River NERR p. 70-72 All courtesy of Connecticut Coastal Management Program, Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Long Island Sound Programs p. 74-76 All courtesy of Mike Mahaffie, Delaware Coastal Management Program p. 80-81 All courtesy of Florida Coastal Management Program, Department of Community Affairs p. 83-84 All courtesy of Apalachicola NERR p. 85-86 All courtesy of Rookery Bay NERR p. 88-91 All courtesy of Sapelo Island NERR p. 94 Coastal city: courtesy of Charles Knutson, Guam Coastal Management Program P. 98-100 All courtesy of Waimanu Valley NERR p. 104-106 All courtesy of the Louisiana Coastal Resources Program, Department of Natural Resources p. 108-111 All courtesy of the Maine Coastal Zone Management Program p. 112-115 All courtesy of Wells NERR p. 118-121 All courtesy of Maryland Department of Natural Resources p. 124-127 All courtesy of the Massachusetts Coastal Management Program, Executive Office of Environmental Affairs p. 128-129 All courtesy of Waquoit Bay NERR 2 5 8 APPENDIX / Photography Credits p. 132- 135 All courtesy of Neil Christerson, NOAA/OCRM p. 138-140 All courtesy of the Mississippi Coastal Program, Bureau of Marine Resources p. 142 Coastal cleanup: courtesy of the New Hampshire Coastal Program Office p. 144-145 All courtesy of Peter Wellenberger, Great Bay NERR p. 148 Canoeing: courtesy of Hudson River NERR p. 152-158 All courtesy of Hudson River NERR p. 160 Masonboro Egret: courtesy of the North Carolina Coastal Management Program, Department of Environ- ment, Health, and Natural Resources p. 162-163 All courtesy of North Carolina NERR p. 166-167 All courtesy of Helen Farr, NOAA/OCRM p. 170-171 All courtesy of Old Woman Creek NERR p. 174-179 All courtesy of South Slough NERR p. 182-183 All courtesy of Neil Christerson, NOAA/OCRM p. 186 Aerial photo: courtesy of Nathalie Peter, NOAA/OCRM p. 188 All courtesy of Jobos Bay NERR p. 190-192 All courtesy of Rhode Island Coastal Management Program, Coastal Resources Management Council p. 194-195 All courtesy of Narragansett Bay NERR p. 198-199 All courtesy Leigh Handel, South Carolina Sea Grant p. 200 All courtesy of ACE Basin NERR p. 201-202 All courtesy of Cheryl Graham, NOAA/OCRM p. 203-205 All courtesy of North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR p. 208 Sailboats: courtesy of Dottie Banks, NOAA/Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment p. 209 West End, St. Croix: courtesy of David J. Brower, Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Sailing in cove: courtesy of Dottie Banks, NOAA/Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment p. 212-213 All courtesy of Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program, Department of Environmental Quality p. 214-216 All courtesy of Chesapeake Bay-Virginia NERR p. 218-219 All courtesy of Washington Coastal Zone Management Program, Department of Ecology p. 221 Viewfrom hillside: courtesy of Padilla Bay NERR p. 224-227 All courtesy Wisconsin Coastal Management Program, Department of Administration P. Xxxii Illustration provided by Celia Anderson of Marley Group Cover M.E. Warren Special thanks also to program stafffrom N0AA1OCRM, state coastal management programs, and national estuarine research reserves for their assistance in collecting and writing information for this report. COAST.,& COORDINATOR, WRITER, EDITOR Elaine Vaudreuil NOAVOCRM/Policy Coordination Division IL M LAYOUT, DESIGN IL Elleen Kane and Elaine Vaudreuil z NOAA/OCRM/Policy Coordination Division CONTRIBUTING WRITER AND EDITOR Diane K. Garner and Elleen Kane 259 US Department of commerce 11, NOAA Coastal ServicesI ce'r-iter'Library, 2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SO 29405-2413 J. OP co A ES O@ U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, 0 ce of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management !ffi 3 6668 00003 4415