O. E. LIBRARY

FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION

I

I

O. c. UB^'^^Y

THE NATIONAL ESTUARINE
POLLUTION STUDY

Volu

me

A Report to the Congress

U. S. Department of the Interior • Federal Water Pollution Control Administration

NOVEMBER 3, 1969

TABLE OF CONTENTS - VOLUME III ,-

PART V. Development of the Comprehensive
National Program

Introduction V-1

Chapter 1. Role and Programs of Federal

Agencies V-3

Section 1. Current Federal Role V-4

Section 2. The Federal Programs V-6

Section 3. A Synthesis of Federal
Programs and their
Means of Coordination V-37

Section 4. Summary V-50

Chapter 2. Coastal States' Responsibil-
ities, Programs, and Roles V-55

Section 1. State Profile Development V-55

Section 2. Selected State Organ-
izations — A Spectrum
of Development V-62

Section 3. A Coastal State's Organ-
ization for Managing
Estuarine Resources V-93

Section 4. State Estuarine Laws

and Ownership Problems V-1 00

Section 5. Evaluation of Coastal

State Frameworks V-1 16

Section 6. State's Views on Compre-
hensive Management V-1 24

Section 7. Summary and Conclusions V-1 38

i1 Table of Contents — Volume III

PART V. (continued)

Chapter 3. Role and Activities of Local

Governments V-147

Section 1. Introduction V-147

Section 2. Management Tools V-149

Section 3. Problems and Failures ........ V-156

Section 4. Selected Interlocal
Coastal Management
Programs V-161

Section 5. Recommendations and

Conclusions V-168

Chapter 4. Role of Compact Agencies in

Estuarine Management V-177

Section 1. Use of Compact Agencies

to Date V-177

Section 2. Proposed Uses of the
Compact Instrument in
the Chesapeake Basin V-192

Section 3. Summary and Conclusions V-201

Chapter 5. Views and Recommendations of
the Public and Private Sec-
tors on Roles in the Estuar-
ine Zone V-205

Section 1. Introduction V-205

Section 2. Planning and Conduct of

the Public Meetings V-208

Section 3. Method of Analysis V-210

Section 4. Summary Analysis of

Major Concerns V-232

Table of Contents — Volume III

1i1

PART V. (continued)

Chapter 5. (continued)

Section 5. Summary Analysis of

Recommended Management

Organization and Roles

of the Various Levels

of Government V-236

Section 6. Summary Analysis of

Recommended Role of the

Private Sector V-244

Section 7. Conclusions V-246

Appendix A Report of Sources and
Methods Used for Co-
ordination and Data
Gathering for the Na-
tional Estuarine
Pollution Study V-248

Appendix B Map Showina Locations

of Public Meetinos V-252

Appendix C Schedule of National
Estuarine Pollution
Study Public
Meetings V-253

Chapter 6. The Estuary Study Recommend-
ations as Compared with Other
Proposals for Managing the
Estuarine and Coastal Zone V-255

Chapter 7. Overall Estuarine Management,
A Summarization by Case
Study V-263

Section 1. Introduction V-263

Section 2. Description and Uses

of the Chesapeake Bay V-265

iv Table of Contents — Volume III

PART V. (continued)

Chapter 7. (continued)

Section 3. Major Problems and

Dangers to the Bay V-271

Section 4. Progress in Current

Management Activities V-274

Section 5. Evaluation of the

Chesapeake Bay V-280

Section 6. Description and Uses
of the San Francisco
Bay V-284

Section 7. Major Problems and

Dangers to the Bay V-291

Section 8. Progress in Current

Management Activities V-297

Section 9. Evaluation of the San

Francisco Bay V-302

Section 10. Summary and Conclusions V-307

Chapter 8. Summary and Conclusions V-3n

Chapter 9. Suggested Guidelines for a

State Management Statute V-331

PART VI. Development of Data on the Estuar-
ine Zone

Introduction . VI-1

Chapter 1, The National Estuarine

Inventory VI -3

Section 1. The Handbook of

Descriptors VI-5

Section 2. Estuarine Register

Areas VI-10

Table of Contents — Volume III

PART VI. (continued)

Chapter 1 . (continued)
Section 3

Section 4

Section 5

Section 5

Section 7

Section 8
Chapter 2.

Section 1 .

Section 2.

Section 3.

Section 4.

Chapter 3.

Section 1 .

Section 2.

Section 3.

Collection of

Information VI-14

Present Status of tne

Inventory VI-19

Problems and Solutions VI-23

Automation of the

Inventory VI-31

The Future of the

Inventory VI -45

Summary VI -48

Information and Data Needs

as Shown by the National

Estuarine Inventory VI-51

Nonexistent Data VI-53

"Gray" Data VI-62

Program Definition VI-68

The Recommended

Program VI -74

Major Research and Study

Needs VI-81

Introauction VI-81

The Data base Necessary
for Effective Technical
.Management VI -87

Major Knowledge Gaps

and a Program of Needed

Research and Study VI -97

vi Table of Contents — Volume III

PART VI. (continued)

Chapter 3. (continued)

Section 4. Ecology VI-100

Section 5. Toxicity VI-127

Section 6. Microbiology VI -133

Section 7. Physics and Mathematics VI -140

Section 8. Socioeconomic Factors VI -158

Section 9. Ancillary Research

and Study Needs VI-169

Section 10. Specific Research

Programs VI-181

Section 11. A Management Program
for Research and Study
in the Estuarine Zone VI -197

Section 12. study on Coastal Wastes
Management - National
Academy of Sciences -
National Academy of
Engineering VI-217

Section 13. Summary and Conclusions VI-251

Chapter 4. Sunmary VI -255

PART VII. Collection of Supporting

Information VII-1

Part V
DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
NATIONAL PROGRAM

V-1

INTRODUCTION

As decreed by the Congress in Section 5g of the Act:

"The report shall include . . . recommendations
for a comprehensive national program for the
. . . development of estuaries . . . and the re-
spective responsibilities which should be
assumed by Federal, State, and local governments
and by public and private interests."

The recommendations are included in Part III of this report, and the
following portion. Part V, contains the background material for the
recommendations plus descriptions of the various governmental respon-
sibilities.

The rationale for this development is as follows. To provide a basis
for developing these recommendations and defining responsibilities,
a volume of material was amassed on the views, suggestions, programs,
and legislative authorities of all sectors of the National community
-- Federal, State, and local governments and public and private inter-
ests. This background information was obtained through very diligent
solicitations of all these sectors. The resulting material consisted
of reports, correspondence, and personal communications which were
analyzed and summarized to produce relatively brief overviews. The
source information used to produce the overviews is being retained

V-2

separately from this report for future reference and updating.

These overviews, which are quite brief considering the original mass
of information, are presented as the following chapters of this Part
of the Report. The order in which they are presented is essentially
the saiie as that used in the wording of the Act, that is. Chapter 1
is the Federal agencies; Chapter 2, the "State" agencies; Chapter 3,
the local governments; Chapter 4, the compact (or interstate) agen-
cies; and Chapter 5, the public and private interests. These over-
views were related to those of other marine resource studies (Chapter
6) and then related to specific geographic areas to present a concrete
overall view (Chapter 7) and finally summarized in the form of
Conclusions (Chapter 8). In turn Chapter 8 provides the skeletal
outline for the development of the recommendations enumerated in
Part III of this Report, and Chapter 9 provides suggested guidelines
for a management statute.

V-3

Chapter 1
ROLE AND PROGRAMS OF FEDERAL AGENCIES

This chapter describes the current Federal role and programs in the
estuarine zone and identifies the needs to be met to provide for a
stronger more effective Federal program.

The current Federal role as such, has grown over a period of many
years and has as its basis the national interest which extends
beyond State borders. The role is based on Federal legislation
which itself has developed over a period of years to meet many speci-
fic needs seen and acted upon by Congress. It has also grown as one
of concurrent jurisdiction with the States who exercise the primary
authority in the estuarine zone--Even so the Federal role is a vital
one and is essential to the preservation of national interests.
Broadly speaking these are:

(1) the protection and development of the Federal
interest in the natural resources of the estuarine
zone,

(2) commerce and navigation and,

(3) national security.

V-4

SECTION 1. CURRENT FEDERAL ROLE IN THE ESTUARINE ZONE

The description of the Federal program that follows is a more complete
picture of how the Federal role is implemented. In very brief form
the role itself has come to be:

(1) The provision of normal Federal projects such as
navigation channels, flood control and protective
works, aids to navigation, weather service including
tides and currents, mapping and charting both for
navigation and resources, and port security and
shipping control .

(2) Grants and loans to States and other entities for
planning, acquisition and development, for research
and study, and for facilities construction.

(3) Technical advice and assistance through conference
and consultation, mutual assistance projects, and
joint projects and studies.

(4) The preparation of broad studies and investigations,
including inventories and data collection necessary to
meet the requirements of Federal programs.

(5) Acquisition and development of selected sites to
preserve and protect them for the future.

(6) The exercising of regulatory authority in accordance
with current Federal law and statute. These authorities
include the issuance of permits, licenses, and other regula-
tions governing certain permissible uses or modification of

V-5

estuarine resources. They include also the enforcement of
water quality standards and various other controls over
pollution, and the enforcement of Federal law within the
navigable waters of the United States.

(7) The exercise of coordinating activities, for the
most part through close work with State counterpart
organizations and at the headquarters level through
committee and council work, routine daily business and
memorandum of agreement.

(8) Granting Federal consent to interstate and inter-
national compacts and commissions.

(9) Assuring appropriate Federal performances under
regional and international obligations for the management
of flyways, fisheries resources, etc.

V-6

SECTION 2. THE FEDERAL PROGRAMS

To meet the requirements of the national interest and to carry out
its role, the Federal Government has assumed fairly broad responsi-
bilities in resource management, planning, regulation and control,
and in many programs of technical and financial assistance to the
States and the subdivisions. The description of the Federal programs
that follows will show how this has developed and how these programs
currently meet Federal responsibilities.

In describing the current Federal programs in the estuarine zone it
is important to note that the greater part of these programs is of
much broader scope than just that of the estuarine zone, and thus
the activities reported herein are generally portions of larger pro-
grams which overlap and crossover the estuarine zone, because these
programs are of long-standing importance to the development and
preservation of the Nation's resources and to the promotion of its
commerce and industry they should not be fragmented or segmented by
arbitrary geographic dividing lines; nevertheless, this description
will confine itself as closely as possible to those parts of the
programs relating to the estuarine zone, with the possible risk of
appearing incomplete at times.

FOUR GENERAL CATEGORIES OF PROGRAMS

Categorization of the multitudinous Federal activities in the estuarine
zone cannot be clear-cut as there is a continuous series of interlocking

V-7

activities and concurrent jurisdictions. Nevertheless, four general
categories become apparent when the overall activities are viewed.
These are: (1) those activities and programs having a direct and
significant operational effect; (2) programs or activities having
indirect or related effects; (3) activities primarily of a research
and study nature; and (4) activities of a planning and coordination
nature.

CATEGORY ONE
PROGRAMS HAVING DIRECT AND SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS

Into category one have been placed the programs of the Department
of the Interior, the Department of Commerce, the Civil Works Program
of the Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Transportation, as
all these in themselves have a direct and major effect on the use of
the estuarine zone.

Department of the Interior

By virtue of the numerous activities of the bureaus and offices in
the Department of the Interior, the Department, in essence, is the
resource manager of the estuarine zone. This applies to both the
living ^nd nonliving marine resources and to a slightly lesser
extent the related land resources. This is well demonstrated in
the description that follows.

Interior's estuarine programs are planned and managed to meet expand-
ing national needs for material, aesthetic, and environmental resources

V-3

and qualities afforded by the estuarine areas. Programs in support
of objectives provide for aggressive leadership in research and
management. For the most part the programs also encourage and
complement appropriately designed estuarine activities of other
Federal agencies and State and local governments.

Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

Concerned largely with coastal waters and the open ocean, the Bureau
of Commercial Fisheries works with nature as yet little affected by
human management except for those anadromous species which use the
estuaries and migrate into fresh water to spawn. It has the respon-
sibility to ensure an adequate, dependable, and diverse supply of
fish and shellfish products of good quality; encourage optimum use
of estuarine living resources; and contribute to man's understanding
and control of estuarine living resources and their environment.
To achieve these objectives, the agency conducts research on estu-
aries, estuarine problems, or estuarine-dependent species of fish
at more than half of its twenty biological laboratories.

The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries
and Wildlife have, after more than a decade as a service, recently
formed several interbureau committees on such matters of common
interest as estuaries, anadromous fish, and conflicts between com-
mercial and sport fishermen.

V-9

Task forces on ad hoc basis are constantly being formed for special
interbureau purposes. These developments and other basic respon-
sibilities of longer standing place the Department of the Interior
in an expanding role of leadership and responsibility in estuarine
research, planning, and management.

Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife

In the conservation of estuarine fish and wildlife resources and
the preservation of estuarine habitat, the Bureau of Sport Fisheries
and wildlife has a very substantial program. Under a variety of
legislative authorities the Bureau activities include investigations
and recommendations for the preservation and enhancement of fish
and wildlife resources in connection with waterfowl population
statistics and of regulations pertaining to waterfowl; Federal aid
to the States for acquisition of wetlands, research on fish and
wildlife, and access and development of facilities for fishing and
hunting; training of biologists and dissemination of technical
advice; conservation education: and pesticide monitoring.

The Bureau is also charged with the second estuary study underway
in the Department, the National Estuary Protection Act (PL 90-454).
This Act expresses the intent of Congress ". . .to recognize,
preserve, and protect the responsibilities of the States in protect-
ing, conserving, and restoring the estuaries in the United States."

V-10

This legislation directs the Secretary, in cooperation with the
States and with other Federal agencies, to conduct a detailed inven-
tory of the estuaries of the Nation. Such inventory and analyses
would be the base for determining appropriate means and measures of
preserving or restoring particular areas, including legislation.

Coordination of the two estuary studies has been accomplished
through the Office of Marine Resources, in accordance with Secre-
tarial Order Number 2908, approved in October 1968. In order to
avoid duplication of effort the Estuarine Protection Act Study will
use the Estuarine Inventory being developed by the National Estuarine
Pollution Study.

Of the 312 units in the National Wildlife Refuge System, 78 are
coastal. These coastal refuges have a combined shoreline of more
than 500 miles and an area of more than 18 million acres, of which
682,000 acres are identified as estuarine. As administrator of
these areas, the Bureau is a potent factor in the conservation of
these estuarine resources. An additional potent factor in the con-
servation of estuarine resources is the Bureau's responsibility to
review and comment on Corps of Engineers permits as required by the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.

Bureau of Land Management

While the Bureau of Land Management is the designated management
agency of public domain lands, a sizeable portion of these lands

V-11

are along the California and Oregon coasts. The Bureau plays
strictly a management role, and, as such, has no authority to acquire
any additional lands. It is the Nation's largest land manager.

Bureau of Mines

The Bureau of Mines is oriented to research and information services.
In its estuarine related programs it seeks to develop the technology
necessary to minimize the adverse affects associated with mineral
recovery. They include a Mineral Resource Evaluation Study and the
development of marine mineral mining technology. The Bureau has
jurisdiction over that part of the Solid Waste Program which involves
materials resulting from mineral extraction.

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation

An examination of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation program indicates
a central role in promoting Federal-State cooperation and coordination
in planning the acquisition and development of both existing and pro-
posed new estuarine areas devoted to public recreational use. Although
it administers no lands, it administers the Land and Water Conservation
Fund Act of 1965 (PL 39-578) which other agencies— Federal , State, and
local-make use of in their land programs. The Act provides grants to
the States for the planning, acquisition and development of outdoor
recreation areas and facilities, and to certain Federal agencies for
the acquisition and development of outdoor recreation areas and
facilities.

V-12

The Bureau also participates in comprehensive river basin planning,
water resource project planning, and reviews reports related to such
activities. The Bureau and the National Park Service also work together
on area planning, often with the participation of the Bureau of Sport
Fisheries and Wildlife. Emphasis is given to assure that adequate
consideration is accorded to the estuarine environment.

Federal Water Pollution Control Administration

Created by the Water Quality Act of 1965 (PL 89-234) and significantly
expanded in powers and funding through the Clean Water Restoration Act
of 1966 (PL 89-753), the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
has a singularly complex and essential program.

In carrying out its pollution control program, this Agency conducts a
series of major programs in the estuarine zone. Briefly, these pro-
grams include Comprehensive Water Quality Management Planning, Technical
Services, Construction Grants Program, Enforcement, Water Quality
Standards and Research.

The Comprehensive Water Quality Management Planning Program in the
estuarine zone involves the coordination of the in-house water pollu-
tion control planning efforts with water resources planning conducted
by other Federal, State, and interstate planning agencies to ensure
adequate consideration of water quality factors. It also provides
the means for systematic evaluation of multiple resource needs to meet
future demands. This includes development of programs relating to the

V-13

control of water pollution in the estuarine zone. Water Quality
Management Planning Grants are made to State and local governments.
Under Executive Order 11288, FWPCA carries out certain review and
consultation responsibilities for the Department in connection with
wastes from Federal activities. The Corps of Engineers dredge and
fill permits on estuarine and coastal areas, are reviewed in regard
to effects on water quality.

The Technical Support Program operates water quality surveillance
networks and sampling programs (in cooperation with the Geological
Survey) and conducts special studies on the character, effects and
abatement of water pollution including that related to vessel wastes,
dredging activities, thermal discharges, municipal and industrial waste
discharges, land drainage and salt water intrusion. In addition, the
Program operationally administers the Oil Pollution Act of 1924, as
amended, and develops and coordinates the implementation of the
I'lational Multiagency Oil and Hazardous Materials Pollution Contingency
Plan and the supporting regional plans.

Enforcement proceedings are conducted to abate pollution of coastal
waters and also when there are violations of water quality standards.
Some 14 enforcement proceedings have been carried out in the estuarine
areas.

The research and development program provides for increasing the
knowledge and techniques for monitoring water quality in the estuarine

V-14

zone, for recovering those areas damaged by pollution through
a variety of means, and for determining the effects of water
pollution on estuarine life. The Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration has an extensive Research and Development
Program involving the detection, control and clean-up of oils
spilled into harbors, rivers, and estuaries.

Recently accomplished activities of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration include:

(1) the partial or complete approval by the
Secretary, of interstate water quality standards
for the fifty States, three territories, and the
District of Columbia;

(2) completion of the Oil Pollution Report and
a completion and implementation of the National
Multi -Agency Oil and Hazardous Materials Contin-
gency Plan; and

(3) in conjunction with the Geological Survey,
the Agency is currently using STORET as a data
storage and retrieval system. Its use will expand
as funds permit.

V-15

Geological Survey

The Geological Survey has been describinq and internretino the
environment for nearly a century, a nrereauisite for intelli-
gent efforts to Shane, control, or preserve it. It maps the
physical, hydroloqic and cultural features of the land and by
aerial photographs nrovides a record of chames over time,
thus, forming a basis for land-use plannino and interpretation.
This structural and historical geology of the Nation nrovides a
guide to useful minerals and fuels, and is basic to an under-
standing of soils. Reliable knowledge about v/ater is necessary
for inland navigation, flood control, power development, irri-
gation, municipal and industrial water supplies, pollution
abatement, fish and wildlife, and recreation. Geological
research plays a supportim role for many Federal agencies.
State programs, and private enterprises on land, at sea, and
in space. It should be noted that much of the survey's activity
is of a research nature and some of it is of a planninn and
coordinating nature.

Recent program accomplishments include the chames made in
Outer Continental Shelf (O.C.S.) rules.

On February 17, 1969, an amendment was published in the Federal
Register making the nnllution pr'^venticn section of the Geologi-
cal Survey (n.C.S.) regulations more restrictive. It also

V-16

established that companies operating on the Shelf shall be liable
without proof of fault for pollution resulting from their opera-
tions. These particular changes aonly to onerations on the
entire Shelf all around the country. On ^arch 21, the Secretary
announced that certain California O.C.S. Orders were changed.
(O.C.S. Orders are issued by Geological Survey Regional Oil and
Gas Supervisors and they aooly only to those Darts of the Shelf
within the snecific region under each supervisor's jurisdiction.)
These changed Orders nrovide for more strict control of oil
drilling and production operations in all Federal waters off
the entire State of California. Also, on March 21, the Secretary
directed that a two-mile wide permanent ecological preserve be
established off Santa Barbara immediately seaward of the
three-mile limit of the State of California. He also directed
that all unleased areas south of this permanent preserve will
be held as an additional buffer zone where no oil drilling or
production operations will be permitted.

Bureau of Reclamation

Although the Bureau programs in the seventeen western States have
little direct involvement in the estuarine zones there is
opportunity for its unstream water resource development activi-
ties to have long range impacts downstream on estuarine resources.
The downstream influences of these projects are being considered
and are of importance to the Department's interest and responsibility
in the estuarine zones.

V-17

National Park Service

The preservation of marine life and environments and the pro-
vision for marine-related recreational activities are major
considerations in the national Park Service's administration of
twenty-four areas along the Nation's seacoast and alonq the
shores of the Hreat Lakes. Fifteen of these areas are national
parks and monuments where resource protection is a major manage-
ment objective; seven are nr'tional seashores located along the
Atlantic, Tulf, and Pacific Coasts and two are national lake-
shores located along the Great Lakes where outdoor recreation
is a primary management consideration.

In addition, twenty-eight units within the "ational Park System
are historical areas found along our coastlines. Total length
of shoreline in these 52 areas exceeds 1,370 miles.

The service's combined role in marine-related areas is to
preserve and manage natural, scenic, historical, and scientific
features of these areas, to interpret these features for park
visitors, to provide and maintain facilities and services
necessary for park visitors to safely enjoy compatible recrea-
tional activities, and to provide access to waters and beaches.
The Service, also, participates in comprehensive river basin
and water resources project nlanning and in review of project
proposals and nermit applications.

V-18

Office of Saline Water

The primary objective of the Saline Water Conversion Program is
to develop practicable lov/-cost methods of producinq fresh water
from sea and other saline waters. The research and development
program is conducted by means of research and develonment grants
and contracts awarded to individuals, universities, nrivate
research organizations and industrial firms, and other govern-
ment agencies. Estuarial v/aters are one source of saline waters
for desalting. Disnosal of waste brine from a large desalting
plant may be a problem in relation to environmental conditions
in certain estuarine situations from the viewooint of increases
in salinity and temperature. The Office of Saline Water brine
disposal research program is directed to determining any
detrimental effects and means of alleviating them so that the
economic production of fresh water by desalination can be
continued without imnosing stresses on the environment.

Office of Water Resources Research

The Office of Water Resources Research, authorized under the
Water Resources Research Act of 1964 (PL 89-404) provides a
major benefit to the flation. It seeks to stimulate, snonsor,
and supplement present programs of research and traininn in
the field of water and of resources that affect water. This
is done through grants and contracts with academic and nrivate

V-19

institutions, private firms, individuals, and public aoencies
through operations in 50 States and Puerto Hico. 'lost of the
studies are on water supply augmentation and conservation,
while others are concerned with v/ator nuality mananenent and
protection, water quantity management and control, water
resources planning, and the hydrological cycle.

In summary, Interior's programs cover most of the major resources
and uses of the estuarine zone, including the ranidly increasing
recreational use and the unquantified aesthetic values.

The Department of Commerce

The Department of Commerce is another organization whose programs
have a direct and significant effect on the beneficial uses of
the estuarine zones. Because estuarine zones are used for sea
commerce, the Department of Commerce, and especially the Mari-
time Administration and the Environmental Science Services
Administration (ESSA), are concerned with these areas. Action,
primarily is directed toward collection of navinational data and
the development of harbor and port facilities. The Office of
Business Economics, the Bureau of the Census, and the Economic
Development Administration are indirectly involved in these
efforts.

V-20

The Maritime Administration has statutory resnonsibllitles for
promoting and encouraging the development of an American flag
merchant marine and U.S. ports and related transportation facil-
ities in connection with waterbornc commerce. In recent years,
the Maritime Administration has become increasingly aware of
the detrimental effects of harbor pollution and is involved in
activities to solve this problem. With the advent of nuclear
powered vessels and the resultinn radioactive discharges, the
Administration has worked towards the establishment of stringent
standards to prevent radioactive contamination of harbor waters.
Contracts for the development of devices to detect and nrevent
oil pollution of harbors have been let; the results of this
research have been oublished. This anency is also involved
in comprehensive research studies with several other agencies
to investigate the requirements of a national system of norts.
The proposed study v/ould consider long-range U.S. nort and
transportation needs, including detailed analysis of, recommended
solutions for, and specific Problems generated bv raoidly
changing shipping technology such as "the supercarrier." In
the process important interrelationships between transnortation,
urban renewal and estuarine resource developments could be
identified.

V-21

ESSA provides a direct and imoortant service throuoh its mission
of maooinq and charting the coasts and harbors of the United
States and its territories. In addition, it nrovides the adjunc-
tive services of tide and current information, marine weather
service, hurricane and tsunami warnims and various other suonle-
mental services rclatinn tn marine safetv and navination. Its
recently inaugurated flushing Prediction service will grow in
value to the beneficial use of the estuarine zones.

The Economic Develooment Administration althounh indirectlv
involved in estuary related programs does provide assistance in
comprehensive planning affectinn the estuarine zone and in sup-
port to actual projects in the zone. For example the Coastal
Plains Reaional Commission establishment pursuant to the Public
Works and Economic Development '^ct of 1965 has as an important
segment of its activities a Marine Resources Program desir-ned to
stimulate growth and use of marine resources in the Region. The
agency itself has contributed to numerous projects within the
coastal area.

In brief summary the Denartment of Comnerce nroorams provide
essential services in the estuarine zone contributing primarily,
but not entirely to the commercial use of the zone.

V-22

Corps of Engineers

Perhaps the organization that has the greatest direct physical
effect on the estuaries is the Corps of Engineers operating under
the Department of Defense.

Through its civil works program it literally maintains and adminis-
ters the navigable waters of the United States. Its programs in
the estuarine zone include:

(1) provision of channels, basins and protective
works;

(2) control of dredging, filling, excavation and
construction in navigable waters through issuance of
permits;

(3) development of areas for disposal of dredged
material during construction and maintenance of
navigation projects; and

(4) issuance of permits regulating the discharge of
industrial and other wastes into navigable waters.

Other important Corps estuarine-related programs include:

(1) removal of wrecks, aquatic vegetation, debris, drifts,
and other obstructions from navigable waters,

(2) restoration of beaches;

(3) construction and maintenance of small boat harbors;

(4) providing fishing sites on piers and breakwaters;

(5) fish and wildlife conservation;

V-23

(6) development of offshore sand sources for beach
restoration;

(7) low flow augmentation;

(8) conduct of design and research studies of estuaries
at Corps laboratories;

(9) administration of Federal laws protecting and
preserving U.S. waters; and

(10) flood and hurricane protection.

In addition, it must be noted that the Corps of Engineers programs
of dam building, flood control and river clearance upstream from
the estuarine zone have very definite effects on the fresh water
inflow to the estuary. Its study programs cover many facets of
estuarine research, including physical, chemical, biological, and
ecological factors. The comprehensive study of the Chesapeake Bay
authorized in 1965 but not yet undertaken, is a typical example of
Corps activity in this area.

Department of Transportation

The Department of Transportation is the fourth Federal agency whose
programs have a direct and significant effect on the resources and
the use of the estuarine zone.

Under this Department the Coast Guard performs a series of service
activities of essential importance to the beneficial use of the
estuaries. These include:

V-24

(1) the enforcement of Federal laws within the
navigable waters of the United States;

(2) port security with emphasis on the control and
movement of vessels and on the safe movement of
hazardous cargoes;

(3) maintenance and operation of aids to navigation
and regulation and administration of bridges over the
navigable waters ;

(4) search and rescue - assistance to persons operating
vehicles and aircraft in distress;

(5) administration of the Federal Boating Act of 1958;
and

(6) icebreaking.

In regard to the resources of the estuarine zone, those Coast Guard
activities having the greatest effect are the enforcement activities
concerned with oil pollution control, as provided under the Oil
Pollution Act of 1924, as amended, and its attempts to find ways to
ease or eliminate the unavoidable pollution. The Coast Guard now
has an active research program in oil pollution abatement, containment,
source control, and recovery of oil spills. Its role in the Ocean
Data Buoy System Program could assist in inshore pollution monitoring
at a later date.

Also under the Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway
Administration's Bureau of Public Roads is concerned with estuarine

V-25

resources because many of its highways cross and provide access to
estuaries. The Federal Aviation Administration's activities in
the construction and operation of airports encroach upon the estu-
aries and have impact on the surrounding environment.

CATEGORY TWO
PROGRAMS HAVING INDIRECT OR RELATED EFFECTS

In this category are the programs and activities of the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, Agriculture, and Health, Education,
and Welfare. In general, certain of their programs do have direct
and beneficial effect in the estuarine zone but they have it indirectly,
a result of programs directed towards the land rather than the water
areas of the estuarine zone.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

The Department of Housing and Urban Development provides direct
financial and technical assistance to States, metropolitan, and
local areas for comprehensive planning, housing and other aspects
of urban and metropolitan development. Much population growth and
development is near estuarine zones, and assistance programs for the
planning, development and use of estuaries and adjacent properties
have significant impact on these zones.

Comprehensive planning grants provide assistance to many levels of
government for the preparation of comprehensive plans for land use,
facilities and the use of natural resources. Comprehensive planning

V-2C

on an areav/ide basis is required as a condition for funding many
facility grant programs which directly affect estuarine zone manage-
ment. Grants for water and sewer facilities, for acquisition of
sites for public uses, and for the purchase of open snace for parks,
recreation and conservation can all contribute to better use of
waterfront areas and can aid in more effective estuarine management.

The National Flood Insurance Program, authorized by the Housing and
Urban Development Act of 1968, requires land use provisions to
restrict future development of flood-prone lands. By June 30, 1970,
permanent land use and control measures consistent with land
management must be adopted by State or local areas before insurance
coverage is provided. Title I of the Housing Act of 1949 provides
loans and grants for urban renewal or redevelopment of waterfront
areas. The Open Space Program can help protect urban wetlands and
develop or preserve undeveloped, waterfront areas for recreational
use. Newer programs, such as I'lOdel Cities, can assist estuarine
management by providing a coordinated program to improve the urban
environment. The New Communities provision of the 1968 Act will
encourage the private development of new communities by guaranteeing
the financing by developers. These can contribute toward estuarine
management through the location and design of land use patterns so as
to reduce pollution loads and improve recreational facility develop-
ment.

V-27

Department of Agriculture

The Department of Agriculture contributes to the overall management,
use, and preservation of the estuarine system. The particular pro-
gram concern of the Department is land use, soil and water conserva-
tion, erosion prevention practices, and certain measures involved in
placing and maintaining these lands in a stable and productive con-
dition. As erosion and the volume of sediment is diminished, the
estuaries can more effectively perform their normal biological roles.
Its areawide sewer and water planning grants and its sewer and
water facilities loans and grant, contribute to the abatement of
pollution to the extent that they are adjacent to the estuarine
zone.

Under Public Law 566, Watershed Projects provide effective control
and stabilization of sediment source areas that could otherwise con-
tribute harmful deposits into estuarine areas.

The Forest Service has Federal leadership in the forestry phases of
watershed protection. Twelve National Forests, which involve lands
that drain directly into estuarine areas, have land management
activities that directly affect the estuarine resource.

Research directed towards pesticide residues in silt and the use of
brackish water for irrigation will contribute to an increase in
knowledge of the estuaries, their uses and problems.

V-28

Here again is an example of programs directed towards land use and
the preservation of that land contributing also to the preservation
of the estuarine zone. In that they do so, the planning of such
activities should be related to any comprehensive estuarine manage-
ment plan.

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare

The relationship of this Department to estuarine zones and management
includes its concern about the fitness or suitability of these areas
for human use and the resulting impact on human health and well-being.
The Public Health Service of the Department has jurisdiction over
its estuarine-related activities through the Consumer Protection and
Environmental Health Service, namely the Pesticides and Shellfish
Sanitation Programs of the Food and Drug Administration and the
Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Water Hygiene and Radiological
Health of the Environmental Control Administration.

Food and Drug Administration activities include the evaluation of
food additives and pesticides in seafoods, conducting studies on
flora and fauna of certain estuaries, the development of fish pro-
tein concentrate, ecological studies of Clostridia (botulism),
toxicity, and carcinogenicity of smoked fish, salmonella in fishery
products, virus in marine foods, and toxicological screening. The
Food and Drug Administration is also responsible for administering
the National Shellfish Sanitation Program, which is primarily

V-29

concerned with the sanitary production of safe shellfish from high
quality estuarine waters.

The Bureau of Water Hygiene conducts studies on health aspects of
the water quality of the marine environment as it relates to shell-
fish production, recreation and water resources planning.

The Bureau of Radiological Health conducts projects on reactor
effluent radionuclides in marine ecosystems, radiological surveillance
of marine environments, and the passage of radio-elements through
sub-tropical marine environment and biota.

The Bureau of Solid Waste Management is surveying through contract,
the ocean disposal problem and expects to produce pollution potential
data. A research project in Boston, Massachusetts, is studying the
effect upon the marine ecosystem of incinerator residue.

CATEGORY THREE
RESEARCH AI^ID STUDY PROGRAMS

In Category Three are those agencies whose activities in the
estuarine zone are primarily research in nature; namely, the National
Science Foundation, the Smithsonian Institution, and the National Academ;.
of Sciences - National Academy of Engineering. The programs and
activities of all three of these organizations are extremely broad
and it is only as their activities relate directly to the estuarine
zone that we briefly describe them here.

V-30

The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation supports scientific research and
education in the sciences, including estuarine-related disciplines.
It has funded the development of marine and atmospheric research
facilities. It has also sponsored a broad spectrum of research
activities, and has supported the education of environmental
scientists of all kinds. The agency was also given additional author*
ity by the National Sea Grant College and Program Act of 1966 (PL 89-
688). Under the provisions of the Act, the National Science Founda-
tion acts to support applied research by establishing an Office of
Sea Grant Programs and by preparing policy guidelines for use by
grant applicants. Several Sea Grant programs have been directed
largely towards the estuaries.

The Smithsonian Institution

The Smithsonian Institution relates generally to the ecological,
biological and geological study, preservation and educational aspects
of fauna, flora, and sediments in estuarine areas. It depends upon
the accumulation and analysis of adequate biological and environ-
mental data to predict the impact of environmental modifications on
the estuarine biota. The modifications must represent improvement
rather than degradation. It operates an Oceanographic Sorting Center
for the processing of aquatic, biologic and geologic samples. It
develops interdisciplinary conferences, such as on pollution problems

V-31

in New York Harbor. It conducts studies on subjects ranging from
sedimentation and beach erosion to the distribution and abundance
of marine plants and animals. The agency is involved with several
research facilities with capabilities in the area of estuarine
ecosystems and in various kinds of tropical research.

National Academy of Sciences--National Academy of Engineering

The National Academy of Sciences (fJAS) and the National Academy of
Engineering (NAE) are twin organizations composed of distinguished
scientists and engineers dedicated to the furtherance of science and
engineering and their uses for the general welfare. Although not
government agencies, the academies enjoy close relations with the
Federal Government from which they hold Congressional charters.
Each charter specified, "the Academy shall, whenever called upon by
any department of the Government, investigate, examine, experiment,
and report upon any subject of science or art, the actual expense of
such investigations, examinations, experiments, and reports to be
paid from appropriations which may be made for the purpose, but the
Academy shall receive no compensation whatever for any service to the
Government of the United States."

The NAS and the NAE contribute to the development of knowledge of
the Nation's estuaries through their respective committees on
oceanography (NASCO) and Coimnittee on Ocean Engineering (NAECO).
The most recent contribution of the NASCO a:id NAECOE, acting in

V-32

concert, has been the conduct, at the request and under the sponsor-
ship of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, of a
meeting: "Coastal Waste Management," held in June 1969. This
session is described elsewhere in this report; the final resultant
document will be published by the academies early in 1970. The
purpose of this meeting was to examine the following questions:

(1) What is known about the impact of wastes on the
oceans?

(2) What is known about the magnitude of the impact
the marine environment can tolerate?

(3) What is our present capability to predict future
impact of wastes on the coastal ocean environment?

(4) What investigations should be undertaken in order
to improve our ability to handle the above questions?

The National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of
Engineering have a history of significant contributions to knowledge
necessary to develop a sound system of management for the estuaries
and will continue to offer valuable guidance in the future by bring-
ing together in appropriate groups the most competent scientists and
engineers in the country to deal broadly with scientific and engineer-
ing problems in estuaries and to exchange information in the further-
ance of research.

V-33

CATEGORY FOUR
PLANNING, COORDINATING, AND LICENSING PROGRAMS

These are the Government agencies whose functions lie generally in
the field of planning, coordinating or licensing. Their activities
as they relate to or affect the estuarine zone are briefly described.

The Water Resources Council

The Water Resources Council, established in the Water Resources
Planning Act of 1965 (PL 89-90) awards planning grants to the States
for their comprehensive planning in the development of water and
related land resources, including estuarine resources. This planning
considers that the Nation's estuaries and coastal areas are inseparably
related to their watersheds and to the rivers which supply them with
fresh water. These watershed relationships determine the characteris-
tics of estuaries and coastal areas and influence their usefulness to
man. Among the many objectives of such planning is a consideration
of appropriate regional institutional arrangements necessary to
implement the comprehensive plans. It also advises the President on
national water policy, maintains a continuing assessment of national
water supply needs, and coordinates the activities of Federal water
resources agencies. The Council also oversees the execution of con-
gressional ly authorized comprehensive water and related land resources
planning projects for specific river basins. Existing Federal-State
river basin commissions under the aegis of the Council are organized
and functioning in 15 of the 30 coastal States, and alternative Federal'

V-34

State planning coordination mechanisms are organized in all the remain-
ing coastal areas under the general leadership of the Water Resources
Council .

National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development

The Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of 1966 (PL 80-
454) established two complementary bodies: The Commission on Marine
Science, Engineering and Resources and the National Council on
Marine Resources and Engineering Development. The latter provides
for the development, encouragement, and maintenance of a comprehensive
long range and coordinated national program in marine science. The
national program applies to oceanographic and scientific endeavors
and disciplines, engineering and technology in and with relation to
the total marine environment. The report of the Commission with
respect to multiple use of the coastal zone will be discussed in some
detail in a later chapter.

The Atomic Energy Commission

The interests and operations of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
regarding the estuarine zone lie almost completely in the effects of
radiological and thermal wastes as pollutants in estuarine zones.
Research programs and projects of the Commission most directly related
to the estuarine system are conducted through contracts, with an
emphasis on nuclear safety. Such broad programs include:

V-35

(1) Disposal of radioactive v^/astes--the1r effects and
movements through estuarine zones;

(2) accumulation of radionuclides in wildlife and
sediments of these zones and their relation to the
ecology of the zone;

(3) use of radionuclides in pollution study and
the detection of pollution, and in some cases,
the abatement of pollution; and

(4) thermal effluents from atomic plants.

The AEC licenses nuclear plants from the standpoint of radiological
safety only. This important licensing authority unfortunately does
not now require consideration of other environmental effects, parti-
cularly those of thermal effluents.

Federal Power Commission

The Federal Power Commission is an independent agency operating under
the Federal Power Act, the Natural Gas Act, and other statutes. It
is concerned principally with the regulation of the interstate aspects
of the electric power and natural gas industries. Some of the regu-
latory activities involve power and natural gas facilities located
in estuarine zones.

Under the authority of the Federal Power Act, the Comnission issues
licenses for the construction and operation of nonfederal hydroelec-
tric power projects on navigable waterways, on any stream over which

V-36

Congress has jurisdiction where the project affects interstate conroerce,
or on public lands or reservations of the United States; it investi-
gates and prepares reports on the water and power development of the
rivers of the United States; it collects data on the electric power
industry; and it studies plans ^'cr reservoir projects proposed to be
constructed by Federal agencies i..d makes recommendations concerning
the facilities to be installed fot hydroelectric power development.
That Act directs the Cormiission to promote and encourage the voluntary
interconnection and coordination of f.lectric utility systems to assure
an abundant supply of electric energy throughout the United States
with the greatest possible economy and with regard to the proper
utilization and conservation of natural resources.

V-37

SECTION 3. A SYNTHESIS OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS AND
THEIR MEANS OF COORDINATION

The Federal proqrams in the estuarine zone are widespread and quite
obviously have far-reaching effects. They must support the national
interest and meet numerous Federal responsibilities. In addition,
thty have a considerable effect on State and local programs. To be
effective the various Federal programs should complement each other,
should avoid duplication and should be well coordinated with one
another and with the corresponding State -level programs.

In order to present a reasonably clear synthesis of the Federal
programs, the accomoanying Table V.1.1 presents a summary of major
Federal activities in six different estuaries. For each Department
and for each of the selected estuaries there are listed the routine
activities or programs of the Department and then the additional or
special activities in that particular estuary. The routine activ-
ities generally stay the same for each estuary and are most often
those imposed by statute or results of long standing programs. The
special activities are an attempt to note specific projects, studies,
etc., of current or recent nature in individual estuaries. Means
of coordination currently in use are listed in the final column.
For purposes of simplicity the table presents only the programs
having direct and important interest or related effects (categories
one and two). This is not to derogate "the importance of other
activities but only to provide for simpler presentation.

V-38

TA&LE V.1.1
Sunmarlzatlon of Federal Activities

Federal OttMrtMent

DeliWitr* B«y

Penobscot Bay

Chesapeake Bey

Routine Activities

Happing and charting envlrorwental

prediction Port Developaent

Special Activities
None reported.

Applies to a1] six estuaries

Special Activities
Special E$tuar1ne~f lushing
studies and predictions.

Special Activities
None reported .

Transportet'lon

Routine Activities
A11 Coast Guard services, I.e., Lew
enforccaent. aids to fMvlgatlon, rescue,
boating safety, port security, control
of shipping.

Special Activities
tone reported.

Applies to all six estuarlts

Special Activities
tone reported.

Special Activities
None reported.

Corps of Engineers"

Rouilne AcHvlCTT

Kafritenance of ICivlgeble waters.
Control of dredfe and fill by perait.
Harttor pollution. Hart>or construction.

Special Activities

Scale KydriuHc Model (Vicksburg).

Study scheduled on deep draft channel.

(Dept. of Defense)

Applies to alt six estuaries

Special Activities

Deep draft channel study.

Special Activities

Special study of the Chesapeake Bay

authorited by Act of Congress )96S.

joutJBt ActKUTw

Pervit review In conjunction with Corps of
EnginMrs paralt ectivltles. Land and Uater
Cofuenration Fund Grants, Sewage and Construc-
tion Crents, various Planning and Nenagaaant
and Resource Preservation and Qevelopavnt
branu. MaUr flow dat^ participation In
R1*er a«s1n CoMtlstlon Type I and II Studies.

Special Activities
SpmUI Sled ituAy
SedlMnution Study
Fluthlng Pattern Research

Interior

Applies to all sli ettueriet

Special Activities
Participation in Conservati on ,
Biological and Heavy Nttjl Studies

Special Activities

Various Fisheries and Fisheries Econoaic
Studies. Milfoil and Sea Nettle Studies
BCF Biological Laboratory. FHKA Chesapeake
Technical Support Laboratory. Water Quality
Enforcanent (PotOMc) Administration of
Historic Shrine. Participetlon In various
ecological, biological, chaalcal and geologic
*tudiM.

AflTi CU I tU^"

Bouiu icHvurw

Soil and Uater Conservation Projects.
S«Mr and Water Planning and Construction
Grants. f:«t«rshed Protection. Flood Control.

Special Activities

dune St^lllzetlon Adjecent to Delware Bey

Applies to all six estuaries

Special Activities

Special AssisUnoe Grants with

Measures to Control Pollution

Special Activities

Bank Erosion Control Projects

Healt/i Education
and yelfare

BouHne Activities

Marine Health. Pestialdes. Public WaUr Supply
Food and Drugs froa Marine Sources. Solid
UasU. Shellfish Sanitation Progran

Special Activities

Savage Sludge Du^ S1U Study

Applies to all six estuaries

Special Activities Special Activities

Special Shellfish Sanitation Survey Planned Special Study Re^rdlng Effect of

Sewage Plant

Hoittj'oa and Urban
QevelopBenI "

Routine Activities

Planning and Assistance In lise of Uater
Adjacent Property. Areawlde and L'Kal Planning
Uater ind Sewer Facilities GranU.

fVen Space Land Grants

Special Activities

None Refwrted

Applies to all six estuaries

Special Activities

None Reported

Spec

tone

lal Activities

Reported

V-39

TABLE V.1.1
SuMwrlzatlon of Federal Activities - Continued

I B«y

S*n Frinclsco B«y

Pu9tt Sound

Coordination U cirrltd out In UfM of th« R*qu1r«*Rt«
liposed on tht various progrMn.

Sptclil ActWItlei
Hon* rtporttd.

SptcUl Act1»1ti«
Nofw rtportcd.

Special Actlvitlti

HoM reported.

Water Resources Council Associate

rship

Coordination Is carried out In tenn of requlrenants l^wsed
on the program In Enforcement boating safety and the lUe.
Enforcenent Is carried out In close coordination with StaU
and local authorities.

Uater Resources Council

Special Activities
Hone reported.

SptclaT Activities
None reported.

Special ActivUiet
None reported.

htp.

Special Activities
Special hurricane
protection ^asures
report.

Special Activities
Coordinated CQapre>)ens 1 ve
survey - Navigation Flood
control, water supply land
reclai^tlon, recreation,
national defense, etc..
operates Hydraulic scale
«Mle1.

Special Activities
CoHprehenslve Survey 1969.

Coordination through working closely with SUte counterparts.
Corps projects themelves are developed through exUnslve co-
ordination of the various ne«h and eipressed desires of StaU
and local Interests - and Federal Interests.

Nutual assistance projects, grants. Joint projects and
studies with States and other Fe^ral affOfKles.

Coordination through regulatory activities (the penalt systaw)
granting of the per«U coordinated with SUU authorities and
with Fe<ieral agencies thro«9h Interior Corp* ■•■orandi* of
agreement.

r.«»rdln^tlon through the Water Resources CoMw:H.

Special Activities
cSwrcral sheTrTTsh
stu4y, water quality
study. Hlllsboro Bay
Jbkilnlstratlon of
historic shrine. Oyster
shell dredging study,
aCF Biological labora-
tory — — — —

Special Activities
EstAbllshMnt of InUrl or
Task Force to work with SUU.
Special Navigation project
studies. waUr quality
■«n«9««nt study-

Special Activities

Various coMarclal fisheries

studies. waUr quality enforce-

■ent (1962), Flushing and

SedlMnUtlon Studies. BCF

Biological and Technical

Laboratory.

Coordination through conference, consultation »n<l «rklng
In conjunction with SUU and local personnel. Field level
conferences with SUU and other Federal agency personnel.
Foneal report coordination through SUU agencies. Participa-
tion In River Basin CoaHlsslon studies under the UaUr Resource;
Council. Coordination thru the eAelnlstratlOA of grants and
subsidies. Pervit review In conjunction with Corps of Engineer;
pcnit systeH. RegulaUry and EnforcsMnt Activities.

Special Activities
SidlMntaUon Study

Special Activities

Bay Council of Soil and

Water Conservation Districts

foraed U laprove Bay

envlrofBMfit.

Special Activities
Participation In coaprehen-
slve land and waUr resources
study. HanagaMnt of National
Forest Lands, (331 of drainage
area) Special UaUrshed
projects.

Coordination throu^ woriing closely with SUU counterparts ^n
Soil Conservation Districts. A^lnlstratlon of granU and
subsidies. Inuragency reviews of projects and work plans.
Coordination and cooperation at StaU level by SCS and SUU
Highway organizations. Participation In River Basin Coavlsslon
Studies Type I and Type II under Water Resources Council.

Coordination through working directly and closely with SUU
counUrpart organizations. Technical asslsUnce to SUU and

Federal agencies on Narlne Health.

Special Activities
Heavy HeUU Study

Special Activities
rJone Reported

Special Activities
Heavy HeU1s Study. Special
Shellfish Studies. Marine
Health Science Laboratory

Special Actlvltlet-
None Reported

Special Activities
None Reported

Special Activities
Hone Reported

Coordination through participation as assocliU aa^wr of
WaUr Resources Council In River Basin Coeerlislor Studies.
Operation of Planning AssltUnct Nequlreaents Coordinating
CoMlttee (PARCC). BOB Circular A-95 - Coordination of
Fe<Jeral AsslsUd planning activities. Inter-depart»enUl
reviews by executive order and aaao of agreenent.

V-40

Working from the information presented in the table there follows
a discussion as to the adequacy of the programs in meeting the
requirements of national interest and Federal responsibility and a
review of the current state of coordination.

ADEQUACY OF PROGRAMS

The national interests in the estuarine zone in relation to Federal
programs are protection and development of natural resources,
commerce and navigation, and national defense.

First, in regard to the protection and development of the natural
resources of the estuarine zone, the Department of the Interior very
likely has the strongest effect here since it has broad interests
and management responsibilities in the use, preservation, development,
and study of our living and nonliving marine and related land
resources in the estuarine zone. At the same time, the Department
is also interested in the equitable and reasonable exploitation of
these areas for all manner of business and commercial activities.
Through its permit review activities in connection with the Corps
of Engineers, definite action goes on with particular emphasis on
the protection of the vital fish and wildlife habitats and preven-
tion of water pollution. In general, Interior's programs meet
objectives. A serious weakness lies in financial limitations. What
is being done is good but not enough can be done. This is partic-
ularly apparent in the need for estuarine zone or coastal zone

V-41

research laboratories devoted to the problems and the resources of
the estuaries and adjacent coastal areas.

The permit control activities of the Corps of Engineers under the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, as amended, and the Interior-Army Memorandum of Understanding
of 1967, act directly in the protection and development of the
estuarine resources. Army policy requires permit applicants to
seek State approval before its own consideration of the application.
The Corps issues public notices and holds public hearings when
there is appropriate demand. The permit control activities are
effective and cover a large part of the preservation or protection
problem, but there are two weaknesses. First, the authority of the
Corps to deny a permit on any grounds except impediment to naviga-
tion has been successfully challenged in Federal Court. Second,
there is the matter of policing or enforcement. The Corps simply
does not have sufficient facilities and personnel to police the
Nation, thus change and alteration mav take place without Corps
authorization.

The licensing activities of the Atomic Energy Commission (not in the
chart) now cover only radiological safety — this by Statute. Thev do
not take into account environmental effects, thus can supply only
limited protection to estuarine natural resources.

The routine activities of the Departnents of Agriculture; Health,
Education, and VJelfare; and Housing and Urban Development, as can be

V-42

seen from the chart, contribute to the protection of natural
resources for the overall public good. Their effect is not
always a direct one but, nevertheless does make a strong and
continuous contribution. Like those of Interior the programs
are effective. With more funds and facilities they would
naturally increase their effects.

For those National Interests of Commerce and Navigation the
chart shows a series of activities both contributing and con-
trolling, for this is essentially a direct Federal responsi-
bility.

Conmerce supplies the necessary mapping and charting for navi-
gational purposes, the marine weather service and port develop-
ment. The Coast Guard under Transportation regulates water-
borne commerce and maintains navigational aids. The Corps of
Engineers maintains the navigable waters and the Department of
Health, Education and Welfare maintains a marine health pro-
gram. Since commercial shipping is one of the most valuable
and efficient uses of the estuarine zone these Federal ser-
vices can be considered adequate to meet the national interests,
at least under current law and funding.

Nevertheless, as pointed out in the Report of the Commission on
Marine Science, Engineering, and Resources, and in other studies,
rapidly changing trends in shipping-containerization and larger
ships among other things — make a review of the situation necessary

V-43

A thorouqh study and national survey covering future requirements
is needed.

In regard to national security as a national interest in the estu-
arine zone— the Federal programs appear to be adequate. The Navy
as a user relies on the same support programs as does other com-
merce. Major naval bases, of course, are in the same area and
all the logistic support of the many facets of defense beyond the
continental limits pass through the area.

THE COORDINATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
IN THE ESTUARINE ZONE

With many different Federal agencies managing active and important
programs in the estuarine zone, the question is frequently asked,
"How is coordination accomplished with this multitude of programs?",
or, "Is there any coordination at all?" The assumption is usually
made that it's all a very thorough mess and there is no proper
control over the situation. In truth, there is coordination and
there is progress in obtaining better coordination, yet there are
some serious weaknesses, and corrective action is needed.

Specific Means of Coordination

From the chart several distinct and important means of coordination
can be seen. These are:

V-44

(1) working closely with State and local counter-
parts in the development of programs and in mutual
assistance— joint projects and studies— data gather-
ing and exchange of information;

(2) the administration of grants and subsidies--
joint review of plans and applications;

(3) regulatory activities— permits, licensing and
enforcement of Federal laws;

(4) statutes. Executive Orders, Bureau of the
Budget Circulars;

(5) Memoranda of Agreement; and

(6) the work of the Water Resources Council and its
river basin commission and interagency organizations.

The means of coordination are many--the point in question is "How
do they work and what are the results? --at State and Federal levels.

Coordination at the State Level

As the table shows, perhaps the strongest means of coordination is
that of working directly with State counterparts in the development
and administration of various programs. Through the administration
of grants and subsidies the Federal agencies also must work closely
with appropriate State and local agencies. The granting of permits
and licenses is normally done in conjunction with State agencies.
The Corps of Engineers, for example, desires and usually obtains

V-45

State approval of permits before granting the Federal permit. The
Coast Guard in its law enforcement activities works in close con-
junction with State authorities in inland and coastal waters. These
are but a few of many examples. There is also coordination at the
State level through the river basin commissions and interagency
organizations under the aegis of the Water Resources Council
since the States are members of these organizations and participate
with various Federal agencies in the planning studies.

The fact that there is this coordination at the State and local
level supplies an important component of coordination to the
Federal programs since the State must attempt to integrate these
Federal programs into their own activities. The great weakness
is that all too frequently Federal agencies deal only with their
particular State counterparts and thus v^ork with the States does
not tend to pull the Federal programs together. In those cases
where there is a comprehensive State management plan for the
estuarine zones and coastal area and there is a State agency
implementing this plan, there could be much stronger and more
effective coordination.

Coordination at the Federal Level

Coordination of Federal programs in the estuarine zone takes place
through several of the previously listed methods in addition to that
which results from the extensive coordination at the State level.

V-46

Memorandums' of Understanding are one of the most used methods and
are particularly applicable to the joint reviews of applications
in the administration of grants and subsidies. In regulatory
activities there is a continuous series of joint reviews or
permits and licenses. The 1967 Memorandum of Agreement between
Interior and Army which calls for Interior review of permits from
the standpoint of environment and natural resources results in
coordination of Interior and Corps of Engineers activities. The
enforcement of water quality standards brings about a form of
coordination since Federal programs must be reviewed and considered
to determine their effect. Passage of such legislation as S.7
or H.R. 4148 would bring an even stronger control and coordination
mechanism into play, in that State certification of the fact that
an applicant's facility would not cause violation of water quality
standards would be required prior to granting a permit or license.

Under statutes. Executive Orders and Bureau of the Budget Cir-
culars, there is a continuous routine of coordination required. For
example. Bureau of the Budget Circular A. 95 furnishes guidance
to Federal agencies for added cooperation with States and local
governments in the evaluation, review, and coordination of Federal
assistance programs and projects.

Federal programs are also coordinated as necessary by the requirements
imposed on them, or in other words, in general order of daily business.

V-47

A very good example of this is mapping and charting activities and
aids to navigation. When the Corps of Engineers establishes a new
navigation channel or changes one, the Coast Guard is informed
and makes the necessary changes of navigation aids. The Environ-
mental Sciences Services Administration under the Department of
Commerce is aware and takes the necessary steps to have these
changes placed on the proper navigational charts. Information
regarding the changes is published in the form of Notices to
Mariners and put out by the U. S. Naval Oceanoqraphic Office under
the Department of the Navy. This is all reasonably automatic
coordination, there is much of it and it is very effective.

A most important form of coordination and one which encompasses
all our charted organizations is that carried out under the guid-
ance of the Water Resources Council. As noted in the table des-
cribing Federal activities in the six estuaries, membership or
associate membership on the Water Resources Council and partici-
pation in the planning studies conducted by the river basin commis-
sions or the interagency committees provide a significant means
of coordination.

To highlight its interest in the estuaries and estuarine zones
the Water Resources Council adopted on November 29, 1967, the
following resolution:

V-48

It is the policy of the Water Resources Council that the
use, preservation or development, and management of
coastal, lakes, and river shorelines and islands and
estuaries are to be given full consideration in the plan-
ning of use of water and related land resources by river
basin commissions established under the Water Resources
Planning Act.

The Council also considers the planning for the preser-
vation, development and use of estuaries, islands and
coastal, river, and lake shorelines and an appropriate
use of Federal and State funds in accordance with Title
III of the Water Resources Planning Act [which provides
authority to assist the States financially in planning
for the use of water and related land resources].

The National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Develop-
ment charged with the coordination and development of marine
sciences created the Committee on the Multiple Use of the Coastal
zone (CMUZ) in August 1967. This committee through its meetings,
studies, and symposia was an excellent forum for bringing forth
the problems of the estuaries and the adjacent coastal area.

In regard to the furtherance of coordination it should be noted
that the Water Resources Council, by memoranduin for the record
dated June 18, 1969, has in agreement with the National Council
for Marine Resources and Engineering Development established

V-49

procedures whereby the National Council will review plans and
studies relating to the coastal zone and that a member of the
Council Staff would attend meetings of the Water Resources Council
where such plans, studies and reports are to be discussed.

V-50

SECTION 4. SUMMARY

It can be seen that the sum total of the current Federal programs
in the estuarine zone are broad in scope and reach into every
facet of the area. Within the limits of the authorities and
resources available these remain well directed towards their
objectives and are reasonably effective,

THE CURRENT ROLE

The role of the Federal Government in brief continues to be one of
support and technical assistance, of regulatory activities within
current law» and of the provision of normal Federal services,
such as, navigation aids, channel and harbor maintenance,
protective works, and weather service. The Federal Government
continues to promote and encourage cooperation among the States
in interstate estuaries. It participates in broad studies and
inventories particularly as directed by Congress in specific acts.
Land acquisition in the estuarine zone continues under the
various current laws, and research goes forward.

Augmentation

Even though the Federal programs cooperate reasonably within
their statutory authority the accomplishments when combined with
State and local activity are not enough as yet to really slow
down the loss of valuable estuarine zones. The conflicting
demands on the resources of the estuarine zone increase at a

V-51

rather rapid rate. Unplanned and unrequlated alteration and
modification of the area mostly as the result of activities by
the private sector continues with a consequent loss of wildlife
habitat and a decreasing availability of open space for public use.
The cause is in part rapid urban and suburban development, heavy
industrial growth and increased population. Development in the
estuaries is necessary and will continue, but it should be done
in a planned and regulated way designed to provide the most bene-
ficial use. To do so, integrated and coordinated management and
planning is needed. This will require more technical assistance
of all kinds, more knowledge to be gathered through research and
data collection. Not in the least, it will require more effective
use of current programs and authorities. This simply means more
money and more people. As has been pointed out before in this
chapter, the Corps of Engineers does not have the overall facil-
ities and personnel to administer its permit program in the most
effective manner. In cooperation with the States, land acquisit-
ion by the Federal Government directly and through grants-in-aid
programs proceeds at too slow a pace. There is in particular no
grant-in-aid program which concentrates its activities in the
estuarine zone and which could assist the States in developing
that type of State organization that could prepare and implement
an integrated and comprehensive plan for its overall estuarine zone.

Coordination

In terms of coordination it is relatively easy to point out that

V-52

the strongest coordination of the Federal programs takes place at
the State level, that is, that it is accomplished to the greatest
extent by working closely with the States. As noted, the weakness
of this is generally the lack of a single strong State organization
to deal with.

There have been noted many other means of coordination. All ap-
pear to work fairly well, but not well enough to provide an effect-
ive and comprehensive program of management in the estuarine zone.
There is no single policy and no national policy which would pro-
vide for the protection of national interests and for development,
preservation and use of the estuarine zones for the overall public
good. Such a policy would be helpful in the coordination of Fed-
eral programs.

A STRONGER FEDERAL ROLE

It is apparent from the above discussion that there are needed
additions to the Federal role and programs and that augmentation
would be helpful in certain areas.

There needs to be added:

(1) A national policy with specific objectives to
provide coherence to the Federal programs and to lay
the basis for better coordination of these programs.
This national policy should also contain guidelines to

V-53

the States based on the policy and objectives.

(2) A stronger means of coordination of the Federal
programs. This could well lie in an interagency group
charged with monitoring developments and conditions in
the estuarine zones and with providing at specified
times a review and report of the situation.

(3) A system of grants to the States to provide them
the ability to prepare and implement comprehensive plans
for their estuarine zones. These plans and the State
organizations behind them could be a strong factor in
the effective coordination of Federal programs within
the State.

Augmentation is needed:

(1) In various technical assistance, research and informa-
tion programs and the grant programs supporting these.

(2) In the programs of land acquisition in the estuarine
zone.

(3) In strengthening the regulatory and enforcement
activities of the Federal agencies. This in terms of
personnel and facilities and in terms of strengthened
Federal law. The terms of S.7 and H.R. 4148, if passed,
will contribute a great deal to this.

(4) In terms of increased broad studies at the Federal
level and jointly with the States. Examples not now
authorized are a national port study and studies on site

V-54

locations for potential electric power generating plans.
As noted in the chapter devoted to research needs,
continuous broad studies in hydrology, living resources
and ecology are needed.

(5) Increased research effectiveness is needed in terms
of better use of existing Federal research facilities
through organization and reorientation to broader estuarine
problems and their solutions. There are also needed
additional facilities devoted to research in the estuarine
zone, probably in the form of a network of estuarine
and coastal zone laboratories. Federal in nature but with
State participation.

CONCLUSIONS

In very brief conclusion regarding the Federal programs in the
estuarine zone, it would appear that both augmentation and better
coordination are needed to assist in providing for a strengthened
Federal role. There is also needed a national policy and a set of
objectives to provide the basis for a comprehensive national program
of management within which a newer and stronger Federal role will
be carried out.

V-55

Chapter 2
COASTAL STATES' RESPONSIBILITIES, PROGRAMS, AND ROLES

SECTION 1. STATE PROFILE DEVELOPMENT

As specified in Section 5g of the Clean Water Restoration Act of
1966 in amending the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Nation-
al Estuarine Pollution Study and the resulting report to the Congress
shall include the development of recommendations for the
" . . . respective responsibilities which should be assumed by Federal,
State, and local governments and by public and private interests."
Also, the Act specifies that the Study shall be conducted in cooper-
ation with appropriate State organizations, institutions, and indivi-
duals.

Because of the key or important role of the States in managing the
estuarine zone, it is essential to define the scope of present manage-
ment frameworks and from that to develop what should be the proper
role of coastal State governments in regard to marine/coastal /estuarine
resources. Coastal States are indicated in Figure V.2.1.
Likewise, it is essential to find out weaknesses as well as strengths,
accomplishments versus needs, existing organizations versus proposed
ones, negative as well as positive views, and deficiencies as well
as resources. Thus, the overall State picture must be defined clearly
as a basis for creating, building, and basing plans and programs
for estuarine management. Towards this goal the National Estuarine
Pollution Study obtained from the coastal States the information for
the development of profiles which define and outline the State's overall

V-56

V-57

picture, which define the States' views and which assure that States'
opinions are included for consideration in the development of the
management plan. The followinq section of this report summarizes
these findings,

METHODS OF PROFILE DEVELOPMENT

The source of material used in the profiles of the coastal States
was developed throuah contacts, direct and indirect, with the
State governments and sunplenented by material and reports in
the technical literature.

Beginning in 1^67, the Governors of the 24 coastal States and the
territories were notified that the advice and counsel of the States
were essential tn the success of the Study, and they were asked to
designate a person to serve as the State's primary contact point for
this project. The primary concern underlying this procedure was that
the Study did not want to burden the States with the tasks of
completing lemthy questionnaires or providing data summaries and that
it wanted to avoid duplication of effort wherever possible.

Subsequently, the Study's regional estuarine coordinators contacted
the State estuarine representatives to collect information on the
organization and activities of each coastal State in the use of its
estuarine resources and tc gain the individual State's views in respect
to the responsibilities of Federal, State, and local governments in
this program. Specifically, each State was asked to provide information

V-58

on the following 10 topics.

(1) What State agencies are directly or indirectly
involved in the use of the estuarine resources of
the States? What are their specific programs and
what fiscal and personnel resources are available
for carrying out these programs?

(2) What mechanisms, if any, has the State provided
for coordination of these programs? For example,
highway construction, pollution control and beneficial
use.

(3) What are the current problems in estuarine
resource utilization within the State, and what
are the State views as to how these problems can
be managed best?

(4) What information does the State now have on
the use of its estuaries? We would like to have
copies of relatively recent reports, and would like

to have an idea of what additional data may be available
in State files but which are not published or organized,

(5) What is the legal authority for the various
programs?

(6) What is the legal status of estuary, tidelands,
and wetland ownership?

(7) Do the State agencies now have projects under

V-59

way which are directly related tn estuarine resource

utilization?

(3) What is the extent of the present direct control

of estuaries by States? What is their size, location,

and nature of use?

(9) What dre examples of current problems in
estuarine nianagement or in conflict of uses? The
emphasis should be on pollution or estuarine modification.

(10) What are the present State research facilities
used in management of estuaries or study of estuarine
resources?

The information obtained from the States on these 10 tonics was used
to develop the profiles. In many cases to supplement these resoonses,
information available to Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
Regional Offices in their files, material presented in transcripts of
public meetings, reports published by or about the States, results of
other studies such as the Commission's reports, other correspondence
with the States' governors or agencies, plus direct consultation with
appropriate State personnel were incorporated in the profiles. To assure
accuracy and adequacy of the profiles, they were returned to State estu-
arine representatives for annroval at the highest possible level,
considering the time available. The following material represents
a very brief condensation of this mass of information which is being
retained and is available separately from this report. It is

V-60

also referenced in Part VII as a part of the supoorting information
used in the preparation of this report.

Since a most important part of this profile is to be an expression
of the States' views on the composition and management of a compre-
hensive National program for estuarine resources, special attention
was directed to this area. The individual State's views with respect
to responsibilities of Federal, State, and local governments on this
program were very diligently sought, not only through the mechanism
mentioned above but also by direct correspondence to the States
asking specifically for the official States' views. To assure in
every way possible that the States had adequate opportunities to
express their views, the preliminary recommendations for the compre-
hensive management plan, including a summary of the available States'
views, were sent to the States for review and then the States were
asked to attend Regional/State review conferences held in various
sections of the country. The responses varied widely. Because of
the emphasis on this topic, in accordance with Section 5g of the Act,
these views are presented separately, in section 6 of this chapter.

The following Table V.2.1 presents a brief summary of information
received from and about the coastal States in the area of estuarine
management information.

V-61

TABLE V.2.1
Estuarine Management Information Received from Coastal States

Coastal States
& Territories

Profile
Material

LETTERS*

Reports

other**

State
Reps .

Gov.
Letters

Other

Alabama

Alaska

California

X
X
X

X
X
X

X

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

X
X
X

X

X

X

X
X
X

X

Georgia
Hawai i
Louisiana

X
X
X

X
X

X
X

X

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

X
X
X

X

X
X
X

X

Mississippi
liew Hampshire
New Jersey

X
X
X

X
X

X
X

New York
North Carolina
Oregon

X
X
X

X

X

X

X
X

Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina

X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X

X

Texas

Virginia

Washington

X
X
X

X
X

X

X
X
X

X
X

Virgin Islands
District of Columbia
Puerto Rico

X
X
X

X

X

*Views regarding Federal -State-local responsibilities in estuirine

management

**Including contracts

V-G2

SECTION 2. SELECTED STATE ORGANIZATIONS - A SPECTRUfl OF DEVELOPMENT

The 24 coastal States have, in essence, 24 different estuarine
management frameworks; viev/ed together they present a broad spectrum
of development towards effective and efficient estuarine management.

To show or indicate this broad spectrum of development, the manage-
ment frameworks of a few selected States are presented. They provide
a basis for defining strengths, deficiencies or weaknesses in the
States' role and establish a path, leading to a more dynamic and
effective role of the States in estuarine management.

The following section of the report previews the management systems
of selected coastal States, large to small, rich to less prosperous,
populous to soarsely developed, urban to rural, and highly industri-
alized to mostly pastoral. The selected States are Massachusetts,
Maryland, California, Florida, and Alaska. Following this will be
a typical State's management framework, State laws, and States'
views on estuarine management.

V-63

MASSACHUSETTS

Massachusetts is a relatively snail, densely populated, highly urban,
highly industrialized, and affluent New England area. The population
of Massachusetts is about 5,400,000; the tidal shoreline is about 1,500
linear miles including about 45,000 acres of coastal marshland; and
about 85 percent of the people live in urban coastal areas. Owner-
ship of the 1,519 miles of shoreline is as follows:

Federal Government 110 miles or about 4,500

acres of coastal wetlands

State Government 45 miles

Local Government 50 "

Universities, etc. 25 "

Private 1289 "

Massachusetts' coastline is widely used by the surrounding New England
and east coast community as a prime resort/vacation/historical area.
The condition of Massachusetts' shoreline areas affects not only the
populace of Massachusetts but also that of the surrounding area since
so many people throng to Massachusetts for their livelihood, enjoyment,
and relaxation.

Massachusetts has developed legislation and corresponding organizational
structure for the management of its estuarine areas. The two principal
enactments are: An Act Providing for the Protection of the Coastal
Wetlands of the Commonwealth (General Laws, Chapter 76P, Act of 1965)
and An Act Relative to Removal, Filling, and Dredging in Coastal Waters.

V-64

Other enactments include the new oil pollution and offshore mineral
resource laws.

The estuarine management activities in Massachusetts are focused on
the Department of Natural Resources, headed by a Commissioner.
This Department has both operational and regulatory responsibilities
in estuarine areas. The Coastal Dredge and Fill Law, the Coastal
Wetlands Law and new oil pollution and offshore mineral resource
laws are all administered by the Divisions of this department.
The organization of this department is described in Figure V.2.2.

The primary means by which the Department manages the estuarine areas,
other than Federally controlled areas, such as the Park Service's
Cape Cod National Seashore, and the Coast Guard's stations also on
Cape Cod, is by restrictive orders - permits, licenses, leases, and
so forth - as to the use of these areas, based on the results of
public meetings. The Department is placed organizationally high
enough in the State governmental structure so that its activities
and recommendations are effective in controlling the development
of and alteration of estuarine areas. Such an estuarine management
organization must be capable of handling and acting on estuarine
problems.

In May 1968, by a Commonwealth Executive order (#59) the Massachusetts
Commission on Ocean Management was created to develop a comprehensive
long-range State plan for the management of Massachusetts estuarine

V-65

GOVE

nJOR

— Dept. of Public Works

i— Dept.
1

of Natural Resources

-Div. of Waterways

Commissioner

'-Div. of Sanitary Engr.

-Div.

of Forest and Parks

—Dept. of Commerce and

-Div.

of Marine Fisheries

Development

-Div.

of Law Enforcement

—Dept. of Administration

-Div.

of Fisheries and Game

and Finance

-Div.

of Conservation
Services

-Div.

of Water Pollution

Control

FIGURE V.2.2

Massachusetts' Agencies Involved in f'anagement or Control

of Estuarine Resources

V-66

areas and to recommend an appropriate State governmental organization
to, in essence, carry out the plan. The Commission's findings will
be reported to the Commissioner of Natural Resources.

Other Massachusetts departments which have organizational responsi-
bilities are the Department of Public Works which is also headed by a
Commissioner and reports directly to the Governor, and the Department of
Commerce and Development which provides planning and program development.
A third department, the Department of Administration and Finance acts
to provide coordination and to guide joint planning. This department
is the agency responsible for personnel, financing, and budget.

Details on the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of
Public Works are included in the tabulations on the following pages.

The Massachusetts State government assists the local governments in
estuarine management and acquisition through their Self-Help Program
which consists primarily of funds awarded to town or city conservation
commissions.

The Wetlands Act restricts activities which may pollute the coastal
wetlands, whether Dublicly or privately owned. The Act states that
"... to immediately provide for the protection of coastal wetlands
against the imminent threat of the development of such lands for
industrial and other uses detrimental to their preservation in their
natural state, therefore, it is hereby declared to an emergency law,
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public convenience."

V-67

Also, the Act provides that a city or town may take (by eminent domain)
coastal lands in the public interest in order to protect them and
for the establishment by the U. S. '"ovprnment of National Wildlife
Refuges. Examples are the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge and
Monomoy National Wildlife Refugp v;hich place about 3,000 tidemarsh
acres under permanent protectinr. Advantages of this Act are that
the State can restrict the use of large areas in general terms or
can be very specific as to permissible uses in small areas.

The second Act or "Dredging Act" restricts people from filling or
dredging in any coastal waters without prior approval of the respective
town or city and the State.

The Wetlands Act of 1965 has resulted in State actions that have
restricted the use of approximately 5,000 acres and Ip proposals to
restrict 12,000 more coastal acres including immediate action on
approximately 1,700 acres of salt marshes in the North River estuary.
(See following coastline map, Figure V.2.3, adapted from an
Outline Map of Massachusetts Coast, prepared by the Massachusetts
Division of Marine Fisheries, Department of Natural Resources, 1969.)

The estuarine management activities and capabilities of the local-
government level in Massachusetts are described in the following
Chaoter 3 on Local Governments. However, in Massachusetts the
towns or local-level governments control both the leasing and regulation
of shellfish. The above description of Massachusetts represents
a condensation of material in the Massachusetts profile.

V-6R

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Division of Fisheries and Game. (DFG) Full functional responsibility
for anadromous species and for waterfowl and animals. Enforces provisions
of State Inland Fish and Game laws and regulations.

Division of Forests and Parks. (DFP) Responsible for providing technical
assistance to communities and other agencies in the acquisition and
development of marine environment recreation lands.

Division of Law Enforcement. (DLE) Responsible for marine patrol and
rescue assistance within the Commonwealth's waters. This agency is
responsible for the enforcement of all laws, rules, and regulations
relative to marine fish and fisheries.

Division of Conservation Services. (DCS) Serves as a coordinating and
interfacing agency between regional within-State groups and also with
Federal agencies. Responsible for administering policy on preventing
coastal pollution and for preserving biological and zoological systems
as related to coastal wetlands.

Division of Marine Fisheries. (DMF) Charged with management of all marine
fishery resources within the territorial limits of the Commonwealth
except such shellfish and alewife control as has been allocated to the

V-69

cities and towns. The program concentrates on estuarine fisheries
research and on both basic and applied research on shellfish and lobsters,

Division of Water Pollution Control. A recently created agency to
enforce water quality standards.

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

Division of Waterways. (DW) Executive agency responsible for harbor
pollution and for transportation and disposal of refuse at sea. Full
functional responsibility for operation and maintenance of the four
State beaches and for construction of public recreational boating
facilities and for design and construction of shore protection struc-
tures and dredging projects in collaboration with local communities.
Also licensing and permits for all tidewater structures including
fish weirs. Specifically, the division regulates an existing law
concerning the removal of sand and gravel from tidal shores. An amend-
ment to the basic law administered by this division gives the local
governments some authority since they may call hearings upon any
application to remove, dredge, or fill.

Division of Sanitary Engineering. Supervises and controls public
water supplies and sewage disposal systems, and regulates public
health aspects of shellfisheries.

Six activities, DMF, DW , DFG, DFP, DLE, DCS, have well defined areas
of cognizance and cooperate through coordinating committees — the

V-70

Marine Coordinating Committee on Coastal Wetlands and the Recreation Ad-
visory Council within the Department of Natural Resources. The latter
council is composed of representatives of all State agencies and other
recreation-oriented groups. On an overview basis, the Division of Con-
servation Services is the authority responsible for the Act which governs
keeping coastal areas free from pollution and an Act relative to removal,
filling, and dredging in coastal waters. The Division of Waterways,
Division of Sanitary Engineering, and the Division of Water Pollution
Control act in consort to complete the program. The Division of
Marine Fisheries is responsible for identifying what measures
must be taken to protect the fisheries but they do not regulate
or enforce such measures -- the Division of Conservation Services
and its colleagues ostensibly do.

^^

Areas restricted or
in process of beinq
restricted

Fstiiarine Studies
comoleted or in process

FIGURE V.2. 3
Map of Massachusetts Coastline, Showing Restricted-Use Areis

V-72

MARYLAND

The State of Maryland is a political entity which encompasses a portion
of a major estuarine area— the Chesapeake Bay. Maryland also can be
considered as beinq representative of a State having an urban/rural
population mixture with a moderate level of industry and development.

Until July 1969, the Board of Natural Resources acted as the coordi-
nating agency for all public and private activities relating to the
natural resources of the State of Maryland. At that time the Board
was disbanded, and Maryland House Bill No. 1311 (approved April 1969)
created the Department of Natural Resources as a principal department
of the State government to be responsible for carrying out policies
in the area of natural resources research and development, management,
and administration. This department is responsible for the coor-
dination and direction of comprehensive planning in the area of
natural resources. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources is
composed of the previously existing Department of Chesapeake Bay
Affairs, the Department of Game and Inland Fish, Department of Forests
and Parks, Maryland Geological Survey, Department of Water Resources
plus memberships in numerous commissions, committees, and groups
of which the State is a member.

The Maryland Department of Natural Resources has not developed to
its full potential in assuming its broad responsibilities of
coordinating all duties related to natural resources which exist

V-73

in other agencies in the State. Detailed description of the authorized
scope of the Department of Natural Resources is included in the Maryland
House Bill No. 1311, Therefore, this Department's scope has been
briefly described on the basis of the bill and the following discussion
is concerned v/ith the prior and continuously existing activities of
its estuarine-related departments.

The Department of Chesapeake Bay Affairs has the broad responsibility
for planning for the development and management of the Chesapeake Bay
and other tidal waters including protection and development of its
resources.

The Department of Game and Inland Fish is indirectly involved in estuarine
management: issuing hunting, fishing, and other licenses and studying
underwater problems affecting wildlife.

The Department of Forests and Parks is indirectly involved in the
management or control of estuarine areas in that it promotes good forest
management practices on both public and private woodlands, including
those adjacent to tidal waters.

Maryland Geological Survey conducts surveys, prepares maps, conducts
studies and recommends plans to protect waterfront areas against erosion
and deposition.

Department of Water Resources conducts water-resource studies; plans
for multipurpose development of waters; cooperates with Game and Fish

V-74

and Chesapeake Bay Affairs in determining tidal and nontidal v;ater
boundaries: controls use of waters through issuance of permits for
such thinqs as waterworks and waterway obstructions; and cooperates
with other State agencies in enforcing water pollution control laws
and regulations. However, most of the zoning of lands for various uses
is done by the local or county-level governments.

Other previously existing and separate agencies that relate to estuarine
management are the State Planning Department, which prepares plans for
State resource development; Natural Resources Institute of the University
of Maryland which conducts research and education programs on nonagri-
cultural and forest resources; Water Resources Research Center of the
University of Maryland which sponsors research on water resources
development; and State Department of Health which has control over the
sanitary condition of State waters. A selective organizational chart
of the Maryland government is shown in Figure V.2.4.

The State believes that enforcement of water quality standards and
effecting of oollution control is the essential responsibility of the
State. To maintain the generally high water quality of the State and
to provide for future quality control, the State considers that its
responsibility is to expand its ability to perform water quality investi-
gation and control. This is being done with some difficulty in
acquiring needed professional personnel and operational funds.
However, to meet its responsibilities, the State may need more funds --
perhaps from another source. The State has stated the need for

V-75

GOVERNOR

Department of Natural Resources
-Dept. of Chesapeake Bay

Affairs
-Dept. of Game and Inland

Fish
-Dept. of Forests and Parks
-Md, Geological Survey
-Dept. of Water Resources

-State Planning Dept.
-Natural Resources Inst.
of Univ. of Maryland

-Water Resources Research

Center of the Univ. of

Maryland

' — State Dept. of Health

FIGURE V.2.4
Maryland's Agencies Involved in Management or Control of
Estuarine Resources

V-76

research on the effects from discharges at specific locations in
Maryland on established or proposed water uses. On problems as this,
specific research assistance is needed from the Federal agencies.
The State has also stated the need or problem that the State's respon-
sibility for controlling dredging and spoil disposal should be
strengthened in order to prevent loss or damage to established or
proposed water uses. More State-Federal coordination for planning
and effecting the placing of dredge spoil is necessary. In the
general area of coordination, however, this does not seem to have
been a problem and with the newly established coordinating Depart-
ment of Natural Resources even previous capabilities will be
increased and improved.

V-77

CALIFORNIA

The State of California represents a western coastal State that is
hiqhly urban/highly industrial/low rural/highly developed (population,
about 19,000,000). It has an extensive, tidal coastline (about 3,400
miles) that is used for a broad range of purposes and has encountered
a wide range of coastal problems including actual coastal filling
as in San Francisco Bay,

In general, California has title to all submerged lands, tidelands,
and swamplands within its borders and can sell the tidelands and
swamplands.

Estuarine management responsibilities in the State seem to be

focused in the State of California's Resources Agency. This agency

has the primary responsibility for managing the ocean resources of

the State; it has advisory, planning, research, development, coordination,

and policing functions. The agency and its component departments

(as shown in Figure V.2.5) have been assigned specific responsibilities

by the legislature for various elements of the resource. A second

State department involved in estuarine management is the Department

of Public Health. This department is responsible for protection of

shellfish beds against contamination and for the health and safety

of ocean water -- contact-sport areas.

Special marine oriented groups in the State government include the
Interagency Council on Ocean Resources, California Advisory Conwlsslon

V-78

on Marine and Coastal Resources, Marine Research Committee, Wildlife
Conservation Board, and Pacific Marine Fisheries Compact Commission.
In addition, there has been intense management activity in the San
Francisco Bay area. The State realized the importance and impending
dangers in exploration of estuarine resources, especially of San
Francisco Bay, and established a program and commission to study
and develop action plans for the most effective comprehensive management
of the Bay. The State is implementing these recommendations and
the Commission itself through the passage of recent legislation —
The McAteer-Petris Act (as amended in 1969). Because the Commission
can be considered as an intrastate or local government function
it is described and referenced as a case study in the following
chapter on the role of local governments and it is included in the
Current Overall Program, Chapter 7. Other Bay area groups, in addition
to the Commission/program, are the San Francisco Bay-Delta Water
Quality Control Program and the Joint Committee on Bay Area Regional
Organization.

Specifically the responsibilities of the departments in the Resources
Agency are as follows.

Department of Fish and Game has the responsibility for protection,
preservation, propagation, and enhancement of wildlife resources.
It enforces the regulations regarding open and closed seasons, bag
and possession limits, various aspects of both commercial fishing and
sports fish and game, and supervises limited-use marine research zones.

V-70

Department of Parks and Recreation establishes rules and regulations
for administration of beaches, parks, and historical monuments on
State-owned lands. The Department acquires, preserves, develops,
operates, and maintains for the public benefit, the units of the State
park system and is directly interested in how the development and
public use of the State parks, beaches, reserves, recreation areas,
and historical units along the coast may be affected by unrelated
development or use of the tidal and submerged lands.

Department of Water Resources has Statewide jurisdiction and responsi-
bilities relating to development of water resources. In regard to
coastal resources the department has responsibility for beach erosion
control and saline water conversion; studies erosion problems on the
State's beaches; acts as advisors to all government agencies; supervises
Federal flood control projects; and makes loans and grants to local
agencies for water development projects. It assists city and county
governments in beach erosion problems by advancing funds for cooperative
programs with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Department of Conservation is responsible for forest, range, and
watershed protection; assists in formation of soil conservation districts
and in watershed protection and flood prevention programs; and
administers the Forest Practice Act regulating timber harvesting on
private land.

Department of Harbors and Watercraft acquires, constructs, develops.

V-80

and improves small craft harbors, facilities, and connecting water-
ways. The Department must, on request, transfer such a harbor and
its operation to a qualified local governmental unit. It also has
jurisdiction over the establishment of uniform boating regulations
and makes loans and grants to assist in development of small craft
harbors and marinas.

Water Resources Control Board. In 1967, the Legislature enacted a
bill forming the State Water Resources Control Board. This Board,
with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, is the primary
State agency in the field of water rights, water pollution, and water
quality control. The creation of this State Board provides a coor-
dinated administration of water quality and water quantity.

The Board exercises advisory, planning, research, regulation, and
coordination functions. Its principal responsibilities provide for
the formulation and adoption of a Statewide policy for water quality
control, control of water quality and pollution, and administration
of the budgets of the Regional Boards. Each Regional Board is respon-
sible for the formulation and adoption of policies for water quality
control within its respective region; it may order offenders to cease
and desist and initiate legal action.

The State Lands Division, previously under the direction of the
Department of Finance but transferred to the Resources Agency by the
California State Legislature in 1969, handles all matters pertaining

V-81

to the leasing or sale of State-owned (ungranted) tidelands and
submerged lands. It also has an active marine inspection program
and provides the focal point for oil pollution control activities
in the estuaries and coastal waters of California.

In the realm of coordination, the California Comprehensive Ocean
Area Plan, to be developed by the Interagency Council for Ocean
Resources, will be the primary vehicle for coordinating the various
programs concerned with the conservation and development of marine
and coastal resources.

Problems in California center around the need to increase existing
management/organization/legislation to keep pace with the extremely
rapid development of the coastal areas. The preceding information
on the State of California represents a very brief summary of
information in the California profile, which also contains detailed
descriptions of the various problems regarding estuarine management
in the State in regard to both subject area and geographic area.

V-82

GOVERNOR

Dept. of Public Health

Resources Agency

— Dept. of Fish and Came
— Dept. of Parks and

Recreation
— Dept. of Water
Resources
-Dept. of Conservation
•Dept. of Harbors and

Watercraft
-Water Resources Control

Board and Regional Water
Quality Control Boards
I — State Lands Division

FIGURE V.2.5
California's Agencies Involved in fianagement or Control of
Estuarine Resources

V-83
FLORIDA

The following describes the recently augmented estuarine
management framework in Florida which is due in some measure to
the efforts of the National Estuarine Pollution Study through its
30 public meetings held across the country. The estuarine
public meeting in Florida presented a forum whereby various factors
of the community cnuld express publicly their views on the Florida
estuarine situation. These views subsequently reached the legisla-
tive bodies and it is felt that this meeting contributed views which
prompted the Florida Legi-^lature to consider the need for action
to preserve/protect Floridian estuaries.

During 1969, the Florida Legislature created the Florida Department
of Air and Water Pollution Control and reorganized the State Board of
Health as a separate department -- the Department of Health and Rehabil'
itative Services.

In Florida, there seems to be two coordinated and related foci for
estuarine management.

First, the Florida Department of Air and Water Pollution Control
is the primary State agency having the responsibility and authority
for pollution control. Most of the powers, duties, and functions
of other State agencies relating to pollution control, including
those in estuarine areas, were transferred to the Department of Air
and Water Pollution Control (Air and Water Pollution Control

V-84

Commission) by the State legislature through the Florida Air and Water
Pollution Control Act of 1967; this represents a consolidation of
authority and improved coordination in air and water pollution control
activities.

Second, the Board (of Trustees) of the Internal Improvement Fund
ov/ns the title to all State-owned submerged lands in estuaries,
except those that are privately owned (as described in Chapter 67-393,
Acts of 1967). By virtue of ownership, the Board is responsible for
the management, preservation, and administration of these submerged
lands. The Board can sell, based on approved applications, certain
submerged lands after establishment of bulkhead lines by appropriate
counties or municipalities. It can also reject applications for
title to submerged lands (F.S. Ch. 253.12) or for authority to
fill such lands (F.S. Ch. 253.124). The Board approves permits, after
initial approval by cities and counties, authorizing dredging and filling.
However, some lands have been leased or set aside for specific purposes
such as oyster culture, aquatic preserves, and State parks.

Other State departments whose responsibilities relate to estuaries
include those duties which logically fall within their aegis, for
example:

Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services-surveillance
oyster and clam-bearing waters
Dept. of Natural Resources-fisheries and shellfish management
beach erosion cont'-*^''

V-85

development of master plan for commercial and
recreational waterways

waterfowl management

State park administration

seafood quality control

seafood marketing program

marine biological research

ecological and environmental studies of projects
pertaining to sale, modification, and development
of submerged lands
Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services -- surveillance

of seafood quality and watershed management

land conservation and reclamation
Dept. of Transportation -- bridge and causeway construction

(mainly U. S. Army Corps of Engineers function)

An organization chart showing the Florida State agencies whose
responsibilities relate to estuarine management is shown in Figure V.2.6,

Further mechanisms for coordinating agency programs relating to
estuarine management include: arrangements whereby plans of highway
construction or modification are evaluated by the Department of
Natural Resources for the Department of Transportation as to adverse
effects on the marine environment. The Department of Natural
Resources and the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
have a formal coordinating agreement regarding each agency's

V-86

responsibilities in sanitary shellfish control. The Department of
Natural Resources cooperates with the Department of Air and Water
Pollution Control on pollution control programs. The Department
of Natural Resources' Marine Resources Division reports its
findings on the results of ecological and environmental studies of
proposed projects pertaining to the sale, modification, and develop-
ment of submerged lands to the Internal Improvement Fund. Then,
in the 1969 session, the State Legislature passed a bill whereby
the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Air
and Water Pollution Control are to be represented on the Department
of Agriculture and Consumer Services' Pesticide Technical Advisory
Committee.

In brief, Florida being a relatively highly urban, low rural,
highly developed State seems to have the organizational and legisla-
tive basis for the relatively effective management of its estuaries.
The current problems in estuarine resource utilization in the State
seem not to lie in the area of adequate coordination but in the
area of lack of funds and trained field and laboratory personnel to
carry out effective pollution surveillance programs and to conduct
necessary studies to determine effects of various water uses and assess
damages when necessary. A potentially serious problem in estuarine
management lies in the private ownership of thousands of acres of
submerged land including most of the intertidal marshland in the less
urbanized areas of northern Florida.

V-87

GOVERNOR

— Oept. of Air and Water

— Oept. of Health and

Pollution Control

Rehabilitative

— Internal Improvement

Services

Fund

— Dept. of Natural

-— Dept. of Transportation

Resources
Div. of Marine

— Dept. of Agriculture and

Consumer Services

Resources

■

Div. of Game & Fresh

Water Fish

Div. of Recreation

and Parks

FIGURE V.2.6
Florida's Agencies Involved in Management or Control of
Estuarine Resources

V-88

ALASKA

The previously described case studies -- Massachusetts, Florida,
etc. -- represent estuarine-management organizational frameworks of
relatively well established States. The following case study of Alaska
represents a rural and generally light industrial (low development
area) State that is relatively new. Alaska has a longer coastline
than any other State -- 33,000 linear miles -- a small population,
and it is one of three or four political entities in the world that
is bounded by two oceans, four seas, and two foreign nations. There
is phenomenal public awareness and concern about the State's estuarine
areas because more than 90 percent of the population depends on these
areas for their livelihood and/or well-being.

In Alaska, because of the vast coastline, the short production or
working season and small staff capabilities, the management framework
is extremely flexible to allow activities in estuarine areas to be
handled on a need basis, rather than based on a preplanned program.
Since Statehood, Alaska owns its tidal and submerged lands, with
few exceptions. The State cannot sell its tidal or submerged lands
but only leases them - maintaining State ownership and control. A
large majority of the State's adjacent uplands are under Federal
control (parks, preserves, refuges) with cooperative Federal-State
management. Because of the general nonexistence of developed local -level
governments and competencies, estuarine management is focused at the
State level .

V-89

In Alaska's State government, three principal departments are responsible
for management of the estuarine or coastal zones. These are the
Departments of Natural Resources, Health and Welfare, and Fish and
Game; ancillary groups are the Department of Public Works and Water
Resources Board.

The Department of Natural Resources manages the use of the State's natural
resources (water, land, and minerals). Specifically the Department's
activities include the management, disposal, and protection of State
lands (tidal and submerged within the 3-mile limit); water resources;
forestry and mineral resources; issuance of leases and permits on
tidal and submerged lands for development such as for log storage
and rafting; construction of dock facilities; sale, leasing, and issuance
of permits for use of adjacent State-owned uplands and wetlands; and
last but not least, the classification of lands as to their highest
and most beneficial use. The State has initiated this classification -
zoning plan for its tidal and submerged lands as a part of its estuarine
management system. At present, about 50 percent of the lands are
classified for recreational purposes. In any consideration for leasing
and issuance of permits, one of the prime factors is the potential
effects of the proposed use on the ecosystem or fish and game in adjacent
lands. If land is unclassified, then it must be classed for the highest
and most beneficial use before leasing.

The Department of Fish and Game is responsible for managing, protecting,
maintaining, improving, and extending the fish and game resources

V-90

of Alaska. The Department's Environmental Division coordinates the
development of tidal and submerged lands or adjacent waters as they
may affect the fish and game resources. This division is the main
coordinating mechanism among the Department of Natural Resources,
the Department of Fish and Game, and Department of Health and
Welfare -- i.e., a coordinator for estuarine related activities. The
Departments of Fish and Game and Natural Resources also coordinate
their activities related to fish and wildlife through a memorandum
of agreement intended to identify and classify fish and wildlife
habitats for their maximum protection.

The Department of Health and Welfare includes responsibility for the
prevention and abatement of water pollution and for the assurance
of adequate supplies of vjat.er. This department has responsibility
for pollution control.

Ancillary to the above agencies are the Water Resources Board which
consists of a group of private individuals who advise the Governor
on any and all matters pertaining to the State's water resources
(Alaska Statutes Sec. 46.15.210 Art. 3) and the Department of Public
Works which constructs and/or maintains small boat facilities, ferry
sites, and docking facilities. (See Figure V.2.7.)

In addition to the above coordinating mechanisms, the State coordi-
nates activities through the following two agreements. In southeastern
Alaska about 2,000 miles of shoreline are in a National forest. This

V-91

area is managed, and respective activities are coordinated through, an
interagency agreement among the U.S. Forest Service, the Alaska Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, and Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Timber sales are held by the U.S. Forest Service and they issue
permits for all activities such as for log storage and rafting
grounds, only after the plans have been reviewed and approved by
Alaska Fish and Game.

Second, is the Haterfov/1 Protection Agreement. Waterfowl areas on
National forests bordered by tidal and submerged lands are managed
through a Federal-State agreement among the U.S. Forest Service,
Alaska Department of Natural Resources, and Alaska Fish and Game;
no activities are conducted on the lands unless agreed upon by all
three parties.

Problems regarding estuarine management center on the need for more
professional personnel, more funds to enlarge the scope of planning
and classification of estuarine uses, and more comprehensive studies
of estuarine uses. At present, supposedly the tax base is not suf-
ficient to support an adequate staff; however, recent oil discoveries
on the Northern Slooe may drastically change this situation. Also
needed are more precise definitions of territorial/sea boundaries
and more waste disposal facilities.

V-92

nOVERNOR
1

—Water Resources Board

— Department of Health and

Welfare

—Department of Fish and

-Division of Public

Game

Health

-Environmental Division

—Department of Natural

Resources

-Division of Lands

—•Department of Public

Works

FIGURE V.2.7
Alaska's Agencies Involved In Management or Control of
Estuarine Resources

V-93

SECTION 3. A COASTAL STATE'S ORGANIZATION FOR MANAGING
ESTUARINE RESOURCES

The preceding section presents a picture of several selected coastal
State estuarine management frameworks which show the wide range in
management capabilities. Because it is difficult to gain an overview
of the 24 coastal State frameworks, the following description is
presented as a single State-level estuarine management-organization-
legislative framework. It is considered to be analogous to those of
coastal States, and it is intended to show what the average State-level
organization includes. It is neither extremely strong nor very weak.

The analogous State organization consists of an agency such as the
Division or Department of State Lands and Resources which has significant
responsibilities for management provided for by statute.

This agency has responsibility for developing natural resources for
issuing/approving leases for the removal of material from natural
waterways; for granting permits for structures and projects, such as
laying cables on coastal lands; and for selling or leasing the lands
under navigable waters and along State-owned estuarine areas. However,
permits are not required for the disposal of "spoil" into estuarine
areas.

Related to this agency are other agencies whose responsibilities involve

the use of estuarine resources, generally in a particular area, as follows.

The State Fish Commission or Division has the responsibility for the

protection, propagation, and preservation of food fish and for the

V-94

protection and development of commercial fisheries. The Commission
studies, researches, and inventories the marine life and food fish
resources; manages fish hatcheries; sets seasons and regulations on
taking of food fish and marine life; and by intervention, protects
against man-made structures or alterations v/hich adversely affect all
marine life.

The State Game Commission sets seasons, regulations, and licensing
provisions for recreational harvest of sports fish and v/ildlife;
propagates sports fish and wildlife; and studies, researches and
engages in management activities in estuarine waters. By inter-
vention, the Commission advises on all man-caused alterations to the
estuaries of the State.

The State Sanitary or Water Pollution Control Authority exercises
control of estuarine areas with general powers and duties to set
standards of water quality in all waters of the State; enjoins and
abates water pollution; and conducts studies to promulgate specific
water quality standards for each estuary and portions thereof.

The State Parks Division acquires, develops, expands, and manages
all State parks. It protects, preserves, manages, acquires as
necessary, and controls the public beaches of the State. The
State has ownership and the Department exercises jurisdiction for
recreational use of nearly all beaches between extremely low tide
and ordinary high tide.

V-95

The State Marine Board has responsibility for making rules and
regulations necessary for the control and use of boats and watercraft
in the estuarine areas and applicable water uses. The Board licenses
and identifies boats; cooperates with State and Federal agencies
to promote uniform boating laws and their enforcement; assists in
local enforcement of boating law; studies, plans, and recommends
the development of boating facilities throughout the State; publishes
and distributes boating laws; and makes rules and regulations
consistent with the State Sanitary Authority and State Board of
Health.

The Economic Development Division directs a program of planning
and development: serves as a coordinating agency for activities
concerning the resources and economy of the State; assists local
communities in industrial development; researches all aspects
of the State's economy and resources for attracting industry;
and publishes general and technical information.

The State Engineer administers laws regarding distribution and
appropriation of water. The distribution includes the maintenance
of minimum stream flows that have been provided for by policy
statements of the Water Resources Board.

The State Water Resources Board supervises and assists diking
and drainage districts that may be established in the State and
develops coordinated programs for use and control of all the State
waters.

V-96

The State Forestry Department has direct responsibility for forest
protection and conservation on private, county, municipal, and
certain Federal forest lands, with the protection of the watersheds
influencing both the quantity and quality of water in the estuarine
areas.

The State Committee on Natural Resources coordinates resource
management of the State and serves as a forum for establishing
State policy on the protection, development, and use of the State's
resources. Such State committees generally have '^ery small budgets
and/or staffs.

The State Soil and Water Conservation Committee supervises the
soil and water conservation program. All of the estuarine areas
of the State are in local soil and water conservation districts.
Programs are underway with these districts in coastal erosion control

The Port Authorities Association makes technical, administrative,

and industrial studies and reports to show the most appropriate

and practical ways to formulate a Statewide comprehensive plan

for the orderly development of ports and waterways in the State.

All of the above mentioned agencies are provided for by State
Statutes or State Laws, or State Constitution. (See Figure V.2.8.)

Coordination and consultation exist between State agencies and
Federal or nongovernment entities not covered by permit systems,

V-97

laws, or formal arrangements. However, no central coordinating
agency exists to handle the management of the State's estuarine
resources.

Construction of any facility involving navigable waters requiring
a permit from the Corps of Engineers is controlled by consultation
between the Corps and the State agencies involved. Hater policy
of the State is determined by the State Water Resources Board
through a public hearing and determination system involving the
public and all State agencies concerned.

Principal problems existing in the analogous State are in the
area of the need for more coordination of existing activities;
resolution of conflicts regarding ownership of estuarine and upland
areas; clear statement of ownership which is basic to determination
of rights, developments, and erasing of conflicts by wise long-
range planning; comprehensive planning to preserve and provide
for the orderly development of estuaries, with the States taking
the initiative; funds (Federal) to assist the States in long-
range planning and coordination; increased involvement of govern-
ment, industry and all citizens in estuarine planning, development,
and protection; enforcement or strengthening of existing State
laws; establishment of guidelines by the Federal Government for
use by the State to assist in establishing uniform regulations
especially for watercraft; and last but not least, the major need

V-98

is for an orderly improvement program of water quality within the
estuaries, providing broad guidelines allowing for multiuse.

In brief, the analogous or average State management framework
includes capabilities for planning, regulating, and controlling,
at least to some extent, certain uses of estuarine resources,
through the use of restrictive provisions. For example, it can
issue leases for the removal of material from waterways; issue
permits for structures; lease lands under navigable waters; issue
licenses for sport fishing and wildlife; control public beaches;
set water quality standards; issue licenses for boats; and manage
State park lands.

However, what is often lacking is a strong management organization
able to coordinate all estuarine-related activities and able to
produce and implement a Statewide comprehensive management plan
which includes enforceable provisions and regulatory authorities
to control use or modification of the estuarine resources for
the maximum benefit of the population.

V-9Q

Governor
1

Department of State Lands

Division

and Resources

——State Engineer

State Water Resources

State Game Commission

Board

State Forestry

State Sanitary Authority

Department

State Parks Division

Natural

Resources

State Soil and Water

State Marine Board

Conservation

Committee

Port Authorities

Association

FIGURE V.2.8
Analogous State Agencies Involved in Management or
Control of Estuarine Resources

V-100

SECTION 4. STATE ESTUARINE LAWS AND OWNERSHIP PROBLEMS

No uniform State-level estuarine law framework exists; there are,
instead, many laws, often conflicting, which affect the estuarine
zone. The States' estuarine legal system is a confusing and complex
blend of water rights, land ownership claims, use conflicts, and
State, Federal, and local laws which vary from area to area and
are often subject to varying interpretation and constant litigation.
This section briefly discusses the legal aspects of estuarine manage-
ment, in particular ownership problems and State laws; it does not
include a comprehensive survey.

Some fundamental legal questions on estuarine use are (V-2-1):

(1) How much of the estuarine zone is owned by Federal,
State, and local governments and by private parties?

(2) How was ownership acquired (e.g., colonial or legis-
lative grants, adverse possession, condemnation, leases)?

(3) What limitations are there on ownership -- what
rights and privileges does the public have to use estu-
aries and their resources including privately owned lands?

(4) What kinds of legislation and regulatory tools are
constitutional and offer the best framework for management
of the estuarine zone?

V-101
BASIC STATE-LEVEL LEGAL PRINCIPLES

The above questions indicate the variety of legal and policy problems.
However, some basic legal principles and trends can be outlined,
even though their application has varied historically from State
to State. A fundamental doctrine dating from its English common
law origin is that of the public trust and right -- that these
coastal and submerged lands are held by the State in trust to be
used by all the people for certain purposes, such as navigation,
commerce, hunting and fishing, and (more recently) for parLs and
recreation. Public ownership usually includes four types of lands:

(1) submerged lands (beds of navigable waters owned by
the State up to the 3-mile territorial limit) and

(2) tidelands (generally defined as the coastal area
between mean high and low tides).

The extent of the public's right to use and have access is less
clear in the case of

(3) marshlands or swamplands (subject to extremely high
tides) and

(4) abutting lands which are affected by water uses.

Subject to the paramount Federal interest in protecting navigation,
the States generally control the uses of water within their territorial
limits. Under their police power they may regulate pollution,
sewage disposal, control harbor lines, grant fishing and hunting
licenses, and issue boating permits. The land-use prerogatives of

V-102

the State, such as zoning, have usually been delegated to the
municipalities and local governments.

Although held by the State in trust for the public, some tidelands
have been purchased by private owners. However even when sold,
the public has the right of commerce, navigation, and fishing in
these areas. These use rights remain until the area is dredged
or so changed physically that these rights can no longer be exercised,

OWNERSHIP PROBLEMS

In practice, problems of estuarine zone ownership and use rights
abound in e'^ery coastal State. Despite the commonly accepted public
trust doctrine, States can and have transferred ownership to private
individuals by outright grants. Short of purchasing the land,
individuals have acquired rights and more limited interests through
leases, easements, other licenses, and permits. Questionable surveys
and dubious colonial and pre-colonial land grants further complicate
the situation. The private interests who acquired ownership or
use rights often proceeded to "improve" and "develop" the land
through dredging and filling.

Thus, judicial clarification by each State is needed for such owner-
ship questions as — are these titles still valid? Is the sold land
still subject to the public trust? Can the State revoke licenses it
granted and on what grounds?

SUBMERGED LANDS: STATES VS. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Several court decisions and Congressional acts have failed to
settle definitely the question of Federal vs. State jurisdictions
over submerged lands, minerals, and ocean islands. In 1947, in
U. S. vs. California (332 U.S. 1947), the Supreme Court ruled
that the Federal Government and not the State had paramount rights
in the submerged lands and oil found under it in offshore navigable
waters. This displacement of State regulatory authority in the
3-mile belt off the coastline was subsequently applied to Louisiana
and Texas by the Court. The Supreme Court's decision in issuing
this opinion states that:

"California is not the owner of the 3-mile marginal
belt along its coast, and . . . the Federal Government
rather than the State has paramount rights in and power
over that belt, an incident which has full dominion
over the resources of the soil under that water area,
including oil ."

To offset these so-called tideland-oil rulings. Congress passed the
Submerged Lands Act of 1953 which generally gave the States title
to the lands, minerals, and other resources underlying the navigable
waters within 3 miles off the coast; beyond that it v/as under
Federal jurisdiction. Nevertheless, this law failed to clarify several
questions of ownership, taxation, and regulation. For example,
how the seaward boundary or island waters are defined is unclear.

V-104

Litigation has attempted to settle the question of measurement
from artificial jetties and in relation to river deltas and islands.
There is, however, still some jurisdictional uncertainty over
the submerged lands surrounding some islands and over man-made
lands and emerging islands.

A supplemental Decree of the U. S. Supreme Court in 1966 established
California's offshore ownership boundary line. The ownership
boundary extends 3 geographical miles seaward from the coastline.
Much difficulty is associated with the establishment of the exact
location of this line. In addition to the problem of establishing
the line, the base line for measuring the State's boundary is
the "outermost permanent harbor works." Disputes have arisen over
the interpretation of this phrase. Another problem has to do
with the State's seaward boundary in the Channel Islands area
off the southern California coast. These jurisdictional problems
are extremely important for planning and management of the coastal
area and financially, because of royalties from oil leases and
other developments of the submerged lands.

These difficulties point up the need for an organization to handle
such boundary disputes on a national level or a higher-than-State
level. This need has also been expressed by the Panel (on Management
and Development of the Coastal Zone of the Commission on Marine
Science, Engineering and Resources) in their recommendation that
a National seashore boundary commission be established by the Congress

V-105

with authority to hear and determine coastal boundary questions
and controversies involving proprietary interests of the States.

In addition, the Supreme Court was asked in June 1969 to rule on a

dispute betv/een the Federal Government and the thirteen Atlantic States

over title to offshore lands (Docket No. 35 original, 37 Law Week 3483).

These States claim that for the purposes of granting leases and

collecting royalties for oil exploration and production, and

on the basis of colonial charters granted by the British Government

before the Constitution was adopted, their authority extends up

to 100 miles on to the Outer Continental Shelf. Texas and Louisiana

have also asserted jurisdiction beyond the 3-mile zone in another

unresolved dispute.

DIVERSITY OF STATUTES AMONG STATES

A survey of intergovernmental relations in the coastal zone disclosed

that: (V-3-2)

"State statutes establishing distinctions between public
resources and private property and the extent of State
responsibility for management of public resources have
little in the way of uniformity. Even if legislatively
clear, the distinctions are difficult to fix on the
ground. The resulting situation is a legal nightmare."

In effect there is a separate legal system for each coastal State and

V-106

management programs for the States must take each of them into
consideration. A broad range of estuarine zone policies are affected
by some of these interstate variations:

(1) Basic Water Laws -- Eastern States follow the riparian
doctrine, in which water rights are tied to ownership

of adjoining or underlying land. Western States generally
accept the first-in-time, first-in-right appropriation
doctrine in which rights are acquired or abandoned by
use. Unlike riparian law, priority in time determines
water rights, independent of land ownership. To complicate
matters further. States on the Pacific recognize both
these rights while Louisiana accepts elements of the
Napoleonic Code.

Water law does not closely control water use. For example,
under riparian law, water should be free from "unreasonable"
pollution so that "reasonable" use may be made of it.
Yet the interpretation and application of these water
rights affect the type of improvements and accretions
that may be made by riparian owners, such as reclaiming
land, constructing piers, or removing sand and gravel.

(2) Tideland Boundaries -- a majority of States claim
ownership under English common law from the high water

mark seaward to the 3-mile limit, but, there are significant
variations. Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Delaware,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Georgia permit private land

V-107

to the low water mark. Thus, in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland
claims all the coastal land from the mean high tide mark
while Virginia asserts its ownership only from the mean
low tide.

Standards of measurement also frequently differ. Louis-
iana measures from the highest winter tide and Texas
from the mean higher tide. Further complications arise
from the fact that, even if precise and standardized
measurements are used, tidal characteristics vary from
coast to coast.

(3) Outer Limits Claims -- While State territorial
boundaries are generally considered to extend only out
to 3 miles, some States exert claims to waters beyond
this limit, Louisiana, for example, claims up to 27
miles and Texas up to the outer edges of the Continental
Shelf.

(4) Extent of Delegated Powers -- Most States delegate
the responsibility for the use of land above the high
water mark to their municipalities and counties. However,
a few like Hawaii stress Statewide zoning and reserve
this prerogative to the State. In general, there is a
wide variation in the extent of home rule granted by

each State to its localities.

In conclusion, the boundaries of private property in tidelands

V-108

vary from State to State. Almost each State differs from Its
neighbor in how it defines and interprets such basic units and
concepts as submerged lands, navigability, tidelands, marshlands,
and abutting lands.

REGULATORY POWERS OF THE STATES

Under their police powers, the States can legislate for the protection
or promotion of public health, safety, moral, or for the general
good. This attribute of sovereignty enables the States to regulate
the use of estuarine zone, land, and waters and to control the
actions of individuals upon them. Despite the many variations
among States, the basic Constitutional doctrines which allow them
to create and enforce property rights for use and transfer can be
outlined along with some important limitations on this power.

Among the legislative tools which can be utilized in estuarine
management are the following:

(1) a declaration of public rights, such as access;

(2) zoning or allocation and use controls, usually
delegated to the local subdivision;

(3) taxation, used preferrentially for estuarine
preservation;

(4) development easements, or the purchasing of partial
public rights; and

(5) eminent domain.

V-109

Yet there are limits to these broad State powers. First, the

supremacy clause of the Constitution may prevent the State from

acting in an area where the Federal Government through its interstate

commerce and treaty-making powers has preempted the field. Secondly,

the establishment of estuarine rule-making bodies may occasionally

be subject to attack as an improper or invalid delegation of legislative

authority.

Third, procedural due-process may invalidate State actions that
are taken without notice and/or the opportunity to have hearings
before the affected parties.

Also, the equal protection doctrine requires the government to

act fairly in treating all alike without arbitrary or discriminatory

classifications.

Finally, and most controversial, substantive due-process, not allowing
any property to be taken without just compensation, can be interpreted
to disallow use restrictions that may deprive or damage property
owners. Courts vary in their interpretation of the States' police
power and the extent to which they will permit use restrictions
without declaring them to amount to a taking of property without
due compensation. It is particularly unclear if a State can repeal,
modify, or deprive private owners of their future improvement
rights. Especially in the case of fill control, there are few
yardsticks as to what compensation or fair return must be allowed

V-110

an owner. The variation in dredge-and-fill regulations among
the coastal States is indicated in the following Table V.2.2.
It also points out the States which apparently do not have a State-
level regulatory permit system for dredge-and-fill operations.

Most State laws are considered to be legitimate exercises of the
police power under a presumption of validity, although there have
been some significant exceptions to this rule. Thus, to avoid
involved litigation and possible annulment. State laws must be
carefully drafted to avoid being successfully contested on the
above grounds.

MODEL STATUTE GUIDELINES

Many of the coastal States expressed a need for guidelines for
assistance, especially from the Federal Government, for the develop-
ment of adequate or strengthened regulations for the use control
of resources in estuarine areas, or portions thereof.

In response to this call for assistance, the National Estuarine

Pollution Study, through a contract awarded to the University

of Maryland School of Law, developed a Model Statute for Chesapeake

Bay Basin Management. The Chesapeake Bay was selected for this

project because it possesses many characteristics, benefits, potentials,

and problems which are common to many other estuarine areas of the

United States. The model statute, developed under this contract,

is included in the following Chapter 9 of this Part V of the report.

i

v-in

TABLE V.2.2
State-Level Regulatory Systems for Dredge-and-Fill in Coastal Areas

State

Yes

No

Partial

Alabama

X

Alaska

X

California

X

Connecticut

X

Delaware

X

Florida

X

Georgia
Hawaii

X
X

Louisiana

X

Maine

X

Maryland
Massachusetts

X
X

Mississippi

New Hampshire
New Jersey

X
X

X

New York

X

North Carolina

X

Oregon

X

Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

X
X

South Carolina

X

Texas

X

Virginia

X

Washington

X

Virgin Islands

X

District of Columbia

X

Puerto Rico

X

V-112

The statute is considered to be applicable in principle to other
estuarine areas of the United States, and it is presented as
suggested guidelines which could be tailored by the coastal States
to meet their needs in important estuarine areas in order to improve
or strengthen their management capabilities. Of course, it is recog-
nized that some States have made significant progress in this direction.
Such guidelines were developed on the basis of a selected geographic
area (Chesapeake Bay) merely to insure an element of reality and
practicality rather than a purely theoretical approach. Therefore,
these guidelines do not imply the need for action by the governing
States, but merely a response to an expressed need.

SUMMARY OF STATE ESTUARINE-RELATED LAWS

State governments are both owners and regulators of the estuarine
zone. They generally have sufficient legal and constitutional
authorities to act. Yet in practice, most State Laws. are ineffective;
they are sorely out-of-date and need updating, revision, and a basic
reorientation towards comprehensive management and regulation of
estuarine resources.

At their worst. State laws affecting estuaries are rudimentary,
antiquated, and fragmented. There may be laws dealing with water
quality or land zoning but they are uncoordinated and sometimes
inconsistent with each other.

V-113

On the other hand, some States have adequate laws which touch

upon estuaries but they fail to focus on the estuarine zone as

a unit and deal with fragments and pieces of the total picture.

Thus, a State may have a law to control dredging or filling or

regulate leasing and sale of public lands or the construction

of harbor and marina facilities and yet fail to develop a comprehensive

estuarine management policy for optimum use. Further, they may

fail to use effectively or enforce the laws that they have.

With the increasing concern over the future of the estuarine zone,
there has beien a gradual change from general oermissiveness towards
greater government planning and control. A few States have begun
to use the full array of tools already available in a total,
coordinated manner for estuarine conservation and development --
use control through planning, a less than full fee interest, permits
and licenses, and favorable tax treatment. Here, too, the Federal
Government can encourage State planning and coordination of the
operations of several interrelated aqencies dealing with water
quality standards, economic development, recreation, and conservation.
One of the best means toward this end are the grants for State
planning under Section 701 of the 1954 Housing Act (40 U.S.C. 461).

The Commonwealth of ^Massachusetts is probably farther along the
way toward optimum estuarine management. First it enacted a stop-
gap law, the 1963 Coastal Dredge and Fill Act (Mass. Gen. Laws
Ch. 130, Section 27A, 1963) which gave the Director of Marine

V-114

Fisheries 14 days notice to impose protective conditions on the
permit he issues. Hov/ever, to allow for the long-range planning
and optimal resource evaluation and allocation, the Massachusetts
Coastal Wetlands Protection Act was enacted November 23, 1965
(Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 130, Section 105, 1965). This law authorized
the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources to promulgate
orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting alteration or pollution
of Massachusetts' coastal wetlands. Alarmed by a report (V-2-3)
which stated that 43 percent of the remaining wetland acreage
was subject to alteration and destruction in the near future,
the Legislature permitted these lands to remain privately owned,
but allowed the Commissioner to restrict their use. Such use
restriction orders may be adopted only after holding a public
hearing in the municipality in which the affected wetlands were
located. It is still too early to assess fully the implementation
of this Act but its effectiveness as a legal tool for estuarine
management has been widely praised (V-2-4).

Another approach towards land use has been taken by the State
of Hawaii. Recognizing that land use is a policy power of the
State, it has not delegated this authority to its local subdivisions.
Rather it has adopted a zoning system to promote Statewide and
regional goals to protect its invaluable aesthetic and natural
resources.

V-115

Finally, the State of Wisconsin has adopted a Shoreline Zoning
Act which, although Wisconsin is not a coastal State, could be
applied to the estuarine zone of coastal States. Under this Act,
the State sets standards for "country" zoning of unincorporated
areas as well as broad objectives such as the prevention and control
of water pollution plus the protection of fish and aquatic life
and natural beauty. Further, the State is directed to adopt its
own ordinance for counties that fail to enact or meet minimum
objectives or standards. The State has also issued a model ordinance
and planning guide which designates three zoning areas -- conservancy
districts, recreational areas, and general purpose zones (V-2-5).

Adoption and adaptation of the Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Hawaii,
or model approaches to State zoning and/or use control would
eliminate piecemeal estuarine zone planning and lead to optimum
management and development in the public interest.

V-116

SECTION 5. EVALUATION OF COASTAL STATE FRAMEWORKS

An evaluation of the overall coastal State picture of estuarine
management reveals a pattern or trend that is quite bleak. However,
some coastal States have made significant progress towards effective
estuarine management.

In the realm of organization, each coastal State has some type
of mechanism, capabilities, or organizational framework directed
towards estuarine management. But most of these frameworks
are, unfortunately, inadequate, not effectively coordinated,
not strong enough, or not adequately staffed nor financed. Tliose
States, which seem to be making a definite attempt to handle
their estuarine management capabilities, have a central organ-
izational/coordinational focal point. A primary factor in the
organizational format is that the effective ones are placed
high enough in the State structure so that they can operate
efficiently and not be overburdened by needless bureauocratic
delays. But this focal point cannot exist alone. It is only a
first step tov/ards estuarine management. Second, the policy
dictated and effected by this central agency must be in accordance
with, and supported by, a Statewide comprehensive estuarine
management plan. The plan must be approved by the State and
it must consider all aspects of the use, development, and protection
of the estuarine resources for the maximum possible benefit
of the populace, not only in the State but also in the region

v-n7

affected by the resource. Third, the comprehensive plan must
include sufficiently strong regulatory authorities -- licensing,
permits, leasing, and restrictive use provisions -- so that the imple-
mentation of the plan by the central agency will be truly effective.
The effective tying together of these three points (organization-
plan-authority) depends on coordination.

THE ORGANIZATION

Details on the structure of the States' central organizational
focal points can be gained from the preceding case studies.
The specific structure would, of course, vary with the size,
scope, development, population, political atmosphere, and financial
capabilities of the particular State. No one organizational
format can be presented as being representative of all the
coastal States; nor should one type of format be imposed on
all of them.

Fanning out from an organizational entity are the various other
State agencies which have responsibilities dealing with particular
aspects of estuarine management; for example, the fish and wildlife
agency issues hunting and fishing permits, the park service
manages the State parks, and the oort authorities handle the harbors
These individual agency responsibilities are generally not,
and need not be, merged or included in the specific estuarine
organization. This would often create additional difficulties

V-118

and needless duplication, because estuarine activities cut
across all facets of a coastal State government. However to
be effective these individual responsibilities and activities
must be effectively and efficiently coordinated through a consci-
entious sptHtof cooperation. More often than not, these activities
are not sufficiently coordinated. .

THE PLAN

The State organizational entity, when effective, is backed up by
and empowered to develop, approve, and/or implement a comprehensive
Statewide estuarine management plan or concept. In respect to these
management plans, the States generally do not have approved compre-
hensive Statewide management plans to guide or provide a basis for
the activities of the organizational framework. When existent they
are often \jery flexible, nebulous, incomplete, confusing, and rely
more on the individual experts to solve problems, as they arise,
than on preplanning.

THE REGULATIONS

The comprehensive management plan and the corresponding organiza-
tional entity, when existent, are empowered or strengthened, directly
or indirectly through coordination mechanisms, by regulations, pro-
visions, statutes, and orocedures for use control either through
zoning, acquisition, restrictive covenants, or State ownership
of submerged lands. This lack of organizational frameworks.

V-119

coordination, planning, and regulatory authorities is evidenced by
the plight of our coastal areas and by the numerous responses
from coastal States for the varied types of Federal assistance and
coordination as described in the following section. Details on the
range of State laws, which also vary based on the characteristics
of the State can be gained from the preceding discussion of State
estuarine laws. In general the coastal States either have confus-
ing laws and statutes; have regulations that are inadequate, weak,
or incomplete and need the passage of additional ones or the
strengthening of existing ones; or they do not dynamically enforce,
coordinate, or implement the regulations that are adequate and
could be effective. As evidenced by Table V.2.2 included in the
preceding section on State laws, there is a surprising lack of
dredge-and-fill regulations in the coastal States -- a basic use/
destruction control technique.

In many coastal States, zoning responsibilities have been delegated
to the local-level governments but are often not adequately
supervised/coordinated by the State level, possibly because of the
general absence of comprehensive management planning.

COORDINATION

In the realm of coordination, coastal States use the following
mechanisms to coordinate their estuarine-related programs such as
highway construction, pollution control, and various beneficial
uses:

V-120

(1) comprehensive review and/or approval of licensing or
leasing applications by multiple agencies;

(2) holding of public investigatory forums attended by
various representatives;

(3) conduct of a coordination/arbitration/reconciliation
agency such as natural resources or public health agency;

(4) establishment of written agreements providing for
coordination of activities -- interstate, intrastate, and
Federal ;

(5) membership by various agencies on a coordinating board
or commission or the like; and

(6) development of a comprehensive management plan that
provides the guidelines for activities and actions by all
appropriate agencies and amounts to a coordination mechanism.

Table V.2.3 shows the distribution among selected coastal States of
coordination mechanisms. More often than not, coordination is not
adequate among intrastate agencies, nor is it adequate or truly
effective between the Federal and State level components.

The problems, which abound in almost every coastal State pertain
to shortcomings in ability to accomplish their programs. These
shortcomings center around the need for a central, strong operation-
al/coordinating management organization, placed high enough in the
State government to be effective; the need for the development
and implementation of a comprehensive management plan, approved by

V-121

TABLE V.2.3
State Level Coordinating Mechanisms of Selected Coastal States

States

Licensing
Review

Invest.
Forum

Coord.
Agency

Agree-
ments

Coord .
Board

Manage-
ment Plan

Alaska

X

X

California

X

X

X

Florida

X

Georgia

X

Maryland

X

X

Massachusetts

X

X

X

X

X

iJorth Carolina

X

X

Pennsylvania

X

X

Washington

X

. ,

V-122

the State; and the development, passaqe, and enforcement of restric-
tive use regulations and provisions plus the need for assistance in
five areas: technical, scientific, legal, administrative, and last,
but not least, additional funding of estuarine-related activities.
For this assistance and coordination the States look to the Federal
Government (as detailed later in this chapter) but first, they
must fully utilize their own capabilities.

In an evaluation such as this it is very easy to let details and
complexities overshadow and even obliterate the basic concept. A
simple, though often and easily forgotten basic concept or common
denominator in estuarine management, is that if estuarine uses are
not controlled, regulated, planned, or guided, then the undaunted
exploitation, by whomever happens to be there, continues and the
estuaries are not managed for the maximum benefit of the population;
this is against the public interest. As expected, the States consider
it to be their responsibility to control their estuarine uses. How-
ever, if this responsibility is not adequately assumed by the States
then the responsibility to prompt them into action must emanate from
a source other than their own initiative -- in this case, the
Federal Government. The chance that the responsibilities for man-
aging the estuaries would revert to the local level are highly
remote because generally local governments have fewer capabilities
than State-level governments. It follows then that if the respon-
sibilities cannot be assumed by the State government they also

V-123

cannot be assumed by the local level. Therefore, the States them-
selves must act, and act quickly, to develop adequate capabilities to
assume their responsibilities of forestalling further degradation
of our estuarine resources.

V-124

SECTION 6. STATES' VIEWS ON COMPREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT.

HOW OPINIONS WERE OBTAINED

To help develop a true picture of the opinions and expressions of the
States on the comprehensive management of the estuarine zone, the
coastal States were queried directly through several routes. The
National Estuarine Pollution Study staff directly and through its
regional representatives asked the estuarine study representatives
(appointed by the Governor) of each coastal State "What were the
States' views on the composition and management of the comprehensive
National programs?" The responses were received via several routes:
incorporated in the State profile, prepared and/or reviewed by the
States; by correspondence received directly from the Governor, his
assistant or the State's estuarine representative; and/or by state-
ments included in the record of the 30 estuarine public meetings, held
in the various sectors of the Nation and attended by several thousand
people. Other sources included State-prepared reports, special study
(contractor) reports, and miscellaneous study documents.

The result of all these responses was a mass of information containing
an extremely wide range of ideas; however, there were some prevailing
ideas. The following discussion constitutes a summary of the high-
lights of these responses, which are being recorded and preserved sep-
arately from this report for future reference, study, use and updating.

V-125

SPECTRUM OF INTEREST

To organize and analyze the mass of information, it was necessary to
develop a span of interest or a scheme for categorizing the various
viewpoints of the States regarding the Federal-State-local management
interplay. All of the viewpoints fell into one of three categories:

(1) Federal -State-Local Partnership for Estuarine
Management,

(2) State Ownership/Management of Estuarine Resources
with Federal Assistance, and

(3) Autonomous State Management.

Over 91 percent of the coastal States' responses fell in the second
category. The coastal States want to own/manage their own estuarine
resources but with a wide range of Federal assistance -- technical,
legal, scientific, administrative, and financial. Federal assistance
does not necessarily mean only funds or financial sunport. Numerous
States want advice, counsel, and guidance as to what they should do.
Many States have the mechanics for managing the estuaries but often
they are either not being used or not used effectively or coordinated.
The States are asking for Federal assistance in interstate and intra-
state matters, in order to assume effectively their expressed estuarine
management responsibilities. This includes the concept that there
are many administrative, technical, and research areas of a national
nature that each State cannot, or probably should not cope with, or
possibly should not be expected to cope with, such as the management

V-126

of estuarine resources that have a regional or national impact
that extends beyond the States' boundaries. From another viewpoint
the States often have State-oriented vision -- while the Federal
Government can provide the national -scope overview. States can
profit from others' experience through coordination at the Federal
level.

Based on the general consensus of the State views, the following
discussion presents the details, expressed by the States, regarding
their ownership/management of estuarine resources with Federal
assistance.

ROLE OF FEDERAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
INTERESTS, VIEWED BY THE STATES

The coastal States believe that the Federal Government's primary
role is to provide assistance to the States in conducting their
activities related to the management of estuarine resources.

In general, the States expressed the viewpoint that the Federal
Government should provide a wide range of assistance; this was
grouped into five categories as follows: financial, scientific,
technical, legal, and administrative assistance (Table V.2.4).

The provision of financial assistance from the Federal Government
to the States should, according to the States, include the funding
of grants-in-aid for construction; funding of development and conduct
of State, interstate, and regional activities; and funding for land

V-127

TABLE V.2.4
States' Views as to Desired Federal Assistance

Coastal
States

Suggest

:ed Types of Federal Assistance

Financial

Scientific

Technical

Legal

Admin.

Alabama

Alaska

California

*

*

*

*

*

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

*

*

*

*

Georgia
Hawai i
Louisiana

*
*

*
*

*
*

*
*

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

*
*
*

*
*

*
*

*

Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey

*
*

*
*

*

*

New York
North Carolina
Oregon

•

*
*

*
*

*

Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina

*

*

*

*

Texas

Virginia

Washington

*
*

*
*

Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
District of Columbia

*
*
*

V-128
acquisition. Perhaps the Federal Government should allow bonus

points as an incentive to States in implementing adequate estuarine

management.

The Federal Government should provide scientific assistance to the
States in the form of:

(1) conducting demonstration projects to prove the reliability
and dependability of pollution control devices or techniques,
the testing of which would be too costly and would involve

too much of a risk for an individual State to undertake;

(2) defining restraints on multipurpose uses;

(3) supporting or conducting wide-range programs including
research/study that is beyond the scope of individual
States (examples would be waste and water discharge rates
and so forth); in addition the Federal Government should
publish the resulting reports to adequately inform the States
of the usable results;

(4) reviewing Federally aided and licensed projects;

(5) regrouping of water classes to answer area needs; and

(6) scientific assistance in the form of managing interstate
estuaries, especially in regard to research on physical and
earth sciences, engineering, and biological problems.

Types of technical assistance that should be provided, or continue
to be provided, to the States by the Federal Government include:

V-129

recommendations as to ostuarine systems and plans; provision of
model statutes and suggested comprehensive management plans; recom-
mendations for State standards and guidelines for tidal waters;
coordination of interstate studies with State plans; coordination
of estuarine programs; development of investigatory techniques,
specifically in aerial mapping; development and provision of training
programs to provide qualified individuals to manage the diverse
aspects of estuarine resources; and assistance in defining, investi-
gating, and solving water pollution problems. Several mentioned the
need for more waste treatment equipment operators.

In the area of legal assistance some States are not able to maintain
adequate counsel and witnesses for the multitude of legal problems
involving jurisdiction and ownership of estuarine areas and especially
the definition of tidal boundaries in interstate areas. In these
cases. Federal coordination in the form of legal assistance to the
States is needed. States may need expert legal advice from. lawyers
specializing in special water laws to assist them in dealing with
specific problems; however, the States may not be able to justify
the retention of such impartial expert counsel, while? the Federal
Government can and should provide such help on request.

Last, administrative assistance is needed by the States from the
Federal level. This would includo increased cooperation, coordination,
and backing at the Federal level to facilitate ai'i to States; provision
of trained specialists or consulting exoerts to assist States in

V-130

handling specific problems that do not morit the retention of such
specialists on the payroll; and provision of advice and support
on administrative matters involving innlementatiori of organizations
and plans to handle estuarine management, such as adequate data
processing systems, and assistance on mechanics of planning and
setting up appropriate organizations.

The concept of Federal cooperation, coordination, advice, counsel,
and backing to the States can be very critical and essential in
those geographic areas where the estuarine resources have a regional
even national impact that extends far beyond the States' borders;
examples would be: the Cane Cod-Provincetown-Plymouth Rock area of
'lew England, the flew Jersey-f'aryland beaches, the Florida sands,
San Francisco 3av, the Louisiana and Mississippi miaratory routes
(flyways) and the Hawaiian Isles. The effective rational management
of such national ir-^act ar^as must include a consideration of the
national use and preservation which is above and beyond the: State-
wide concept. In some cases, responsible State plans that consider
the national viewpoint may have difficulty in being passed and imple-
mented by the State-level ocvernment and population because of their
reluctance to shoulder the financial turdens and responsibilities
for the pleasures of the Nation. In such situations, it does not
seem altogether equitable to expect the States to shoulder the entire
burden, and thus the Federal Government should have available the
capabilities to provide coordination, assistance, advice, counsel,

V-131

and general backing to insure a national management overview of
State resources that have a national or regional impact.

Thus the Federal Government should provide, according to the States,
increased coordination of its capabilities to assist the State
in essentially any problem area that may arise in regard to manage-
ment of their estuarine resources and to assist the States in find-
ing the appropriate agency, program, mechanism, or procedure among
the widely diversified estuarine-related programs of the numerous
Federal agencies.

This viewpoint of the State (that the Federal Government should
provide increased Federal-State coordination, especially in areas
that are beyond the scope of the coastal States) relates to the
recommendations in the Panel Reports, of the Commission on Marine
Science, Engineering and Resources (V-2-6). As recommended in the
Panel Report, the Commission recommends that a

"... National seashore boundary commission, judicial
in nature, be established by the Congress with authority
to hear and determine seashore boundary questions and
controversies involving proprietary interests of the
States under Federal grants to them, using present
principles of coastal boundary determination. Such a
commission should have the following characteristics
and authority:
"The Congress should give its consent to State suit

V-132

against the United States, permitting States to initiate
boundary cases before the commission,
"Jurisdiction of the Commission should be limited to
boundary questions between the States and the United
States, involving proprietary interests of the States
under Federal grants to them.

"Lines determined by the commission or by the Supreme
Court of the United States after an appeal would be
fixed oermanently. Such stablilization should apply
only to ownership of submerged lands or resources, not to
general political jurisdiction and authority. Authority
to regulate mineral lease operations should be stabilized
at the property line so determined and fixed."

The general consensus of States' views regarding the role of local-
level governments is that in most cases there are not, at present,
sufficient local organizations to handle estuarine management
responsibilities and that the people at the local level, i.e.,
county, cannot support such an organization. However, whenever
possible the local-level organization should be promoted and built
up so that it can adequately handle the local government aspects of
the State's overall comprehensive management plan for the estuaries.
Local governments are often too susceptible to economic pressures
and political influences in respect to estuarine development to
enable them to manage the estuarine areas not only for the good

V-133

of the county but also for the good of the State; thus they should
rely on implementation of the Statewide comprehensivo management
plans. Of course, there are notable exceptions to this, such as
in New York, California, and Massachusetts. A complete discussion
of the roles and capabilities of local-level governments is contained
in the following Chapter 3 on local governments.

The primary role of public and private interests, as viewed by the
States, is to support in each and every v/ay possible the comnrehen-
sive management plan of the State. Without the complete cooperation
of the citizenry, a comprehensive management plan cannot be effective
and thus cannot effectively protect the estuarine resources.

THE STATES' ROLE — AS VIEWED BY THE STATES

The overwhelming response from essentially all the coastal States
was that they should manage their own estuarine zones; some of these
responses were even, surprisingly, vehemently expressed. The remain-
ing responses expressed by one or more States seemed to fall into
five broad categories: State land ownership; cooperation/coordina-
tion of Statewide activities; State development of new comprehensive
management plans; strengthening/enforcing of existing State use
regulations,, controls, and standards; research/study; and State use
control (Table V.2.5).

Because of their unique colonial legislative prerogatives, three
States in particular own their estuarine (coastal zones): Hawaii,

V-134

TABLE V.2.5

Brief Table of Viewpoints Expressed by Coastal States

as to Their Role and Responsibilities

State

State

Estuarine

Mgt.

Land
Owner-
ship

Coord.

of
Activ.

Develop

New Mgt.

Plan

Stronger
Controls and
Regs, on Use

Res.

&

Study

State

Contr.

Uses

Alabama
Alaska

*
*

•

•

California
Connecticut

*

*

•

Delaware
Florida

*
*

*

Georgia
Hawaii

*

*

*

Louisiana
Maine

*
*

*

Maryland
Massachusetts

*
*

*

*

*
*

*

Mississippi
New Hampshire

*

*

New Jersey
New York

*

North Carolina
Oregon

*
*

*

*

*

*

Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

*

South Carolina
Texas

*
*

*
*

*

*

*

Virginia
Washington

*

*

*

*

*

Puerto Rice
Virgin Islands

*
*

*

V-135

Texas, and Alaska. Of course, they believe strongly in State
ownership of estuarine lands. Certain other States that are
relatively well developed -- such as Massachusetts, California,
and Connecticut -- believe in and are engaged in, ownership
through acquisition by use of State funds or Federal grants.

Many of the States viewed coordination of all estuarine activities
as their prerogative and also stated that cooperation/coordination
of Federal-State-local-nrivate programs was an essential element
of effective estuarine management that was often sorely lacking.
Some States believed that they should coordinate the Federal and
private activities in their area especially because they had a
better on-site overall view of the area situation than the view
from the Nation's Capitol or Federal level.

However, should a State be expected to view impartially its
estuarine resources that are an area-wide asset without national
support? For example, the fJew Jersey beaches or Florida sands
are enjoyed by the population far beyond each State. Their effec-
tive management involves consideration of regional significance
instead of just Statewide impact. Some States even alluded to
the view that more effective intrastate coordination would nullify
the need for additional regulations and legislation, or even
organizations.

Akin to the States' view of estuarine management was the view-
point that they should develop a Statewide estuarine management

V-136

plan, variously termed, and an effective mechanism for enforcing
it. Principally, such a plan should provide for State control of
estuarine uses; that the States should control estuarine uses was
definitely a prevailing viev/. A management organization to imple-
ment the plan should be placed high enough in the State level
governmental structure so that its recommendations and actions to
control estuarine uses can be effectively heard and heeded. However,
the mechanism or organization may consist principally of a coordi-
nation technique, because a separate estuarine organizational
entity would cut across numerous existing organizational respon-
siblities and probably needlessly duplicate existing delegated
tasks.

Numerous States recommended that effective State management and
State use control could be achieved by strengthening and enforcing
existing use regulations and controls, such as strengthening dredg-
ing and spoil controls, and enforcing v/ater quality standards
applicable to tidal waters. The essential point was that the States
should control/requlate estuarine uses or multiple uses.

Other States took the opposite, though related, view that the State
needed to develop new regulations, controls, and provisions, such
as the development of zoning plans on a Statewide basis, to govern
estuarine areas. However, in general this view is essentially the
same as the preceding one because States that do not have adequate
estuarine RBnagement provisions should develop them and those States

V-137

that already have them should enforce/strengthen them to control
the uses of cstuarine areas for the mutual maximum benefit for
all aspects of the copulation.

Last, but not least, several States believed that they should
conduct area studies/research but restrict them to solving problems
that exist in the local area. Research and study needs as defined
not only by the States but also from numerous other sources, are
elaborated separately in Part VI, Chapter 3.

In summary, the States believe they should manage and control the
use, mainly through ownership or restrictive covenants, of estuarine
areas. This should be done through an efficiently coordinated
State-level management organization, to implement a Statewide
comprehensive plan that is supportable or backed up by sufficiently
strong regulations and needed research/studies designed to solve
problems pertinent to the particular needs of the management organi-
zation and the corresponding estuarine resources.

V-138

SECTION 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

An overview of the coastal States' management framework reveals the
following conditions in many areas. Many management organizations
and systems are individualistic, uncoordinated, piecemeal, and short-
range. Often they are burdened by noncomprehensive planning and
development. In turn, the planning and development is often backed
up by inadequate, confusing, not sufficiently enforced, fragmented
legislation and statutory regulations.

In contrast, the coastal States have the following general views
with respect to their estuarine responsibilities:

(1) The States should manage their own intrastate
estuarine (coastal) areas.

(2) They should control or determine the uses of the
estuaries, for example by zoning plans, development of
preserves or "parks," or other restrictive use regulations.

(3) They should develop, where nonexistent, a comprehensive
State estuarine management plan, often by the development
or strengthening of State legislation.

(4) They should promote effective coordination and coopera-
tion among State agencies, intrastate and interstate, for
example; through commissions, councils, pacts, authorities,
treaties, and agreements.

V-139

The coastal States' views on the role of the Federal Government
in the management of estuaries was that the Federal -level responsi-
bility is to "assist" the State-level estuarine (coastal) programs.
In specific terms, this means that the Federal Government should:

(1) fund (assist) State estuarine programs and activities,
when needed;

(2) conduct (assist) research and demonstration programs
and projects on estuarine problems existent in the coastal
States, and publish the results;

(3) develop guidelines, suggested plans, models, or stan-
dards that reflect the national estuarine policy so that
State plans and programs can be developed in harmony with
the national overview; and

(4) provide (or make available) trained scientific and
technical specialists who can give advice, assistance,
and counsel to, and cooperate with, the States in
developing and managing their estuarine areas.

Such a general coastal States' consensus of opinion -- State-level
estuarine management with Federal "assistance" -- in which the word
"assistance" is used in a very wide context, would seem to offer
a cooperative partnership arrangement which has been widely promul-
gated as the most effective mechanism for estuarine management.

V-140

Thus, the States believe they should manage and control the use,
mainly through ownership or restrictive covenants, of estuarine
areas. This should be done through a newer and stronger State role
involving an efficiently coordinated State-level management organi-
zation, to implement a Statewide comprehensive management plan that
is supportable or backed up by sufficiently strong regulations and
needed research studies designed to solve problems pertinent to the
particular needs of the management organization and the correspond-
ing estuarine resources.

Summing up these viewpoints reveals two essential points:

(1) Estuarine protective legislation cannot be effective
without the corresponding organizational structure and
function.

(2) An organizational structure must have the necessary
legislative authorities, staffing, and budget to give

it the proper and sufficient capabilities to do the job
of effectively managing the estuaries. It is useless,
of course, to have an inefficient and ineffective organi-
zational unit that is buried so deeply in the State
organizational hierarchy that it is unable to do, in
essence, anything.

Thus, the essential aspects of the new and improved State's role
are effective legislative policy enabling protection, with a corres-
ponding efficient organization capable of actually managing the

V-141

estuarlne areas as an Integral and essential part of the total water
resources of the State and/or region.

Based on the above suggestions and views, and on the obvious need
for a stronger and more effective State role in estuarlne management,
it is felt that the more effective and strengthened State role should
approximate as closely as possible the following framework.

The new State role must include the exercise of primary responsibility
by developing an overall Statewide estuarlne management program that
provides for direct, effective State management and the delegation
of the requisite authority to its political subdivisions for local
direction and management in accordance with the Statewide management
plan.

Such a program should include:

(1) a mechanism for its implementation.

(2) provision for:

(a) coordination of State and Federal programs;

(b) Inventory of estuarlne resources;

(c) acquisition of selected coastal areas;

(d) financial assistance and coordination of research
and study of area problems;

(e) control regulation and enforcement;

(f) a program of public education and awareness; and

(g) manpower training programs.

V-142

The needed State actions to assume their new and strengthened role
are:

(1) establishment or designation of a specific State
organization provided with the authority and means to
develop and implement the comprehensive phase of manage-
ment for the estuarine zone.

(2) control and enforcement of Water Quality Standards
as an essential element in the long-range management
plan.

(3) consideration of legislation designed to preserve
the public interest in the wetland and tidal areas.
Such legislation should give authority to the State

to delineate wetlands of significant natural resource
value and to give them long-term protection. The State
should initiate the action and should not have to wait
until a particular wetland or estuary is in imminent
danger of destruction.

(4) establishment or authorization, as needed, of appro-
priate local /regional management organizations or special
districts to provide effective implementation of the com-
prehensive management plan for the State's estuarine zone.

(5) propose or work towards appropriate interstate
compacts or relationships needed for management, regulation,
and optimum multiple-use development in interstate waters
including:

V-143

(a) institution of State-level permit requirements
for dredging, filling, or otfier modification of
wetlands and other estuarine resources;

(b) requirement for all State and local agencies
engaged in activities that may physically or otherwise
modify estuarine resources, either directly or through
issuance of permits, licenses, leases, and so forth, to;

[1] minimize adverse effects on estuarine

resources; and

[2] give notice of intended action and hold

public hearings before acting, if there is

indication that an adverse effect is a likely

result;

(c) resolution of problems in regulating use of
tidal lands, wetlands, and so forth, under private
ownership;

(d) strengthening land acquisition and development
programs for conservation purposes;

(e) institution of State-level authority to review
zoning and other action by local governments and

to veto if inconsistent with an approved Statewide
management plan; and

(f) augmented funding of all components of the
State's comprehensive management program and plan.

V-144

The management plan must also be compatible with those of neighboring
States. This approach seems altogether appropriate, especially
because several States have voiced concern over the anticipated
loss of substantial estuarine areas during the next 5 years.
Relating the 5-year period to a protective action period indicates
the following possible approach: that it would take 1 year to develop
or strengthen the management plan and legislation; 1 year to get it
enacted; 1 year to develop an organization; 1 year to get the organ-
ization moving; and 1 year to actually start improved estuarine
management operations.

V-145
REFERENCES

V-2-1 Garretson, Albert, The Land-Sea Interface of the Coastal
Zone of the United States: Legal Problems Arising out of
Multiple Use and Conflicts of Private and Public Rights
and Interests (prepared for the National Council on Marine
Resources and Engineering Development). New York City,
New York University, September 1968.

V-2-2 Harold F. Wise & Associates, Intergovernmental Relations
and the National Interest in the Coastal Zone of the
United States (prepared for Interagency Committee on
M.U.C.Z.). Washington, D. C, Harold F. Wise & Associates,
March 1969. 200 p.

V-2-3 Report of the Department of Natural Resources Relative to
the Coastal Wetlands in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Boston, Commonwealth Senate Report No. 635, p. 15 (1963).

V-2-4 Ayres, James B., A Case History of the Massachusetts
Estuarine and Coastal Wetlands Program (Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration Contract No. 14-12-185).
Cambridge, Massachusetts (in press).

V-2-5 Institute of Public Administration, The Marine Environment:
A State and Local Perspective. (Report to the Commission
on Marine Science, Engineering and Resources). Washington,
D. C, U. S. Government Printing Office (1968).

V-2-5 Commission on Marine Science, Engineering and Resources,
Science and Environment, Volume 1 (Panel Report).
Washington, D. C. , U. S. Government Printing Office (1969).

V-147

Chapter 3
ROLE AND ACTIVITIES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION

The most crucial decisions on destruction and/or conservation of
estuaries are made at the local government level. Yet the record
of local government in estuarine management is disappointing. As Dr.
Stanley A. Cain remarked, "The authority for zoned use of the Coastal
Zone -- that is, its allocation to determined uses in specified places --
lies v/ith local government. And local government finds itself v/eak in
the face of massive private economic pov/er and the public resistance
to increased taxes" (\/-3-l).

Local governments' present activities, problems, and effectiveness
in the estuaries are discussed in this chapter, and ways in which
local direction and programs can share in the total national effort
to preserve and develop our estuaries are recommended. Particular
attention is given to imaginative land and water-use management
techniques by local agencies.

This discussion of local governments' role is made with full recogni-
tion that our American Federal system is one of shared responsibilities
between local, State, and Federal Governments. Today there are no
autonomous jurisdictions or independent functions even in the relatively
neglected estuarine areas. Our functioning governmental system does
not resemble a layer cake, as a common simile has it, but, more closely
approximates a marble cake of joint powers and activities. Thus, rather

V-148

than allocating specific functions exclusively to local agencies,
their programs can be fitted into a cooperative, intergovernmental
pattern of balanced estuarine uses.

An extensive survey and enumeration of the activities of all
local governments in estuaries is beyond the scope of this report.
Rather, some functions of local governments relating to estuaries
are briefly indicated, and their programs, problems, and regula-
tory tools discussed in general terms. For purposes of this
report, "local government" includes not only cities and towns
but also, when applicable, counties and intrastate multicounty and
regional agencies.

Estuaries are affected by a wide variety of local government
activities and programs, including water resources (pollution
control, waste disposal, and water supply); transportation
(especially port and marina facilities); conservation and recrea-
tion (parks, fisheries, and wildlife); and commercial and econo-
mic development and public and private land use (planning, zoning,
and housing). All of these must be considered in organizing a
comprehensive estuarine management program.

V-149

SECTION 2. MANAGEMENT TOOLS

In developing and conserving estuarine resources, the following
management and regulatory tools have been used by local govern-
ments: public ownership, legislation and permits, financial
inducements, zoning, planning, and public education. A discus-
sion of these categories follows.

OWNERSHIP AND ACQUISITION

The most effective technique for conservation of estuaries is
public acquisition and ownership. Although costly, government
purchase of private land by negotiation (or if necessary through
the power of eminent domain) is the best guarantee against
estuarine despoliation. The most common form of such an open-
space program is outright purchase; other variations include
advance acquisition and excess condemnation. Advance acquisition
is a reserved land technique by which the government purchases
"land banks" before they are actually required for planned public
projects in order to avoid price rises. Excess condemnation, for
conservation purposes, involves the acquisition of land buffers,
to maximize public access and enjoyment, near public facilities
(such as small parks along highways) or schools, or between air-
ports and residential areas.

In addition to ownership, public control may be acquired through
leasing and purchasing development rights. The government can

V-150

arrange to purchase land and lease or sell it back, restricting
its use (to farming or timber, for example) to preserve its open
space. The Tennessee Valley Authority also uses a land covenant
with restrictive provisions in it, such as prohibiting water
pollution, in order to control land use (V-3-2). Additionally,
the government can purchase partial rights such as scenic, con-
servation, or natural -resource easements. In this way, those
who will not be able to sell their land for profit can be com-
pensated. Such government contracts with private owners, however,
usually do not provide for public access.

Outside funding sources can be utilized by local governments
for ownership and acquisition. Federal Government revenues can
be used to purchase land for seashore, parks, and wildlife
refuges. The Land and Water Conservation Fund (Department of
the Interior) (V-3-3) and the Open Space Land Fund (Department of
Housing and Urban Development) are especially suitable for estu-
arine preservation (V-3-4). State aid to localities as exempli-
fied by the New Jersey Green Acres bond issue, can be used for
the purchase of marshlands. Finally, private sources often can
be helpful, particularly such conservation organizations as the
Audubon Society, Izaak Walton League, Nature Conservancy, and
World Wildlife Fund, which have programs that use private funds
and gifts. Further tax-exempt private trusts have been established
to maintain coastal parks and recreational areas, as well as

V-151

golf and country clubs and private hunting preserves; such uses
help protect estuaries. Despite these sources, however, local
governments are still hard-pressed to find sufficient funds for
acquisition.

LEGISLATION AND PERMITS

Legislation, ordinances, and permits have had varying degrees
of success in regulating estuarine development. Laws prohibiting
certain uses, such as disposal of untreated wastes, refuse,
dredged spoils, pesticides, and other hazardous materials are
common. Uses are also regulated by ordinances, such as the
Los Angeles Ocean-Submerged Lands Ordinance, which sets forth
detailed criteria for structures, spacing, and operations affecting
estuarine development (V-3-5).

To regulate dredging or fills, permits may specify that certain
requirements be met; for example, the developer must dedicate a
certain portion of his shoreland for parks, pay a fee for the
increased value, or fill certain designated areas; he may also
be required to provide for the right of public access. Detailed
conditions are often contained in dredging permits, because this
sensitive operation may cause irreversible physical and
biological harm to estuaries.

V-152

FINANCIAL INDUCEMENTS

Local tax policies serve as financial inducements for private
owners to conserve their estuarine land by givinq them more
favorable terms than the standard ad valorem assessment of real
property. Preferential assessment of land— evaluation at actual
or current use rather than the fair market or development value--
is one such technique. A second is deferred taxation, by which
taxes are held back until the land is converted to a "higher" use.
Grants or subsidies by local governments to the landowner so that
he may pay his property tax have also been proposed as a form of
rental payment to induce him to keep his land open.

ZONING

Land use controls, especially zoning, are employed by most local
governments, although their effectiveness is being increasingly
questioned. Zoning, or districting by permissible use, varies
widely from locality to locality. Some zoning tools are use
lists, density standards, and recently, performance standards
(locating according to operational characteristics). Critics
of this use-classification approach charge that it is unsatisfactory
for land conservation purposes because it is either too rigid
or allows for too many exceptions and variances. More imaginative
and flexible approaches, however, such as cluster zoning, planned-
unit development, and new-town zoning generally provide for

V-153

open-space plannlnri and allow greater land protection.

Another land-use measure is subdivision control, which requires
the developer to allocate a specified portion of his land project
for open space or parks. A recent example of creative use of this
tool is the West Islip, Long Island, New York, residential builder
who dedicated one-half of his land as a wildlife refuge. Finally,
flood-plain lines can be established to protect against construction
of houses, while specification of bulkhead lines for private tide-
lands can greatly limit dredging and filling.

PLANNING AND COORDINATION

Planning by local governments for orderly development and balanced
usage of estuaries has generally been lacking. Presently, however,
there are several possible means of increasing planning coordination
at the local level. Section 204 of the Demonstration Cities and
Metropolitan Development Act of 1966, as amended, provides that
Federal grants for sewage treatment, hospitals, v/ater supply, and
transportation should be submitted for review to an areawide agency
with metropolitan or regional planning authority, while Section 701
provides for such planning grants (V-3-6). In addition, Section 3c
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, (33 USC 466)
allocates funds for water quality management planning studies to
local or State planning agencies designated by the Governor. Planning
grants of this kind such as the one recently awarded to the Bay

V-154

Conservation and Development Commission throuqh the State of Cali-
fornia to curb San Francisco Bay pollution are designed to seek
solutions on a basin-wide basis to reconcile the conflicting
interests of polluters and other water users.

In local -State coordination, the codes of towns such as Westport
and Brookhaven, New York, require that local officials approve
permits for estuarine filling only after consulting with State
officials. Planning studies by private organizations can be
very helpful in establishing estuarine management programs. The
Belle Baruch Foundation, for example, aided a survey study of
Atlantic Coast wetlands which extensively mapped and evaluated
the legal aspects of their ownership (V-3-7). The Conservation
Foundation has also shown how new and imaginative planning and
design techniques can be applied to preserve and develop Rookery
Bay in Florida (V-3-8). This study illustrates the feasibility
of a multipurpose estuarine conservation and development plan
using the efforts of both public and private sources. Implementation
of this study, however, has been delayed by the reluctance of
local officials to adopt a resolution endorsing the development
objectives and general recommendations of the plan.

PUBLIC EDUCATION

Although programs to educate and inform the public are of great
value, they are rarely found at the local level. One significant

V-155

exception is the training of marine technicians by the city of
San Diego, California. But on the whole there have been few local
studies to guide developers in cost reduction by better planning
of land and water use, or to acquaint developers with the benefits
of open space.

V-156

SECTION 3. PROBLEMS AND FAILURES

Having briefly enumerated the management tools that local
governments could employ for rational estuarine development,
this section will evaluate the reasons why local governments'
failures in this area outweigh their successes, recognizing
at the same time that the record of the State and the Federal
Governments has also been disappointing.

LEGAL PROBLEMS

The confused legal situation is a direct cause of the failure
of local government in preventing uncontrolled growth in the
estuaries. Divided ownership, disputed titles, unresolved public-
use rights, and varying State, Federal, and local lav/s considerably
complicate the attempt to achieve planned land-water management.

There is an urgent need for court clarification of such essential
questions as: The definition of tidelands and territorial
waters; can they be sold? What is the extent of public-
use rights in privately owned land? When are such rights
legally cut off or alienated? Which zoning regulations so
restrict the use of land by its private owners to the point
that these laws render the land essentially "useless" and amount
to uncompensated taking of property without due process, which
is unconstitutional?

V-157

These questions indicate complexities in the legal problems.
Additional basic legal principles, problems and trends, existing
at the State level, discussed in the preceding Chapter 2 on
Coastal States Responsibilities, Programs, and Roles.

Public trust doctrines, the idea that wetlands and tidelands are
held by the State for the public'trust, generally have been
ineffective in preserving estuarial land from sale nor did they
prevent public uses from being foreclosed. Historically, tide-
lands were considered to be worthless property whose "reclamation"
was to be encouraged. In California, for example, the State
delegated ownership of much of San Francisco Bay to its bordering
counties who in turn sold the land to private developers for
industrial and other types of developments. In this atmosphere
of permissiveness, legislative "giveaways" were encouraged and
private owners easily obtained permission to wharf out or construct
piers and other structures in the tidelands.

Lately, however, there has been a shift in public policy and a
recognition of the irreplaceable value of such areas. Stricter
regulations have been devised to limit use of these areas formerly
considered to be worthless.

While the States generally control the uses of navigable waters,
local governments have been delegated the prime responsibility for

V-158

managing the landward areas. There is, nevertheless, great
uncertainty as to ownership, and each private title is unique
and complicated. Extensive litigation over these lands, some
of which have been fraudulently acquired, has been long delayed
and is urgently needed. Despite the reassertion of public
rights and interest in estuaries, no overall State or municipal
policy on use and disposal has evolved. As a result, develop-
ment is frequently unplanned and unregulated.

PROGRAM DEFICIENCIES AND REVENUE PRESSURES

A second reason for the difficulty local agencies encounter in
attempting to evolve rational and comprehensive estuarine manage-
ment policies is programming deficiencies. Almost all coastal
local agencies lack the staff and funding capabilities to plan,
decide, and implement regulations for compatible land and water
uses. One survey reported that some local authorities were unaware
of their jurisdiction and control powers over the coastal zone
and its resources {V-3-9).

Decision making is also hampered by fragmented jurisdictions.
Almost all local governments are too small to encompass the
entire estuarine area; they approach problems on a piecemeal
basis rather than by an overall view of the suitability of uses
and the total resource value of estuaries. In addition.

V-159

local Governments, including major metropolitan areas, have little
impact on upstream v/ater resource projects that can bring about
major changes in the quality and amount of fresh water inflow
to the estuary.

Another problem is that of coordination within local governments.
As at other levels, local departments often work at cross pur-
poses. The port development agency may favor filling estuaries
at the opposition of the parks department; or the building of
public-access roads by the highway department may destroy the
wildlife protected by the fish and game department.

Intergovernmental relations among agencies are also hanhazard.
For example, rational estuarial management must intearate related
land and water uses. Yet land-water zoning plans are rarely
coordinated, because the State sets water ouality use standards
and owns the submerged lands, while the counties and local qovern-
ments control the use of land bordering these waterways.

Conflicts may also occur, as illustrated by the following state-
ment: "State and local novernments frequently find themselves
in adversary positions concerning conservation and recreation
facilities, with local governments both hesitating to move them-
selves (financial limitations being the chief factor) and objec-
ting to State action that would remove real estate from local
property tax rolls or othen-.'ise impinge on local government
prerogatives" (V-3-10).

V-160

Strong economic pressures often v/ork against preservation of
estuaries. Heavily dependent on property taxes, local govern-
ments need the revenues brought in by "developed" land. Simi-
larly, heavily taxed private land owners find selling their
land to developers more profitable than retaining it in its
natural state. Because of these iimediate and tangible benefits
and the insistence of industrial, commercial, and residential
interests, it is very difficult for hard-pressed communities
to conserve such things as the habitat and recreational values
of the estuaries for long-range benefit. As a result of these
compelling needs for revenues and profits, estuaries are dredged,
filled, and developed.

The picture presented here is not encouraging: multiple frag-
mented units of government, inadequately staffed, desperately
competing for use of the same tax base; permissive laws and
regulations; few comprehensive programs; few formal mechanisms
for State-local or interlocal cooperation; and little coordi-
nation of water and shoreline zoning and uses. Without local-
government direction, the decision-making initiative lies within
the area of private interests as more and more estuaries are
destroyed.

V-161

SECTION 4. SELECTED INTERLOCAL COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

San Francisco Bay vividly illustrates the problems and promises of
comprehensive estuarine management. Alarmed by this shrinking and
polluted bay, the California Legislature in 1965 created the San
Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC).
The Act provided for a 27-member commission representing all
elements of government including the cities and counties. It
declared that: "The present uncoordinated, haphazard manner in
which San Francisco is being filled threatens the Bay itself
and is, therefore, inimical to the welfare of both present and
future residents of the area surrounding the Bay" (V-3-11).

The BCDC was directed to make a detailed study of the Bay and to
prepare a comprehensive and enforceable plan for its conservation
and the development of its shoreline (V-3-12). It was given the
power to protect the Bay during the study and planning period by
issuing or denying, after public hearings, permits for all fill
or excavation projects.

The BCDC study documented the deteriorating conditions and com-
plex problems of the Bay. In 1850, before extensive diking and
filling had begun, the Bay comprised about 680 square miles.
Presently, it is 400 square miles in area. Further, if all
relatively shallow parts of the Bay were filled, as planned by

V-162
some interests, the Bay would consist of only 187 square miles.
Similarly, marshlands and mudflats at the rim of the Bay, once
totaling 300 square miles, have been reduced to 75 square miles.
The Bay is especially vulnerable to land-fill projects because
more than 70 percent of its area is less than 18 feet deep.

Existing political, administrative, and legal mechanisms were
inadequate to protect this invaluable resource. Haphazard plan-
ning and zoning practices abounded, with each municipality
operating independently of its neighbors. Ownership of the Bay
was divided between the State (50 percent), cities and counties
(23 percent), the Federal Government (5 percent), and private
owners (22 percent), whose titles were often disputed. Moreover,
there were differences of opinion on the extent of the public
trust, such as whether cities could fill in lands granted to them
by the State.

In January 1969, BCDC filed a final report which included the
Commission's detailed study of the Bay (V-3-12). A comprehensive
plan was adopted and to maintain and carry out this plan, an
appropriate agency was recommended, at an estimated annual cost
of $400,000 to $500,000. A bill, the McAteer-Petris Act as
amended, implementing the BCDC recommendations and extending
its life was enacted in August 1969 (V-3-13). The bill gives the
commission in general terms the following powers: To analyze,
plan, and regulate the entire Bay and shoreline as a unit with

V-163

jurisdiction up to 100 feet; to make an effective use of each
prime site; and to grant or deny permits for all Bay filling or
dredging in accordance with the standards in the plan. The com-
mission is also able to regulate shoreline development to insure
that prime sites are reserved for priority uses, to provide for
maximum public access and repurchase, and to encourage attractive
design of shoreline development.

In conlusion, San Francisco Bay is not unique in its estuarial
problems. The picture BCDC painted of a neglected, shrinking,
polluted bay, yet an irreplaceable and immensely productive
resource, is typical of most of our Nation's estuaries. What is
significant about the San Francisco Bay experience, in addition
to the comprehensive and detailed background reports, is that
this study commission was oriented toward practical planning and
implementation, and that it was also endowed with interim power
to prevent further despoliation and uncoordinated development.
Under the act that created BCDC, this commission could grant
permits for fill or excavation only if a prooosed project was
"(1) necessary to the health, safety, or welfare of the public in
the entire Bay area, or (2) of such nature that it will not
adversely affect the comprehensive plan being prepared." Thus
BCDC showed how a regional agency endowed with permit powers and
focusing its studies on program implementation did not merely

V-164

study the problem but also served as a catalyzing agency to
perserve this irreplaceable estuary.

LONG ISLAND WETLANDS PROTECTIVE PLANS

The wetlands of Long Island have long been a cause for concern
to those worried about the rapid loss of our estuaries. There
is a lengthy history of political controversy over fillings
and alleged dredging violations.

It has been estimated that 12.5 percent of these irreplaceable
lands was lost between 1954 and 1959, and that at present 30
percent of Long Island's remaining wetlands is in immediate
danger, while another 39 percent will be endangered in the
foreseeable future. In addition, of 29 cases of dredging by the
Corps of Engineers, undertaken between 1964 and 1966 over the
objections of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 21 were in the
Long Island area (V-3-14).

This has spurred legislative action on both State and Federal
level to protect the rapidly disappearing estuarine resources of
Long Island. In 1966 Congressman Herbert Tenzer (D. - N.Y.) of
the 5th District introduced legislation to create a National
Wetlands Area in south Long Island. Broadened to include other
estuarine areas. House bill H.R. 15770 barely failed to pass in
the 89th Congress and was finally enacted as Public Law 90-454,
the National Estuary Protection Act, in 1968 by the 90th Congress.

V-165

At about the same time, New York State passed the Long Island
Wetlands Act, which provides that the States and localities share
the costs on a 50-50 basis of maintaining, operating, and develop-
ing county or municipally owned wetlands that have been dedicated
to conservation purposes. At present 15,500 acres, mostly in the
town of Hempstead^ are protected and authorities plan to extend the
Act's coverage to another 31,000 acres.

Also a government instrumentality has recently been created in
recognition of the importance to Long Island of its marine envir-
onment. In 1P65 the Nassau-Suffolk Regional Plar,,iing Board created
an oceanographic committee which prepared a report of the status
and potential of Long Island's marine environment with recommenda-
tions on duck and vessel pollution and on regulating marine sand
and gravel dredging (V-3-15). The report also recommended a com-
prehensive research and planning program to remedy present manage-
ment and coordination deficiencies.

Following the Committee's report, a Regional Marine Resources Council
was created by the Planning Board in 1967 to act in an advisory
capacity on all matters involving Long Island's marine resources
on an ad hoc basis and to formulate a long-rame management plan.
The Council serves as an informal coordinating agency and also brings
together various nongovernmental and private interests through its
bi-monthly meetings. The Council is now funding a research program
and has been instrumental in bringing about improved methods for

V-166

duck-farm waste disposal, elimination of DDT used as a pesticide
in several areas, and greater attention to improved v/etland use
and sewer outfall locations.

MASSACHUSETTS LOCAL CONSERVATION COMMISSIONS

Recently, qains have been made in Massachusetts in recognizing
conservation needs and effecting appropriate programs. During
this time, 38 of 60 coastal towns established conservation com-
missions to administer to the conservation needs of the community .
As stated by the 1964 Massachusetts legislature, ",,, the greater
effort of many coastal commissions has been directed toward the
protection of tidemarsh areas. Protection methods in various towns
have included: establishment of dredging and filling by-laws;
conservation district and/or subdivision zoning; and actual acguisi-
tion of tidemarsh acreages. Unfortunately that acguisition, the
most highly desired form of protection, is being exercised in
relatively few towns. The towns of Orleans and Chatham are leaders
in acquisition, having procured 400 and 170 acres respectively.
Acquisition in both of these towns has been by gift, purchase and
eminent domain. In addition to the actual acquiring of tidemarsh
acreages for conservation purposes, each of the above towns employs
zoning, and dredging and filling by-laws to further regulate the
use of coastal wetland areas.

"The Town of Barnstable ... designated the Great Marshes of Barnstable
as the Great Marshes Conservation Area. This area comprises about

V-167

3,300 acres of tidemarsh. It is expected that the entire area will
be deeded over to the Town within two or three years.

"If all coastal conservation commissions could boast of similar
accomplishments the problem of our vanishing wetlands would no
longer exist. To date, less than 1,000 acres of coastal wetland
have been acquired at the town level of government.

"A primary goal of every coastal commission should be to acquire
and place under permanent protection, at least one of its more
important tidemarsh areas" (V-3-16).

V-168

SECTION 5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

This chapter has briefly surveyed existing practices and evaluated
the accomplishments and problems of local government activities
relating to estuaries. On the following pages, some recommenda-
tions are made to promote effective local programs, bearing in
mind that, under our Federal system, operating success can best be
achieved through cooperative local-State programs.

The purpose of these suggestions is not to freeze forever the
estuaries in their present status, but rather to curb uncontrolled
growth and haphazard but devastating urban incursions and to develop
compatible land and water management systems that will provide for
balanced use of estuaries.

First, local governments must be strengthened and reoriented to
focus on estuarial problems. Carefully drafted model legislation,
ordinances, and planning guides for local governments should be
established to call attention to these vulnerable resources. They
should include a statement of public purpose and interest along with
a description of basic goals (such as open space and recreational
development and the shoreline area. Including wetlands and water-
front areas, to be covered). In addition to a leqislative declara-
tion of public rights and use claims, planning and regulatory
authority should be given to a specific estuarine management agency.
At least an interagency committee should be established to coordinate
local policies.

V-169

Such legislation could establish an open space and estuarine
preservation policy to control the alteration of estuaries and
prohibit any pollution. Further grants of State-owned tidelands
could be halted, and the State could definitely establish claim
to all such lands unless it could be shown that colonial or
territorial titles or special legislation had given this land to
a private owner. The legislation could also designate essential
areas to be preserved, or repurchased if necessary, and give the
agency full planning and zoning power. Dredging or filling would
not be permitted unless it was in accord with the estuarine use
plan, with burden of proof on the filler or dredger that such
alteration would not pollute or destroy the area.

With reference to geographic jurisdiction, it would be desirable
to establish a regional agency to cover the entire estuarine prob-
lem area, because the individual municipalities or even counties may
be too small. Whichever form such an areawide agency may take--
independent special district, interaaency cooperative committee, or
multijurisdictional planning unit— this governmental mechanism should
have management responsibility as well as study and research auth-
ority. This would include regulatory power over dredging and fill-
ing, zoning and land-water use authority, and perhaps even the ability
to raise revenue from licenses and to study management techniques.

The regional estuarine agency should utilize the full array of
management and planning tools described earlier, including especially

V-170

the power of eminent domain with just compensation, repurchase
and easement rights for public access, and development options to
preserve the land. Its leases and permits should be flexible so
they can be terminated or revoked should their conditions be
violated. Regulations should not rigidly foreclose any further
industrial, commercial or residential development. Sufficient
safeguards for public representation, such as notices, hearings,
and possibly an appeals board are also desirable. To survive
legal attack, regulations should be reasonable and should be
applied in a nonarbitrary, nondiscriminatory manner; they should
not preclude some other public or private economic uses. Ideally
these regulations and plans should be viewed as guides and
standards, and, while restraining and controlling development,
should serve as an inducement for better design and land use.

Such a multifunctional agency could also deal with hurricane,
flood, and erosion control; waterfront access; architectural
preservation and beautification; and upstream water projects in-
fluencing the estuarine zone. Its regulatory and policy powers
could be subjected to the final decision making of a review and
appeals board composed of municipal officials and group representa-
tives. In its decision on licenses and permits, the board would
be empowered to consider such factors as recreational and economic,
aesthetic, and environmental effects. It is unlikely that many
areas will immediately establish such a regional estuarine

V-171
management agency, but in all probability will first choose to
undertake an overall survey of their estuarine problems. Such
a study, however, should not be an excuse for inaction. As in
the case of BCDC a moratorium on further filling and sales could
be declared until the study commission reports, and the commission
could be given interim permit and zoning authority, such as the
power to grant dredging licenses and establish bulkhead lines.

States have an important role to play in aiding local orograms.
Financial assistance in the form of matching grants for pollution
control or open space bond issues can be crucial in local estuarine
management. In addition to funding, cooperative programs can be
utilized in such areas as zoning and planning. The State may
choose to establish an official map or enact a broad zoning law
with general requirements to be met by county and local government
plans. Permits for dredging and fillina issued by municipalities
could be reviewed by State natural resources commissions or
wetlands boards.

Utilization of the expertise and resources of private organizations
is advantageous for local governments. For example, the Conservation
Foundation study of Rookery Bay, Fla., could serve as the basis for
a "model estuaries" Federal -State-local grant program. Also, the
Nature Conservancv fund could be used by localities to establish
parks and other refuges in estuaries for public purposes.

V-172

In addition to research on biological aspects and water quality,
there is a qreat need for further study of the legal aspects of
estuarine management. Clarification of conflicting ownership
claims and titles is urgently needed in almost every estuary. A
detailed survey and inventory of ownerships, to include legal
basis, rights, title checks, and assessment of land value, should
be undertaken by local governments-. It is not unlikely that such
a survey would disclose land still owned by the State and leases
that need renegotiation because their terms have been breached.
A continuous updating of this land register should also be part of
local governments' management activities.

This Chapter has stressed the crucial role that local governments
can play in the direction and management of estuaries. In the
past, localities have not been very effective in developing and
maintaining comprehensive programs. Greatly handicapped by a lack
of plans, administration, finances, and government personnel, they
have been further hindered in decision making in the public inter-
est by their limited geographic scope, taxable resources, and legal
powers. In almost all cases they have failed to arouse the public
or overcome popular indifference to the loss of estuaries to the
encroachments of _"ci vi 1 i zati on" .

The record of estaurine management has been disappointing at all
levels. Federal and State as well as local. The only answer to
the question "Can we rely on local government?" is that we must --
for we have no choice -- work throuqh the municipalities, counties.

V-173

and towns. Indeed only a cooperative, intergovernmental approach
can succeed because each level is ineffective by itself. Regional
agencies covering the estuarine zone can promise the best results,
but only by strengthening the existing decision-making machinery,
as suggested here, can local government rise to this challenge.
Local government has the capability to play a leading role in
estuarine management, and it is essential that it do so. For,
ultimately, any such program must rely on local initiative, organi-
zation, planning, and support.

V-174

REFERENCES

V-3-1 Cain, Stanley A., Multiple Use of the Coastal Zone (Remarks
at a panel on Marine Science Affairs, Annual Meeting of the
American Association for the Advancement of Science).
Mimeographed report. Washington, D.C., Department of the
Interior, 1967. 2 p.

V-3-2 Tennessee Valley Authority Provision 6 of Deed Covenants
applicable in the sale of reservoir lands; Based on Sec.
26a of TVA Act of 1933 (48 Stat. 58; U. S. C. 831-831dd)
(unpublished document).

V-3-3 Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965. Public Law
88-578. 78 Stat. 897.

V-3-4 Office of Economic Opportunity, Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (a description of the Federal Government's
domestic programs to assist the American people in furthering
their social and economic progress). Washington, D.C.,
Office of Economic Opportunity, January 1969. 609 p.

V-3-5 Los Angeles Ocean - Submerged Lands Ordinance, City of Los
Angeles, Sec. 12.20.1 (Added by Ord. No. 126,825). Los
Angeles, California, 1964.

V-3-6 Public Law 90-351, Amending Public Law 89-754, the Omnibus
Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 80 Stat. 1263

V-3-7 Belle Baruch Foundation, Evaluation of Atlantic Coast Estu-
aries, Belle Baruch Foundation (Marine Resources Committee,
Technical Advisors). Washington, D.C., American Geographic
Society (in press).

V-3-8 The Conservation Foundation, Rookery Bay Area Project, (A

Demonstration Study in Conservation and Development, Naples,
Florida). Washington, D.C., The Conservation Foundation, 1968.

V-3-9 Garretson, Albert, The Land-Sea Interface of the Coastal
Zone of the United States: Legal Problems Arising out of
Multiple Use and Conflicts of Private and Public Rights and
Interests (prepared for the National Council on Marine Re-
sources and Engineering Development). New York City, New
York University, September 1968.

V-175

V-3-10 Maton, Gilbert L., and others, A Perspective of Regional

and State Marine Environmental Activities: A Questionnaire
Survey, Statistics and Observations. Washington, D.C.,
John I. Thompson and Company, February 1968.

V-3-n State of California, "McAteer-Petris Act". Statutes of
California, Chapter 1162, 1965.

V-3-12 BCDC Staff, San Francisco Bay Plan, San Francisco Bay

Conservation and Development Commission, January 1969. 63 p.
with supplement, (quotations p. 35 and 38).

V-3-13 State of California, Assembly Bill 2057, approved August 7,
1969. California Statutes, Chapter 713, 1969. p. 1188-
1202.

V-3-14 Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House, Estuarine
Areas (Hearings on H.R. 25 and others). Washington, D.C.,
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1967. 30 p.

V-3-15 Stephan, Edward C. (Chairman, Oceanographic Committee), The
Status and Potential of the Marine Environment. Hauppage,
N. Y., Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board, December 1966.

V-3-16 Foster, Charles D. W. (as Commissioner), Report of the Depart-
ment of Natural Resources Relative to the Coastal Wetlands
1n the Commonwealth, Senate Document 855. Boston, Common-
wealth of Massachusetts, January 1964. 77 p.

V-177
Chapter 4
ROLE OF COMPACT AGENCIES IN ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT

This chapter describes and evaluates the present role of inter-
state and Federal -interstate compact agencies in estuarine
management. It also develops recommendations concerning the
role of such organizations in the comprehensive national estua-
rine management program.

SECTION 1 . USE OF COMPACT AGENCIES TO DATE

Use of the compact instrument in managing the Nation's estuarine
resources has been limited to management of water resources and
management of fisheries. Included in the first category are the
three pollution control compacts establishing, respectively,
(1) the Interstate Sanitation Commission, (2) the Interstate
Commission on the Potomac River Basin, and (3) the New England
Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission. Also in this
category is the multipurpose Delaware River Basin Commission.

Fisheries compacts include the regulatory Potomac River Fisher-
ies Commission and the three advisory and research-oriented fish-
eries commissions for, respectively, the Atlantic, Gulf, and
Pacific fisheries.

Selected details on the purposes, powers, and roles of these
compact agencies in estuarine management are presented in
Tables V.4.1 and V.4.2.

V-178

0)

en

c

«

I/)

o
«♦-

</>

"3- O

• lO

> O.

E

UJ o

_l o

<: •—

K- O

o
o

c
o

o
a.

I/)

1.
9i

. J.

^B^

^^^

o c

■^—

-

C •»- lO

*» O 1

O E C

•>- Irt 1

O ••- O T3 C

>» -M 3 •■-

«/»

r— -r- C ••-

1— C I- O.— r-

F— <U

C ■•-» (O

r— O O Vt to ^

*0 T-

O C n> iU

to O.T- 'r— 3

•r- I.

•1- <U O) (/> XJ

O C T3 O O.

u to

•M <Ut- E

.,- O •— 0> i—

0) 3

3 ^ +J 0) TJ

T3 •!- (o x: Q-x: <o

Q.+J

O -M T3 O) w cr> c

(/) W

•— (/» OJ ^ 3

•r- C -r- 3 3 O

LU

O lO > O O

u o; 4* o I- o •!-

>l-

Q-f C 1. f

OJ -M {. O I. -M

ox:

•r- O. (/)

a.-*^ di jz ^ (O

•M

</> ••

rO X: 4-) r- -M O

C T-

■M >)■•-> I/I a»

■o +-» <a 3

O X

••- -M C -O 1—

(U O C 3 73 T3

•r-

•1- (U C O

•M ••-»♦- -t- C C 0)

+J c

C > I- <t> k

•

Q-i— O (/) C lO

ra (.

ro -r- t. f—

<0

E ^ <0 lO <«- I/I

u a>

jC ■*■' Z> ■*-> Ut

V

0> 3 I/I ^ I/I O •—

•1- o

4J U O (U -M

I.

■M Q. E -M a> i«

■a c

<0 5 ••-

10

•4-> 0) 0> re C C •!-

c o

i. o

(O «/) »— x: -r- O l-

>-i o

OJ r- 4-> O -M ■!->

3 U3 ••-> C 4J -f- a>

f O -M «

(O

1/) U O O « -M -M

•M t. -D c x: ^

iaos-<*--r-a>(0<o
3:««-o.oi/»E«JE

O 4J 0) •■- S

•M

1

1

,_

1

1

">7

O)

c

o

t.

r—

c

C II'"

■M

J-^

<4-

•r-

t-

o

r- 10^

• ^B

oj +j -f- en o

•r-

« +J •»-> o

O

«/)

»-o

+J

+j

(0 iJ O JZ

c -o C C 0) Oi -f-

^w

x: •!- o +J

c

-o J-

c

UJ

l~ •!-

■M -O

OOCa)3I.-Mr-
4-> lO E (0^0)

(O

u X i/t <o

■•->

o

c o

o

c

0) -M (/)

•1- 0)

3

Ifl 4J D. C

c

•^

lO o

u

CD C O -O

»•<-

4J +J 0* -O C 3 4J

cr

••- >, C E O

i

10

o

•^

OJ lO O

«f-

I. ."CDrtJ+J C'f- Q.I/5

«/l

■Of— gj O -r-

•r-

c

W

CD t. x:

>>•'-

oiocoiO'aE <o

&.

t.

O. E U -M

OJ

>

irtM-

o

0.4J

■M O

D.4J •!- s- E o; 0) 5

<u

0)

(O E (U U
0) O U 0) (O

u

o

U O

•f—

OJ

<0 Oi

•1- o;

aj<aT3-»-»o "uix:

•)->

X

u

1.

01

■M

x:

■t-' E

E ^

1--OC l-</)iA+J-0

(C

o

•r- O ••- ^

o

Q.-0 OJ

3

•M

0) (/>

t. (/)

•1- 0» D. (U ••- C

2

o.

•tJ 3 4J 4^ <♦-

t. (/)

^—

w o ^~

o

"o >>«»- x: r- -a o a>

•1- o o- i-

c

</)

o o

r^

<♦-

<0 E <0

»♦- Vt

C 4J 1 -M O 3 4-> E

-a

t.

■M -M (U C 3

a>

Q. O

O

o. u

c -o

•

lo •!- ■•-> -tJ »- o e

c

o

C U -1- O

4->

c t-

CL

V o •<-

o t.

•M

r— O C -M C O

m

•r-)

a» Q> <J

0)

o

2 3

w

t-jczB

U 10

U

Q) to to O "• - OO

•

<0

CT>+J "O

^

<o

o CL o;

0)

Q.+J O

-o

(O

r— 3<t- IrtUI'^'i-O)

+J

10

S

I. le C OJ C7>4->

o.

x:

•^

c

o> c

Q.

•i-er x:oiXi«-»Ji-

c -o

OJ J OJ -f- c
■o oi £'♦-•'-

E

V) V

+J

■M

O <f- o

c to

E

Q. C U 4-> (O C (O

<X)

t.

r—

o

•M x:

•^

■MOO

••- *J

O

EE-r- !-««■— OEO

^

to

1. (/) -p -f- 1.

01

u

•r- +J

en

>

«

i. iA

o

O «J »0 <0 -r- C 4J

■o

O (0 u ^

Q.

c

•r-

o C

3

ua>a;o)3E-Mo

(O

c

en OJ 0)

E

(U

•o i-

•f—

+J

«/) lO "O

U 0)

0>

t. 0> I/I t (O <4- "O

OJ

to

O C 1. o. o

o x:

C O

•M

o

0J<— c

oj x:

£

04->(0fl><4-0r— CC

(.

4->

h- T- +J (/) +J

u

•!->

to <♦-

<q

<o

•»- Q. <0

IA -M

■•J

1— (/)C7li-0*«- 3.r-«

■•-»

l/>

3 0)

1

3 0)

r- 1.

1— »-

.— 3

r— 3

O +J

O 4J

0)

O. 3

Q. 3

«/>

«♦-

It-

o

CT

en

o

Cr—

Ci—

t.

•■- o

•.- o

3

•M t.

+J u

O.

l/> 4-»
•1- C

t.

X O

X o

O

9) U •

0) o •

■"H

C

c

<e

oi-a o

a> -o o

z

To abat
tion an
polluti

To abat
tion an
polluti

'-•

c

• • "

(/>

o

c

•> itj

a>

1

'r-

fO •!-

•f-

c

•r"

c

l/l

•1- c

1.

o

+j -a

o

»0

^ ••■ .

o

•f"

u c

•^

[33

to cnu-

+j

4->

0) <o

(A

> u o

ro

ta

c

I/I

t.

r— '^

C

■M

c •

•r-

0)

>,> -M

Ol

•r-

o v,*-*

g

>

1/) O — >

'^

c

C_> 0) VO

E

^1—

C -t-J ••- O

LO

i- en

o

q:

C 1/1 t- *!■
OI 0) •!-> (T)

-o

.. OJ 1—

o

Q. 3 to f—

c

OI

c

■"3 »_

0)

to

*r~ ^-^

<tj

4J

o

2 ^

to

§

"O <B to

>.

■)->

l/t

<U t.

•M

+J

tZ -r- QJ •!-

u

(/)

(/)

z o

M

o

ro c x: ^

c

t-

>-

I.

o.

•— •!- -M E

^

£J

i

5

(U

>» CD 3
C t. -nr-

<

o

3 OJ

C
1-^

x:

2: > lo o

V-179

1 I/I

(O (/I l-

1 1

■0 10 w x: <4- 0 m

1 oil

mm If- QJ c -o

«♦- T- T3 <U

ccoi-<u 3i/>04j;.

QJ •»-> -D ro QJ QJ

(/)

0 0 I- ■!->

(OOi — Q-i- O-r- (O

•r- +J in E ■•-> 1-

— a>

0 10 10 •

+J-r- (0(UE>4->,ina)

C ceo ro ro

(O •!-

<U in T3 S c

in+J-o^ coc-D-OQ.

•r-I-QJrO+Jl-i— 3

.- 1-

in «o c 0

j-a)«ji/)-.-t.T-3ca.

ro QJ E r— 0 QJ ro

U rO

3 <o «o r— .c-

>,0 Q-l- 0) J--a<+-4J lOeC

4J -O Q. Q. Oi<*- i- f—

(U 3

■«J (O 4J

4Ja.O'0'f-'o<o i/)<—

I- C 0 C QJ

Q.+J

<U -u m XJ 0

•f- r— a>i_3C-0 -M

QJ 3 r— Wr- C TD Q

I

/5 en

Jl C •!- •!-

1— <U(Uino-tJioc-o<u •

0 QJ C T3 ro C

LLi

4J <0 >,-•-> X3

(OC>(U-t->in (0C3in

in > -r- ro r— ro *♦- •

♦-

+j i/»

3T-a)i-<oa>in ro 0)

TJQJQJl-QJO. 0>>

0 x:

C in •!- S. -r-

0"»-"0 C 0)^ >*-o

QJ 0 TJ ro r— 1. 1—

4->

fO C r— 0 l-

ro mcni'Di/iinoi.

T} i~ Q- ro QJ in 1—

C T-

x: 0 10 M- 3

t.3'(UT- 3-r-C 3

33ajQJ>, -t-JajrO

"O

0 5

4-> •■- 3 •"->

(U +J I- -r- I/) cnr— 14- 0 Q. 0

.— 0>i--al«-rO(JO

<u

f—

4-» CTXJ

■fJiniui. coi— -r-'i-i/i

Om-r-CL303t-*'-

3

*-> c

4. 10 (U (/)

ro(U>a)x:-r-Cr— +Jx:<u

C QJ 1/) -M 3 »4-

C

(O S-

<u 0 i- -0 +->

S -r-XIO+J-r-ailOint-

•r-4-C*(llO-t->QJO'f-

•^

0 0)

.C •!- dl C -f-

i-t-in-r-c x:C7>c

Qj •-• c x: 1/1 u

4J

r- U

4-> l«_ 4-> 0)

-DO T-xiaicin'i-o^^cjQj^ -Offl-Majoj 1

C

T3 C

0 -f- "O S c

(Ulf_<Ul>.5gO -M-r-l.

> C QJ ro E S~ m.

o

c 0

to S E •«-

+J .^ ai-r-'m+Jflj

rO-r-l. 'OO-Oi I/)

o

— 1 0

0) m 0 -C

din+J $- Er-+->JC i» rox:

x:i-Q.ci-oc-o

C «J TD 0 +J

OT3 iO(aQ.t.l/J>f— l/>

rOEr0^r-T-C>,

1

Or— CJ O) •!-

T3 1- <4- 0) I- E 0 •>- C OJ •■-

030r— QJOlrorO

;z 0 4J 1- S

<C lO 0 >> Cn-r- CL>*- ;- i. <*-

■tJ-l->OQ.ro>rOr— QQ

4->

c

1 <u

0 -O 1

-a

i

>, in 1 ■!->

■t-) c t.

10 in 1 •«

*J iT3 .» 0) -r- rO

QJ <0 (O

0 1 4J i~ I— l/»

0)

•1- 1— O) > **- 4J

U T)

i.<UO«(D -MSC

o>

.— 0 in 0 •!- </)

(U cn c

x>t-(ua)-4-> 1 ccno

<0

ro 3 I- m k.

£ C 3

D.Q.iniO<U<U(U'i-

c

3 m Q. in 01

4J •(- 0

>, i/i33l-El--t->

<a

o" 3 I- a. (0 *■>

^ J3

t. 0 <0 dJ (0

2:

en

0 4) 10 >— C

in ja

<U4J -l^-r— r— j:J-

i-

1. .r- +J 0 T-

(U OJ OJ "O

> 1— ■MOIOQ-OIO)
t. r- C J- fc 3 Q.

Oi

Ol

<U I- (0 X)

•r- -tJ c

c

5

•M 10 5 C - l-

I. m ro le

-aaj'oa)C3«^oo •

• ^

0

(O > (O in -r-

(0 1- -M .—

c 3 E 0 +-> I- 1/)

u

a.

2 **- <U OJ

+J QJ 1/1 CT.

(OOi-Q.-i-rOOX:CC

le

i- 0 3 •<- JZ

3 •(-> C

Q-OO+Jfct ■•->+-> 3<0

3

&.

JZ 0 0) i- *^ -O 10 *■> LU

W <♦- r— ro 06

30) ai>T3-oin £

4J

0

l/» »♦- I/) T- 0

•1- 3 in

in

'•~i

•1- C > +J "4-

;- (OS

Ox:in>J-Qjcctn

^- UJ

(O

r— m 0 OJ <o 0

■U r- D. 0)

j-+Jca>aj+JiO(o-t->i-

•

5:

X) -a -t- J- c

<o z:

qj (O T^ '/> (O r— '^ d)

E<l>r— Cr-l/lCL X:

^ i.

(O 1- 4-> 01 in

•"■a CT

• 0

4-> (0 (0 0 -r- C

in -r- c c

3-oQ.<uoa)a) •••-»

><i:

in "O 0 ■♦-» m 0

I. 4J -1- -r-

C3 xroi-ooico

a» C •#- -r-

oj 3

r— OJ -M I. 1/) 0

LLi m

(O •♦- "o at +J

•»-> TD 0 m

ojoi- ■o-o3a)T--o

_j •»-»

0 +-> •!- C JZ <o

(0 C r— 0)

j_ cnjM- c cox:-4->c

CO u

1— m in <o ■»-> u

3 <0 tf- -r-

ift— iQ.O(0<0l/)-«-><0i0

< fO

1- Q.

1

1 a;

E

3 o;

■M x:

0

.- t.

CI +-> OJ

0

1— 3
0 •«->

V (U -C

E "O 0) -o 0 +J

r—

0)

Q. 3

C 4J C ■!-> ,

0

(/>

»♦-

1- 0 (0 ro 4-

1.

0

CD

<u +J 3 a> 0

<fJ

Q.

C r—

> +J " c

c

t.

•>- 0

0 « 0 in •<- »/)

0

3

+J t.

cn c 0) 0) -M (i>

0

Q.

m 4->

•r- C

c

i.

X 0

4-> -t-> Q» -r- QJ 3

0

0

(u 0 •

C (O r— U 0

•1—

•""3

c

•r- s- TJ 0 m

+J

<o

0) -0 0

0) C 0. in QJ

3

s:

•M C •■-

x: Q. (0 -M l-

(O (O ■!->

CD 0 •• 0

f.1.

J3 3

3 0 0. in q; i- c

0

10 C 1—

0 0 0 C -1-^ Q) •!-

Q.

0 >—
0 -r- 0

&. ^- ro 0 •♦-> in
^ r— a» r— 1. ro ro

^.

h- -M 0.

1— ro > a. 0. 3 XJ

10

. M-

+»

m

0

W)

a>

Ol

0

1

L.

•r-

■M

s-

C7) O;

«» «^ QJ

0)

t.

10

4J

C ^J

c

O)^ x:^-^

•M

0

■*->

c

lli <o

•r—

1. S- ■•-> r—

C

4->

i/l

0

4->

m

ro 0 <0

l-H

(0

l-

0

3 1/1

fO

3 >- "O cri

C

<U

(U

CO

ro C 1—

0

■*J

c

Z ■0'-»

,— 3 ro^--

c

0

c r^

{.

0) QJ

oo

(-H

■»-»

10 (O «*
en

0)

>

Q Z • 1/1
ro 0)

•0

T3

3

•• in r—

•r-

.. «.^ 4J

c

C

c

(U^^

o:

c

>, C ro

(0

(O

j^^

0

■u

0

QJ ro 4J

0

ro -ii:

0)

•r-

m > 1/1

>

1 01

CL

CO

4J t.

u

1/)

1- 1—

u

c

in

i>o 0

10

1/1

QJ >»'0

c

LlI

s.

•r—

>-

3

•r-

■D in Q>

0

1 3

1

■0

c 3

<o

1

3 c •.-

•*

10

3

0
0

<o a>

r— -Z.

0

QJ QJ C

ko-P

¥-180

C

c

UJ 4-*
—I u
03 <«
«C Q.
I- E
O
O

t-
04

a;

4->

i/t

1

Ol

c to

1

1

+J

1

1

—

•

TD

c

o c

M

4J

OJ

c

OJ

■o

1

•»

C

•r-

1

r—

C

"O

•r- O

CD

OJ T3

1

OJ

Ol

- c

to

3 1

•a

dj

t-

3

TO C

(/I

o

0)

+J -i-

C

3

•r—

OJ

m

f—

TO

-O OJ

0) OJ

r- +J

«/>

0)

g (/)

l~

r—

to T3 •.-

+J

^

TO •*->

•r—

3

Ol

OJ

TO

c

OJ E

J- -r-

1 — TO

r*

(U

■M

€ 3

3

^i*

O C

L.

>» to

>— TO

r— •

i»-

O)

TO

1-

C

TO

■M S

3 l-

O C

ITJ

•r*

Q.

o o

U

O

Q. TO to

o s:

•r—

^—

o

C

Q.

o

E

a. o

(J OJ

Q.

•f—

t-

u o

o

Q. to TJ

*«-

a.

r—

Q.'3

*r~

<*-

TO

•r—

E o

OJ J=

»♦-

o

<o

fU

^^

o

•.- •> C

M-

TO ^

E 0>«+-

c

o

E

^-^

4->

OJ

OJ OJ

to lO

>i O

a>

3

■»J

JC

"O to TO

O)

w

3

O 0)

o

^

TO

c

4J I-

•^

J3

Q.-t->

-M

o

a>

W

r^ ^™

Ol a.

O l-

•»

OJ

OJ

^_^

O

• r-

+-)

o >♦-

C

i/>

(/)

<o

t/» ■•->

CT>

3 -O TO 4J

(-

o

CD-M

u

c

3

(-

TO to

■•->

-a o

LU

■M

TO

O

c •■- <u

• ^

•1—

lO

^ T3

C

•^

c

•o

T3

TO

4->

Ol OJ ••-

<♦-

>>

-F- •>

E

t.

TO t. X

0)

^—

0)

VO C

•r*

to

TO

i-

c

OJ

3

>>•<-

* c

to ■»->

o ^

>, TO x:

V

-C J3

•^

ON TO

Ol

o

3

TO

TO

■M

>>•<-

3 TO

-»->

r— •

<4- 4J -O

+J

Oi+J i«-

K-

•r—

■a

^*

TJ

Q.

to

3

It-

to

•

^ >4-

+J •(->

TO l-

c

•^

lO

O -r-

C TO O

JH

3

(/»

OJ

to

to

4->

• ^

O

OJ

to

TO O

•1- o

O OJ

o

X

<J

l.

c

to

♦->

--> X

I.

•^

to VO

E

O

I- OJ

4->

'^■

•r-

0) o

o

(U

cn c

•

^—^

to

C\J TO "O

T3

OJ U3

C

C

OJ

•n- OJ

O 4->

OJ r— .

■•->

c

■a

V\ -C

•r-

■O T3 O

W

1-^

^^•^ r~^

,— ^

O^

o

o

"O to

x: O

Ol TO I/)

nj

t.

o

3 -M

c

W

a» a» •>-

TO

-m^-^

OJ

O)

1-

cn

^-

^—

-Q

O 3

•4-> i.

TO S

(J

0)

3

o

TO

t- cn-M

c

.». <u

c

OJ

^^

o

-u

+->

O

3 Q. E -O O

>r—

u

(_

^ TO

3

-a -o o

3

Ot

•r-

LO 4J

•r*

-C

>*-

c

TO

OJ

J-

Z SZ

TO

TO C .—

T3

c

^

cn

x*

•»->

<U 3

O TD

U

U3 TO

c

+->

• ^

•r-

u

Q.

OJ Ol

c

-a TO «♦-

C

o

3 >, C

«1

• I. I-

•1"

3

TO

Ol +J

1-

o

to

to

TO

x:

D. 3

>, o

1.^

o

O 1-

0)

0)

c -o ••->

■M

r—

3

r- l>0

O)

-a

OJ

■•J

Q. a.4J

O

t- •!-

g <= >—

</>

I- o

■t->

o to

L

o

■l->

>

■o

c

c

c

OJ

E

C

M t.

O +J

O O TO

rtj

SI 4J

•»->

O

•r-'*- (U

TO

c

to

c <♦-

o

c

TO

•r-

1

L

TO

i

TO ^

+J o

U -f- &.

a:

4J TO

TO

■u

■M O T3

Q.

•^

<u

•f- o

Ol

TO

■"

D.

Q.

o: -M

TO TO

•4- 4-> 3

1

~

>^

i~

1

1

l|-

-o

o

•»->

1

t-

o

o

T3

O

•«-> 1

C (U

<+-

cnx: 1

o;

TO <♦-

.c

I.

C

OJ

H- Ol 1

<u

O) ^

<u

TO

OJ ■!-> </)

^

o

o

OJ OJ

x: OJ

TO OJ ■•-> TJ

c

-^

E -*-'

to

(.

r— -^ -r-

to

to

>,

<+-

-^ E

■M to

i. r- .— TO

o

(0

E

•^

X)

X c

•r—

TO

u

Ol OJ

TO E

•^

T3 3

•♦->

O Ol

u

>> -r-

tt-

c

c >

>)

+-> o

OJ o

>, in Ol

in

L.

u -u

I.

o

l- +J E

+->

O)

•.- TO

o

J- o

4-> l-

O i- C 4->

OJ

to

<U

<U TO

0)

+J

<U r— -O

C

u

CJ-.

■t-) ^

c

OJ OJ

TO 0)

+J OJ O TO

•^

t.

■o

1- C

X

JC 3 TO

o

TO

TO

c

OJ

-o J-

C X

x: O ■»->

o

<u

c

•^

(U

• #t

W </1

O) to

O)

c

•.- OJ

• 'in oo

c

•%

3

^ -o

t.

•.- c <u

to

O

>,

to OJ

TO

3 J=

T3

w •.- o

OJ

10

o

a>i-

1-

a; i«_ o ■•-»

<u

■M

I-

C •!-)

Ol $- J-

OJ *4- +J OJ

O) E

o.

■o

3 O

•r"

X

(J TO

'^

o

O TO

O)

•

T3 3

O •.-

? in

TO

OJ

c

o o

<u

o -o -M

o -a

4->

O +J

£

*-^*

C O

O OJ

o -o -o ••-

^—

(-

<o

i. o

-E

O-

C O CO

c

C

TO

t/1

••->

OJ

TO i~

(J sz

ex c c >

OJ -O

o

^

■«->

0) -tJ

0)

TO

f—

OJ

to

SZ

•»-»

OJ TO T3

>

o

•"-5

(U

+J o

>,

E ^ <U

Ol

3

I- O

OJ

o

OJ ■•->

o

>. E TO

• r-

i~

(O

■•->

4->

c

u

TO

• fy

O)

Q C

to

Q.

■!->

+J c

J- E ••■

+J

D-

z:

Q

• »

•^

o

O C 'r—

to

0)

3

1-

o •-

■p—

0 O C T3

TO

^

«/) •>

■»->

o o >

0)

E

1-

3

E «/>

•>

■•-> o o c

i~

>,

o

0) 1/)

01

TO

a; -1- Tj

>

0)

S- in

o

O.

O OJ

to to

TO OJ •!- TO

■»->

i.-

1.

■^ c

0)

^—

1- -M TO

•^>

r-"

+->

O OJ

+J

J- •!-

C OJ

r- t. 4J

in

OJ

Q.-a o

+-»

3

TO

•»-> ^

c

■«->

to

Q.T3

o +->

3 TO x:

•r-

^

3 -1-

TO

Ol-O .— T3

TO

o

'r—

O TO

c

•r-

3

•1- TO

Ol-O 1— +->

c

in

o

•M ■•->

■•->

0)

C (/) c

i-

1-

o

S •»->

01

^

O +J

■»-> •!->

at c to -r-

•f-

•r-

1—

t/1 TO C/)

1.

TO -e- TO

+J

D.

•i-tM t>0

in

■♦J

1— in

TO 00

I- TO -1- 5

E

*»-

M-

14-

O

C71

C

1

sz

Ol

c

O Ol

c

1 O)

sz c

OJ

•r- tt»

c

</>

•^

OJ T-

OJ c

m -r-

m

D.-M

o

+J 01

tO Q.4J O

•r- +J OJ

0)

3

O TO

•r-

*»r

C ■(->

3 O

TO •<-

«♦- c -tJ

(/)

r— -M

+-»

01 to

r—

■»-> 4J

OJ in

o

(-

a» 1/5

o •♦-

> TO

I- OJ

I/O O S- > TO

Q.

0)

> 1

E

o

Ol 2

OJ >

1 E

o OJ S

I-

■»->

(1> >—

o

t-

•M OJ

r— O

i-

3

■»->

T3 TO

l-

c

Q.^

•M -O

TO 1-

c o.^

a.

a>

t-

cx.

o

TO

O)

J- D.

O TO

x>

>, a>

>. U

JQ >, OJ

•r- >, O

t-

J3 T3

t.

4J ^ -r-

jQ

■D J-

•M XI T-

o

u

o;

o

O

to

OJ

OJ O

U to

•»r!

■M

(/) U-

M-

Ol

■o >,

+-> 1/)

U. <♦-

OJ TJ >,

<a

Q

0)

+->

c ^

O OJ

-!-> c x:

2:

o

1-

<U t-

E
TO

i.

o

1-

TO O.
to I.

E •>-
o w.

J- OJ

■M E
C TO
•r- t.

O TO Q.

Cf o

o>

o; •>-

n.£

O Ol

0) •!-

«/) •r-J

o

-o

•r- 9)

to

•n O -O T- 0)

o

•*—

t.

c

i~ J=

o •.-

J-

c: s- x:

(—

<4- TO

Q-

TO

OJ ■«->

(- ^-

TO D-

TO OJ +->

____,

LO

to

1

OJ

</>

t— «/>

OJ

^—

•*

^"

0)

(U

0)

•^

TO

C

J3

c

.. ^

s.

U

O'-^

•r-

T

c

TO

O)

Dir-»

Ol

o

T!

o

+->

s:

^

OJ ^

•r-

•4J

TO

00

to

TO

s- o^

^—

<o

s:

to

•^

^ o .—

OJ

c

to

r-^

u.

to

^— ^

Ol

to

•f—

TO

TO

«K

(A^~.

•r-

OJ

c

4->

OJ

r—

o c

•1- D-

OO

■M

TO

o

in

TO

<c

x: o

TO 4->

O ^

-a

•M

o

O

(-

• •

T3 Ol

m to

c

oo

O

TO

c

—^ c

1— c

<o

u

</1

0)

o

s:

o

♦•x:

TO OJ

XI

>,

(J

(/)

TO t/l

•r- E

o

-t->

u

4->

^^-^

•r-

t/1

•f- TO

•I- OJ

c

c

OJ

c

C\J

«4-

•r-

C 3

TO E

OJ

TO

x:

TO Tl-

•r—

£

(-

X ,

en

to

CTl

o

fc

O -D

TO t.

<t

u.

4J

TO

o

o

•1- TO

3.2

____

,

V-181

■^"

1 i. (u 49

T3 I. IT3 ^ l-

1

•• C

1

1

4J

c

in tJ 1

fc.

1 -!-> T3 0

1 C

c <o f— a» -•-> 0

•r~

O) 4J

re

0 c re ■!->

1^^

1/) 10 3 CD 3 x: *♦-

T3

1 T- H- (0

3 •

s~ QJ in

1/)

4J +J C U +J l. <*-

I.

r- J_ 0 l-

■M in

Q. E >) to re

E QJ

r~

o;

•f- >, VI •!- •.- 0 OJ

0

<0 <T} ■•->

00 QJ

D-r- QJ £

CD

«

•^

4J OJ +J •!-) cn>4-

0

1- 3 C 00

QJ -r-

s- 0 r- u

0 re

!•

L

JO ••- (O t C J-

0

QJ 4J 0 C

S-

01 1— re c ••

4J c

(J

(0

CD i. 1/1 C re •!- +-> -r-

■a in •!- 0 "♦- QJ

> QJ •>- Q) 01

re

0)

3

3 O+J-r- Q.-(-> C OJ

10

QJ QJ *-> E

0 -C

0 > +-> 3 in

00 E

Q.-MI

0 -C •<- TD 0 <U -C

Lu 10 0)

00

QJ C CT'i-

c

1/1

1/1

t. +J t. 0) 0) E 1—

to

4- 1- "O

QJ -r-

C T3 QJ QJ 2
;- ■!-> in t

0 0

LU

x: 3 I*- 0 > -t-) c

10

QJ 0 <0

0 <♦-

•r- -^

i^

■M <tJ 0 0 •!- 0 0

-0 Q. E

C

QJ r— 0 C QJ

4J

0

-C

0 CD S- t- •

QJ

•r- >, QJ^-

re M-

0 re o- 0 -c

0 O^

■»->

•• >, Q. D.T- t/1

0

5 t. I- •■-

-•-> >—

C -r- 0 4J

re c

C

T3 J- •■- 1— 0 > OJ

• r-

1 0 Q.<+-

t. 3

0 I- m 0

■r~ *

0

5

<uox:<Tj-MOC'i-

>

4- -M

0 0

0 ■(-> re to

to c to

■U ■!-> to 0 -M (1) J-

s-

.— C -U .—

Q.

in •!->

■M -r- QJ

■M

c

Q- ro 1- -t- •> OJ

QJ

3 QJ C (O

E QJ

T3 3 to •!- •

•.- re ■<-

<o

l-

E"a(i)c<i;c:<ux:

to

0 > QJ C

•I- x:

QJ -O -O 00

4J 1-

0

<u

<uc"ox:<uocto

C 1- 0

■fJ

U C I- C QJ

-0 S- QJ

T3

0

■♦-) a> fO 0 +-> •!- -1- -r-

QJ

C -I- I. r-

QJ

•1- ••- re -f- ■<-

QJ Q) x:

0)

T3

c

4->E(Uai-«->4->t-<4-

■0

•I- 3 +J

^ 0

0 en 1-

c Q. to

3

C

0

ic E •—••-» ••- c (O

3

QJ U (O

•!-> ■»->

> -0 QJ QJ QJ

■r- *^>

C

►— 1

<_)

0 E <u 3 M-

^—

s- +-> 0

QJ 1- in ^

M- to 14-

•r-

t/l 0 (DOJ E-t->+->r—

0

0 (O -a 3

CD to

to oo I- to

C i-

4J

(0<l)^CO+Jl/l3

C

■»->■»-> C T3

C QJ

re 0 *J QJ ■•-

0 QJ >4-

c

3:l--t->T-On3<UC3

•r-

10 1/1 fO QJ

n: D.T- > 4-

0 -1-) 0

o
o

1

1 <4-
T3 0 +J 1

1

to 1

IT3 CJ) 0

>> c x:

1-

-a

aja)x:a>'oai-*->to

SZ

+J 0 •!- 0

0

c

4->

^ E +-> in i- r— -r- -r-

in

(J C 4->

14-

re

c

<0 E -^ -0 2 c

rT3 QJ C QJ

■»-> 0 OJ 0 >> •!-

<^

CD QJ >

>,

«t

c

s-o-t-)J-ot-+-»E

0 ro to (O

0

QJ

0)

(/)

a)aj<oa>+JQj<— T3

c

4-> c x:

C

to

Ol

1.

-0 S- C X JC 3 <o

0

>, 0

QJ

C

10

0)

c •!- a» ••- in to

■0 i. 0 00

CD

QJ

c

3

3 jC T3 S- •!- c <u

00

CO QJ

re

0

(0

0

CD I- 1. 0) H- 0 -tJ

QJ

(O •»J QJ -M

•p"

2:

a.

T3 3 0 •!- 3 <J (O

c 0 0 0) 0 -a 4->

U

10 t. fO
•'r- 0 4->

QJ •

x: '-^

•"

0)

s.

nsi-O^Q-COOO

C

to 3 E OO -M QJ

•» •

c

0

^ +J QJ +J

O)

E CD

to

QJ CD

•^

•'-)

<U 4-) 0 >, E QJ

CD

QJ QJ I. 0

QJ 0

•4J C

c\j s-

(0

+J ■•-> c 1- E •' to

(O

.— i- 0 c

to Q.

re ••-

• 19

t:

0 •' -r- 0 0 C -^

J3 — '

3 i.

r— x:

«* 3

E to •> +-> 0 0 >

QJ

0 4J 0

3

3 to

• +J

OOJioinra QJ-i— "O

>

J- C 5 m

0 Q.

CD-r-

> W>

i-'r- caj>— s-+->io

• r~

0..^ +J QJ

+J

0) ^-

UJ

Q--C3 0 -!-> 3 rtJ

+J

0 ■•->

m

j-

UJ

3 •>- (O CDTJ 1— "O

<o

>,'ro l_ IT3

C -r-

X

_I I-

04->-t->+->(UCinc

l-

J- 0 •»->

QJ x:

0 re

CO 0

1 — tOIOCOt-IO-r-IO

4->

QJ re 4- 1/1

in -M

1— -M

< <4-

^"

l—

>4-

4- i*-

m

0 CD 1 CT)

oj 0 0

•P

c ^ c

>

0

0) T- Q) c: to •!- •

0 to c

(O

to ca. 4-> 0 -1- -M <u

t- QJ 0

CL

OJ

3 0 <0 •■- M- C ■»->

Q. 0 •!-

E

to

1— ■(-> 4-> 0) to

E t. -M •

0

0

I- OJ I/) 0 >♦- > «

•1- 3 t- J-

0

OJ > 1 E C <u 2

4-> QJ .— 0 t.

0 0 QJ

X) in Q. >

>,

3

+J -0 (T3 t- C Q.I—

C QJ •!-

c

Q-

QJ t. Q. 0 lO

m i- i- o£.

<u

J3 >5 QJ •!- >, 0

QJ

JO

S-

J3 T3 I- ■♦-> J2 •■-

QJ >,+J 0

(/>

0

QJ QJ 0 0 00

> I- re re

•1—

•<->

4J m u- ■+- QJ -a >,

J- QJ 2 E

u.

0 QJ 4-> C JZ
E •>-■•-> E 0 « Ci

OJ x: QJ 0

in to T3 -M

OJ

0 ^ C IT3 ^

C-r- -t- 0

4J

J- QJ •!- 4. Q. in i-

0 <4- +J Q.

(0

Q- ^ 0 CD QJ •■-

(J

•♦->

m •'-5 0 "a -r- QJ

QJ QJ QJ

in

0 •!- i- C t. ^

0 x: ^ ^

1.

1— >4- (O CL ro QJ 4->

(_ 4J ^J +J

•t-J

,

#1

c

1/)

x:

c

00

l-H

OJ

10

IT

c

: Ala-

buisia

Texas

QJ
QJ

x:
in

yland
58)

c

c

_i -o

•r-

i- CD

cr

Z.

0

c

Ll.

re r—

rtj

•r-

.* (O

s:^-'

<^

s

t/)

-0 -

OJ

re

•a

m

•^

>

• • "r"

c

QJ

^

Z. 0.

•^

C

c

(0

TO

§

0 a.

Qi

0

'd-

>

•M

0

H '[n

0

00

i.

u

1/1

to -—^

re

in

•^

c

m

"•r- 01

E

•^

>

0^

«4-

QJ

(0 00 «3-

0

£

0

^a-

•^

E to 01

+J

fc

T3

<

3

I.

(O T- 1—

0

O-

0
0

re

V-182

GENERAL ACCOMPLI STENTS OF WATER RESOURCE COMPACTS

Accomplishments of the compact instrument in managing water (and
related land) resources generally fall into two broad categories.

The first is regulation of use and/or modification of water
resources covered by the compact. This too takes two forms:
(1) the enunciating or developing, by means of the compact, of
a binding agreement among the signatories on basic policies which
are to govern the use of the resources and (2) the implementation
by a joint agency, which the compact establishes, of such basic
policies through a variety of means, including action to induce
or compel others to comply with these policies and direct opera-
tion of facilities and administration of resources by the compact
agency itself.

The second category of accomplishments is the performance by the
compact agency of services supporting resource use or regulatory
programs.

Each of these accomplishments is illustrated and elaborated below.

DEVELOPMENT OF BINDING POLICIES

Use of the compact can accomplish this in one or both of two ways.
Under the first method, the compact itself exoresses a negotiated
agreement among the signatories on basic policies which, by virtue
of that enunciation, become binding upon all of them. The tyoical

V-183

water allocation compact 1s probably the best example of this
type of accomplishment. Among compacts more directly Involved
In estuarlne management, the best example Is the Tri-State com-
pact, which creates the Interstate Sanitation Commission. Here
the compact Itself specifies the type of waste treatment each
signatory will require for each of certain classifications of
water use.

Under the second form, the compact itself does not express the
basic policy agreement among the signatories. Instead, each
State 1n the compact agrees to be bound by the policy decisions
which the States collectively will reach within the framework
of the compact agency. Examples are the Delaware River Basin
Commission 1n its decision on water quality standards for the
Delaware River and In the policies 1t applied to the recent
drought emergency In that basin. Also Illustrative are the
policies adopted by the Potomac River Fisheries Commission to
regulate fishing 1n the waters under Its jurisdiction.

In either form, th^s accomplishment effectively achieves program
coordination between the signatories to the compact, perhaps In
the only sure way possible short of transferring the resoons1b1l1
ty for coordination to a higher level of government.

V-184

IMPLEMENTATION OF BASIC POLICIES

Use of the compact can achieve Implementation of basic policy
agreements among the signatories In two ways. Under the first
form, the compact agency Is authorized to require those propo-
sing use of the basin's waters to obtain Its prior permission.
Depending on Its exact authority, the agency thus Is able to
implement policies, either enunciated by the compact Itself or
which the agency Itself has developed, through such means as:

(1) the attaching of performance requirements as a condition to
Its permission to others to utilize or modify the resource,

(2) the issuing of directives ordering other entitles to take
steps, or halt activities, specified by the agency, and (3) the
initiating of court action to compel compliance by others with
the agency's permits and orders. Exemplifying this accomplish-
ment among the agencies here surveyed are the Interstate Sanita-
tion Commission and the Delaware River Basin Commission. The
former's accomplishments in this regard are limited to the pre-
vention or abatement of pollution. In contrast, the latter's
actual or potential accomplishments extend also to such matters
as the withdrawal and diversion of water from the basin and to
the use of water for purposes other than waste disposal.

A compact agency can Implement policies, secondly, through its

own direct operation of various facilities affecting water resources

V-185

or through directly administering certain resources. Although
not strictly water resource agencies, examples are: the Breaks
Interstate Park Commission and the Palisades Interstate Park
Commission, both of which administer Interstate recreational
facilities; and the Port of New York Authority and the Delaware
River Port Authority, both of which administer transportation
facilities In Interstate metropolitan areas. Although none of
the agencies included in this survey has accomplishments In this
area, the Delaware River Basin Commission is authorized directly
to administer and operate a broad variety of estuarlne-related
sites and facilities.

PERFORMANCE OF SERVICE FUNCTIONS

A major objective of the States In utilizing the compact instru-
ment has been the creation of a joint agency to support the pri-
vate development and use of such resources and/or their manage-
ment by the signatories or others. Although these services may
not seem as prestigious or significant as the development and
implementation of basic policies governing the use of water
resources, such compacts too can make an Imoortant contribution
to improved use and management of resources.

The nature of these supporting services varies. They include:
(1) serving as a clearinghouse and regional forum through which
the signatories gain improved understanding of one another's

V-186

objectives and needs and through which they voluntarily coordinate
their respective programs; (2) planning in the sense of develop-
ment by the compact agency of policies and plans of an advisory
or recommendatory nature; (3) the conducting or promoting by the
agency of research and studies aimed at exoanding the knowledge
base and thus improving management policies; (4) increasing pub-
lic awareness and understanding of program needs by information
dissemination and education programs; and (5) representation by
the agency of State views and interests at the Federal level.

Although most compact agencies perform one or more of the services
mentioned above, the programs of several of the agencies included
in this review are limited to these services. Specifically, this
is true of three of the fisheries comoacts (Atlantic, Gulf, and
Pacific); the present Potomac pollution control compact, whose
agency has stressed studies, public education programs, and ser-
vice as a regional clearinghouse and forum; and the New England
Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission, whose activities
have been characterized by advisory program planning, program
coordination, research and studies, and service as a regional
clearinghouse and forum.

EVALUATION OF THEIR PAST ROLE IN ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT

As shown in Table V./:.2, each of the three interstate fisheries
comnisslons has stressed the improved use of fishery resources

V-187

as Its major purpose. As part of this effort, each also has
attempted to reduce the damage to estuaries through pollution and
other causes. Limited in each case to a research-coordinating
and recommendatory role, none of the agencies has itself been
able to do much about such damage. Moreover, even in the restric-
ted role of these agencies, their limited resources -- in money
and size of the staff -- have seriously handicapped their
effectiveness.

Like their counterparts in the fisheries, the three interstate
pollution control agencies have not become significantly involved
in estuarine management. In the case of two -- the New England
Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission and the Interstate
Commission on the Potomac River Basin -- authority is limited to
support of State pollution control agencies. It also extends, in
the case of the first agency, over a geographic arei much larger
than this region's estuaries. This latter point ar>pears less
important in the case of the Potomac commission, because it has
shown special concern with the estuarine portion of the river.
That concern, however, has almost solely stressed the pollution
threat. In both of these agencies, limited financial resources
also have curtailed the overall contribution which they can make.

Although concerned with what clearly are estuarine waters, the
authority of the Interstate Sanitation Commission extends only to
the control of pollution. Also, while it technically has

V-188
regulatory authority, this may be more apparent than realj for
it can compel a polluter to take corrective action only if its
order to that effect receives assent from a majority of the
commissioners from each member State. Thus, a decision by the
commission to order abatement of pollution, or to enforce com-
pliance with such an order, is really a decision by the State
in which the polluter is located, and the role of the interstate
commission can more properly be described as ministerial in
nature.

Unlike the agencies already discussed, the Delaware River Basin
Commission is multipurpose in nature. Moreover, in developing a
more comprehensive approach to water resource management, it can
employ a broad range of authority, including regulation and
operation of its own facilities. It also can exercise regulatory
authority on the basis of a simple majority decision by its
commissioners. Federal membership in the commission also enables
it to coordinate Federal and State activities in the basin. To
date, however, its concern with the estuarine resources of the
basin appear to have been quite limited. It includes adoption of
water quality standards for the estuarine portion of the river,
the development of a 10-year fisheries research program, the
inclusion of certain estuarine resources under its comprehensive
development olan for the basin, and the preparation of plans for
a broad study of Delaware Bay, leading to the development of a

V-189
plan for manaqing its water and related land resources. This

limited role presumably reflects a decision to give priority

to the river itself.

Although the Delaware River Basin Commission clearly has the
potential to develop into a more significant force for a compre-
hensive approach to the management of the estuarine resources of
that basin, its role in this regard can be expected to emphasize
the management of estuarine water resources. This is because
its authority tc control land use appears to be primarily advisory
and recommendatory in nature.

Compact agencies thus to date have not played an extensive or
significant role in managing the Nation's estuaries. With the
exception of the Delaware River Basin Commission, each agency
has been predominantly concerned with a single phase of estuarine
management problems. In most cases, the agency's concern with
estuaries also has been only an incidental part of a broader
mission. Finally, the role of most agencies -- in law or in fact --
has been restricted primarily to service to the signatory States.
In other words, the States usually have stopped short of giving the
compact agency real decision-making and enforcement authority on
estuarine management questions and issues.

POTENTIAL POLE IN ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT

What about the role of the interstate compact in the comprehensive
national program to manage estuaries more effectively? Can, and

V-190

should, the compact Instrument play a significant part In this
emerging program? The answer to this second question Is "yes,"
If two conditions are met.

First, If a compact is proposed for more than the performance of
service functions, the States must In fact give their joint agency
authority and resources sufficient to enable It to override each
State's prerogative Independently to make and carry out its own
policies in its own portion of the estuary. Put differently, this
condition requires that the authority and resources given to a
compact agency be commensurate with its basic mission. If that
mission is regulatory in the sense that the agency is to develop
the basic policies that are to govern the management of a particu-
lar estuary, then the decisions of the comoact agency must be
binding and preclude any signatory from administering less restric-
tive management policies. There also must be a means of avoiding
deadlocks between the signatories which stall needed decisions,
and of compelling the agency to make those decisions. The latter
is especially essential in situations where differences in State
views concerning policy in the estuary reflect very fundamental
conflicts among tJifferent uses of estuarine resources.

Similarly, if the basic mission of the compact agency also Includes
the implementation and enforcement of these basic policies, then
its authority (1) must not be subject to the veto of a single
State, (2) should include all of the usual legal oowers employed

V-191

to abate pollution and other public nuisances, (3) should include
the power to disallow action that is inconsistent with established
policies, (4) should include authority to perform functions of a
State or local agency if made necessary by the inaction of one
of Its signatories, and (5) should be supported by adequate finan-
cial and staff resources.

Likewise, if the agency's mission does not include either the
setting or implementation of policy and is limited to that of
regional service, then too its authority must be designed and
supported so that the staff of the agency in fact can perform that
service effectively and usefully.

The second condition is that the compact cannot be allowed to
supersede or diminish Federal responsibility and authority for
sound management of the Nation's estuaries. With or without
Federal membership in the compact agency, a compact cannot
abrograte the Federal Government's obligation to view the problems
and needs of each estuary from a national perspective and to act
accordingly within the limits of its authority.

Given adherence to these conditions, the compact instrument should
prove to be a constructive way of achieving improved management
in interstate estuaries. It also could achieve the decentraliza-
tion of policy-making and administration that is essential, if a
major enlargement of Federal management responsibility is to be avoided.

V-192

SECTION 2. PROPOSED USES OF THE COMPACT INSTRUMENT
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BASIN

THE SUSOUEHANNA AND POTOMAC COMPACTS

Both of these nev/ comnacts are concerned with the management of
resources indirectly affecting the estuarine resources of Chesapeake
Bay. The first, the proposed Susquehanna River Basin Compact, has
been approved by Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania, and legisla-
tion granting Congressional consent is awaiting action in the 91st
Congress. The second, the proposed Potomac River Basin Compact,
was drafted by a special committee established by the Governors of
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia. It presently
awaits action by the State legislatures and by the District of
Columbia, which the compact includes as a member.

In brief, each compact would establish a joint agency of the
signatory States and the Federal Government patterned after the
Delaware River Basin Commission. Each would be empowered to perform
essentially three broad functions.

The first would be to serve as a special organizational mechanism
through which the basin States and the Federal Government v/ould
consult on mutual problems and interests regarding the water and
related land resources of the basin.

The second function would be to coordinate the activities of these
governments and of nongovernmental entities directed toward the use

V-193

and management of the basin's water and related land resources. This
coordination would be achieved principally through a comprehensive
water resources plan -- which would be an expression of basinwide
goals, standards, objectives, programs, and projects -- to be adopted,
and revised as appropriate, by the compact agency; and through the
water resources program, which the compact agency would be required
to adopt annually as a statement of how the comprehensive water
resources plan would be implemented by the signatories, the commis-
sion, and others.

The third broad function proposed for the agencv is to construct and
operate necessary projects and facilities, or to undertake other
desirable activities, when no other governmental agency or nongovern-
mental entity does so, or when the signatory parties decide that the
compact agency is the most appropriate entity to do so.

Although substantially similar, the Potomac compact differs in that
it would also extend the agency's authority to the preservation and
promotion of, in the words of the compact, "... the aesthetic
and other values inherent in the historic, scenic, and environmental
amenities . . ." of the Potomac River Basin. The Susquehanna compact,
in other words, is more strictly confined to the management of water
resources.

If the new Potomac compact is enacted, the new basin agency would
absorb the present Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.

V-194

OBJECTIONS TO PROPOSED COMPACTS

A number of Federal agencies have voiced objections to certain
features in the Susquehanna compact. As stated in WRC Agenda
Memorandum #2, prepared for the Water Resources Council, these
agencies are objecting to:

(1) Voting and other provisions that could be used to
adversely affect the duties and responsibilities of
Federal agencies under the Federal statutes defining
their respective missions.

(2) The provision that the Federal member on the compact
agency is to be ". . . the direct representative of the
President. . . " The Federal agencies object to this
because the States reportedly have indicated this wording
would mean that no Federal agency would be authorized to
guide the decisions of the Federal member and, further,
that this member could disregard the wishes of the Cabinet
officers directing the Federal departments dealing with
water resources.

(3) The absence of safeguards giving assurance that the
action of Federal licensing and regulatory agencies would
prevail, in the event of conflict or confusion resulting
from the exercise by the compact agency of comoarable
powers vested in it by the compact.

V-195

4. The absence of provisions requiring the compact
agency to give preference to public bodies and coopera-
tives in the sale of hydroelectric power generated at
projects constructed and operated by the agency.

Because the proposed Potomac compact follows substantially the
same approach on each of the above issues, one must conclude
that it will encounter similar objections from Federal agencies.

In addition, however, objections already are being raised to this
compact as it is being considered for possible ratification by
the State legislatures. This early opposition appears to stem
from various local governments and private interests in the basin,
and particularly from the West Virginia portion of the basin.
Although phrased in a variety of ways, the objections seem basical-
ly to reflect the following: (1) that the interests of uostream
water users are inadequately protected; (2) that local govern-
ments in the basin are subordinated to a too-powerful compact
agency; (3) that there is a lack of popular or citizen control
over the compact agency; (4) that the agency's regulatory authori-
ty over the use of land resources of the basin is too extensive;
and (5) that the District of Columbia should not be included as
a signatory equal to the basin States.

V-196

A SUGGESTED USE OF THE INTERSTATE COMPACT
IN MANAGING CHESAPEAKE BAY

Proposals to utilize a compact to improve State-level management
of the estuarine resources of Chesapeake Bay have been advanced
from time to time. In recent years, this proposal usually has
called for the enactment of a compact modeled after the Delaware
River Basin Compact and the two compacts now being urged for the
Susquehanna and Potomac River basins. Adherence to this approach
would place the estuarine resources of Chesapeake Bay under a
Federal -interstate commission empowered to perform the three
broad management functions which were noted earlier in describing
the latter two compacts.

As here conceived, however, the interstate compact to manage the
estuarine resources of Chesapeake Bay would be an agreement
between Maryland and Virginia under which each State would commit
itself to tsko four actions:

(1) To prepare and, after consulting with the other
State, to adopt and implement a management olan for
the portion of Chesapeake Bay under its jurisdiction;
to prepar'e this plan in cooperation with local govern-
ments, the other State, appropriate Federal agencies,
and others; and to include in such plan at least the
following components: (a) wetlands protection and
management component; (b) water quality management

V-197

component; (c) recreational use comnonent; and (d) water-
v/ay, utilities, and industrial use component.

(2) To establish policies and procedures whereby each
State assures that its local political subdivisions will
implement and comply with the plan after its adoption.

(3) To require its agencies and local subdivisions,
when developing legislative or other significant action
proposals affecting the bay resources, to (a) study
and consider all impacts, including the long-range
effects, of the proposed action on the estuarine resour-
ces of the bay; and (b) explicitly state considerations
of National, State, or local policy which justify any
adverse effects that cannot be avoided by following
reasonable alternatives.

(4) To establish and maintain a joint agency in coopera-
tion with the Federal Hovernment that shall: (a) coordi-
nate State and Federal research and studies in the bay
and conduct its own work along these lines; (b) conduct
an education program concerning issues in the use and
management of the bay's resources; (c) evaluate proposed
plans and projects, both public and private, for the

use and management of the bay and its estuarine resour-
ces by identifying the proposal's advantages and disad-
vantages, weighing tradeoffs between disparate benefits
involved in the proposal, pointing out effects on the

V-198

various interdependent uses of the bay's estuarine
resources, and suggesting alternatives that should
be considered; and (d) periodically evaluate exis-
ting management programs and the condition of the
bay's estuarine resources, economic and other trends
affecting those resources, and report its conclusions
and recommendations to the two States and the Federal
Government.

Three major objectives underline the proposed use of the compact
instrument along the preceding lines.

The first is to create a governmental institution whose predo-
minant concern and mission would be to define and clarify issues
and the consequences of alternative policies for the use and
management of the estuarine resources of Chesapeake Bay. Deci-
sions on those issues and execution of those decisions would
remain with the politically responsible legislative and adminis-
trative institutions of the two States and the Federal Government,

The aim would be to dramatize more effectively, to the political
process which must choose among alternative ways of utilizing
and managing the resources of the bay, the two central needs that
are the core of sound resource management. These are, first, to
eliminate or reduce the adverse spillovers from certain uses that

V-199

decrease or destroy the possibility of other use of the same
resources. The need, in other words, is maximum preservation
or conservation of the resource in order to maintain multiple
use, and therefore maximum use, both now and in the future.
The other need is to resolve the competition among different
uses which results from the ever-increasing intensity of
utilization, and from the inherent ultimate scarcity of some
estuarine resources, through the conferring of priority on that
mix of uses which society deems most beneficial, based on both
short- and long-range considerations.

To facilitate the compact agency's performance of this unique
function, which today is largely not performed, each signatory's
membership in the agency should represent broad citizen interest
and values in estuarine resources rather than those of the indi-
vidual Federal or State agencies administering resource develop-
ment or protection programs. It is the nature of the governmen-
tal process in this country that these line agencies as a rule
must be especially responsive to special client groups. Sound
management, therefore, requires that the special evaluative
function here proposed for the compact agency be directed by
persons not associated with the more narrow interest or viewpoint
usually characteristic of these agencies.

The second objective is to obtain an agreement between Maryland
and Virginia that each will develop and implement a comprehensive

V-200

plan for the use and management of its oortlon of the estuarine
resources of Chesaoeake Bay. In essence, the goal here is to
apply to the resources of the interstate bay the planning and
management approach that the San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Conmission has applied to, and proposed for, the
resources of that intrastate estuary. (See Part V, Chapter 3
for a discussion of BCDC.) Also implicit in each State's agree-
ment on this point would be a comnitment on its oart to establish
a greater degree of State-level supervision and control over
zoning and other local regulations over land uses within the
basin that affect estuarine values. At present, of course, each
State's original authority to exercise these controls itself,
has largely been delegated to its local units of government.
These units, not surprisingly, have wanted to promote the economic
growth of the local area and improve its tax base. However, in
the absence of effective review and supervision by a State agency
charged with protecting estuarine resources, the result too often
has been that local governments succumb to strong local pressures to
proceed with poorly planned or limited-purpose development of
these resources.

The third objective is to enact in each State, by means of the
compact, statutory provisions requiring that all State or local
legislative or other significant action oroposals affecting the
estuarine resources of the bay include m) assessment and justifica-
tion by the nroposinq entity of the proposal's effect on those
resources and their use.

V-201

SECTION 3. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of existing compact agencies 1n managing the
Nation's estuarine resources has been limited. The reasons are
basically three.

First, the predominant concern of most compact agencies
in existence has been with a single phase, or at most a
few of the multiple phases, of estuarine management.
Single purposes that have received special emphasis are
the protection of fishery resources and the prevention
or control of water pollution.

Second, concern with estuarine resources in most
instances has been only an incidental part of a broader
assigned mission to the agency. In other words, estua-
rine resources and problems ordinarily have not been
the agency's special point of focus.

Third, the actual role of most compact agencies -- in
law or in fact -- has been predominantly one of rendering
supporting services to the signatory States. The States,
in other words, have continued to make and execute most
of the important estuarine management decisions outside
of the compact agency's framework and procedures.

The potential contributions that the compact instrument can make
to improved management of estuarine resources are important.

V-202

nevertheless. They fall broadly into two categories.

(1) Regulation of use and modification of interstate
estuarine resources through, first, the enunciating or
developing of a binding agreement among the signatories
on basic policies which are to govern the use of those
resources; and, second, the implementation of such poli-
cies by the compact agency through a variety of means,
including action to induce or compel compliance by others
with these policies and the direct management and oper-
ation of estuarine sites and facilities by the agency
itself.

(2) Performance of services supporting the use of es-
tuarine resources or their management by the signatories.

The use of the compact instrument which this chapter has suggested
in the case of the Chesapeake Bay is an example of each contribution.

For a compact device to contribute to improved management of inter-
state estuaries, it must meet two requirements.

(1) the authority and resources of a compact agency must
be commensurate with its basic mission. It is especially
essential, if a compact authorizes the signatories' joint
agency to develop and implement the basic policies which
are to govern the use of the estuary, that each member
State in fact should subordinate its authority to that of
the compact agency.

(2) the compact cannot be allowed to supersede or diminish

V-203
the Federal Government's responsibility and authority to
view the problems and needs of each estuary from a national
perspective and to act accordingly within the limits of its
authority.

V-205

Chapter 5
VIEWS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
SECTORS ON ROLES IN THE ESTUARINE ZONE

SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION

The Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966, in establishing the National
Estuarine Pollution Study, directed that the Study be conducted in
cooperation with various Federal, State, and interstate bodies, and,
in addition, with "...local public bodies and private organizations
institutions, and individuals...", and that "recommendations [shall
be made] for a comprehensive national program for the preservation,
study, use, and development of estuaries of the Nation, and the re-
spective responsibilities which should be assumed by Federal, State,
and local governments and by public and private interests." [Empha-
sis added.]

Much was done through appointed representatives and many briefings,
consultations, and exchanges of correspondence. But, to meet the
requirement of bringing the Study to the local level and to private
individuals, and generally to reach all those who were not being
reached by other means, it was decided to hold a series of public
meetings — at least one in each coastal State — to obtain the views
of all those concerned about the condition of the estuaries.

The decision was a fortunate one, in that the meetings proved to be
an excellent vehicle for obtaining a comprehensive cross-section of
public opinion regarding the needs of and dangers to the estuarine

V-206

zone. Attendance at the thirty meetings was good — not only in terms
of number, but also in variety of organizations and individuals repre-
sented. Many statements, both oral and written, were made. Complete
transcripts of each meeting were prepared, and, as a result, it is
possible to extract from them a reasonably accurate report of the
major concerns of those in attendance.

An additional important result of these meetings has been increased
public awareness of the values and problems of the estuaries, because
of the publicity given them. This has already resulted in favorable
action at both State and local level to further the protection of the
estuarine zone.

The public meeting proved to be an invaluable mechanism for obtaining
statements of concern and recommendation from those groups and indi-
viduals who are usually left without a voice in studies of this kind.
It was hoped that a variety of presentations would be made, and the
success of the public meetings in this regard was far beyond anyone's
expectations.

Because the public meetings were most important in bringing the Study
to the attention of individuals and to private organizations, the re-
mainder of this Chapter is devoted to an analysis of these meetings
and the conclusions to be reached from such analysis.

In addition, there were other successful means of contact which re-
sulted in a continuous flow of information. The wide diversity of

V-207

sources and methods used has been briefly described in the intro-
duction to the Study, and is more fully delineated in the outline
in Appendix A. The outline also further indicates the importance
of the public meetings in reaching various groups.

There were, of course, many other sources of information used
that made particular efforts to gain the views and ideas of both
the public and private sectors. The report by the Panel on
Management and Development of the Coastal Zone is an excellent
example. This Panel of the Commission on Marine Science,
Engineering and Resources held eight informal hearings in various
parts of the Nation at which a total of 126 persons testified.
The Panel, in addition, interviewed or corresponded with over 600
persons.

The results of the above Panel studies are discussed in greater
detail in another chapter; they are noted here because of their
importance as sources of public contact.

V-208

SECTION 2. PLANNING AND CONDUCT OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS

In order to bring the planning of the public meetings as close as
possible to potential witnesses, this responsibility was delegated
to the six Regional Offices of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration involved with the coastal States.

To reach as many people as possible, and to allow for the broadest
possible representation, invitations were sent to organizations,
business and industrial concerns and groups, and State and local
government bodies; and announcements were made in the local press
and on local radio stations, in an effort to encourage individual
citizens to attend and speak.

Each meeting was presided over jointly by the Regional Director and
by the Governor's Representative to the National Estuarine Pollution
Study.

Because of the high degree of interest shown by the people in attend-
ance, transcripts of the meetings, including written submissions,
were prepared and sent to the participants and other interested
persons.

Between January of 1968 and February of 1969, thirty meetings were
held. A map showing the meeting locations appears in Appendix B,
and the schedule of these meetings appears in Appendix C.

V-209

The meetings reached a total of 2,868 persons and groups 1n attend-
ance, with 1,069 statements presented for the record. Attendance
and participation involved many different types of organizations,
government and nongovernment institutions, business, and individuals.

Transcripts frequently ran to 350 pages, and included a number of
technical reports on the effects of pollution and on the general con-
dition of specific estuaries, among other things.

Because the transcripts are a permanent part of the Study, it is pos-
sible to analyze them for a number of features, and report the results.

V-210

SECTION 3. METHOD OF ANALYSIS

Perhaps the hallmark of the public meetings was the tremendous volume
of information and recommendations presented by the various represent-
atives of national organizations and their local affiliates, of State
and local government godies, of academic and research institutions;
and by the individuals who spoke only for themselves.

Attendance was good and varied. Testimony was most frequent from the
national organizations and government bodies. Academic institutions
and industry were somewhat less involved in testifying, but did pre-
sent good information and recommendations. In addition, the involve-
ment of individual citizens was most heartening.

All of these people presented input vital to the Study, and the pub-
lic meeting provided the only real forum for them.

In order that the material presented at the public meetings could be
reported with some accuracy, it was important that there be some means
for identifying the affiliation of each speaker, and the nature of his
statement.

Accordingly, the first step was to determine the kinds of representa-
tion, and the numbers of speakers within each group. After determin-
ing categories of speakers, a count was made of the speakers and total
attendance within the groupings for all meetings. The four groupings
selected are as follow:

V-211

Group I. National organizations and their local affiliates,

local organizations, and individuals;

Group II. Academic institutions, private research firms,

and scientific foundations;

Group III. Industry, users, and industrial groups; and

Group IV. Federal, State, and local government bodies.

Table V.5.1 presents the tabulation of witnesses and attendees in each
of the groups, and the total number of statements and attendance.

TABLE V.5.1

Types of Groups and Participation in Public Meetings

for the National Estuarine Pollution Study

Number Total
Group Statements Attendance

I. National Organizations and

Local Affiliates, Local Organ- 407 746
izations, and Individuals

II. Academic Institutions,

Private Research Organizations, 133 264
and Scientific Foundations

III. Industry and Users, and

Industrial Groups 168 705

IV. Federal, State, and Local

Government Bodies 361 1,153

Totals of All Groups 1.069 2,868

V-212

As will be noted, organizations (Group I, above) and governments
(Group IV) were most strongly represented in statements, with users
(Group III) and academic people (Group II) speaking in lesser numbers.
However, governments, organizations, and industry were well represented
in terms of total attendance.

After organizing the statements by type of speaker, it was then nec-
essary to determine subject areas for the information and recommend-
ations presented in the various statements. These subject categories
were established as a series of eight questions, as follow:

(1) What are the major uses and values of the estuaries and
estuarine zones?

(2) What are the dangers and problems in the estuaries and
estuarine zones?

(3) What have been the results of pollution, modification,
and use in the estuaries and estuarine zones?

(4) What needs to be done to restore, preserve, and protect
the estuaries?

(5) What types of research and study are needed, and how
should this research be done?

(6) What type of organization is needed to best protect,
control, and manage the estuaries?

(7) What should be the role of the State and local govern-
ments in management of the estuaries?

(3) What should be the role of the Federal Government in
management of the estuaries?

V-213

Table V. 5. 2 shows the number of statements responding to each ques-
tion, by group, and in gross total.

As will be noted, the questions on dangers to, uses and values of,
and needs to restore the estuaries received the largest numbers of
replies. Slightly behind were the questions on effects of pollution
and research and study needs. The questions concerning management
organizations and the recommended roles of the various levels of
government received considerably fewer responses.

The next step, and without doubt a most important one, was to analyze
the replies to the questions in order to bring out the concerns and
specific answers most frequently expressed. To do so, each of the
eight questions was analyzed separately on one of the accompanying
1^ Table V.5.3 formats. The views, concerns, and answers expressed were
synthesized into a few brief statements listed in the left-hand col-
umn of the Table, and then the number of statements expressing each
of the views was entered by group and in total in the columns to the
right side. From this process, a more-or-less priority listing of
the major concerns expressed by the greatest number of participants
was prepared for each question. Because most of the people attend-
ing the public meetings made several points in each statement that
responded to any question or questions, the total derived by adding
the responses shown on the appropriate Table V.5.3 format will be
greater than the total shown for the corresponding question on Table
V.5.2.

V-214

to

en

c

0)

u

jQ

3
Q.

(U

x:
+->

•*->
•o

CSJ 01

• >

IT) •!-

• <U
> O

<u

-J

OQ C

■a: o

to

(1)

-C

(J

to

0)

i/>

c
o

Q.

to

Ol

Role of
Fed. Gov.

If)

00

r— *

O
<3-

o

uo

CVJ

Roles of
State &
Local Gov.

uo
en

00

CO

ft-

O

CM

Management
Organiza-
tion

in

00

00
CM

CO

O^

247

Research
& Study

o

r— '

LO

<T>

ir>

CM
CO

Needs to
Be Done

CO

00

in

Effects of
Pollution

"a-

1^

00

to

CO

Dangers &
Problems

tn

o

CO

to
eg

IT)

Major Uses
i Values

U3
00

tn

s

«*

00 /
z /
o /

1— 1 /

^- /

00 /

UJ /

=j /
cy /

/ ^
1 t^

/ ■=>
/ o

/ -^

I.

National Organizations
and Local Affiliates,
Local Organizations, &
Individuals

II.

Academic Institutions,
Private Research Organ-
izations, i Scientific
Foundations

III.

Industry and Users, &
Industrial Groups

IV.

Federal , State & Local

Government Bodies

00

_J

<:
1—
o

1—

V-215

Tables V.5.3a through V.5.3H demonstrate this analysis for each of
the eight questions for 66 percent of the public meetings.

V-216

o
en
<u

IB

o

(U

-o

c

ra

a.

3
O

<J3

at <->

>

o.

o

J3

a.

<♦-
(O o
CO

• <u

• >>

_i a»
en a.
<

<U
»/)

c
o
a.
1/1

<u

c
o

c

>

(TJ

3

to

"*

-J

•

h-

o

CO

tn

CVJ

to

CVJ

en

^

00

<-

CTl

CM

CO

r^

CO

C\J

•0-

CM

00

CM

CM

f—

00

Cvj

CO

CVJ

•

a.

to

=3

>• en

o

—< i-

Qi

„o

00

«x>

0

CO

rv.

in

«3-

0

p..

CO

CM

<T»

t3

3 •

CO

CM

h^

•—

CO

•—

CO

CD

O >

^

1- o

O

to o

»— H

'— >»

t/1

i-i L. t/>

LU

•M t.

f*—

^

ix.

1^

CO

CO

r^

CM

to

»3-

0

CO

00

CL to <U

CO

^

CM

^—

^M

f^m

CM

zi;

3 3 1/1

o

O -O =3

Q.

5- C

00
1 1 1

Ci3 l-H t«

q;

• •
Irt to

U-

+j en

o

to J-
>— C CD

^

»— 1 1-^

^—

^~

CO

tn

»a-

^M

^—

0

CVJ

«;»■

0

0

o

•

CSJ

CO

CVJ

^_

t—t

a. • o

h-

3 T3 »/1

ZD

o <a q:

CO

i~ u

h-4

CJ3 < oa

.

00

to to

H- 1

en c

Q

i. 0)

►-•ON

CO

^

CM

^^

CO

0

CM

to

un

CO

0

p—

•r—

r^

CO

0

r— •

CM

^

Q. • -»->

3 f— •!-

O -M CJ

I- fO

0:2:00

u

0)

Ol

XJ

t.

JZ

g

c

3

4J

Q

rtj

4J

r—

-0

0

to

3

C

u

(U

(J

nj

a>

•r—

nj

j-

3

«t

o>

«

CT

E

<u

c

3

(tJ

i/i

M-

"^

4->

•r—

C/>

■•->

lA

-0

T

r—

4J

r~"

<U

3
0

"O

0

3

(U

4J

•^

Q.

(U

^

>>

3

t.

+J

t-

•a

-a

>-

<u

c

■0

c

■0

QC

r— <4-

l/>

«o

c

«

r"—

c

o

0

J-

ro

J-

(O

<o

C3

•

3

CD

<u

Qi

g

LU

0 to

C

c

JZ

0

^~

*»

t—

2= (U

•r-

<A

i-

t.

03

OJ

a>

<c

3

Ol

j^

L.

a»

•^

-C

c

o

0 fO

c

to

<r

+J

>—

•-I >

•5

«♦-

>,

0

to

CT

•r-

o

h-

3

(U

0

3

C

iA

LU

00 XJ

r~

4->

r—

>

-a

•r-

■-3

LU C

0

I.

ta

•p-

01

c

-0

r"~

20

^ ra

c

0

;

■•->

E

>i—

3

(O

Z5

cr

■r-

Q.

0

(U

0

•f—

r™

•^

oo

to

to

<u

to

0)

■i->

en

0

i.

0}

•k

Q.

3

4J

•r"

c:

c

*»

to

l/>

cn

I/)

0

t.

«r"

•f—

Ui

3

OJ

c

<U >*-

r—

s-

fO

■0

C

3

0

• r->

0

(0

Q.

^

3

M

0

-0

(-

u

-0

•» <u

't—

r^

c

>>

•r-

C

0

3

3

to t.

0

■0

to

1

<J

0

i-

■!->

•^

•1-5 (^.

0

f—

(U 0)

•p~

c

(U

1

c

•r—

0

<o

<o to

to

0

0 ^

tf-

ro

«j

•^

4->

■!->

0

T3

E <U

a»

C

t. -l->

0)

I.

c

IT3

ro

• ^

C

c

1-

•»—

3

c

f—

3

0

A

^™

;.

14-

lO

0) 0

0 c

(U

0

a

•^

>>

•r-

0

•r-

^ N

-a

M

to 0

-Q

t-

iA

4->

_E

XI

■0

r^

+J

0

c

<u ■.-

■M

(U

ns

'q.

10

0

ro

<U

0

0

S- 4J

(U

C

I.

+J

Q.

10

r—

E

•r-

Ol C

<4-

m

0

L.

3

to

4J «/)

l--r-

4->

1— >

Q.

0

^—

0

to

ro

^—

O)

C 4J

ta u

0)

(O

(O t.

(O

Q.

ro

4->

<U ••-

<a

c

Oi

t- 0)

-(->

•0

i_

to

J-

<U

J-

ro

-a <4-

■•-» 3

•^

i~

3 to

r-w

0

0)

C

0)

+J

3

E

•r- <U

<a+j

(.

0

■(-> C

3

0

c

lO

■M

(/»

+J

•f—

to c

^ to

«

(U

m 0

:^

•r-

(-

<o

ro

ro

^—

<u <u

73 u

a:

z 0

=

u.

Z

1—

3

It

^

<_)

OC J3

V-217

4-1

>,

1

t.

+5"

•f—

**-

«

o

•r-

(/)

•r-

E

14-

Q.

»*-

>

a>

a

O

«t

B

o

4->

i.

u

•*
•M

c

{/)

(/)

0>

O

(«-

3

•p-

OJ

s:

0)

a

o

3

o

E

<♦-

r—

JZ

■M

u

x:

L.

T3

OJ

ro

■M

§

u

■•->

3

O

<fi

T3

c

U

3

O

t-

OJ

OJ

OJ

•r-

+J

l.

o

^-

J/>

O.

3

•f-

X)

D>

C

D>

</)

o

r^

n—

O

01

■)->

0)

+->

<*-

lO

Q.

—

r^

«/)

3

t.

CO

c

o

>

E

CO

o

OJ

o

•»->

<a

•r-

i~

o

k

^

c

■»->

to

o

OJ

0)

o.

(/)

fO

0)

t.

to

'r-

•

l/>

x:

OJ

■M

i~

o

o

g

*>— *»

lO

-tJ

t.

k

•^

3

0)

o.

Q

«^

5

o

o

-l->

•tJ

E

C

00

4-

to

"O

lO

<o

•r-

■•->

o

^-^

4J

^

OJ

c

c

4-»

c

o

Q.

o

c/)

•^

•

lO

10

>,

OJ

O)

CO

OJ

(0

3

1-

(/»

10

0)

>

4J

O

o;

U

lO

Ol

CO

•t

f

^

'ct

0)

OJ

L.

c

o

E

^"

c

■fj

4->

C

i.

^

o

o

o

^—

c

^

un

o

lO

•^

o.

•M

o.

o

■M

3

ro

«4-

sz

to

"O

1/)

H-

>

x»

o

+->

lO

o

OJ

-a

OJ

^

c

10

0)

■M

s-

c

^

t.

le

CT

CT

0)

0)

4->

Ol

I.

QJ

19

■u

O

C

C

1-

lO

c

u

4J

5

2

>>

•r-

•^

^

<J

x:

c

O

di

-o

L.

2

>>

(0

<u

•M

5

•r-

OJ

to

U

c

"O

o

o

c

h-

t-

o

<4-

oi

1-

<o

c

4-»

r~

ro

i/>

c

»*-

c

OJ

<o

IS

^—

Q-

c

00

ro

3

'o

<o

OJ

4J

. —

«t

■tJ

o

£

o

u.

o

o

OJ

o

to

to

X2

u

1/1

T3

C

X)

••->

o

«a-

•p-

<o

OJ

o

L

<U

t.

c

E

^-^

X

^™

x:

ro

01

(/)

<U

•

o

'f—

OJ

OJ

4-*

5

(/)

u

^-^

4J

o

E

CO

o

!■•

OJ

QJ

c

<NJ

4->

•r—

•^

OJ

u

n

"O

x:

c

t-

o

CM

ro

3

r-*

■M

E

s-

c

4->

et

Q.

o

CM

0)

o.

X)

•^

•r—

c

3

<o

X

to

3

I.

•»->

<o

+J

c

"O

Oi

+->

Q)

Q.

<o

u

«a

CO

•p-

c

(/I

0>

0)

J3

E

^—

c

•r-

10

0)

(U

<4-

.cr

OJ

<o

to

.c

■o

(/)

4J

4J

■4->

x:

«4-

t-

OJ

le

4J

OJ

Vt

3

(0

f—

to

4->

O

OJ

CO

4->

S

0)

-o

■o

>

3

</>

c

ro

a>

-P

L.

o;

E

C

T3

OJ

lO

•^

U

•r*

t/t

CD

•r-

N

•r—

C

CO

>.

•r-

>

0)

5

to

lO

c

J*»

(/)

■o

x:

4->

c

<U

CO

a.

(O

s-

OJ

c

(•-

C71

X

T3

CD

o

+->

«s

3

E

lO

c/l

•p"

o

04

C

o

•F-

c

*— ^

3

OJ

.c

c

lO

u

■♦->

(O

CO

OJ

■M

+J

x:

to

c

OJ

o

Q.

1—

E

ro

(/>

4->

ro

o

(U

0>

x:

s-

lO

r—

(O

x:

<U

C

•r-

.c

sz

to

i~

o

^— ^

o

+J

OJ

"

■t-l

■»->

h-

^^-^

Q.

•r-

0)

S-

4->

10

>4-

CO

■4J

+J

z

ro

f

ro

c

N

*

c

I.

c

OJ

OJ

+J

Q.

•r—

•r-

lO

•

4-

CM

o

(O

OJ

1/1

■o

O

u

00

,.-^

O

Q.

E

3

•r—

<*-

C

Q.

10

IT)

+J

Q.

•

o

*•"

un

CO

C

to

ro

<+-

O

r—

OJ

c

OJ

H

CO

o

OJ

>

O

<o

JC

OJ

OJ

cn

3

>

<J

s-

"oJ

•^

4->

je

3

c

CO

■!->

w

0)

t-

>

o

(O

r^

•f—

dj

E

iQ

3

to

Ol

OJ

■r-

to

4->

(O

u

o>

l/>

>

o

c

J3

■o

>♦-

•r—

>

ro

c

J3

i.

to

o

E

OJ

OJ

OJ

*'"

n3

L.

0)

0)

(J

3

r^-

c

to

t-

0)

Q.

CO

V—

3

CO

t.

C

rtJ

OJ

•r—

<a

x:

Q.

•p—

o

c

•a

•r-

^

,C

-t-i

ro

ro

E

+-»

o

■o

c

(O

l.

1—

CO

^

o

o

o

3

4->

0)

c

to

to

i-

-o

o

O

>»

to

o

ro

L.

(/>

■M

<4-

c

0)

«4-

to

J3

3

Q.

•

•^

:s

OJ

lO

x:

-a

•r-

>.

+J

-Q

C

c

■M

0)

4->

"O

c

■t->

3

■o

E

OJ

(U

CT>

c

■O

OJ

,—

4J

ro

OJ '—

3

E

0)

c

>,

•f—

^

CO

3

C

U

■4J cri

C

OJ
4-»

</>

u

4->

to

■o

_E

OJ

OJ

c > —

^

u

lO

3

3

t.

OJ — ■

0)

ro

0)

l/>

lO

E

-o

o

fO

C3-

Q.

CO

jC

4->

X)

c

to

E

OJ

OJ -C

1—

l/>

If.

3

««-

(9

^M

t.

l-

C

L. U

c

O

o

■o

lO

OJ

M-

•^

Q. i.

«♦-

n>

-)->

•t

•r-

-!->

(0

ro

1 ••

o

o

u

+J

a;

-a

o

4J

QJ

+J

O OJ

i UJ

o

(-

(J

o

l/>

C

01

S.

1.

to CO

1 1—

^

(/>

Q.

(0

c

o

0)

.c

o

OJ

•Z- S"

1 o

OJ

<

to

o.

ro

>♦-

5

-a

1—

3

o

«* »-

z

.Q

V-218

o
en

0)
•M
lO

o

u

0)
CL.

-o

c

lO

CL

3
O
t-
U>

(U

*J

>

•r-

a.

O i-i

J3

3

JO o
CO

• <u

_J (U
CO Q.
•X

h- «/•

l/t

c
o

Q.
c/l
01

c
o

at

>

01

a.

AS

3

to

_J

•

t—

U3

r-

in

r>^

vo

r~.

00

o

CO

o

o

p^

<T>

CVJ

CO

o

p—

^—

f^

a\

f—

CM

^^

(/I

o

ro

CM

.

■^"^

CL

CO

ri

> en

o

►-1 t-

q:

o

^

cn f— '^ 1^ >^

CT>

00

00

CO

LO

lO

00

«a-

un

in

^

t3

o.

3 •

^

f— n CO r— «*

o

«a-

CM

o

o >

J- o

o

CO (J

^

t/1

>— 1 I- in

UJ

■•-> u

r^

^ r>. o CO CO

^..

in

00

CO

CM

^

<T>

TT

ir>

CsJ

^.

00

Q. (/I 0)

^

CO

T~^

3 3 in

o

O T3 ZD

Q-

t- C

LlJ

CO 1— 1 ca

• •

</> lA

Ll.

■*-> o-

O

I/I t.
1— 1 C O

^

•— < •— •

U}

IT) 00 Lf) r«» en

r>.

r>>

en

o

p..

^

^~

O

«s-

o

CM

o

•

^

CM 1—

CM

^—

>— •

Q. • U

►-

3 TJ «/1

r>

o fo q;

ca

t. O

CO «3: oa

•

(>0

Irt 10

t-^

en c

Q

t- 0)

►-•ON

r>.

O CO CM O^ CO

o

ID

CM

LO

CTl

«3-

CM

LO

to

CO

n-

•r-

ID

CJ CO «^ «3-

^~

«;f

>*

Q. • 4->

r—

1-^

3 1 1-

O •*-> O

t- m

CO zr oo

Ji£

u

lO

<u

4->

o

10

■o

c

1-

10

■o

c

•o

o;

3

C3.

ITJ

c

<B

c

i

o

10

•r-

o

J3

(/)

en

a>

«/l

OJ

0)

M

(TJ

u

t-

+J

W

^~

c

0)

•1—

c

I.

r—

ITJ

s-

c

L.

•^

ro

•F-

E

o

5

O

o

10

3

«♦-

■M

o

c

01

4-1

■o

<TJ

CT

>»

10

jC

l/>

•o

c

3

n

c

4J

c

w

0)

c

n

10

•r"

•r-

•r—

(.

la

«f-

c

C

O

M-

IQ

0)

o

o

c

• »—

E

^

a>

I.

*!—

ITJ

I.

«*-

>-

4J

c

<u

01

■!-»

r—

■»->

O

■o

QC

CNJ

•r-

a.

lO

O

a.

to

o

c

O

C

CT

o

o

•^

5

0)

■M

10

o

• '^

TO

i~

^—

TD

"4-

lO

r-"

(0

LU

o

r^

0)

o.

10

o

^—

(U

OJ

10

h-

Z i/l

iTJ at

1.

E

• 9t

•^

M-

(U

ci

E

g S'

■TD

•^•

to

L.

.^

J^

i.

OJ

•r-

o

z s

T3

3

o

(O

o

■o

1.

O 1—

0) 2

M

TJ

i-

•1-)

lO

0)

*♦-

10

t—

1-. J3

^ 01

C

c

la

r—

s

■o

3

C_)

1— O

0.-M «/>

o

nj

-o

M

>»

c

4J

UJ

00 I-

•f—

•r"

c

10

-o

-a

lO

m

■"O

LU Q.

^ C71 >)

4->

■•->

4->

ITJ

2

c

c

^—

<u

a3

^

to C <— ^

C

ITJ

C

■!-»

<0

(O

lO

»o

r^

rs

cr-o

01

■M E

0^

10

^—

•f—

o

to

(/>

c

■o -o <o

5

C 0)

E

to

to

to

o

u

■o

(O

10

C 3 t-

0) ^

Q.

>>

^

+J

•a

s

0)

+J

(.

"O

(O >— o

ro

E ■•->

O

+J

lO

(O

c

lO

a.

c

10

10

c

u u

0)

• ^

OJ

■o

10

r—

to

o

;

L.

•^•

OJ -M C Q.

k

-5 t.

'oj

r—

•^

E

0)

o

o

Ol

.:i^

10 lO •>- (/>

■*->

0) 0)

>

ITJ

u

o

<u

It-

■p

a>

<a o r— a>

lO >

0)

3

c

'1—

•a

o

M

c

cr-

r».

0) ^ " (TJ

0)

o

•T3

o-

QJ

<♦-

to

o

to

(0 10

^_

1- f— i. «

-•->

1

en

•^

<u

+J

T3

■^

<u

-o 0>

(O

a> 1 ITJ 3 r—

i/i

1 c

O

i-

ITJ

+J

01

c

C

•«->

■o

c

1 .,_ 4J (O

<o

o

■»->

a>

c

3

01

lO

3

3

0) o

(4-

-O J- 1— Q.

5

C •!-

ID

-!->

4-

<u

e

E

^—

■P

^ M

o

C r- 4-> 3 -r-

O 10

C

ITJ

o

•r—

Ol

OJ

0)

r—

•r-

+J

« 0) I/) O O

0)

•r* '^

X

o

c

u

■a

o

■P

0)

c

I/I 3 -r- -r-

*J

4-> >

E

<u

10

•^

i-

ex

+J

0) c

o

r- 01 -O t- C

ITJ

ITJ i.

en

-a

•!->

o

0)

10

l.-r-

•r- <U C CT> 3

3

U (U

i.

c

3

M-

O

<+-

o

u-

(0 s-

+J

O 5» •— • < S

o-

•>- a.

o

•r-

-M

O

• ^

c

L.

o

o

(O

3

0)

4- 3

to

CT

•r"

r-*

0>

3

•r-

■»-> 3

■o

•r- in

•r—

C

4->

-i^

i*-

1

O

■»->

r"

fO-M

^—

ITS

■a

"O

ITS

r—

u

c

c=

to

to

^

^ lO

o

c

O H-

c

-C

3

lo

o

o

0)

o

3

3 QJ

Q.

►— #

s: o

»— <

CJ

S

_I

CJ

2=

□i

o

a.

V-219

«/1

1

a>

•«

•M

(/I

+j

1

to

(0

•i"

«/)

<u

Oi

^

■0

•

s

«o

L.

to

+J

■t->

(/)

c

^■^

C

2

(0

to

0

10

•r-

0

o

u

0)

"D

c

X

0)

Ol

•^

^—

0

OJ

<*-

•^

^■^

■•->

It)

g

0

N

0)

C

0

r-"

3

•^

o

1.

•r-

L.

0

i/l

s.

t.

Q.

C

itJ

Ck.

(/I

0

£

^i*

4J

«*•

CD

3

E

4->

QJ

O

lA

E

0

(/I

0)

p—

_o.

3

C7>

3

U

■a

-0

^—

T3

^

T3

c

(U

<u

0

a;

XI

C

P

C

•r-

(.

^

■»->

0

ItJ

t-

>,

•f—

■M

"o

•M

c:

s-

0.

r—

L.

l«

QJ

Q)

D.

"q.

««

3

♦J

n>

E

g

X

■p

E

^— ^

1/1

<U

S

t

01

0

(U

•f"

^—

<U

Q.

4->

0

^

c

«/)

CM

1.

E

♦->

c

0

•»-)

10

0

•1—

t/1

*- -

<u

0

i-

0

#*

■fj

ItJ

to

U

0)

i.

10

4J

>.

c

J^

3:

Ol

<o

<4-

3

^—

X

<u

•

(U

CO

O)

(U

•r-

0

et

0)

x:

*^"N

E

t-

lO

1-

tu

f

4J

4J

r^

in

<u

2

cn

to

3

0)

c

0

>>

Ol

<u

iQ

s:

•

0

to

r—

>

c

to

-o

0)

,

4->

3

0

nj

■t->

c

<u

-o

>,

<o

CJl

^-^

■4->

0

to

*

10

(U

IT)

It)

-0

T3

3

J3

-a

,_

f^

T3

00

^

■a

x:

0)

10

CT

lO

<u

(O

•f—

C

CM

•4->

(U

■•->

c

0

U

f-

c

•r^

o

lO

^ta^

•r-

0

r—

&.

o

o

•o

i-

c

"^

«»-

c

0)

>,

r—

c

<U

i.

HH

•M

4->

'r~

••->

Ol

•r—

t-

■M

It)

C

c

0

c

iA

^—

0

(1)

It)

0.

<u

QJ

Irt

(/)

QJ

0)

<o

0

■M

•

E

E

r^

L.

^

*>

•

c

to

(U

^"^

'f—

10

0)

M

o

^^^%

^■^

0

s-

c

0)

-0

2

>,

to

<u

•3-

IT)

u

10

10

0

X3

<u

<u

1/1

0)

a.

00

CO

•0

•^

to

L.

c

■»->

+->

10

^^

•0

3

>>

■I-)

TO

01

<t

c

v>

0)

c

0)

It)

r^

0

5

(1)

to

zr>

to

0

4J

x:

■•->

3

•M

■o

3

5

•»

c

a;

u

•r-

■•->

c

0

10

c

cr

lO

•r-

■M

0)

0)

0

-0

•r™

(0

<u

^—

0)

>>

10

to

•t

x:

E

"O

t-

1.

«3

ai

4J

<o

a;

0

•^

4->

10

o;

«/)

<*-

a.

i.

a.

:s

(U

^—

•f—

-0

C

■M

2

•^

19

E

^

^

^

0

Si

■CJ

•r—

a;

■u

o

xz

(U

r^

•M

ItJ

2

10

E

c

t.

•^

in

•^

<J

<o

t.

*^.^

0)

10

0

>

Q

c

I/)

<u

i.

to

•»—

c

CD

^

3

CD

3

10

to

•^

u

lO

r—

CD

>f-

E

■o

f—

■»J

2

a»

a;

s=

•f*

C

o

(U

•^

^~

-0

vo

>

ITJ

0

•^

^

(U

r—

J3

3

»

It)

•r"

E

10

c

c

+J

t.

0)

0

^—

<u

0)

U

Q.

c

o

(U

to

■a

>r—

10

^

i.

0.

-o

0

lO

4->

2

to

c

i.

L.

ItJ

3

c

■M

r— •

•M

(O

<u

(O

CD

3

>»

It)

Ci.

ro

-C

to

>

ro

4J

(0

0)

E

r—

<U

N

-u

0)

to

10

E

x:

0

x:

<+-

o.

#»

-0

■0

c

4J

S-

i.

■(->

0

ll

c

>,

-»-<^

0

C

CD

>4-

0)

(0

(U

■iy

r-«

^

m

L.

c

■*->

Q.

i^

.^

0)

f—

•)->

0

0

■0

0

>♦-

u

S

to

■o

fmm-

0^

•»

r^

<u

a;

(-

0

«o

3

(U

^^tf

E

**^

<U

r^

4J

• ^

Q.

r"»

00

0)

+J

CNi

■0

>^

0

t.

E

x:

JD

(O

lO

a»

^

It)

«♦-

i-

t.

to

-0

-M

4-»

c

E

Q.

ItJ

10

c

c

to

C

•r-

c

-0

0

TD

3

10

to

(U

X>

to

10

c

0

C

u

>»

3

<o

E

10

4J

f—

ItJ

0

(/)

r—

0

f^

ItJ

^->

-0

-•J

-!->

I4I

0)

L.

o>

-0

•^

+J

c

•r"

c

M-

C

2

0)

c

<u

L.

c

c

lO

0)

(U

3

J=

■r"

10

<U

QJ

•f—

E

•*

3

It)

4J

CD

•r-

4J

^

10

0)

^

cr

r-a

-D

Oi

<U

■0

>

ItJ

0.

L.

•a

CO

0)

(0

C

t/l

x:

<U

L.

E

0

•

S-

10

L.

3

i-

0)

1—

i.

<u

un

<4-

Ol

-a

a.

4-

(U

0

to

•

<u

CD

T3

•>

3

0

>

<4-

3

5»

■M

jC

C

C

c

-a

to

(U

to

■M

3

0

(U

E

-0

-0

CD

(U

o

Q.

+J

>>

(U

(U

C

s:

CD

Q.

CD

*->

'f—

r^

<u

+J

'^

S

c

c

19

E

Ij

-Q

-l->

0

••->

lO

• r-

^

tf—

0

*J

0

ItJ

(U

u

t—

•

-0

to

■0

•p-

r^

ItJ

L.

c

4J

•^

^— %

3

3

«♦-

3

Q.

•r-

0

r"

c

VO

to

•r-

0)

cr

E

i.

<♦-

o

a\

0

to

"u

■o

E

<u

(U

•^

a.

C

t-

CO

C

(U

c

0

0

-a

-C

i.

c

0

u.

N.-"

•^

s

to

It)

■M

0

3

<_>

V-220

o

en

01

•t->
<o
«_>

u

O)
Ci.

■o

c
If]

Q.
3

o

s.

C3

Qi t—i

>

a.

o

J3

O O
CO

• <u

ID Q.

>>^

UJ t-
_l (U
CQ O.

<:
I— </»

(/>

c
o

Q.
(A

at
cc

0)

c
o

c

>

ID

to

-J

•

<

t>^

^.

CO

r*

r^

UD

CO

C-sl

CTi

CM

CO

h-

^—

CO

0

^

«*

0

CO

CM

CO

to

O

r—

CM

•"

^~

'"

•

Cl

m

=3

> cn

o

•-< t.

or

o

«a-

^»

<Ti

CO

in

a\

CJ

0

CO

0

r-»

o

3 •

«3-

r-»

CM

•"

CM

CO

•~

Tf

•"

o

O >

^

S- O

o

CJ <J3

<:

oo

>-i J- l/>

UJ

■!-> 1-

^

fm^

CO

CO

CM

cn

r<.

0

CO

cn

r—

00

Q. in 0)

00

r—

^*

f^

^

3 3 m

o

0X1:3

Q.

J- C

I/)

cj >-i c^a

UJ

«/) «/i

U.

■M CT

O

l/> J-

2;

k— 1 •«-•

Lf)

CO

l£>

f^

in

in

in

CM

CO

^

in

o

•

r—

CM

r-*

^—

^~

Q. • U

t-

3 -0 in

n

0 « q:

m

J- 0

1—

tu cc €>a

.

00

in m

»— *

cn c

Q

L. (U

•— 1 0 N

^

P-*

0

00

in

CO

«3-

0

0

en

10

*3-

0

in

^—

ro

r—

^

f^

Q. . +J

^-

3 r— •»-

0 -M 0

^

J- (O

CO :=: oo

-a

1

1

c

T3

1—

nj

•^

M

•0

c

(U

•t

3

c

<0 10

m

s.

c

0

4->

0

0

T3

•r-

>. c

«»

■0

C

«/»

.— QJ

x:

0

+j

(O

0

a. i~

in

r""

<a

s-

Q. i.

•^

lO

u

.c

0)

3 3

«»-

E

in

B

in u

10

«^

•r-

in

TD

i»-

-a

■0

't—

«4-

0

J- -

0

c

c

"O

w

in

0 >,

rtj

(O

0

CT> in

3

(O

4J +J

J= 0)

^—

E

C •!->

0

<u

<a -r-

■M J-

■(->

c

c>-

•r- 1.

+j

J-

S c

2 Qi

0^

0

" i/>

-a 0

0

in

0 J=

3

•r»

C (U

3 «♦-

CD

c

^

<♦- »^

t-

■*->

>.

0 c

r— M-

c

0

0 (O

C7>^

•0

<o

£X

CO •!- 0

0 0)

•r-

•T)

in

1.

c

u

s

-•-> N

c

T3

«

c

QJ 0

ta

•^

• 3

•p- c

3

>,

-0

0 -

0 3

^

1 ij

0 r— 0)

0

r—

■fj

c

•1- in

C

10

a.

Z r— C

M (fM

(J

•^

<o

4J OJ

"* 2?

OJ

0

Ot-

in +J

c

>

U T3

^ ITS

•r~

w

z: CLj-

0) i«

•f—

>>

3 •!-

c E

i-

•4->

0 (0

CJ >

'■M

u

-0 4J

<u

lO

3

t—

1 1 1

i-H <+- 3

P^

I- J-

*

u

4->

o;

C

0 1

3

0

t— o-t-»

(0

3 (U

r—

3

in

i. M-

0

•M

CO 10

0 m

10

-0

3

0

•r-

•M

10

M

^3

UJ in 01

■M

</) c

• r*

0

■0

«t

4J

10

o;

m

0 •4->

C

OJ 0

-!->

I.

c

c= c

0

0) ■•->

OJ

CTr— -a

0)

U (J-

C

a.

-0

'1—

0 0

c

(. C

4-

0

00

3 C

+J

o;

in

a;

•f— T-

3

Q* «J

0

+->

in iQ

0

r— 0

4J

-0 O^

t-

TO

+-> -u

«f-

^ r—

'r~

0)

a.

ro +J

0

c c

(U

0

(0 (O

5 Q-

c

3

t- m

U

Q.

(O -r-

o>

0

CJ> t-

>,

Oi

0

CT

<u

•a

3 +J

•0

c

«♦-

•1- OJ

S-

to 1 —

•r—

in

OJ-i-

0

•)-> C

C

(U r—

(O

ITJ

> -t->

0

r- ITJ

+J

0

^ J-

0

rtj QJ

0

3 •.-

-0

01

ro 1—

-•->

0) -r-

U

E

••J 10

>4-

C E

.— 3

c

in

c <a

<a

0

3

3

-M

10 J3

a>

I.

T3 -r-

1.

A

C+J

01

<+- ll

<0

>

«4-

M- -0

0

(U l»-

-•->

1.

(U in

c

0 ■»->

H)

0

-E

0

0 c

J3

m 0)

10

0)

Ol 0)

•r-

o;

i.

-0 ■•->

■M

(B

ra

3 C

0}

+->

0

S-

c -a

u

C

r—

c

c

r—

OJ

"O

IQ

0)

fO

0

0)

<a 0)

(9

0

0 "

+-> ^

3

Ol-C

E

•r- TD

t-

.— CD

0)

•^^

■•- >.

0

<TJ

-t-»

> ■)->

4-> C

(O

-C

4->

■M +->

+J

0) "O

c

■M

<o

«4-

0 (O

M-

4- e

U

<J T-

^ c

0)

C

0

3

0

0 (O

u

3

3 .—

0)

(O

c

m

t. •

XJ

• r*

i.

J- r-

cn

01

T)

c

■4->

(/)

-U 0)

in

in

f^

4->

-•-> J3

ns

■!-> ^

E

CT)

iQ a>

m

in <+-

in

in T3

J3

in

m <o

E

in 10

w

«J

^ m

0

(U •!-

0

0 c

3

o;

J3 in

<a

ro •.-

a;

+J

3 3

—1

.0 1—

—I

_j 10

Q.

Q

0 3

Q

3 f-

a.

00

V-221

dj

^

a>

a>

*

0)

■o

4->

jO

g

■o

w

0)

Q

•r-

3

4-*

>♦-

a;

4J

o

ro

to

O

x:

O

u

««

t/>

■o

r-"

4J

C

^

^^

c

(U

c

c

CO

*>

(0

q:

o

<♦-

(O

o

o

c

•1—

O

o

■M

QJ

•«

•M

%M^

f

c

«

(0

C

•M

(O

■M

o

-■— ^

c

o

(O

0)

p—

•^

r^

•r-

•^

x:

i-

lO

4->

■M

CO

E

■»->

■4->

fO

c

t/1

la

CM

(O

u

o

oS

o

v_^

•t->

3

0)

(U

•^

Sl

•^

c

&.

Ol

sz

•M

ro

««-

<u

o

■«->

(O

4->

lO

01

•r-

«♦-

u

to

E

OJ

C

T3

•^

0)

<o

0)

1.

o

r"

&.

T3

■o

to

o

•

>,

E

■o

o

3

0)

ra

t/

r—

•

a>

to

lO

L.

OJ

lO

^

•^

Ol

*«—*»

£

•1—

u

u

3

u

c

X

c

1^

4->

OJ

H3

■M

ro

o

•f*

r"~

iA

to

^

to

•

•^

•o

^—

r*"

W)

*r—

4J

+J

OJ

OJ

LT)

•«->

c

^-■

^.-■i'

(0

JT

c

c

•

3

(O

•r-

2

•M

ro

>,

•^

0)

>

r^

Jl£

r—

■)->

o

t-

£

^—

jC

ro

«t

L.

3

1.

<o

+J

0)

o

W

I-

•r"

<u

O

■l->

3

f— •

o.

•f"

01

■p

o

M-

^—

1/1

4-»

c

^

<4-

^

c

c

O

OJ

to

•^

<0

«t-

4J

0)

n

«t

o.

T3

0>

1-

o

>,

•^

+J

■M

,-— ^

c:

0)

o

L.

fVI

t-

10

01

o

c

-M

f—

Q.

O

OsJ

<u

V.

x:

•r-

•^

r—

(O

^

Q.

^—

JZ

o

■»->

+J

3

•r—

O)

■o

E

*• -

+J

■•->

3

1/)

(/)

O

3

O

*r—

o

o

c

L.

<U

<u

O

O

1/)

(O

r—

(U

L.

o.

U

«4-

0)

<u

TO

>♦-

o

s

(/>

JC=

t-

£

c

.^

CL

1/)

-o

OJ

•M

<U

Q

</)

«o

<u

0)

c

(1>

c

E

I-

lO

O)

<♦-

<

c

»

#>

•r—

(O

#*

0)

to

o

o

»/>

>»

L.

o>

E

0)

x:

XJ

•^

(U

&.

<o

c

O)

+j

o;

to

c

■M

u

■(-)

E

•r-

T3

(0

+J

ITS

c

t.

t/)

>

C

3

*i

"q.

dJ

3

3

<♦-

to

HJ

u

>,

o

3

(/)

E

o

-o

o

-C

to

«

(U

to

5

l/»

c

to

«/)

Q.

0)

(U

>,

<u

•^

(/)

to

■o

3

L.

•^

r—

t.

«/>

Q.

c

<0

o

to

>

••-»

•o

o

(O

lO

t-

4J

Ol

OJ

C

r—

o

-C

3

x:

<4-

0)

(O

o

(.

+J

«k

(/)

4J

o

3

t.

«♦-

4J

(U

(U

</>

to

"ro

o-

3

(0

c

Q.

3

O)

OJ

>

<u

c

OJ

4->

tt)

(U

x:

^

o

t.

<0

in

t.

4J

+J

u

■o

,^-^

•t—

«4-

C

I-

3

c

<o

Ol

CO

1.

•p

(U

3

^

(U

0^

o

CO

o

<0

4J

»♦-

-C

o

o

J3

^L-

to

N

(/>

o

4->

c

#»

rtj

0)

•^

o

o

>»

•»->

■a

^~

■o

I.

E

c

<+-

o

T3

0)

*

(O

fO

o

o

+3

lO

I.

>>

c

o

E

0)

•^

(U

c

(U

o

■l->

^

^

■l->

c

^

a>

i-

•M

"o)

3

4J

u

o

4J

3

•p-

■l->

3

■M

•o

•

00

3

•r-

cr

0)

■r-

(0

0)

^^•^

4J

t.

(/>

^

(U

-C

^—

-M

a>

^

ro

lO

4J

to

+J

L.

4J

to

•r—

to

ro

-C

10

(V

•^

«*-

M

lO

>

ro

•M

0)

t.

2

-o

I.

0)

ro

■o

Q.

lO

c

0)

C

c

-

(/>

(U

•o

10

(O

-!-»

0)

(O

a>

Ol

T3

0)

<u

(O

+J

■o

x:

.u.

■M

JC

r^

(—

to

3

(O

c

3

c

<o

4J

(U

o.

<u

ro

•r-

o

-C

3

->J

>

>,

t.

«t

+J

•1—

1/1

■t->

o

<o

r—

■is

o

*»

to

to

-a

(O

u

^

(U

i.

^— ^

o;

c

5

t/)

to

•^

#>

f— .

to

4->

•r-

<o

M

E

-o

^-^

'S-

to

1-^

t/>

3

.^-^

E

01

r^

01

-

<J

<u

u>

o

-C

*

«*

c

CO

•r-

■u

o

lO

+J

c

^—

4->

•1

•

V.

u

r-M

o

ro

•^

>,

in

<o

0)

x..*^

-D

lO

>^

s

•

3

>4-

(U

a>

+J

c

4J

+J

>

4J

«*-

lO

c

•t—

+J

C

,»»

«J

l/>

(U

Q)

o

Z oj

■a

^—

0)

ro

C

0)

!U

•^

•r—

ro C

•o

to

■o

I.

•r—

r—

(/»

CJ

4->

3 O

(W

o

•r-

o;

tJ

-Q

<U

•r-

lU

c

+-» -o

x:

to

>

tJ

TJ

-C

^

a.

(U

to C

c

c

Ol

0^

3

1—

+J

-)-»

to

<U 3

1—4

3

I-

oo

to

V-222

o

en
<u
■♦->
ta

CJ

t-
d.

T3

C
ra

o.

O

s_
<u

>

a.

^>*
o

^

Ql

LU

CO Cl.

<:

I— u»
0)

(/>

c
o
a.
(/>
a>
a:

«♦-
o

<u

c
o

en

>

(U

s-

3

to

-J

t/>

o

1—

tn

0

CM
CM

CO

to

CM

CO

in

0

in

to

CM

to

CO

tn

^3-

**

00

.

""""

a.

tA

rD

> cn

o

i-i t.

a:

o

o

D.

ro

00

cr.

CO

CO

0

r^

CO

CM

r^

Lf)

CO

3 •

r^k

^~

CO

^—

LO

r—

CO

CM

CO

O >

z

I. O

o

C3 CJ3

<

I/O

>-) i- V)

UJ

■K-> L.

oo

3 3 to

t£}

m

0

CM

*"

CM

^

CM

cn

tn

—

CM

00

o

O TD Z3

a.

1. C

t/1

LU

CJ3 >-i ca

■ •

(/I l/l

Ll-

+J C3-

o

»-• c o

o

1— 1 t— <

•

CM

«3-
CM

r^

0

,—

t^

r—

OJ

CO

«*

0

^

r-»»

»— ^

Q. • O

^^

r—

CM

h-

3 -O lO

r3

O « Qi

ca

t. U

1—

to cC oO

__^

•

00

CO (/)

►-H

cn C

Q

t. (U

•—•ON

CO
CO

(Ti

CO
CM

CM

LT)

00

CM

0

CO

in

to

CO

0

CM

IT)

to

CTi
CM

3 1 <-

O 4-> O

i. («

tr> -^ ca

OJ

-C

+->

0)

C

M

-(-»

U>

0

Q.

u

3

•

3

r"-

(U

+J

u

+J

-0

fO

•(->

C

•f—

o

C

>

cu

<a

(«-

i.

fO

t.

(U

^_

Q.

4-»

to

00

0

c
0

•r-

0

"O

c

(0

c

c
0

c
0

0

E

■0

to

c

1-

u

•^

■M

3

c

0

(U

4J

•r—

ro

rO

•*

CD

T3

u

-0

t-

4J

O)

ITS

+J

C

•r-

<U

■»->

0

^

Ol

>

c

c

(O

•0

IV

c

4J

cu

"O

c

TJ

<u

to

c

<u

ro

to

c

>-

o

LU

<:
o

E

E
OJ

0

c
0

3

■0

c

E
cu
0

s.
0

E

<u

>

0
0

t3

3

i-
• a.
o
2: »

0
*♦-

CD

1-
0

4-

c

to

to

to
(U

s-
0
<*-

c

cn

c

•f—

>>

4J

0

c

C

<D

3

cx

Q.

3

cu

■0

3

ro

■«->

1—
o

LU

0 0

c

to

0

-C

ro

TJ

0

c
cu
E
(U
4_>

t— 1/5

IB

J-

<T3

CO

>

c
10

(J

c

cu

Q.

-a

c

ui 0)

r—

(O

cn

0)

>>

•r"

I/)

ro

■"3

LU L.

Q.

T3

c

c

I/)

0)

Z3

r3
0- 0

4->

CU

«3

"5

5
0

ta

3

ro

to

«k

to

4J

ro
ro

I/)

•4->

C

a>

+J

3

■!->

0)

c

10

0)

t/1

0

to

2

CO
OJ

0

0

•r-

-u

c
0

T3

0

ro

1

-U

•r—

(O

0

>

3

•r"

rO

ro

"O

(U

05

■r—

r^

+J c

4->

■M

.c

I.

C CD

^-

•»

0

3

4J

f^

ro

^

(U

+->

0 c

(O

c

14-

C -r-

0

0

+J

"O

0

-O

r— -f"

3

0

0

0 +J

r~

r^

CO

ex

c

0

I.

0)

c

a-

•r—

•1- CJ

0

0

aj

0

■!_>

0

+J

QJ 0

+->

c

-M 10

ca.

I.

>f-

>♦-

E

14-

c

-M

to

> tM

i~

0

0

<o

1

4->

0 CT)

0

cn

ro

0

10

•r—

<u

<u

•r-

CJ c

•r"

c

c

3

cu

CJ

to P"

2

to 1

4J

+J

■M

3 CU

4-»

0

c ■—

c

ro

to

"O to

c 1

lO

0

10

-0 Nl

c

u

0 cn

0

c

0) 0)

(U

0)

3

1-

U

(U •■-

ro

•r- -a

3

■0

0

0) •■-

+->

-C 1—

Q.

•^

-!->

c

■(-) cu

4->

0

cu

•r™

c: i.

<TJ

<u 0

+->

4-

U -f-

cn

0

<o s-

c:

>

-)->

na

3

^ L.

0

1—

•r—

•<- U

c

1 — "U

cu

l+I

0

3

+-> 3

CT

Q.*->

•r-

ns

s-

r—

0

to

3

>

t.

nS 4->

CU

£ c

S-

cn

<o

-Q -0

i.

0

cnTD

cu

s

Q.

^

j:: to

"O

0 0

+->

cu

r—

3 C

4J

J-

<u c

L.

0

E

0

3 01

<c

<_> 0

00

—1

C_>

a. ra

1/1

LU

Of ro

Q.

—I

»— «

Q.

V-223

■o
CO

in

>

10

i/i

L.
0)

(/)

c
<

•o

c

«0

(/I

01

«4-

o

c
o

to

M

to

TJ

to

a;

(U

<u

o

a>

lO

■o

c

t-

c

3

r-»

o

o

•p-

3

<♦-

1.

J-

O

3

c

(0

OJ

2

OJ

OJ

3

■t->

c

4->

w

<U

0)

to

5

W

en

^

OJ

(U

c

■a

-C

•p—

+J

•4-

c

•M

■•->

</)

O

lO

««

o

3
E

I/)

-o

<tJ

c

E

c

•r"

(U

ft

0)

to

i.

^-**

1—

r—

0)

■o

fO

^

•♦-»

c

to

o

r*

'r-

(O

>m^^

k

3

t.

Q.

0^

U

to

0)

L.

o>

>

L.

J=

<T3

c

fO

(O

•»->

U

c

^

T3
C

^

T3

c

2

(O

+J

C

ITS

o

4J

•r-

(O

r—

c

to

2

01

Ol

(U

>>

cr

c

«4-

2

•»->

c

•^

O

*r—

•p-

c

to

r—

r*

c

.^

s

to

(O

(O

O

(O

3

(U

P-*

to

r—

o-

■o

o.

C

1-

s-

0)

to

o

0)

o

en

•

•r*

■u

u-

c

lO

-o

+J

<o

«

iQ

<u

3

3

c

i.

3

^

^—

o

1

to

r^

en

•r-

CD

L.

•f—

o

c

4->

c

(U

r—

Q-

•r-

(0

o

•r—

J3

TJ

TD

r^

^»

<o

(U

3

c

u

•l->

-C

<u

c

<TJ

to

■•->

(J

o

0)

o;

C

fS

en

•r-

o

■o

-o

to

c

o

0)

O)

0)

•^

»t

0)

to

c

•^

c

l/>

i.

lO

o

■M

<u

3

J3

•F-

^

<a

«4-

4J

I.

4->

<U

•»

c

o

O)

♦r"

+J

(U

•r-

c

0)

^

c

E

u

0)

-C

O

to

a.

4->

4->

0)

<u

E

<+-

to

*>

-C

en

0)

o

>,

■M

to

-a

c

^

4J

0)

+J

■M

ro

o

a>

>

C

(0

E

i~

to

r— •

(TJ

-C

Q.

o

+J

4J

(U

to

>

t.

>

a>

C

o

W>

•r-

j=

•a

•r-

Q.

<u

W»

4J

c

E

■M

C

(O

C

•r-

<0

(U

<«-

o

•

I.

x:

O

«

•f—

<u

-— **.

-)->

0)

•o

•t->

L.

LO

10

1-

<u

<u

<n

O

vo

c

Q.

c

Q.

-o

e

n™

Q

E

o

o

c

^■.-^

£

o

r—

Qj

M

<u

o

Qi

0)

g

-»->

OJ

■o

to

>

2

3

>

10

3

0)

o

CO

•r-

-o

(0

ro

■o

o

••-»

<n

s

U

(U

O

•

0)

0)

t-

•

(U

Lf)

c

ca

-Q

■a

<♦-

•

o

+J

(U

<*-

>

•r-

o

X

-a

<u

4J

•

4->

<u

(U

a»

3

^— ^

c

0)

(U

i—p

OJ

0)

c

j3

x>

r-»

^—

>

01

(0

o

C\J

(O

-C

to

O

I—

a.

-~'

x:

>—

<TJ

•M

OJ

>>

to

JC

(U

4J

^—

o

ro

•^

■o

•^

to

*->

c

O

to

u

ro

(O

(U

Q.

J=

L.

to

to

u

a.

<u

0)

3

•^

t/)

c

{-

««

o

<o

c

to

3

o

(U

43

■*-»

'r-

(O

10

+J

•M

>

<u

3

•r"

t-

>

(U

>♦-

r»

•^

10

o

O

•M

c

Q.

O

o

»/)

(0

o

0)

3

«*-

■a

p^

(U

•

O

c

ro

>

^^

to

>

q;

^—

c

J-

LD

o

c

<U

Q.

^—^

o

^

■•J

•^

•«->

O

l-

ro

4->

+-»

3

>^>

o

O

3

</»

♦->

■o

O

o»

<u

o

<U

3

c

O)

t-

CT

o

c

o

(J

•p-

■M

#*

(O

■M

<u

^-^

<o

J=

01

un

Ol

O

-u

O

<T>

c

3

c

N_.«

•r-

-o

to

ro

•o

<U

(O

J=

•4->

3

3

O

C

^—

o

<u

O

•o

(0

B

c

r—

<u

•^

ja

to

to

<o

3

to

ro

<u

•»

Q.

(U

-C

(.

l/>

s_

■M

<u

TJ

•fj

•«->

•^

C

to

•»—

(U

1-

ro

■l->

(O

o

0)

t/1

3

•»

to

s_

(TJ

+J

*^^

o

3

to

(X)

5

*«-

<u

r-.

0)

<u

^..^

^

+J

0)

•

lO

x:

4J

^.— ^

•»

3

■M

c

o

>1

CT

(D

Lf»

4->

(U

«l-

E

^-^

•p-

-o

O

(i>

>

fO

4->

Q.

•p-

C

to

3

+->

-o

o

J3

<J

<u

'f~

ro

E

ro

-o

+->

<u

3

(J

-a

.c

E

r^

OJ

c

+-»

3

(J

•t->

to

0)

c

o

c

p—

L.

^^

ro

o

a.

o

0)

I.

(/)

I.

+J

c

^~

-!->

o

OJ

o

(O

c

Q.

w

o

o

4J

0)

o

+-»

T3

ITJ

C

-o

c

-a

(O

c

*

o

CD

(U

-— ^

Ol

CT>

to

■4-J

c

C

5

CO

3

•p»

o

r—

4J

a.

o

f^

c

o.

cu

en

o

(U

•p*

I.

c

a.

3

-C

•^

O"

(/>

(-

a>

•*

OJ

<u

"O

^— ^

to

E

J=

OJ

CM

c

O

4->

J-

CO

o

t.

o

-o

— '

o

V-

V-224

o

CT>
(U

4J
«3

O

I.
(U

o.

■a
c

(O

ex
o

a>
+j

>

L.

a.

"^

a.
«♦-

(U o
CO

• OJ

in Q.

• >»

ca

i.
<u
a.

i/t
<u
i/i

c
o

Q.
1/1
O)

oc

**-
o

(U

c
o

en

>

ITS

3

_J

•a:
I—
o

ir>

«3-

r».

o

r^

U3

CM

f—

lO

o

P_

00

^

CO

o

^—

^—

r—

CVJ

in

^—

t—

fsl

r^

^^

^K>

to

(—

.

o.

l/>

=3

> en

o

>-i 1-

Cd

o

CO

00

in

*J-

cr.

oo

CM

00

in

r-^

O

p.

^

CM

CJ3

o.

3 •

ro

CO

«*

CM

to

O >

I- o

O

O CD

•ri.

<

I/O

•— 1 t. 1/)

LxJ

4J J-

•£>

CO

^

00

r^

t^

OO

CM

o

^»

^_

r-.

^

r—

00

O. to Q>

r—

r^

3 3 m

O

o -o US

Q.

J- c

1 1 1

cu 1— 1 ca

q;

1/1 t/l

U-

4J cn

o

1— 1 c o

7^

►—4 *— 4

CO

V£)

CSJ

o

cn

^o

CM

r^

^—

oo

o

r^

O

o

o

•

r—

r^

^-

1— 1

Q. • U

f-

3 -O 00

=)

O ns Qc:

CO

t- U

• — 1

t—

to <: oa

.

(/I

00 </>

H- 4

cn c

Q

J- 0)

•-4 O r>i

ro

CJ

l£>

00

C\J

o

in

o

o

cri

o

in

CM

tn

•r-

CO

«3-

"O-

CM

CL • -M

3 f— •!-

O 4J C_)

,

L. t)

to :s: oa

■o

r—

3

c

o

o

-C

T3

•^"

to

a;

C

4J

in

5

•r-

c

o

O

•♦->

•f

^

•r-

c:

to

0)

"S

■a

00

^

c

01

cn

o

c

a>

c

si

o

•o

t.

o

fO

c

o

lO

3

4->

J-

0)

u

A

■o

'oj

4-»

o

-o

+J

p—

-a

E

>

LO

3

c

o

JO

(U

Its

<D

ai

T3

(O

t.

•T3

•a

O

00

4->

■o

<u

0)

r—

E

<^-

L.

T3

to

c

■o

(U

<a

C IT)

o

£X

O

lO

u

>-

c

^

ea t.

-E

>>

+->

u.

a:

-n

{_

1— cn

to

■a

>,

4J

+J

i.

#»

o

O)

0)

Q. O

■!->

o

t.

OJ

• r-

o

00

*>

o

• s_

-C

s-

o

o

(O

E

^—

<+-

c

to

<

LU

O lO

4J

C Q.

0)

<+-

3

(O

<+-

o

CJ.

o

(—

■z.

<4-

•4->

+J

3

a>

•^

3

e^

•a:

>,

>,

*" •»->

t-

0)

to

c

cr

+->

o

3

o

3 -o

4-> C

<U

c

0)

0)

0)

3

i.

U.

O 3

^^

1/1 <u

'r^

^

s-

c

-u

CJl

^—

►-I +J

03

•<- E

1

i-

>>

0)

•^

•r—

■!->

Ol

o

h- oi

i/l 01

1

a

2

IT3

+J

r—

+J

i-

-a

c

UJ

00

U

irt cn

E

Ol

lO

a.

00

IT)

•t-»

c

•^

■-3

LU -O

(U

lO lO

to

9s

s.

s

-!->

•p—

c

C3.

c

lO

XI

23

ZD C

Q.

c

4->

-o

to

+-»

s-

o

•r-

Si

3

rD

cr 03

\A

O fO

O

0)

o;

>4-

10

00

C

E

tO

n—

00

<u

4-> E

0)

00

s.

OJ

o

+J

•^

(J

•r—

c

c

o

.C t^'

C5.

fO

3

-*->

1/1

•a

•r—

t.

o

c

U 01

M

to Ol

W)

0)

-M

to

>>

1

E

•»J

0)

to

'^

i- c

C

O -E

lO

I-

lO

UJ

o

■o

•p—

OJ

to

>

t-

<w o

o

•I- +J

o

0)

3

(0

o

-t-»

TO

lO

o

0)

•«

0) -a

•r-

■o

O

c

l*-

3

o

^—

fO

Ol

cn

Q.

00

t/>

4->

3 <♦-

• r—

L.

o-

cn

3

o

r—

■o

<U OJ

3

+-> o

'e

r^

OJ

OJ

E

fO

<+-

0)

c

i- -Q

r—

to

o

■a

1—

4J

-o

fO

-M

o

^—

3

c

c

c

lO

4J

lO

««

•t

ro

^

M-

>♦- ^

o

OJ o

o

n3

0>

to

01

+->

\A

rtJ

O O

Q.

> T-

o

1

-Q

OJ

•f™

>

c

•t

r—

^—

r—

l-

•r- ■♦->

<u

OJ

1

c

0)

>i

0)

•r—

(0

00 (O

<*-

to lO

i.

Ci.

•r-

>>

to

E

\.

>

fO

I.

(U (U

O

c u

-o

3

>>

O

f

■o

c

c

4J

OJ

>

0)

Q. US

0) -M

c

+J

C

3

OJ

I-

l/l

r—

lO

■o

>, 0)

i/>

-C to

<o

^^

o

'oJ

OJ

-!-»

x:

OJ

3

<u

-M J_

+->

01 -r-

3

4->

>

-f->

to

01

>

-o

r—

r—

u.

u

1. c

r«-

O

c

OJ

0)

i.

o

c

^—

r"~

■•-> w>

(U

Q.-I-

IT3

fO

OJ

T3

■o

00

Q.

cn

•r—

lO

ns

SI

(fl -r-

<+-

E E

CT

3

>

•»—

E

+J

^ x:

<4-

o -o

0»

CT

c

O

o

J=

o

>>

>>

>>

^

*p*

3: +->

UJ

tj m

_l

<:

»-^

1—

1—

1—

tJ

CQ

CO

CD

ca

3:

V-225

1

^—

^~

e

(0

w

ro

o

1

•^

■o

CD

(.

u

o

u

o

•o

c

0)

4-

(U

(U

•^

^

a;

•1—

x>

o

t.

en

«*-

4J

2:

■o

1-

0^

OJ

0)

i

(U

Ci

C

U-

QJ

>,

to

«t

c

a>

<u

4->

•r—

O

lO

<J

o

3

c

m

r—

^

t.

'oj

X

•p-

^

t.

•^

O.

■M

3

>

CT1

(U

E

to

c

•r-

•^

O

•r-

■(->

O

0)

-M

(U

'1—

•r-

U

3

in

4->

•^

r—

•M

£

E

l/>

lO

o

s

Oi

■fj

>,

•o

•^

*

0)

*>

o

•r-

X>

x»

<o

-o

>>

x:

o;

>,

0)

10

Q.

3

1

•M

L.

to

ft)

O

4J

■o

•^

4->

ai

0)

o

E

in

c

4->

C

O

4J

c

•o

o.

o

(U

ro

r-~

0)

4->

10

•f—

3

«/)

>

JZ

3

3

f

■o

■a

0}

o

CD

£

¥

V)

•♦->

1.

u

c

o.

■o

(.

c

re

o

c

<o

o

lO

•f"

•

t.

1/)

o

o

(U

D.

0)

<♦-

to

lO

o

•»

'oj

■♦J

to

O

>

c

3

<c

-a

c

>

0)

^—

•f"

•«

o

01

o

0)

tJ

u

OI

in

•o

•r-

ro

#t

3

•f—

•o

<u

>

c

c

4->

•

0)

•

O

4->

(U

-«->

o;

0)

«0

ro

Lfl

CO

-o

5

3

o

c

<o

-o

.c

-o

•

a;

^—

+J

JZ

a>

•*

c

>

ir>

+j

i/>

r—

(U

■1-)

o

i.

^— «*

0)

•

•F-

o

.c

^

*->

n.

o

^

0)

>

E

j=

Dl

o

■M

-a

E

CM

E

•r-

►—

t-

<u

OJ

o

^—■'

o

X)

<u

,—

<4-

<o

■o

-l->

<J

o

o

rO

o

0)

c

lO

c

0)

01

h-

X)

>,

•

to

(O

o

<a

to

f—

t.

10

c

0)

to

QJ

•^

■M

ro

X3

C

t—

dJ

-a

4-)

l-

lO

•o

to

•1—

0^

•r-

>

ra

o

• ^

c

•»—

+J

to

-a

c

B

OJ

to

I.

•^

to

3

to

3

12

•r-

tn

<♦-

<o

o

in

O

o

r-»

<U

<4-

4->

c

ro

Q.

o

(U

-o

J3

0)

P-M

•r—

o

TJ

c

5

a;

(U

r—

u

•f—

cn

0)

in

•r—

CO

•M

en

>,

0)

<u

o

+J

c

•r"

ro

c

ITJ

-o

l-

x:

5

to

•r—

L.

■•->

<

t->

(U

O

-(->

CT>

01

-o

t-

to

O

*

•r*

+->

in

c

3

•r—

ro

c

c

to

T3

-o

1

c

«♦-

(O

•^

O"

>

U

o

at

C

c

(U

o

c

o

•r~

■o

't—

10

•r-

c

>

•»

c

in

u

Q)

■•->

•r*

-o

.^

c

c

^— ^

<a

•r-

CL

J3

ro

-o

3

in

T3

o

ID

^—

x:

N

+->

5

c

o

o

Q.

4-»

<♦-

m

*r—

to

to

oi

10

>»

•M

o

a»

c

0)

•f—

c

c

in

^_^

<4-

O

•r-

ro

to

T3

5»

9>

<0

0)

o

+-»

ro

T3

CD

c

01

1/)

(J

3

3

■•->

0)

3

L.

o

•«->

If-

O)

<u

+J

a-

c

.^

to

L.

■M

O

Q.

m

O

c

Q.

to

<0

u

o;

(0

to

m

OJ

•F-

1/1

<u

0*

■•-»

•

<o

•r-

<4-

o

CD

c

••->

1

x:

3

^^

^—

p—

r—

0)

O

u

CD

o

01

■»J

>,

■•->

lO

CL

ro

to

3

•f-

10

^

^—

in

nj

0>

i.

0)

m

<♦-

to

4->

^

JZ

1

•

to

o

«_^

i.

<U

^

(U

o

«

+J

>,

^— ^

fO

Q.

«4-

c

4->

Q.

OJ

N

(J

c

r^

s

in

o

<♦-

0)

>i

>>

sz

•r"

1

<a

CNJ

■o

(U

o

CD

■•->

-•->

+J

+J

t.

^_

1

3

•o

<U

+J

E

ro

'f—

M

^

+J

^.^

(U

i~

to

0)

I.

0>

x:

■t->

s-

x:

C

3

</)

in

<u

(U

lO

0)

^

+J

C

o

to

^

o.

(U

(U

to

c

-3

5

X)

i

-M

0)

•■-5

•r-

3

•r-

0)

•r*

o

■o

L.

lO

r^

CO

<u

l.

•t

1-

>>

in

«4-

s-

3

C

a;

<U

E

Q.

sz

<o

(U

3

•a

c

O

c

C

•r*

•o

«♦-

E

4J

3

>

4J

3

o

c

<♦-

OJ

o

4J

•r»

<0

■M

o

t7>

0)

-M

T3

<u

•1—

-C

(J

■•->

to

to

(U

m

C

-C

C

C

s

■o

■M

o

10

OJ

C

»♦-

^

■•->

ro

lO

5

ro

<u

r*

Q

in

O

o

>>

**

4->

••-»

JZ

u

ro

c

O

#»

•r"

««

o

c

S-

O

3

3

<u

(U

a.

m

>4-

-M

0)

ro

o;

■*->

O

O

i.

o>

t_

to

in

c

•r—

C

1.

E

>

X>

ex

o

E

o

C

(U

•

o>

in

■M

ro

E

"O

(U

■5

■ r—

CT)

E

c:

to

to

2

■o

x:

o

o

■*->

4J

■r-

□.

<o

ro

ro

o

c

en

C

o

t.

<u

•r-

T3

I/)

to

o

r^

3

3:

3

3

2

-o

j3

C

(U

^—

a.

>»

<*-

O

o

lO

>,

<U

lO

3

<

Oi

■M

J3

L.

c

^

O

^

o-

>

4J

•r-

•

u

^

^

+J

+J

o

CT

0)

c

''^

''"^

o

to

-o

to

C

1.

•

-o

<u

»•

lO

CO

a>

in

JZ

c

4J

•^

<u

■o

E

>»

>— ^

-—^^

r^

c

■r-

■t->

<o

r*.

J-

-!->

OJ

to

0)

0)

Oi

o

lO

r^

to

•^

a>

^—

to

cn

c

/^

<u

-a

^

<+-

«*-

a>

{-

to

J=

ro

lO

4->

c

c:

4-»

OJ

u

t.

<0

3

4->

c

&.

i-

•^

o

+J

-o

•r"

o

00

+j

Q)

o

<a

<u

o

-o

in

0)

4J

c

CD

to

<u

to

s-

E

c

<+-

c

L.

c

• P—

0)

o

m

«4-

c

•^

o

*y

<+-

3

0)

o

r-

E

<

3

o

*-H

-a

>♦-

ro

CJ3

<u

«♦-

C3k

V-226

o
cr>
(U
+->
(O
<_3

%.

CI.

•a

c
«o

o.

3

o

i-
cu

0)
•M

>

s.
a.

o

J3

3

<+- o

in cl
• >>

UJ S-

_l <u

ca a.

<x.

I— i/»
a>
i/>
c
o
a.
to

O)

a;

c
o

c

>

3

_J

«£

VO

CM

IT)

CNJ

CVJ

vc

Itl

o

,—

CO

CO

Ln

1—
O

1—

Lf)

OJ

r—

OJ

f—

LT)

r—

1—

CO

C/0

•

a.

1/1

ZD

> en

O

1— I t.

q:

O

^

CO

CM

«a-

cr^

CTl

r>.

Lf)

uo

^

in

OJ

t£3

o.

3 •

CVJ

CD

O >

^

1- o

o

c3 cn

<

I— •

-. >,

l/l

>-i S- trt

UJ

4-> J_

CO

IX)

CO

OJ

U3

o

CO

O

OJ

o

«^

o

1/1

Q. l/l 0)

^

3 3 lO

O

o -o rD

Q.

J- c

00

1 1 1

CO »-« ca

a:

•

m 10

u.

4J Ol

O

1— 1 c: o

7f^

>— < 1— «

f>-.

CO

o

^—

OJ

o

ro

CO

o

o

VO

^—

o

•

1— 1

Q. • U

^-

3 -O CO

rs

o fo c>;

CO

i- o

Qi
1—

CD < oB

.

00

I/) I/)

t-H

cn c

Q

s- cu

>— • O N

r^

m

o

to

Lf)

r-^

OJ

OJ

Ln

OJ

CO

OJ

•r»

r—

OJ

^—

Q. • ■»->

3 »— ••-

O +-» O

J- <o

CD :=: oo

o

u

1

M

+-»

<TJ

s.

1

4->

c

M

<u

o

c -a

o

3

t-

cu (U

u

E

o
o.

o.

(U

E ■•-»

#t

O)

t.

J- OJ

■M

i.

<u

cu »4-

O

o

s-

•4->

> M-

c

0)

o

c

O tJ

o

+J

4J

E

(U

cn

•r*

o

c

c s-

+->

t-

<u

<u

c

o o

ro

a.

E

c
o

to

3

■U

c

+j

1-

•^

>

.c (U

(U

(/)

OJ

+->

t3

o

■t-> >

to

Ol

>

(O

cn

•r- ^—

S"

>i

X)

o

$-

3

c

s o

t.

o

CD

OJ

o

o

>

Q.

c

>-

o

Q.

o

c

•> c

(U

cu

nr-

lO -M

r^

o

r— T"

S-

cn

o

ro =

o

+J

^

(O

ro

C3

• "O

U >,

o

3

■M

O -M

^"

LU

O 0)

O U

Xi

•^

o o

ro

■•->

1 —

s: -o

r— C

>,

3

c

I— c

L.

c

<c

cu

O)

i.

•>

o

c

CU

a»

o

:r oj

T3 cn

+J

r~

•*

T3 (U

o

T3

E

o c

c: to

to

r—

c

-M

C to

•f-

CU

^L

1 —

1 — 1

(O J-

3

0)

o

(0

(0 O

c

•(-»

U_

O

(J

t- l/l

<u

■a

s

•r-

N

J=

o

>i

ro

r-*

1 t 1

OO -f-

« Q.

c

+J

• 1—

••4J

•^

o

tsl

^

CU

"-^

UJ

<U 3

to -M

<r3

c

<u

-M

c

•^

-M

>

^

■=3 ac^-

-fJ to

.i^ C

rj

rtJ

■M cn

ro

cu

c

•r—

0)

^

CJr o i/i

<o =

a>

S~ 0)

•r- OJ

cn

rtJ c

M

cn

ro

3

■C3

C/)

•t- 0)

■!->

+->

O E

C +J

i~

+J -r-

•r-

ro

cn

+Jt-

00 (O

Q

s <u

(O <o

o

OO "O

c

i-

A

TJ

(O $-

^

o

cn-^

3

ro

cn

o

c

C

N (0

•> i.

o

c fc.

i. &.

^—

M ^-^

cn

c

o

(O

•r- 3

r- cu

i.

o o

o ca.

(O

r— O

t-

•r-

<u

•r-

C -M

(O -o

>>

a.

•r- 4-

o

I-

<0 C

o

•M

+->

+J

-C

(O to

i. c

+J c

1— J-

0)

s- •.-

ro

ro

lO

o

cno*

(U 3

c

^M.

(0 (U

ta £3.

-o

cu

■tJ

c:

+->

N

s.

S-

"O

o

r—

tM

O £3.

<u

T3 «

c

•f—

C/1

•f—

■o

o <u

<u >>

•r*

•1- J-

o <a

Ll.

OJ c

cu

T3

1

C

(U

JC

LU f-^

f—

3

c o

r-*

Ll. O

E

i-

r^

(O

in

14-4J

-Q

o

(O <+-

1 1/1

i-

•(—

cu

O

ro

cn

cu

o

(V -1-

i.

■M

cn

Ol «J

o

cu ■*-*

cn

O

i-

L.

i.

Ol

> in

4->

(O

J- >>

+J

> ro

ro

u

CU

O

0) a

•1- to

c

-C

O r-

(0 c

-o

•r- -M

c

■o

'H

Q.rO

4-> O

o

■(->

+-> o

c

-M C

rrJ

cu

cu

r— •

4->

>>c

(0 Q.

u

+J 'io

OO •«-

lO

ro cu

E

n™

U-

ro

(0

+-?<o

i.

a>

C -r-

-u

I. 1/1

cn

C

+J

E

(U -

<u

CL

0) O

■U fO

0)

(U CU

r—

c

+J

o

OO

■t-J

a. c

-tJ

>>

to QJ

C ■»-)

4J

ca. s-

fO

•f—

c

•r"

fOXJ

o o

ro

+7

OJ Q.

•r- C

(O

O £3.

o

in

•^

cn

s

.= c

O -r-

+J

t. l/>

o <u

+J

O (U

o

o

cu

cu

-3 rO

o -u

OO

=1

Q. a)

■-3 to

OO

O i-

—I

<:

o

Qi

:3

V-227

■o

*

r^

c

^■«*

1—

■a

ItJ

r—

■o

0)

0)

#»

r*

r—

u

««

f

^-«^

^^^

3

0)

•1—

+J

p_

O
3

o.

^

••->

^..^

IT3

a>

"i

(0

O

^

•M

^

c

O

U

»

1/)

4J

o

1

J=

(V

a;

to

4J

<u

2

o

rtJ

U

4-»

o

I/I

3

-o

■M

>>

o.

<u

c

00

t/0

•o

V

^

o

1

o

i.

•r-

z

r'

J3

i

■o

•

c

3

ITS

^—

^■^

•r-

••->

L.

r">

3

00

Q.

<U

■a

tn

o

w

O

01

■o

c

■o

-C

0)

<4-

c

<u

o

•

(U

to

2

ro

r^

U-

•r*

^-**

lU

to

nj

"u

en

CO

c

+->

c

Lf)

L.

lO

1

0)

CO

•p*

in

•

0)

3

t-

^.^

■u

>

c

+J

•^

#»

^—

(U

m

(A

rtj

c

c

r™

OJ

n

0)

c

o

••->

o

(O

o

m

•^

(0

•^

^

0)

<U

•r—

la

■•->

£

4->

^

m

^

■•->

••->

X

<o

■M

l«

j-

•M

(O

IT)

4J

Ni

r—

• r-

N

•^

c

■»->

•

•^

<o

c

-t->

-o

•r-

00

(U

3

>,

c

3

•^

3

(U

c

OJ

to

J3

4J

<0

■(->

J3

la

•r-

OJ

•^

en

t-

w

^

oi

s.

t.

*«

i.

I.

•p-

u

#t

'r-

U

<o

o.

^—

o

o

>

0)

<4-

o

3

OJ

^M

c

3

n

<v

+->

I-

<u

•r-

+J

c

1/1

•

JT

^M

01

3

E

c

•r-

c

Ln

4->

<o

(U

4->

H)

<

•

4->

c

to

<u

E

TJ

>

T3

C

<U

0)

^

^

Oi

(U

■o

C

<u

4->

E

t-

•M

D1

•f*

c

<u

o

E

(0

c

o

<o

^—

<0

>,

c

■»->

t.

5

c

c

Q.

^

a?

L.

U1

(U

•^

lO

E

I/I

m

J3

•

(U

t-

>

E

E

•r—

5

1—

*-^

>

O)

o

0)

lU

^^-^

a)

E

Lrt

o

4->

CD

■M

w

0)

T3

o

IT)

O)

c

to

<u

'~

+->

>

(U

u

t.

r*

>1

5

+J

1.

•t->

«+-

<u

nj

to

o

M-

<o

c

+->

«4-

o

(U

>+-

«4-

O

c

c

o

c

o

o

■M

r^

o

M-

•^

o

•r—

•

r—

c

Q.

Ol

C

E

•r-

•M

o

O)

lU

o

<u

o

o

-l-J

03

•^

+j

00

-a

to

<u

t.

■o

•^

-o

Ifl

-•->

4J

(U

n}

c

(U

Q.

3

c

+J

■»-»

c

c

O

rtJ

u

■!->

to

(0

c

c

0)

^

Q.

<u

(O

N

o

<u

to

o

•'—^

0)

«t

to

c

c

•r-

CO

<u

•>-)

en

x:

<u

(1)

Oi

o

u

■»->

0)

1.

+->

+J

x:

SI

(U

•r—

«J

(O

t.

D-

OJ

lO

■!->

+-»

x:

4J

g
"

■o

Q.

0)

t.

<u

c

-M

4J

o

c

0)

i.

OJ

+j

•r-

CO

-«->

#t

c

3

0)

J-

2

(O

(O

J-

4-

3

1/1

+J

■M

>5

•*

^

OJ

o

*4-

^

<u

c

■o

00

r—

-l->

>

o

■o

<u

0)

1

^~

ITJ

0)

to

«♦-

o

3

s

■o

m

S-

4->

3

m

o

a;

c

c

<a

•r-

(U

^—

o

<u

t.

(J

(.

<u

s-

O

-o

QJ

3:

^—

c

c

(D

(U

<u

V

*•-

-C3

o

r—

•^

>

s

■o

Q-

u.

(.

•^•

ns

o

5

01

lO

to

•

(O

■M

c

o

01

o

U-

0)

<u

■!->

^^k

en

nj

o

4-»

c

(U

+->

c

esj

0)

o

•r"

o

t_

««

M

<fl

<0

p—

I.

•r—

•M

T3

c

^-^

"O

•r-

Q.

*^^

^—

itj

2

>,

OJ

OJ

(.

•p-

•»

Cl

N

(U

OJ

■o

a.

o

+J

•»->

3

T3

+J

c

o

• ^

c

lO

-o

C

c

3

c

a>

I.

■(-»

<u

^

<0

o

Oi

r^

CL

I-

E

-tJ

-o

o>

'^

"o

3

<TJ

^

Q.

<o

<v

•p—

L.

•M

c

cr

O

o

<o

Q.

o

4->

o

o

(0

OJ

o

o

i-

r—

>

tsl

1-

<u

O)

r-*

o

(U

<0

0)

• r—

T3

»4-

1

L.

-o

(O

l»-

(*-

c

c

0)

3

i-

c

o

o

ra

3

+J

+J

o

(U

0)

+J

+J

CI

O

I/)

to

to

o

>

to

o

t.

^

Q

4->

r—

c

0)

M-

o

l/>

o

00

2:

oo

<c

■r-

1/1

o

«i-

<T3

V-228

o

cr>
<U

4->

o

<u

a.

■a

c
n

CL
3
O
U
<J3

0)

•M
IS

>

t.

3

cn o

CO

♦ (U

in Q.

•a:

(U

o.
fl

I/I

c
o

Q.
(U

o

>

(U

a.

3

""

_1

O

r^

CM

, —

vo

r—

^

LO

^

o

o

uo

f—

CM

lO

p—

CO

t-

'' .

a.

i/>

ZD

> C7>

O

l-H t.

a:

o

•SI-

LD

in

o

If)

CM

<Ti

to

CD

3 •

CO

CO

CM

•—

CM

o

o >

^

I- o

o

CO CD

<

*—t

— ' >»

O)

-i^t

LU

^_

CO

CD

CM

o

^M

CM

«*

t>0

Q. (/) (U

CM

r~

T^

3 3 1/1

o

o -a =3

D.

1- c

t/1

CO 1-t oa

LjU

or

«/> 1/)

u.

4J ai

o

t/1 t.

t-i c o

r^

1— < t-H

CM

<£>

«s-

^—

CM

CO

in

f—

o

•

»— 4

CL . o

f-

3 -O (/)

=3

o Its q;

CQ

I- o

1—4

1—

CO < oO

,

00

«/1 W

l-H

cn c

Q

t. 0)

•-■ON

O

CO

VO

CO

«3-

CO

cn

CO

•r-

>;}•

*a-

r—

^—

Q. • +J

3 ■— •■-

O +J O

i. ITS

CO ;z oa

o

^

4->

• •%

•r-

«♦-

C

-o

(U

O

o

<u

c

o

ns

t=

10

c

H-

c

c

in

lO

+->

o

i-

r—

CD

+J

4->

c

•r-

O)

o

c

l/>

c

<u

t/1

>

o

•r—

(U

E

•p—

o

+J

c

l/>

E

<u

>

zn

o

</>

4J

cn

o

^—

fSJ

to «/»

«

ITJ

J-

f^

o

(U

(U

c

Q.

rO

s-

cn

^~ ■^

s.

ITJ

O

■M

c

ITJ •»->

■•->

E

-a

o

c

• r-

i~ -r-

c

o
u

-o

3

<U 1—
T3 TJ

c

lO

■o

r—

OJ U

00

•«

c

M-

o

U. O

(TJ

■!->

c

>-

03

O

c

(/)

2

C

ITJ

a:

P».

• r—

t3 *"

uo

(U

r—

o

(U

i~

c o

OJ

•a

E

C3.

CO

• +J

<u

•»

fO ■»->

J-

C -M

c

LU

O "S

■M

cn

ITS O

i-

^—

I—

Z 4J

E

C

<U T3

o

c

OJ

lO

<x

CO

3

(U

■M -r-

J-

cn c

>

c

■)->

o

C

E

ITJ lO

Q.

C ITJ

o

o

c

O (U

tu

■U

•r- O

CO

•1- c

o;

H—

►-< x:

(O

CJI +-»

I/O ■—

■a

i-

4-> ITJ

to

O

H- ■»->

10 c

IB

c

O to

^—

ITJ 1—

01

UJ

t/1

CD

c <u

o» Ci

ITJ

+-> OJ

ITJ

C CL

s-

f-o

LjJ 4-

c

lO E

C •.-

•^ '^

s.

Q.

□3

rs o

E 4J.

•1- c

trt

C ■!->

01

UJ OJ

3D

o-

M

(/!"

N x:

^

O -f-

-o

x:

C

l/l

<u

•^

1— 0)

•r- O

<u

E ■—

01

c -u

la

r—

m >

r— OJ

0)

to

u.

•r"

x:

'o

■ ^

o c

•r- ■4->

c

<4- O

xr CL

■4->

1-

■4->

O -r-

■M

o o

OJ

4J O

3

3 -O

o

r^

x:

•f— r—

>>

<u

T oj

c

4->

c

+j

5 <U

4->

«t

<U J-

» ITJ

o c

>

•r—

+3

4->

+-> o

+->

c

•r- <U

x:

+-> 0)

>

C

ITJ E

C r—

o

+-» x:

+J

c -o

•r"

QJC"

OJ

-u

(U (O

*»—

TJ S

•f—

0)

+J

^4->

E

C/1 ••>

E -r-

■t->

:*

E Q-

o

c

Ol

c

<u u

ITJ

.— CU

0) r-

ITJ

"O Ol

en

OJ o

CD C

o

ITJ +J

c

C71 O

r- E

IT3

> -1-

lO ITJ

3

+J ITJ

o

ITJ x:

OJ

3 OJ

c

•1- -*->

c c

-o

to +->

*r-

c

+J

O CT

IT3

-M lO

ITJ T-

OJ

C 00

4->

ITS O

ITJ

-C ns

C

(0 C

E 4-

• ^

ITJ

E -•->

■!->

to C

I- -r-

u

• ««

s-

'^1

ITS

cu

0) -o

.— QJ

• r—

1 — to

<u

Ol +J

■4-> E

■(-»

Q. S_

nj -M

r—

<a 0)

CL

+J 3

(U

ItJ

la

O O

O ITJ

j3

tJ •!-

o

ro Q.

s-

x: c

4->

O O

O -!->

3

o +J

o

■l-> C

o

3-1-

00

-) O

_l OO

Q.

_J -r-

o

OO -r-

^

V-229

c

t/>

r-M

<*-

re
o

Ol

o

lO

■M

•o

o

■M

re

OJ

r—

o

4J

00

x:

to

t.

o

0)

■M

o

CL

C

0)

E

^

X>

p

re

>

■M

•^"

1.

•r-

c

re

Q.

to

•

4J

x:

(/)

<u

^■^^

u

•M

o

+j

tn

n

-a

•^

r^

10

re

lo

(U

2

re

^~

+->

v.— »

0)

i.

re

t/1

s.

r-*

Irt

0)

c

a.

C

>

i/i

u

re

c

E

o

V

IS

^

r—

•r"

•r-

00

5

•M

O.

(0

■M

■«->

o

4->

■»-»

r"

>)

3

c

•

H-»

re

re

«?

J3

3

^'■v

f

c

<4-

^—

■♦-»

o

a>

o.

•>

r—

•

•r-

CO

>,

+J

s^.^

^■*»

■o

+J

t

"O

C

l>»

c

re

in

r—

<u

10

o

re

c

3

<a

E

E

r—

>

o

u

0)

Q)

"■*— ^

•>

<u

JZ

•r-

en

■M

c

x:

(U

(/)

«♦-

lO

00

•

-o

re

+J

•r-

c

>,

^-*^

(U

n~

XI

(/)

U

re

V)

^—

■o

Q.

en

<o

(U

0)

E

If)

c

c:

h—

4->

Q.

Ol

^— ^

0)

r—

'f—

(O

to

(U

c

E

re

to

c

-t-J

x:

•r-

>>

t

c

•r-

•r-

</1

^

+->

J-

-M

o

o

>

o

•r-

u

•r-

(U

(/)

OJ

^ -.

zn

•tJ

^—

0)

+j

(-

t.

x:

c

•r-

•^»

(.

re

O)

4J

O

•r-

C

^

c

*

2

•o

s.

Q

•r"

to

-o

1/)

+J

(0

E

t/)

re

re

(U

c

<0

2

-C

C

s

•o

<c

^

o

t/l

T3

O

c

(U

-*->

c

C

o.

<A

•^

O)

•o

c

re

«rt

01

x:

c

c

c

>>

•^-

V

•p-

4J

(0

<u

V

••->

t.

■u

't—

to

0)

x:

(U

c

•r-

2

re

(/I

J3

+J

^

Ol

4->

r—

3
0)

01

c

o

B

c

re

3

9\

-a

'r—

>

HJ

■•->

re

£

c

O

c

>

(O

^

<u

(U

o

re

-C

4J

c

s.

cr

E

-o

(4-

(U

-»->

re

3

0)

en

o

o

^—

(U

c

l-

•F—

c

4->

o

(/)

0)

re

4J

i-

•^

c

I-

+J

E

to

s-

o.

o

t/1

+J

01

to

c

re

o

•r-

3

c

re

re

>>

•r"

o

r^

4->

(/)

o

2

5

i-

<u

(0

C

o

re

<4-

<u

>

M

(U

>>

a>

E

O

x>

(U

•r—

<J

c

■!->

c

•r-

•a

t.

c

o

•^-

•1—

t.

s-

E

ra

o

•^

r—

4-»

Cl

0)

re

c

o

4J

>^

u

-Q

L.

•r-

c

3

J3

a;

(U

E

O)

3

0)

M-

x:

3

o

■»->

00

jr

^_

(/)

<+-

4->

C

1.

Irt

4J

o

C

(U

Q.

•r—

Q.

o

<u

re

to

</)

Q.

■o

>

4J

to

(U

■o

1/1

c

re

-C

C

re

■M

c

0)

re

f

o

(U

(0

>a

i-

3

E

o

i.

OT

T3

O

(U

+-»

+J

■»->

^—

c

r-*

I-

en

I/)

c:

re

3

-C

re

4J

c

(U

o

c

O

+J

c

3

o

o

c

^

re

a.

E

CI

re

(/>

-M

E

c

O)

CT

r^

C

•f—

T3

<o

cu

O.

I/)

(U

(U

c

x:

a>

E

+J

q;

a>

(O — .

■M

c

•^»

OJ

re

-o

CO

E i/>

•r—

•M

O)

+J

'f—

•

u

«t

<r-

re

00

>

Lf)

(u a»

>>

L.

r—

c

o

•

c 5

O

re

re

0)

t.

>

•r- to

^~

o

E

x:

o.

S. C

re

<«

o

■M

a>

(TJ lO

I.

^•^

r—

(U

to

3

a>

(NJ

-•->

■M

(U

^

+j a>

c

O

0)

re

re

•r-

(O

Wl ^

OJ

1^

^

+-»

-C

4J

I—

0) 4->

CJ3

-M

oo

-<->

••—

V-230

o

en
0)
4J

<a
<_}

a.

c

Q.

o

<u

>

L.
O.
^»

O i-i

a.

^ o

CO

• 0)
ID Q.

>^^

LlJ i-
-J Ol

O)
(/>

c
o

Q.
<U

<u

c
o

CD

c

>

3

to

■^

-J

■

<c

a

LO

,—

CO

, —

CO

r^

r>.

l£>

CM

CD

r~.

CM

'a-

00

1^—

CO

in

r—

to

•

CL

1/1

=>

> cn

o

•-■ i_

q:

_ o

pM.

cr>

CO

CM

in

CO

CO

l£>

^v

^

CO

CD

o.

3 •

CO

CO

CM

o

O >

^

1- O

o

CJ CJ3

s:

<

CO

►-1 U i«

UJ

+-> u

CM

in

CM

0

CO

CO

vo

^

CNJ

pa*

^

lO

a. »A <u

r-^

r-»

^—

TT*"

3 3 m

o

o -o =D

Q.

t- c

00

1 1 1

c£) >-< oa

oc

• •

U-

+J CJl

o

1-4 C O

^z

t— 1 >-H

<■

CM

ir>

0

00

0

10

r""

^•»

^—

r«

CD

•

H-l

Q. • O

h-

3 -O Irt

=D

o rtj q:

03

J- o

»-H

O < oO

rv'

h-

•

(/1

tfl </>

»— <

en c

Q

t- <u

►-•ON

CVJ

crv

^—

^»

^

CM

CM

10

CM

in

^—

•r-

CO

r^

Cvj

^—

^—

CM

Q. • -M

3 r- •>-

O +-» O

t. rO

ta =: oa

t-

1
>

0

l*-

0

0

x>

10

<a

4J

<u

<u

c

■M

c

c

rtJ

''~

■0

c

0

■!->

•r—

Ol

rO

*+j

c

-a

■0

nj

<u

i-

•^

C

0

E

0

3

0

3

c

0

O)

•r-

-o

i.

0

4->

0)

0)

^*

E

•r-

>

rtJ

I/)

<o

(O

(/)

0

3

U

nj

t.

•r-

•r-

(U

s-

en

3

(U

^—

C

t.

0

0

CT

r—

J3

>-

r^

^

(O

M-

I-

0

T3

3

OC

CO ra

0

a.

(O

C

a.

o

i.

QJ

a*

to

fO

C3

• O)

+->

c

(U

4->

■0

01

-C

■0

LlJ

o -a

•r-

•r-

u

c

c

c

^

2: <u

■0

t.

-(-»

fO

rO

•r—

+J

10

cl

U-

C

<o

•r—

■0

0

CJ

^

rO

3

r*

0

(A

3

c

t/t

c5 <u

+J

10

■t->

•0

r—

c

■4->

^

»-< x:

P-*

</)

0

I-

tj

«

r~

o

1— +J

<o

(/)

<U

0

r^

IT3

c

0

3

UJ

10

■M

r^

•f—

-0

•r"

m

LO H-

0

C

01

OJ

C

t/>

0)

ZD 0

c

(O

■(->

-0

<+-

<a

#•

0)

L.

— i

CT

fO

--.

L.

(0

c

■t->

£=

■tJ

o;

t/)

0)

c

OJ

CD

4J

(O

</>

irt

0

nj

x:

^~

0

«/>

<u

•^

4J

0

p

"o

M-

c

a>

s-

l/l

■u

>.

■l-»

00

S-

1-

t-

(O

c

<u

(U

03

■u

0

ns

«k

■»->

4->

■u

+->

•r-

fO

»»

<U

■l->

Qi

(U

t/»

c

c

<a

00

r—

+J

10 to

c

x:

0

•r-

+j

fO

<u

c

01 to

<u

4->

c

Irt

t3

00 E

c

3

>

0)

t- 0>

{A

n

(/»

L.

c

rO

<u

cx

•^

E

L.

(U

(U

+J

(O

■!->

x: t.

^

4->

<u

<+- cn

u

J3

(/>

■»J CD

3

(. (U

0

CT)

0 0

Q.

•r-

c

-0

>>

•r- 0

(U lA

QJ

(0

u

-ot^-

(/>

0

C

r—

S J-

#1

■M 3

■4-> 1 —

c

C Q.

c

1— -M

l/>

(O

C

Q.

+J

ITS

0 0

19

0

•r"

3 C

10

■M

0

(U

c

s 0

1. i-

E

•r- -0

0 <U

0

J=

+J 1—

<u

+J

C1.4->

■M C

0)

.= E

p..

3

0

cu

<TJ (O

E

E

C

^—

<o <0

3

i/> <U

<a

t.

s-

■!->

{. C

<u

3 (/)

CD 0

(tJ

(J

C

CT

t.

+->

<o

<o

(U 0

en

E <U

c 0

i.

•r- to

•r-

■t-> <o

<u

lA

(U

(.

Q.-r-

rO

•r- -!->

0

(U

r— T3

■u

(O c

c

C

t/)

cu

0 ■*->

c

c <o

t- >>

•a

^ a>

c

JC <o

(U

0

<u

Q.

0 10

(O

•r- +->

+J +J

<u

3 0)

0

3: E

CiJ

0

a:

0

0 C

s

•s: 00

00 •!-

LL.

Q. C

0

V-231

•o

E
3

s

OJ

E

A

1

L

•r*

C

1/)

a;

««-

(0

c

o

s

s:

•r-

o.

•r"

•r"

+J

4J

■o

t

ro

E

5

s.

M-

o.

<u

•o

ro

CO

o

O

>

c

«♦-

i-

<a

O)

ro

0)

>

Q.

OJ

c

x:

(/)

•r-

4J

3

.Q

•^

o

<U

4J

.^

E

ITS

c

ro

1>

(J

3

0)

•

•^

>

o

lO

C

J3

*»— ^

o

^—

k

«^-

^

00

+J

(U

0)

>a

O

^»

XJ

(/)

•M

(0

(/)

^_^

U1

'f-

c

ro

&.

0)

3

o

9^

•

D>

o

(Q

o

•l->

cn

o

L.

^■^

C

<+-

</)

<a

cn

IX>

•r*

•o

■»-»

CD

-o

*■— ^

OJ

0)

o

00

c

c

o

£

J3

o

3

X)

•r-

10

o

c

CO

c

O

<u

4J

•»->

o

(/)

<o

3

o

^

ro

a;

•r"

in

lO

•4->

■(-)

+->

t-

>

VI

4-»

(/)

4->

o;

•^

ro

o

>

0)

»— 1

T3

JZ

Q.

4J

S

c

1/1

<U

■u

o

O

3

0)

o

(/I

•r-

lU

E

<♦-

t-

<o

•

•r-

3

«♦-

4->

(U

r\

^— .*

lO

o

P

r-*

■»->

fO

r"«—

^^

r^

^-

^

t-

JD

c

1—

lO

(O

«a-

I-

en

CL

O

(U

^

o

«/)

o

c

i-

E

c

o

OJ

3

•r*

CI

Q.

(U

•^

"O

c

^

+->

•<-»

c

OI

0)

x:

o

Its

■•->

-M

•r-

C

ro

1/)

u.

o

t-

-M

c

<U

J^

O

c

1.

O)

<o

00

OJ

to

lO

•r-

S

0)

0)

4-)

(U

E

•M

■M

E

3

.E

l/>

QJ

c

0)

3

(/)

4->

"O

(U

^

s-

-C

C

r"*

OI

c

c

L.

+J

d)

+J

•^

r—

-C

<

3

(O

>

O

■(->

rO

■o

+J

o

<u

T3

a.

-o

I/)

^_

c

C

e>

-a

ro

01

c

(O

(O

(U

3

a>

0)

E

m

>»

>

r^

r^

•

^~

c

3

u

^-"^

(1>

<o

(J

^■^^

•f—

CO

(/)

^^

c

in

s-

c

r^

4J

I.

01

5

lO

lO

CSJ

(U

0)

•r—

n

c

ro

ro

$

1.

c

^

■o

^-^

oj

3

•^

(1)

-!->

<u

•o

E

•M

-a

>

c

<+I

c

u.

»—

«/>

c

01

r—

01

o

c

3

<u

i~

<U

3

(«-

O)

«4-

•^

•^

<u

O

■M

<u

o

o

o

■M

x:

3

ro

>

0)

-E

l/>

O

•I

+j

+->

o

x:

CO

c

0)

^

3

10

(/)

00

CJ

+J

o

(/)

^

J-

CJ

■M

•^

■*->

(/)

o

+J

•r-

lO

x:

0)

r^

+->

C

^

(U

»f.

(/)

S-

-C

1—

^

ro

ro

0}

(0

c

C

(O

-»->

-M

I-

x:

E

N

+J

(U

o

3

(U

+J

E

•r-

•r*

j:

o

•M

-a

•

>>

-a

%-

1.

3

-M

U1

(1)

^— **

X)

<u

T3

01

la

en

(U

-o

00

U-

(U

>

(U

C

c

c

^—

(U

■!->

,9

e

.c

•^

(U

<u

r^

(/>

<u

ro

<J3

3

4-»

T3

-C

g

»^^

3

x:

■M

00

■o

3

+J

E

+->

Wl

r-"

+J

(U

o

+J

i-

•

rO

fO

-o

O

<u

u

s-

O

-•->

*•"*•

</>

L.

.c

•^

E

O)

<u

o

<4-

ro

r-^

ro

OJ

:^

>

rO

l-

»♦-

x:

CO

3

-a

o

C

>♦-

01

■•->

^•—^

0)

(/)

u

•t

n3

1/1

(U

T3

4->

Ll.

0)

Q.

,^-^

E

ro

t-

■o

c

•^

■M

un

3

r~

ro

(U

o

(U

<o

OJ

^

T3

ro

-a

4J

•r-

#>

^

u

J3

C

■*->

c

c

</1

4->

CO

+j

^ -.

ro

•r—

o

>o

(U

•^

0)

"O

TO

•p*

■!->

CT)

01

o

+-»

c

(/I

C

•t

■*->

l/l

Ol

•r"

c

ro

•^

3

OJ

•r-

>,

ro

3

3

lO

-C

O

(/I

J-

C

>>

l/l

or

+J

+J

x:

s

o

(U

lO

4J

u

O)

ro

Q.

>

r—

-a

•r"

O

ro

c

■o

ex

U

o

^~

<u

p^

CO

•r-

E

un

3

3

E

o

4J

ro

r—

CT

ro

j;^

Q.

s.

ro

3

ro

C

3

:»

O

O

o

c:

a-

•r—

<U

"

l/> (TJ

+->

-!->

u

(/)

■o

4-

!U

(U

OJ J^

C

■5

i-

ro

3

r^

*J

(U

I/)

ro

i.

(U

3

r^

rO

■o

Xi

<a oi

I.

(/I

o

■(->

o

c

(0

4-> ^

(U

(U

(/)

o

ro

+-»

c

C

ro

t- I/) 1—

<♦-

c

<

o

S

»— *

•■"

t— 1

x:

V-232

SECTION 4. SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF MAJOR CONCERNS

Summarizing the major interests and concerns of the witnesses, as ex-
pressed in the replies to the first five questions, a number of fac-
tors were demonstrated, as described in the ensuing paragraphs.

The primary interests of the speakers were: the estuary as a source
of food, the estuary as an ecosystem, and the estuary as a locus for
leisure activity. The estuary also serves as a protective barrier
against storms and flooding, and it helps to modify the climate. It
is a source of commercial resources — harbors for shipping, fish and
shellfish for food, minerals for industry, and water for human and
industrial use.

For these reasons, the estuarine environment is considered a good
place to live and work.

An additional use of the estuary is as a natural laboratory to in-
crease understanding and knowledge of its biota and other features.

Accordingly, concern was expressed over any activity or phenomenon
that acts to destroy the values of the estuary, and over the result-
ant damages.

The major worry was pollution of all kinds, and especially inade-
quately treated municipal, industrial, and vessel wastes.

V-233

Modification, whether natural or artificial, was the second concern.
This would include drainage ditches used for pest control, impound-
ments for water supply, and fill for residential development. Related
to this, and to some degree involving it, would be the problems cre-
ated by indiscriminate and too rapid development and by improper land
management. These concerns were expressed in terms of upriver as
well as estuarine activities.

Jurisdictional and legal questions were also mentioned as being of
concern, especially as the lead various authorities to a reluctance
to take action and a tendency to complain that nobody is doing any-
thing. The need to resolve these questions, and those related to the
lack of planning criteria for coping with conflicting use demands, is
critical .

The destruction of natural resources despite conservation efforts
was a source of uneasiness for a number of witnesses, as was the re-
lated loss of marine food potential and consequent depression of the
seafood industry.

Related to the shipping and water supply values was concern about
phenomena reducing these uses — obstruction, salinity intrusion,
and tidal and current alterations.

Because recreation was cited as a prime estuarine use, the thought of
the destruction of its potential through health hazards, stagnant

V-234

water, foul odors, increased pest populations, and sheer ugliness v/as
particularly bothersome to many of the speakers.

Among needs that concerned the participants were: long-range planning,
stronger laws, enforcement of laws and water quality standards, pollu-
tion control and abatement including air, and clarification of juris-
dictions. Related to several of these were recommendations for activity
control, including in many cases a moratorium on dredging and filling.

Another problem brought out at the meetings was that relatively little
is known about the estuaries, per se, or about the effects of many pol-
lutants on the estuarine ecosystem and environment, nor is there suf-
ficient background knowledge for effective use planning and adminis-
tration. Research in these areas is needed.

To summarize, the chief concerns are shown in chart form below. Num-
bers of the items correspond to the questions which they answer, and
the numbers to the right are obtained from the appropriate Table V.5.3
format.

la. A place for leisure activity 335
lb. A habitat for fish and wildlife 222
Ic. A source of food 213

2a. A pollution collector 396

2b. A place subject to modification 285
3a. Destruction of resources 231

3b. Destruction of estuary itself 122
3c. Loss of recreational value 108

V-235

4a. Mismanagement 212

4b. Weak and unenforced laws 165

5a. Lack of knowledge 127

5b. Lack of planning criteria and data 114

In discussing the areas of concern, the four groups expressed sub-
stantial agreement.

V-236

SECTION 5. SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT
ORGANIZATION AND ROLES OF THE VARIOUS LEVELS
OF GOVERNMENT

Before presenting a synthesis of recommendations on management organ-
izations and roles, a brief summary of recommendations by the public
sector (Group IV witnesses), the nonindustrial private sector (Groups
I and II), and the industrial private sector (Group III) will be given,
based on their replies to the last three questions.

THE PUBLIC (GOVERNMENT) SECTOR

The representatives of the various levels of government (Group IV
speakers), especially State and local, provided the greatest number
of answers to these questions. Some Federal personnel testified,
but these were generally regional representatives of various agencies
and Congressmen. Since the various governments will of necessity be
directly active in any management plan, their views are particularly
important.

These witnesses felt that the Federal role in management should be:

(1) Provision of financial and technical assistance,
including that specifically allocated for construction
and research and training, to the States and localities;

(2) Leadership in protective action, including acquis-
ition and activity control;

V-237

(3) Cooperation with the State and local governments
to maximize coordination throughout the Country; and

(4) Establishment of minimum water quality standards
and operating program guidelines for the States to use
as a basis for their efforts.

They saw the States' role to be:

(1) Operation of the management plan through a num-
ber of instrumentalities;

(2) Management within a national plan;

(3) Cooperation with the local governments in manage-
ment, including program coordination;

(4) Provision of financial and technical assistance
to local governments; and

(5) Cooperation with the Federal Government in
management.

The local role was seen to be:

(1) Management, utilizing all State and Federal
assistance available;

(2) Cooperation with the States in management;
and

(3) Development of plans and installation of equip-
ment for monitoring and waste treatment.

V-238

The optimal management organization was seen to be a cooperative
Federal, State, and local venture, including, in many instances,
nongovernment representation. Alternatives offered were:

(1) A cooperative State-local organization with nongov-
ernment representation as appropriate; and

(2) A regional organization, including Federal repre-
sentatives in the membership.

THE NONINDUSTRIAL PRIVATE SECTOR

The witnesses in this category, which was devised by combining
Groups I and II (national organizations, etc; and academic people),
also gave frequent answers to these questions.

These speakers stated that the Federal role should be:

(1) Provision of technical and financial assistance, in-
cluding that allocated for research and training and for
construction;

(2) Taking of strong protective action, including acquis-
ition and activity control;

(3) Cooperation with State and local governments to coord-
inate the national effort; and

(4) Management of those estuaries which the States fail
to manage.

The State role was seen by the nonindustrial private sector to be:
(1) Cooperation with the localities in management.

V-239

including coordination of programs;

(2) Operation of the management plan through a number of
instrumentalities;

(3) Management within a national plan; and

(4) Provision of financial and technical aid to the local
governments .

The witnesses saw the local role to be management, utilizing all avail-
able financial and technical assistance programs of the Federal and
State governments.

The best management system was seen to be by a cooperative Federal,
State, and local organization, preferably with nongovernment repre-
sentatives included. As an alternative, the nonindustrial private
sector would like to see a regional organization, including Federal
representation.

THE INDUSTRIAL PRIVATE SECTOR

The industry and user representatives (Group III witnesses) were of
two distinct types — fishermen (including shellfish harvesters) and
"others". This fact is mentioned, as the fishermen had a quite dif-
ferent view from that of the other Group III speakers.

The industrial witnesses felt that the Federal role should be:

(1) Financial and technical assistance, especially for
research and training and for construction;

V-240

(2) Cooperation with the State and local governments for
a coordinated national effort; and

(3) Establishment of operating program guidelines and
minimum water quality standards for the States.

The fishermen were more concerned that the Federal Government:

(1) Take strong protective action, especially in acquis-
ition and activity control; and

(2) rianage, as the problems were felt to be too great
for the State and local governments to handle.

Industry generally wanted the State to:

(1) Operate the management plan through a number of
instrumentalities, especially water quality control;

(2) Manage in cooperation with the local governments;
and

(3) Manage within the framework of a national plan.

The fishermen wanted only a very minor role for the States, as they
felt that the States have done very little of what they could or
should have been doing.

The industrial representatives saw the local role to be:

(1) Management, in cooperation with the States; or

(2) Conduct of the management plan, utilizing Federal
and State financial and technical assistance.

V-241

The fishermen felt that the local governments should not be directly
involved in management, as they are too subject to the pressure of
special interest groups.

The industrial participants felt that the management organization
should be cooperative Federal, State, and local, with nongovernment
representation.

The fishermen did not express recommendations for a management
organization.

SUMMARY OVERVIEW

Generally, it was felt that intergovernmental cooperation is needed,
and that all levels of government should be represented in any
organization. Several people commented on the duplication of programs
and effort, not only among the various levels of government, but also
within each level of government. For this reason, recommendations
for a new organizational method appeared with relative frequency,
although the present components could be included in the resulting
new organization.

By and large, opinion was that the problem of estuarine management
and pollution control is too great to be handled at one level.
Therefore, it was recomnended , in several different ways, that a
national program, incorporating operating guidelines and minimum
water quality standards, is needed at the Federal level. In addition.

V-242

because of shortages of funds and technical capabilities at the State
and local levels, the States and localities look to the Federal
Government for assistance in these areas.

The States would, in most instances, conduct the management program
and coordinate local activities. The major exception would be inter-
state or regional organizations' management of interstate estuaries,
such as Long Island Sound or Chesapeake Bay. While some saw the
local role as the actual management, it was more frequently seen as
being cooperation with the State and the planning and development of
sewer systems and waste treatment facilities, as well as monitoring
for water quality maintenance. County or State government would
carry out zoning and activity-regulating programs, in the view of
most witnesses.

It was the contention of some of the speakers that no one type of
organization would be best in all estuaries, nor would any set assig-
nation of roles have any more validity. These people wanted to see
a primary coordination of effort among the various governmental
levels, and action and method dictated by conditions in the partic-
ular estuary.

Regardless of reconmended management organization or roles, the prim-
ary concern was for coordination to avoid duplication of programs
and functions. It was generally felt that the State and local ef-
fort and investment should be increased, and that the Federal effort

V-243

should be primarily as a backup — prov1d1nq technical and financial
assistance, minimum standards, and operating guidelines, and being
prepared to step in and manage those estuaries which the States and
localities fail to manage.

V-244

SECTION 6. SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED
ROLE OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR

While the analysis of the public meetings v/as not designed to bring
forth recommendations specifically as to action that should be taken
by individuals and nongovernment organizations, institutions, and
business, a number of opinions on the subject can be extrapolated
from the replies to several of the questions.

Without the concerned interest of the private sector, and the citi-
zens comprising it, no management program can succeed.

Public attitudes towards estuaries and marshlands, and the general
lack of knowledge about these vitally productive areas are two of the
major problems faced in the development of a management program.
Therefore, there is a need for people to learn of the resources and
potential of the estuaries, and the importance of the estuaries to
themselves.

Accordingly, the private sector's first action should be to become
informed about the values of the estuaries — to learn that an acre
of estuarine marsh, without human intervention, is two to seven times
as productive as an acre of cultivated farmland, and that virtually
all seafood is dependent on the estuarine environment during at least
part of the life cycle.

V-245

The informed private sector can be of great assistance in bringing
about the kind of comprehensive long-range management plans needed
by spreading information, by putting pressure on those having respon-
sibility for the laws and ordinances required to effect such plans,
by making enforcement officials aware of violations, and by support-
ing strong protective measures at all levels of government, among
other things.

One segment of the private sector, industry, is beginning to recog-
nize the importance of treating its wastes and acting to improve the
environment of its location. Many industries have employed environ-
mental specialists to develop programs along these lines. A number
of industrial plants have spent a large amount of money to install
waste treatment equipment, sometimes with tax credits or other incen-
tives from the States. This is all to the good, but more needs to
be done. Industry must fully recognize that investment in pollution
control is investment in its own future.

V-246

SECTION 7. CONCLUSIONS

The public meetings, the mechanism selected to receive input from
the public and private sectors that could not have been received by
other means, brought forth much helpful information and many useful
recommendations.

Primarily, concern was expressed about destruction and damages in
the estuaries from pollution, modification, and improper and frag-
mented management methods, and the need to rectify these situations.
Secondarily, but closely related to the foregoing, was the feeling
that all segments of the public and private sectors should take a
more active role in estuarine management and pollution control.

Management recommendations were diverse, but the predominant view
was that the organization should include all levels of government,
and nongovernment representatives, as well. The system should be
essentially:

(1) The formulation at the Federal level of minimum
water quality standards and operating program guidelines
for State use;

(2) The provision of financial and technical assistance
to State and local governments by the Federal Government;

(3) The conduct of the management plan, utilizing water
quality standards and operating program guidelines, by
the States;

V-247

(4) The assignment of financial and technical aid to
the localities by the States;

(5) The planning and installation of monitoring and
waste treatment equipment, and the conduct of the
monitoring and v/aste treatment activities by the local
governments; and

(6) The cooperation with the States in management by
the localities.

The recommendations for the national program, discussed in length in
Part III, incorporate the recommendations from this Chapter, as well
as those from other sources discussed elsewhere in this Report.

V-248

APPENDIX A

REPORT OF SOURCES AND METHODS
USED FOR COORDINATION AND DATA GATHERING
FOR THE
NATIONAL ESTUARINE POLLUTION STUDY

I. Means of gathering information, views, opinions, and recommendations

A. Correspondence, consultation, and briefing — at Headquarters
and Regional levels

B. Public meetings

C. Contracts for specific data gathering

D. Preparation of the National Estuarine Inventory

II. Sources of information

A. Federal agencies having activities and interests in the
estuaries, and their reports

B. State, interstate, regional, territorial, and local govern-
ment bodies, and their reports

C. National organizations, including institutions and foundations

D. Academic community

E. Industrial representatives and groups

F. Other individuals

III. Means of coordination with sources

A. Government agencies, including Department of the Interior
and subdivisions

1. Letter/memorandum request for information on programs,
views, and means of coordination

2. Direct consultation with high-level personnel

V-249

3. Assigned Study coordinator from each non-Interior
agency concerned

4. Advisory committee composed of assigned represen-
tatives from each Interior agency concerned

5. Conferences with assigned coordinators and repre-
sentatives from the agencies

6. Input from specific requests for data to meet Inven-
tory needs from the

a. Corps of Engineers

b. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

7. Input from service contracts for data to meet Inven-
tory needs with the

a. Office of Business Economics

b. Bureau of Mines

c. Geological Survey

B. States, territories, and their local subdivisions

1. State Coordinator named by Governor in reply to a
request from the Secretary of the Interior

2. Direct consultation with and data requests to the
States and localities by the Directors of the coastal
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Regional
Offices for the Inventory and other purposes

3. Preparation by the Regions of State profiles includ-
ing information on organizations and activities involved
with the estuaries, and especially on views and

V-250

recommendations regarding a comprehensive management
program and responsibilities of the various govern-
ment levels — Federal, State, and local

4. State Coordinator served as co-chairman of the
public meetings, and State officials testified at
the public meetings

5. Local government representatives testified at
the public meetings

C. National organizations

1. Appointment of representative to the Study in
reply to a letter from the Secretary of Interior

2. Letter requests for information and data on pro-
grams, views, and opinions

3. Attendance at conferences, meetings, and sym-
posia sponsored by these organizations

4. Briefings and conferences with Washington per-
sonnel of national organizations

5. Statements at public meetings by national organ-
izations and local affiliates

6. Letters requesting views on research and study
needs

D. Academic community

1. Letters, consultations, and briefings with
academic members of certain national organizations

2. Attendance at conferences and symposia sponsored

V-251

by academic institutions and organizations

3. Testimony of academic personnel, both as indi-
viduals and as representatives of universities and
laboratories, at public meetings

4. Letters to selected organizations requesting
views on research and study needs

5. Letters and consultations at Regional level on
research and study needs

6. Input from study contracts to meet general
information needs with the

a. University of Maryland

b. Florida State University

c. University of North Carolina

d. University of Washington

e. University of Rhode Island

f. Gulf Universities Research Corporation

g. University of Hawaii
h. University of Alaska

E. Industrial representatives

1. Testimony at the public meetings

2. Input through meetings of the

a. national Security Industrial Association

b. Marine Technology Society

F. Other individuals

1. Testimony at the public meetings

2. Personal correspondsnce

V-252

-a

c

M

en

c

•r-

in

-M

ej

0)

z

<U

J3

o

3

►— t

Q.

—J

OQ

<4-

=3

O

O.

cn

C

U-

o

X

o

H- 1

•M

Q

z

lO

Z

o

O

LU

1— 1

o

O.

1—

o.

<c

«t

<_>

to

o

<u

_l

CD

u

z

'r*

t— •

T3

3

C

O

31

00

4

o.

<c

00

V-253

APPENDIX C

SCHEDULE OF NATIONAL ESTUARINE POLLUTION STUDY
PUBLIC MEETINGS

Location of Meeting

Date of Meeting

Alabama, Mobile
Alaska, Anchorage
Alaska, Juneau

California, Los Angeles
California, San Francisco
Connecticut, Hartford

Delaware, Wilmington
Florida, Orlando
Georgia, Jekyll Island

Hawaii , Honolulu
Louisiana, Lake Charles
Louisiana, New Orleans

Maine, Portland
Maryland, Annapolis
Massachusetts, Boston

Mississippi , Biloxi
New York, New York
North Carolina, New Bern

Oregon, Newport

South Carolina, Charleston

Texas, Brownsville

Texas, Corpus Chris ti
Texas, Galveston
Texas, Orange

Virginia, Hampton
Washington, Aberdeen
Washington, S6attle

Puerto Rico, Santurce
Virgin Islands, St. Croix
Virgin Islands, St. Thomas

November 21 , 1968
June 13, 1968
June 11, 1968

February 25-26, 1969
February 18-19, 1969
August 19-20, 1968

June 27, 1968
March 12-13, 1968
February 29, 1968

January 28-29, 1969
October 22, 1968
October 24, 1968

September 10-11, 1968
October 30, 1968
October 8, 1968

January 17, 1968
July 23-24, 1968
July 26, 1968

May 9, 1968
June 5, 1968
October 1 , 1968

October 3, 1968
October 8, 1968
October 10, 1968

November 19, 1968
July 25, 1968
July 23, 1968

April 22, 1968
April 17, 1968
April 19, 1968

I

V-255

Chapter 6

THE ESTUARY STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS COMPARED WITH OTHER
PROPOSALS FOR MANAGING THE ESTUARINE AND COASTAL ZONE

In addition to the present study, management of the coastal zone also
has been the subject of one other report at the Federal level during
the past year. This is Chapter 3 in the report by the Commission on
Marine Science, Engineering and Resources entitled Our Nation and the
Sea (hereafter referred to as Commission Report).

This chapter reviews the Commission Report in summary fashion and com-
pares its policy recommendations with those advanced by the National
Estuarine Pollution Study.

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION REPORT

A major conclusion reached by the Commission is that, although.
Federal, State, and local governments share the responsibility for
managing estuarine and coastal zone resources, the States must be
the "focus for responsibility and action." It considers, however,
that effective management of these resources thus far has been
thwarted by the variety of government jurisdictions involved, the
low priority afforded marine matters by State governments, the
diffusion of responsibilities among State agencies, and the failure
of State agencies to develop and implement long-range plans. It
adds that, until recently, navigation— over which Federal authority
is preeminent--has tended to dominate the uses of the coastal zone,
and the Commission suggests that this perhaps is the reason why the
States have been slow to assume their management responsibilities.

V-256

Based on these conclusions, the Commission's major recommendations are

as follows:

Establishment by the States of Coastal Zone Authorities

Each coastal State should establish one or more coastal zone author-
ities capable of develooino and implementing management plans which
would "resolve problems of comoeting uses" in the coastal zone. The
number, form, and exact powers of these authorities would be left
to each State. In general, however, the Commission expects that
these authorities would be organized so as to "prevent domination by
State agencies charged with narrower responsibilities." Powers to
be made available to the tyoical coastal zone authority should
include planning, regulation, acquisition and eminent domain, and
development.

Planning is defined by the Commission as the making of comorehensive
plans for coastal waters and adjacent lands and the conduct of neces-
sary studies and investigations. Regulation includes zoning, the
granting of easements, licenses, or permits, and the exercisinn of
other necessary controls to ensure that use of waters and adjacent
lands conforms to the plan for that area. Acquisition and eminent
domain are self-explanatory. Develooment, as defined by the Commission,
is the provision, either directly or by arrangement with other govern-
mental agencies, of such public facilities as beaches, marinas, and
other waterfront works. It includes also the leasing of estuarine and
coastal zone lands.

V-257
The Commission also suggests that the States may be forced to regain

zoning powers over land use which most States have yielded to local
jurisdictions. Presumably, this regained authority would be exer-
cised by the coastal zone authority (or authorities). Its report
adds, "Additionally, it may be desirable to delegate to the State
Coastal Zone Authorities certain regulatory functions of Federal
agencies, such as reviewing proposals for construction in navigable
waterways and advising Federal construction agencies."

Federal Grant Assistance

To assist the States in developing coastal zone management plans, the
Commission proposes that the Federal government fund one-half of
each authority's operating costs during the first two years of its
existence. Matching grants also should be provided for planning
studies, either through existing Federal grant programs or under new
legislation. Other grant programs now available at the Federal level
and applicable to other phases of the management of the coastal zone
should be used to the full.

Federal Review of State Plans

In the Commission's view, the multiplicity of Federal interests in
the coastal zone calls for Federal review of "proposed State plans
and their implementation." This Federal review should occur at
three stages: (a) when the State first proposes a particular type
of coastal zone authority; (b) when the comprehensive coastal plan is
submitted by the authority; and (c), if the plan is approved, when

V-258

further grants, contracts for acquisition and development, or other
financing are proposed. Failure by a coastal zone authority to safe-
guard national interests could lead to Federal intercession, and inade-
quate performance by an authority could lead to withdrav/al of funding
support and of specific Federal functions delegated to the State.

Centralization of Federal Responsibilities

The Commission recommends that Federal responsibilities for dealing
with the State authorities be centralized to assure that the Federal
Government speaks with a single voice on coastal zone matters. To
achieve this centralization, the Commission recommends that these
responsibilities be assigned to the new National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Agency (NOAA), which its report elsewhere proposes be
established to secure "more effective use of the se.is." Specific
responsibilities which the Commission would assign to NOAA include
(a) administration of Federal grants in support of the planning and
enforcement activities of the State coastal zone authorities— this
would include the pov;er to revoke or withhold grants if the
authorities failed to comply with plans approved by NOAA; (b) assist-
ance to the States in the resolution of problems resulting from the
divergent objectives of other Federal agencies; (c) leadership in
identifying and funding the diverse research programs needed to
solve the problems of the coastal zone; (d) in cooperation with other
Federal agencies, development of necessary monitoring programs in the
coastal zone; (e) encouragement of university research and training
programs relating to coastal zone management and the support of a

V-259

system of coastal zone laboratories; (f) in collaboration with other
Federal agencies, support of feasibility studies and fundamental engi-
neering relevant to the development of offshore terminals, storage
facilities, and nuclear power plants; and (g), in surveys in the
coastal zone by other Federal agencies, identification of areas of
coimon interest and coordination of plans to avoid overlap and

incompatibilities.

Federal Compliance with State Plans

Other Federal agencies providing grants-in-aid to the States, or
engaging in coastal activities, are to review their projects for con-
sistency with plans adopted by the State coastal zone authorities.

Fixing of Territorial Boundaries

Congress should establish a National Seashore Boundary Commission to
fix, subject to appropriate judicial review, the baselines from which
to measure the territorial sea and areas covered by the Submerged
Lands Act of 1953 and to determine, again subject to judicial review,
the seaward lateral boundaries between the States.

COMPARISON OF COMMISSION REPORT
WITH RECOMMEMDATIONS IN THIS STUDY

Like the Commission Report, the Estuary Study concludes that primary

responsibility for achieving sound management of the Nation's estuarine

and coastal zone resources should continue to reside in the States.

Consistent with that finding, it too seeks to create a Federal-State

V-260

relationship in the management of these resources through which
Federal programs and activities will encourage and assist the States
more effectively to discharge their primary responsibility. And like
the earlier report, it proposes reliance on the grant-in-aid mechan-
ism to achieve needed State action.

The Estuary Study also agrees with the Conmission in calling for a
Federal role which will influence and guide the key State-level manage-
ment decisions which from here on will control the use of a State's
estuarine and coastal resources. Thus it would make the grant of
Federal funds to a State for administrative purposes conditional upon
the State meeting three criteria imposed by the Federal Government:
(1) the existence of a State organization for the management of
estuarine and coastal resources not dominated either by preservation
or economic development interests; (2) the capability of that organi-
zation to review Federal and federally-assisted State and local pro-
jects for consistency with the plan that organization is expected to
develop; and (3) the authority within that organization to (a) require
a State permit for dredging, filling, and other alteration of the
lands and waters in the estuarine and coastal zone, (b) override local
zoning that is inconsistent with the State plan, and (c) acquire
estuarine and coastal sites which the plan earmarks for acquisition
by the State.

Other recommendations in the Estuary Study similarly have the intent
of achieving a role for the Federal Government which will influence
State-level management decisions without usurping State management

V-261
responsibility and authority. These include (1) the recommendation
that failure by a State to prepare and adhere to a comprehensive
management plan should be the basis for a withdrawal by the Secretary
of the Interior of additional grant support; (2) the recommended
bonus attaching to the administrative grant if the State institutes
an effective moratorium on further dredging and filling during the pre-
paration of its comprehensive management plan; and (3) the comparable
bonus that it recommends if that plan is acceptable to the Secretary.

The Estuary Study also concurs with the Commission Report in proposina
the establishment by the Congress of a special commission to fix bound-
aries in the estuarine and coastal zone.

However, the Estuary Study is in fundamental disagreement with the
Coimiission Report on the question of centralizing Federal activities
in a single Federal agency. It proposes instead that coordination
and integration of Federal programs and activities be the responsi-
bility and a capability of the State organization administrating or
coordinating the States' estuarine and coastal zone management acti-
vities. The administration of the new Federal grants for estuarine
and coastal zone management specifically would be assigned, under the
Estuary Study recommendations, to the Secretary of the Interior.
Existing authority of other Federal agencies basically would remain
unaltered.

Other important differences betv;een the Estuary Study and the
Conriission Report concern the new Federal grant programs. This study
recommends an initial, one-time grant of 100 percent to each State

V-262

for use in appraising its present management program in the estuarine
and coastal zone and in preparing recommendations for improving pro-
gram. No such grant is proposed by the Commission. Also unique to
this study are the bonus recommendations already noted in describing
the grant for administrative purposes.

Other reconmendations in the Estuary Study not included in the Conmission
Report (a) would require consideration of other resource use and man-
agement plans bearing on estuarine and coastal resources in preparing
the comprehensive plan for using and managing the States' estuarine
and coastal zone; (b) would direct the Secretary of the Interior to
make a biennial review of problems and program needs, followed by a
report to the President and the Congress; (c) would require the
Secretary to establish both an interagency advisory council and a
non-Federal advisory board; and (d) suggests that the President issue
appropriate Executive orders and proclamations to be effective in the
interim before the Congress can enact legislation establishing the
National Estuarine Management Proaram.

V-263

Chapter 7
OVERALL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT, A SUMMARIZATION BY CASE STUDY

SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION

Having presented In the orevious Chapters of this Part of the Study
the roles and programs of various levels of government, it is desired
at this point to present a picture of how and how well these programs
are working. To do so the case study approach has been adopted and
two major estuarine zones selected for review and evaluation.

The method of operation here will be to present a reasonably complete
description of the estuarine zone, its uses and resources, the major
problems and dangers facing it, and conditions resulting from these.
Then there will be described the programs and activities of the
various levels of government being carried out in each case and an
attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs.

Any comprehensive program of management should contain to some extent
the following elements:

(1) Mutually agreed-upon policy objectives and functions

(2) Legislative authorization to carry out the programs
functional activities

(3) Development of the basic knowledge necessary for effect-
ive management

(4) Provisions for planning and implementation

(5) Active administration in terms of regulation, control,
and coordination

V-264

(6) Financial resources

(7) Public awareness and acceptance

As it is possible the evaluation of the progress and success of
management will be made in terms of the above elements.

The Chesapeake Bay on the east coast was selected as representing an
interstate estuary. On the west coast, San Francisco Bay was selec-
ted as representing an intrastate estuary. The two are very different
physically but the same in that they run the gamut from highly indus-
trialized and populated areas to very rural areas. Each has a major
series of problems including industrial growth, pollution, modifica-
tion, and many others.

Sections 2 through 5 that follow will describe the Chesapeake Bay and
its major problems, outline the activities and programs therein and
make an evaluation as to effectiveness. Sections 6 through 9 will do
the same for San Francisco Bay.

V-265
SECTION 2. DESCRIPTION AND USES OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY

In describing the Chesapeake Bay and its uses we have turned to a
brief but excellent work by Dr. L. Eugene Cronin, Director of the
Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Natural Resources Institute^
University of Maryland (V-7-1) and quote as follows:

"Chesaoeake Bay [Figure V.7.1] is about 165 nautical miles
long, averages less than 20 feet deep with a maximum depth
of 175 feet, and contains about 18,520 billion gallons of
water. The surface area is 4300 square miles and the shore-
line is 4500 miles long. The total drainage basin is
74,000 square miles. This includes the Susquehanna River,
the largest on the east coast of the United States, which
drains 42 percent of the basin and dominates the upper
Bay .... The Potomac drains 22 percent of the basin
and the Rapoahannock-York-James complex drains about 24
percent. There are over 50 tributary rivers, with widely
varying geochemical and hydrological characteristics, so
that the physical circulation of the Bay is complex.

"The Bay is the drowned valley of the Susquehanna; its
natural deep channels are the only remnants of the original
flow-carved riverbed. It is characterized by the presence
of great deoosits of fine sediments in the deeper portions.

V-266

FIGURE V.7J
Chesapeake Bay and its Principal Tributaries.
(Adapted from the report by L. F. Cronin, V-7-1.)

V-267

"Large cities, especially Baltimore, Washington and
Norfolk, arose because of the Bay and increasingly impinge
upon it. This is the southern end of the eastern megalopo-
lis, with an enormous growth of population in sight.

"Salinity is near zero at the head of each tributary and at
the north end of the Bay and about 30-31 parts per thousand
at the Capes. Circulation is controlled primarily by river
flow and the resulting density gradients. A strongly two-
layered stratified system develops in summer, with a some-
what weaker winter system, and general vertical mixing
occurs in spring and fall. This produces a net downstream
flow of surface water and net upstream flow of deeper waters.
This pattern of circulation affects many of the organisms
of the Bay.

USES

"Transportation

"Ships have used the Bay since its discovery in the 16th
century, and Baltimore and Norfolk are amonq the Nation's
great ports. In 1964, 107,253,730 tons of material were
handled by these norts, and Baltimore alone receives about
5,000 ocean-going ships per year. This commercial activity
affects other uses of the Bay, principally through pollution
by bilge-pumping and accidental spillage and through insati-
able demands for the deepening and maintenance of channels.

V-268

In the main channel of the Bay, control deoth 1s now 35
feet, but further cuts to 45 feet are now proposed.

"Biotic Yield

"Extraction of organic material from the Bay has increased
from the inconsequential harvests by Indians and colonists
to present efficient removal of fish and shellfish. Oyster
production has been decimated by excessive exploitation,
and other species have been reduced by tributary dams and
pollution; but changes in gear have vastly increased the
catch of menhaden, soft shell clams, and crabs. Landings
for 1965 included 501,600,000 pounds of fish and shellfish
for commercial use, with a value of at least $65,000,000
(2 X dockside value). Menhaden dominated the fish catch,
with 319,000,000 pounds landed, but 108,200,000 pounds of
shellfish provided 74 percent of the value ....

"The yield to sport fishing is much more difficult to measure
and evaluate. [Researchers] . . . have made valuable surveys
of parts of the burgeoning recreational fishery, but no sat-
isfactory estimates of Bay-wide effort, catch or value are
available.

"In addition to these aquatic crops, the Bay area supports
large populations of many species of birds and mammals.
They cannot be fully reviewed here, but are of high use to the
human population and affected by the changes which are
occurring.

V-269

"Recreation and Esthetics

"Recreational uses of the waters of the Chesapeake Bay are
very poorly documented. Boating, swimming, skiing, beach-
ing, fishing and hunting are all increasing rapidly, but
reliable data are scarce.

"Boat registration provides one helpful index. Maryland
salt water boat listings increased 33 percent from 1960 to
1966. Sixty-one thousand craft are registered, about
20,000 are not required to register and about 20,000 visit-
ing boats enter the Maryland portion of the Bay, for an
annual total of 100,000. Over 300 marinas serve these
boats. Virginia has a fleet of about the same size.

"The Chesapeake is the focal point of the Atlantic flyway
for migratory waterfowl, and about 30 species of ducks,
geese and swans concentrate there in winter. These support
heavy hunting during the winter months.

"Waste Disposal

"The Baltimore-Washington metropolitan complex contained
3,771,000 people in 1960, with an expected doubling time of
25 years. While vast and expensive systems are under con-
struction for collection of the wastes from this population
and treatment to remove pathogenic bacteria and solids,
almost no attention is given to the effects of pouring

V-270

increasing quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus
into the Bay and its tributaries. Brehmer . . . points
out that the use of the Potomac River as the final
treatment stage in the Washington disposal system
releases 8,000,000 pounds of phosphorus and
25,000,000 pounds of nitrogen annually into the
estuary. Doubling of this quantity is predicted within

30 years, and the estuary is already badly damaged

II

....

Thermal pollution is ^ery rapidly increasing as power companies
move to the large volumes of low-corrosion water of the estuaries.
There is a complex of some 16 relatively small plants in existence
now with rapid Bay-wide proliferation proposed for the near future.
The new seven stations planned are designed to produce about
1,000,000 KW each and to use about 1,000,000 gallons of water per
minute for condenser cooling, with a rise of 10-T2°F. Some will
be twice that large.

V-271

SECTION 3. MAJOR PROBLEMS AND DANGERS TO THE BAY

We have already noted in some detail two of the increasing problem

areas of the Chesapeake, namely, waste loading and thermal pollution.

Others that must be considered in current and future planning are

as follow:

(1) The use of the Chesapeake Bay for maritime shipping
results in local nuisance conditions from oil spills and
overboard waste disposal. The major impact of the ship-
ping industry is the dredging and spoil-disposal problems.
The Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, a favored route for the
Port of Baltimore, required an extensive dredging program
in the upper Bay with attendant spoil disposal problems.
Demand already exists for further deepening of the ship-
ping channels.

The disposal of spoil in the Bay becomes of increasing con-
cern. With the filling of deeper trenches, less salt water
is able to move up the estuary in the two-layer system,
changing the environment. The estuary is a natural sediment
trap with most of the runoff materials deposited within it^
with very little reaching the Continental Shelf. Spoil dis-
posal practices of large magnitude will greatly accelerate
the filling of deeper trenches of the Bay, not of immediate
concern for shipping, but possibly significant in its effects
on hydrography and ecology. The deep trenches are known to
be wintering areas for certain commercial finfishes.

V-272

More recently the problem of the toxic nature of sooil
from industrialized Baltimore Harbor has raised the ques-
tion of immediate toxic effects in disposal areas.

(2) Altered salinity patterns in the Bay are due to diversion
of fresh water to the Delaware Basin through the deepened
Chesapeake and Delaware Canal and because of increased pot-
able water needs in the Delaware Basin. The use of the
Susquehanna River at the Conowingo Dam for hydroelectric
purposes causes problems of low flow with the resultant
intrusion of salinity further up the Bay.

(3) Aquatic plants such as wild celery, coontail, sea let-
tuce, Eurasian milfoil, and water chestnut have been found
in the Chesapeake Bay area. At times some of these aquatic
plants have increased in such abundance they created naviga-
tional problems, choked out desirable waterflow plants,
interfered with shellfishinq and finfishinq, discouraged
swimming^ and created suitable breeding grounds for mosquitoes.

(4) Shoreline erosion control is [most certainly] another
significant problem. Shoreline erosion can be a major source
of sediment where headlands of easily eroded material are
subject -to wave attack.

Today, pressures for the varied use of Chesapeake Bay are more intense
than ever before. An increasing population looks toward the Bay for
new habitable areas and recreational facilities, and as a conduit for
the disposal of wastes. Nevertheless, the "i^r^ factors which make the

V-273

Bay more valuable for some human uses threaten to dissipate other
resources. The filling of wetlands, the disposal of municipal and
industrial wastes, the deposition of spoil from channel dredging,
and thermal discharges all tend to diminish the Bay's usefulness as
a commercial source of fish, shellfish, and crabs; and as a site for
waterfront housing, swimming, boating, and hunting.

Returning to a quote from Cronin (V-7-1), he states that:
"Prospects are that . . .

"Nutrient pollution from domestic waste ooses the greatest
of all recognized threats to the Chesapeake. It will seri-
ously change and partially destroy local areas, and there
is no assurance that it will not ultimately damage major
portions of the Bay and its tributaries."

V-274

SECTION 4. PROGRESS IN CURRENT MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

In Chapter 1, the Federal Role and Activities in the Estuarine Zone,
were described and a general outline of such activities was presented
in table form. In addition, the weaknesses and the needs of the
Federal program were noted. In Chapter 2, the Management Activities
of the States and the Problems Facing Them, were discussed in consi-
derable detail. With this in mind, it is intended to present here
for later evaluation what appears to be progress in management; namely,
organization - planning - implementation, and the knowledge-gathering
activities necessary for effective support.

MARYLAND

(1) Maryland has this year created a Department of Natural
Resources responsible for policies, management, administra-
tion and research, and study in the area of natural resources.
Among other things, this Department is responsible for the
coordination and direction of Comprehensive Planning.

This in itself should be a most effective step in meeting
recommendations in FWPCA's legal study of the Bay (V-7-2).

The recommendations noted were "the need for a single agency
within the State to control and regulate water and related
land resources, and the need for a comprehensive plan".

(2) Water Quality Standards have been adopted and approved
by the Secretary of the Interior.

V-275

(3) There is in preparation a comprehensive plan for the
Bay and its related resources--coordinated under the State
Planning Department--possibly to include the inventory of
Maryland's wetlands as directed by House Resolution No. 2
of 1967.

(4) Planning is going forward for a Statewide waste control
and acceptance plan.

(5) Zoning or the control of land use adjacent to the estua-
rine waters is not yet well established except in and near
large metropolitan areas; nor does it appear to be planned--
which^of course, is on the negative side of progress.

(6) Maryland has a form of dredge, fill, and alteration con-
trol in its navigable waters, but the controls are considered
weak.

(7) Regional planning appears effective, but like zoning is
confined to the metrooolitan areas, i.e., "Baltimore Regional
Planning Council" and "Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments "--both of which plan and coordinate waste disposal
problems in their areas of concern.

(8) The research and study to support improved management
activities is proceeding as is shown by a quote from L. Eugene
Cronin (V-7-1):

"Research has expanded rapidly on the problems and potentials
of the Chesapeake area. The Chesapeake Biological Laboratory
of the University of Maryland, the Virginia Institute of
Marine Science, and the Chesapeake Bay Institute of the

V-276

Johns Hopkins University not only maintain substantial
institutional research and training programs but have
also formed the Chesapeake Research Council ....
This brings together a total staff of about 110 scien-
tists, 40 of whom hold doctorates, to share information
and to undertake cooperative research projects. The
Council is probably the largest aggregation of estuarine
scientists in the world. The first joint venture utilizes
six vessels for simultaneous sampling of the Bay and its
tributaries. These laboratories have, since the 1930's
and 1940' s, provided a considerable flow of information
on estuarine hydrography, ecology, geology, sport and
commercial fisheries, and pollution . . ."

VIRGINIA

(1) The Department of Water Resources is to prepare a com-
prehensive plan for the water resources and development of
the State.

(2) A basin planning program for the James River Estuary is
being completed.

(3) Water Quality Standards have been adopted and approved
by the Secretary of the Interior.

(4) As in Maryland, zoning or the control of land use adja-
cent to the estuarine zone is confined to the metropolitan
areas.

V-277

(5) Virginia does not have State permit control of dredge,
fill, and alteration in its navigable waters.

(6) Virginia regards the Virginia Institute of Marine
Sciences (VIMS) at Gloucester Point as its key agency in the
marine environment. As noted above, VIMS is a member of the
Chesapeake Research Council.

(7) Regional planning and organization arenas in Maryland;
generally only active in or near metropolitan areas. Exam-
ples are:

(a) Hampton Roads Sanitation District Commission to
serve Hampton, Norfolk, Virginia Beach, and Chesapeake.

(b) Alexandria Sanitation Authority to serve Fairfax
County and the City of Alexandria.

(c) Virginia Beach Erosion Commission to serve the City
of Virginia Beach.

( d ) Southeastern Virginia Regional Planning Commission
which includes Suffolk City, Virginia Beach City, and
Nansemond County.

(e) Richmond Regional Planning Commission v/hich includes
Richmond City, Chesterfield County, and Henrico County.

(f) Peninsula Regional Planning Commission which includes
Hampton City, Newport News, James Citv, Williamsburg
County, and York County.

V-278

INTERSTATE ACTIVITIES

There are a number of interstate activities and agencies in the
Chesapeake Bay area each of which serves to some extent to coordinate
both Federal and State programs and operations.

These include the:

(1) Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin created
by the Potomac River Basin Compact in 1939. Members include
Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, the District
of Columbia, and the United States.

(2) Potomac River Fisheries Commission established by the
Potomac River Compact, 1958, includes both the States of
Maryland and Virginia. The work of the Commission provides
for research, regulation, and licensing with respect to fish
and shellfish, and the taking or catching of such fish in the
tidewater oortion of the Potomac River.

(3) Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission created in
1941, includes the States of Virginia and Maryland among the
fifteen signatory States to this compact. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior is the
primary research arm of the Commission. The purpose of the
Commission is to recommend and coordinate legislation and
general exercise of police cowers with respect to marine,
shell, and anadromous fisheries.

(4) Chesapeake Research Council includes members such as the
Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Chesaoeake Bay Institute

V-279

of Johns Hopkins University and the Chesapeake Biological
Laboratory of Natural Resources Institute of the University
of Maryland. Its purpose is to promote and coordinate
research on Chesapeake Bay.

(5) DELMARVA Advisory Council is primarily concerned with
economic development. In particular, it coordinates and pro-
motes travel and industrial develooment in Delaware, Maryland,
and Virginia.

(6) Atlantic Waterfowl Council includes all the Atlantic
Seaboard States as well as Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and
Vermont. Its main activity is the protection of marine water-
fowl habitat and the regulation of migratory waterfowl routes.

(7) Four-State Study Group includes the States of New Jersey,
Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia. Its main function is the
coordination of research on MSX oyster disease and related
marine environment.

Two of the most significant management schemes that are now being
considered for the Chesapeake Bay region are the proposed Federal -
interstate compacts for the Susquehanna River Basin and the Potomac
River Basin.

Both are modeled after the well-known Delaware River Basin Compact of
1961, and concern the use of water and related land resources, and en-
compass all management functions including comprehensive plannina,
regulation, construction, financing, maintenance, and operation of
public facilities. Both stop short of entering Chesapeake Bay.

V-280

SECTION 5. EVALUATION OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY

In the introduction, the various elements that should be considered
in any comprehensive plan of management were listed and the evalua-
tion of management in the Chesapeake Bay that follows is made in
reference to those elements.

POLICY AND OBJECTIVES

First, in regard to mutually agreed-upon policy and objectives,
some exist at the State level; but it would appear that an overall
national policy coupled with objectives should be established at the
national level. There is need for such guidance not only for State
management, but to provide better objectives for interstate programs
of management.

LEGISLATIVE AUTHORIZATION

At the State level Maryland's recent creation of its Department of
Natural Resources has very likely produced an excellent start in
this direction. Nevertheless, because of the many unsolved problems,
stronger State legislation may still be needed. As was pointed out in
Chapter It a study of the Federal programs, a stronger, more effective
Federal role is needed to provide not only much greater technical
assistance to the States, but also to provide the impetus and the
objectives for better and more effective management. A review of the
Chesapeake only verifies this. Progress is apparent, but legislative
action is needed to provide a stronger and more far-reaching program.

V-281

DEVELOPMENT OF BASIC KNOWLEDGE

There exists a reasonably good understanding of the knowledge gaps
that need to be filled to provide a better grade of technical
knowledge. Research goes forward on many fronts and appears to
be well directed towards the principal problems of the Bay.
Augmentation of research and study is no doubt needed if we are
to stay ahead of the developing problems. A better coordination
of the Federal research and study programs, possibly through the
the establishment of a multi -bureau/department estuarine labora-
tory devoted both to overall study of the Bay and to its indivi-
dual problems is needed. The Chesapeake Bay Research Council
at the State level is an excellent vehicle for coordination and
cooperative exchange of information.

PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION

As for planning, there has been much of it at many levels, but as
yet there are no overall comprehensive plans for the administration
of the Bay. The State of Maryland is moving in this direction.
Virginia's long-range study will help. The Corps of Engineers'
study authorized in 1965 is not yet properly funded. It could, if
carried to completion, include the authorized hydraulic model and
give much assistance to State comprehensive plans and their imple-
mentation.

V-282

ACTIVE ADMINISTRATION— REGULATION, CONTROL, AND COORDINATION

It can only be said, that, although progress is being made, regulation
and control sre fragmented and less than fully effective. What is avail-
able cannot be applied in terms of the needs of comprehensive plans,
because these do not yet exist. Again, there is needed the single
State organization with the authority and the resources to effectively
administer the many good but uncoordinated programs. In addition to
the lack of a comprehensive plan, neither Virginia nor Maryland has
effective State control over dredge, fills, and alteration in the
wetlands and navigable waters at the present time. Neither is there
zoning nor other control over the use of the adjacent lands except
at the local level. Even at this level the amount of control is
quite limited.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES

There has been steady growth in the personnel and financial resources
devoted to estuarine management; nevertheless, considerable augmenta-
tion will be needed if comprehensive plans are to be made and
implemented. ,

PUBLIC AWARENESS AND ACCEPTANCE

There is a considerable amount of public awareness and interest in
the management of the Chesapeake Bay as was evidenced by attendance

V-283

at the public meetings sponsored by this Study, and by other meetings
and symposia. There is still much to do in obtaining public parti -
icipation in the decisions to be made. This is particularly necessary
at the level of local government where the important decisions on
land use are made. Public participation in St. Mary's County,
Maryland, decisions on locating a new oil refinery on the shore of

i

the Potomac, is an excellent example. Increasing public interest
and action and understanding of the estuarine zone and its long-term
value are necessities.

V-284

SECTION 6. DESCRIPTION AND USES OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY*

San Francisco Bay and delta comprises an extensive system of shallow
interconnecting channels and bays. Its water quality ranges from
sea water at the Golden Gate to fresh water at the upstream areas
of the delta suitable for a variety of uses.

By its location and natural features the Bay system from Spanish
times to the present has been a hub of commerce and a defense center,
regional first, and national later. With growth there were added
the recreational values of the immediate area and the national parks
to which the area gave access, and the beginning of an industrial
sector. With post World War II development, the industrial sector
became a major component of the economy.

The Bay is a single body of water, with a total area of 480 square
miles and a shoreline exceeding 276 miles, which receives drainage
from a 50,000 square mile area. Although the Bay is a single body
of water, its appearance varies greatly from one part to another.
To present an adequate or even a reasonably complete description
of the Bay with its massive variety in terrain, appearance, con-
dition, and general development is almost an impossiblity in this
brief discussion of management.

^he information describing San Francisco Bay was taken from the
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Study.
Extensive use was made of the report entitled "San Francisco
Bay Plan Supplement."

V-285

Therefore, we present one aerial view (Figure V.7.2) and further
attempt to describe the Bay in terms of its uses and the problems
facing it.

USES

San Francisco Bay is the most important harbor system on the
Pacific Coast of the United States. Waterborne commerce through
the Golden Gate amounted to nearly 32 million tons in 1965. A
deep-water ship channel extends up the Sacramento River for 43
miles to Sacramento. Total traffic amounts to 2.2 million tons
per year with 340,000 tons being in deep-draft vessels and the
remainder in barges. Another deep-water channel extends to
Stockton.

Supervessels, particularly for transporting petroleum, have in-
creased the need for greater project depths.

The physical Bay is a natural resource in itself--of minerals
(sand, salt, cement), of marine life (commercial and sports fish-
ing), a waterfowl habitat frequented by lovers of the most expen-
sive form of hunting, and a recreational boater's Mediterranean
in miniature.

The mineral resources of the Bay include the salt, cement, and
sand industries. The Bay area supplies almost all of the salt con-
sumed in northern California, Oregon, Washington, northern Idaho,
and western Nevada. Almost a third of the total supply is used by

V-286

FIGURE V.7.2 AERIAL PHOTO OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY

COPYRIGHT 1966, SUNDERLAND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. OAKLAND, CALIF.

V-287

large chlorine-caustic plants. Even the brine drawn from the salt
ponds in the last stages of the solar evaporation process is consid-
dered important. It is called bittern and from it are extracted
magnesium chloride and bromine as well as chemicals used in the
manufacture of gypsum. The salt ponds are located in San Mateo,
Santa Clara, Alameda, and Napa Counties.

Deposits of oyster shells and blue clay found in the Bay are less
important economically than the salt and other chemicals. The
shells are sold to chemical companies and firms manufacturing soil
conditioners and poultry feed.

Sand deposits in the Bay have served as a basic source of fill for
tideland areas, but have been of too-poor quality for general
industrial use. Sand for industrial purposes is largely extracted
from pits in ancient river beds in Alameda County. Approximately
5 million tons come from these sources each year for building and
paving in the Bay area.

The Bay provides a matchess natural harbor and habitat for probably
the greatest variety of fish and wildlife of any comparable body of
water in California. The area's marshlands, mudflats, and permanent
water areas (an important resting spot for migratory birds in the
Pacific flyway) support large populations of waterfowl. At least
six species of anadromous fish run into or through the Bay going

V-288

to or from spawning grounds, while 150 species permanently inhabit
these waters.

Activities that are principally concerned with the use of water as
a medium for movement include power-boating, sailing, water skiing,
fishing from boats, scuba-diving, and riding sightseeing boats and
ferry boats.

Boating registration in the Bay area counties increased from 53,000
in 1960 to 83,000 in 1965, an increase of some 57 percent. It has
been reported that an inventory taken in 1965 of wet-storage facil-
ities indicated a total 12,700 spaces available and 270 lanes of
launching also existed.

San Francisco Bay is a receptacle for waste from municipal (domestic),
industrial, and agricultural sources throughout its tributary area.

Three hundred and ninety-eight million gallons of treated sewage and
industrial wastes are discharged daily during dry weather to the tidal
waters of the Bay system from 77 municipal sewerage systems. Approx-
imately 35 percent of these waste flows receive secondary treatment
at 23 sewage treatment plants with the remaining flow receiving pri-
mary treatment at 54 sewage treatment plants. No community is
discharging waste without treatment in the San Francisco Bay region.
Forty-seven municipal waste discharges are now disinfecting or have
facilities capable of disinfecting their waste flow which amounts to
245 million gallons per day, while 32 dischargers with a total waste

V-289

flow of 153 million gallons per day do not have disinfection
facilities.

A total of 269 million gallons per day of industrial wastes is dis-
charged into the Bay system by 47 industries. It is estimated that
approximately 94 percent of this waste flow is cooling water drawn
from the Bay system and circulated in closed cooling systems. Most
of the industrial waste discharges are located along the shorelines
of Contra Costa County and discharge their wastes to San Pablo or
Suisun Bay. These discharges contribute more than 70 percent of
the biochemical oxygen demand loading in these areas; however, the
depletion of dissolved oxygen below 5 nlg/l has not been measured
irrmediately beyond industrial waste effluent dilution areas delin-
eated by the Regional Board.

The number, location, and degree of treatment of both municipal and
industrial waste discharges changes with the continuing implement-
ation of recommendations in studies of sewerage needs and of master
plans.

Storm water runoff not containing sewage, discharged from storm
sewers, from flood control channels and from tributary streams is
a factor affecting water use. Also governing water usability are
the sediments from such activities as: agricultural practices,
residential development, highway construction, and mining of natural
resources.

V-290

The tributary streams and rivers also carry unknown quantities of
nutrients, pesticides, and organic and inorganic material drained
from residential, agricultural, and forested lands. The magnitude
of the present water quality problem created by these factors is
unknown.

V-291
SECTION 7. MAJOR PROBLEMS AND DANGERS TO THE BAY

Enjoyment of the Bay is adversely affected by:

(1) Land Fill Problems. Wildlife and shellfish resources
are damaged and sometimes lost when tidelands and marshes
are filled. Eighty percent of the marshland has been
"reclaimed". About 20 percent of the reclaimed areas are
salt ponds and are currently used by wildlife. Fifty
percent of the remaining water area of the Bay is vulner-
able to reclamation and fill. Current uncontrolled urban
growth threatens both tidelands and marshes.

Amounts Reclamation

Habitat in 1967 Losses

Original Amounts
(before reclamation)

Marshlands 300 sq. miles 50 sq. miles 250 sq. miles

(83 percent)

Tideflats 82 sq. miles 65 sq. miles 17 sq. miles

(21 percent)

The effects have been noticeable. Wintering waterfowl
population originally numbered about 2 million to 3 million.
Today, wintering waterfowl populations number about
600,000 to 800,000, a loss of approximately 1.8 million
waterfowl .

Prior to 1900 the annual commercial harvesting of the
oyster fishery amounted to 10 to 15 million pounds. With

V-292

the advent of water pollution, today there is no oyster
fishery.

Before 1935 the annual commercial harvest of soft-shell
clam fishery varied from 100,000 to 300,000 pounds.
Because of the water pollution problem there is no commercial
soft-shell clam industry. Recreational clam-digging is
virtually nonexistent due to contamination.

The annual commercial landings of the shrimp fishery prior
to 1936 were as high as 6.5 million pounds. Landings in
1965 were 10,000 pounds.

In 1830, 5,000 sea otter skins were annually taken from the
Bay. Today there are no sea otters. Kelp beds were
abundant in the Bay at that time. Today we know of no
kelp beds.

The harbor seal were abundant until about 1890. Today
there are about 90 to 150.

(2) Water Quality Damage. Historically, upstream hydraulic
mining has severely altered the ecology of the Bay, through
siltation.

More recently the volume of poorly treated industrial,
agricultural and domestic wastes have increased to the
point where fishlife has been damaged in some areas.

V-293

Annual die-offs of hundreds of striped bass continue to
occur throughout the Bay during the late spring and summer.
The cause of these mysterious phenomena and their rela-
tionships to other factors in the Bay remains unknown.
Reports of tainted striped bass flesh have been received.
The problem is being investigated by a joint committee of
State and private agencies.

The ever-increasing tonnage in shipping in the Bay area
has caused an increase in the number of accidental oil
spills from ships.

(3) Loss of Esthetic Enjoyment. Floating debris, trash
and litter from pleasure and commercial vessels, oil
slicks and other waterborne wastes all contribute to the
unsightliness of Bay waters.

At the same time a few of the shoreline developments are of
poor quality, and are inappropriate to a waterfront location,

There has also been a failure to take advantage of the
dramatic view potential from hills surrounding the Bay
because of poor road layout and poorly placed buildings
or plantings. (There are many notches, passes, and
tunnels through the rim of hills around the Bay on which
the traveler is suddenly introduced or reintroduced to
views of the Bay. )

V-294

(4) Inadequate Public Access. Loss of public access to
the Bay is a serious problem. Public access is now
extremely inadequate and will become even more serious in
the future. Of the 276 miles of San Francisco shoreline,
scarcely four miles form the boundaries of waterside
parks.

(5) Population and Pollution Problems. The heart of
the San Francisco Bay planning problem is people and more
people. The population of this area will grow but the
Bay cannot.

Historically, California and the Bay area have experienced
a much faster rate of population growth than the rest of
the Nation, because so many people have migrated to
California from elsewhere in the United States. The
Association of Bay Area Governments' projections assume
these migrations will gradually decline over the coming
decade. The estimates assume that in about 50 years
almost as many people will be leaving California every
year as will be moving into the State; the U.S. Census
Bureau studies have found that the rate of interstate
migration is slowing down and the Bureau expects an
eventual "state of equilibrium."

The population of the Bay area, the delta, and the
Central Valley, whose rivers and streams feed into the

V-295

delta and Bay, is about 6 million now and will increase
more than 3 1/2 times by the year 2020. The 16 million
new residents will require tremendous supplies of water —
and they will produce even larger quantities of wastes.

There is as yet no detailed prediction of the expected
increase in liquid wastes. The U. S. Public Health
Service indicated in 1963 that the volume of effluent
discharged into the Bay would increase to perhaps 1,100
million gallons per day by 1990 and to more than 1,700
million gallons daily by 2015.

(6) Agricultural Wastes. The Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration has completed a study of the effects
of the proposed San Joaquin Master Drain on the Bay. The
study concluded that the proposed drain, which would carry
agricultural wastes from the Central Valley to an outfall
near Antioch, would have a significantly harmful effect on
the waters of the Bay and delta, adversely affecting
fishing, recreation, and esthetic values.

This harm would come primarily from nutrients the drain
would deposit in the Bay; the nutrients would stimulate
the growth of large quantities of algae and other aquatic
plants. The FWPCA study also concluded, however, that
these detrimental effects would be minimized by treatment

V-296

of waste waters; therefore, the FWPCA recommended that no

discharge from the drain be permitted for at least five

years, i.e., until 1972, so that pilot treatment facilities
can be built and tested.

Interestingly, the FWPCA study also concluded that the
drain, as presently planned, would not increase the present
pesticide content of the Bay and delta, principally because
most pesticides are absorbed or decomposed as they pass
through the soil of farmlands, while the drain would
collect sub-surface waters.

The pressures on San Francisco Bay area are very similar
to those of Chesapeake Bay. Population pressures are
present and these people look to the Bay as a source for
water supply, transportation, recreation, and waste
disposal. Dredging and filling are present to the extent
that more than 80 percent of marshland, and 20 percent of
the tidelands have filled with resulting losses to fish,
shellfish, and wildlife. There is a need for deepening
shipping channels to accommodate larger ships.

V-297
SECTION 8. PROGRESS IN CURRENT MANAGEMENT

Ij In San Francisco, after the completion of the excellent, in-depth
study report by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development
Commission and its recommendations, followed by extensive legis-

'I lative debate and passage, progress in providing the necessary
management capability could be classed as excellent.

On August 7, 1969, the Governor of the State of California signed
into law the McAteer-Petris Act which provided for stringent
control of shoreline development in the San Francisco Bay area.

The BCDC became the permanently established agency with powers and
jurisdiction enabling it to protect the Bay.

The amended McAteer-Petris Act provides for the following:

(1) Future development of the shoreline will include a
number of prime water-oriented uses such as "ports, water-
related industries, airports, wildlife refuges, water-
oriented recreation and public assembly, desalinization
plants and powerplants "

(2) Saltponds and wetlands and a 100-foot strip of shore-
line surrounding the Bay are to be protected.

(3) BCOC has the power to issue or deny permits for any
dredge and fill projects or any substantial change in the
use of water, land, or structures within the Commission's
jurisdiction.

V-298

(4) Filling will be authorized only when its benefits are
greater than the detriment resulting from the loss of water
areas. Fill should be limited to water-oriented uses.

(5) Fill should be authorized only when an alternative
upland location cannot be found. Any water area authorized
to be filled should be the minimum area necessary,

(6) The nature, extent, and location of fill should be
such that it will minimize harmful effects to the Bay.
Fill should be authorized when it will establish a perma-
nent shoreline. Applicant must have valid title to
property which is to be filled.

(7) In order to make the Bay more accessible to the
people, the shoreline area should be improved, developed,
and preserved. Private and public development of the
shoreline should be encouraged.

(8) The Commission will review and prepare reports on
estimated costs and method of financing proposed acquisi-
tion of private property for public use.

These definitive and incisive powers are to be exercised by a 27-
member commission, nearly half of whom are to be elected officials.
In addition, there are also two members appointed from the State
Legislature who are to participate in the activities of the
Commission.

V-299

The legislative enactment of BCDC goes a long way towards providing
the necessary ingredients in the comprehensive management of
San Francisco Bay.

The concept of a comprehensive ocean area plan is now also being
formulated by the State of California.

Water Quality Standards for San Francisco Bay have been adopted and
approved by the Secretary of the Interior.

The Governor also recently signed the most comprehensive water
quality control law in the Nation. The California Water Quality
Improvement Act of 1969, which goes into effect next January,
authorizes, among other things, a fine of up to $6,000 a day for
failure to comply with the State's water discharge standards.

Prior to the creation of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Commission and its subsequent legislative enactment,
there was no coordinated regional control of dredge and fill except
for the permit- granting authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
concerning navigation. No State permit was required except for
very specialized reasons, such as, removal of minerals from State
lands.

Regional planning has been present, but not very effective since
there has been no regional agency given jurisdiction over the
entire Bay prior to the San Francisco Bay Conservation and

V-300

Development Conmission. Other regional developments include: the
"Bay Area Transportation Study Commission," which completed a
regional transportation plan with recommendations for implementa-
tion; the "Association of Bay Area Government" which began in 1961
performing advisory regional planning; and the "Joint Committee on
Bay Area Regional Organization," a committee of the State legisla-
ture, after a 16-month study, proposed a limited-function nine-
county regional government to encompass the State-designated water
basin boundaries.

Research and study to support improved management activities is
proceeding as is shown from the following activities:

(1) The State Legislature, in 1965, authorized a com-
prehensive study and development of a water quality manage-
ment program for the Bay area. The report has been recent-
ly published.

(2) The Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife is
examining the effects of dredging on bottom life in the
Bay.

(3) The Geological Survey has authorized programs to
collect geologic and hydroloqic date, and to investigate
the Bav sediments.

(4) The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
completed a study on the effects of the proposed

San Joaquin Master Drain on the Bay in December 1966.

V-301

(5) The San Francisco Bay-Delta Water Quality Control
Program financed partially with an FWPCA grant is involved
in a comprehensive water quality management study concern-
ing the development of a master plan for construction of a
collection, treatment, reclamation and disposal system to
be staged over the 50-year period, 1970 to 2020.

(6) The Secretary of the Interior has established both
Field and Headquarters Task Forces to cooperate with the
State of California and to improve coordination of
Interior's interests in the Bay.

(7) The Corps of Engineers has undertaken a coordinated
comprehensive survey of the entire Bay complex with other
Federal agencies concerning navigation, flood control,
transportation, water supply, land reclamation, recreation,
national defense and allied subjects. The survey is
scheduled for completion in 1972; it is operating a scale
nydraulic model of the Bay at Sausalito and is extending
the model to include the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta;

and the Corps of Engineers has oroposed a multimillion

dollar, multiagency study of the development of

San Francisco Bay as a port to handle super-sized vessels.

V-302

SECTION 9. EVALUATION OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY

At the beginning of Chapter 7, Section 1, mention was made of the
several necessary elements for a comprehensive program of management.
The evaluation of management in San Francisco Bay which follows is
made in reference to those seven elements.

POLICY AND OBJECTIVES

Regarding mutually agreed upon policy and objectives, very little, if
any, existed on the State level, prior to the enactment of BCDC. In
fact, the State of California, in essence, had surrendered control*,
there was no area-wide political authority guiding the destiny of
San Francisco Bay. Such policy and objectives now exist for the
Bay. There is additional need for a national policy and objectives.

LEGISLATIVE AUTHORIZATION

On the State level the recent legislative passage of the BCDC bill
and its signing by the Governor has produced the necessary first
step in this direction by stablishing a permanent agency with powers
and jurisdiction to care for, protect, and properly manage the nine-
county area of the Bay. At the same time, on the Federal level
there is also a need for a much stronger program of technical infor-
mation and assistance to the States, as well as objectives for more
effective management.

V-303
DEVELOPMENT OF BASIC KNOWLEDGE

The BCDC Study and the report published as a result of that study
indicate quite satisfactorily the existence of the best available
information. Nevertheless, new information and knowledge are con-
stantly being produced and BCDC, the responsible agency for coordina-
ting activities of the Bay, is authorized under the enacting legis-
lation to continually review subject areas under its jurisdiction.

PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION

In the past, planning has not been one of the hallmarks in the adminis-
tration of the Bay. Consider the size of the Bay in 1850 and vihat it
is today. Where 300 square miles of marshland once remained in the
Bay, 250 square miles had been "reclaimed" by 1967. The filling in of
the tidal and submerged lands have dried up 17 square miles that once
were Bay. Passage of the BCDC, hopefully, will put a stop to these
activities.

Responsible Federal officials have indicated a satisfaction with what
BCDC has accomplished, and are now watching to see if it will have the
power to protect the national as well as local interest, and thereby
serve as a prototype for State and regional action elsewhere in the
Nation.

ACTIVE ADMINISTRATION - REGULATION,
CONTROL, AND COORDINATION

In the past there were management problems which contributed to inter-
ference and damage to the beneficial uses of the Bav area. There was.

V-304

for example, a lack of coordinated control of land and water uses.
Administration of Bay lands and waters was accomplished by Federal
and State agencies, nine counties and 91 city governments. Local
entities appeared unwilling to sacrifice local autonomy to some
overall coordinated controlling power. There was only limited con-
trol over dredging, filling, and alteration, and there was no coor-
dinated regional zoning or other control over the use of water and
adjacent land. There was a lack of coordinated planning. No true
comprehensive development plan coupled with the authority for
implementation existed. The Association of Bay Area Governments
presented such a plan but, due to conflicting local interests,
its implementation has become bogged down indefinitely while
uncontrolled development reduced the remaining natural values of the
Bay. Finally, there was also a lack of legal definitions of land
ownership. Boundary lines between State and private lands are
confused and complex. Clearer definition of existing State lands
will be needed along with the acquisition of additional shallow
water area.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES

There has been a steady growth in the number of personnel and the
amount of monies devoted to estuarine management. Nevertheless,
considerable augmentation will be needed if comprehensive plans are
to be made and implemented as provided by the BCDC legislation. For
example, funds will be necessary (1) to finance development of the

V-305

Bay and shoreline to their highest potential, and (2) to pay the
operating costs of the agency designated to carry out the Bay plan.
If it were desired to compensate private owners of the Bay lands
that cannot be filled, then additional funds would be required for
this purpose.

PUBLIC AWARENESS AND ACCEPTANCE

The timely rescue of San Francisco Bay represents a demonstration of
what concerned Americans can still do to protect their environment,
and even to save what is left of grace in their urban areas. This
untiring citizen effort, aided by a steadily swelling number of
organizations, and local government led first in 1965 to the
establishment of a temporary BCDS with limited power and, secondly,
to its permanent establishment with strong powers and effective
authority.

Almost as refreshing as the outcome itself is the fact that the
movement to rescue San Francisco Bay resulted in a plan which
devoted a large part of its future effects to the social values
of the estuaries--those which unfortunately have all too long in
the past been neglected.

The public continues to participate in the membership of the 27-man
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. Seven
representatives of these 27 members are appointed from the general

V-306

public, another 13 of the 27 are elected officials and the remaining
7 are representatives of State and Federal agencies.

V-307

SFCTION 10. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Summarizing from the evaluations of management in the Chesapeake
and San Francisco Rays, it is apparent that the immense value and
the need for action both to conserve and to develop them has been
recognized both by government and by the oeonle. But even more so
has been the recognition by the people and private organizations who
brought their governments to the point of action.

The need for a comprehensive plan of management remains evident in
the Chesapeake. In San Francisco Bay such a plan is in force. How-
ever, in terms of administration and regulation, neither California,
Maryland, nor Virginia have instituted effective State control of
dredge, fill, and alteration. Zoning or the control of land use adja-
cent to the estuarine waters is exercised at the level of local govern-
ment and certainly has not yet been generally effective in the
preservation of estuarine areas. The Bay Conservation and nevelopment
Commission plan for San Francisco Bay has been an exception to this
for the past three years and hopefully will continue to exercise
appropriate controls.

At the Federal level there is considerable evidence to indicate that
a national policy with accompanyina objectives and guidelines would
provide helpful impetus to State programs even though many are pro-
ceeding without it. The augmentation and coordination of Federal
programs in the estuarine zone is a very current need. Although
the development of the necessary basic knowledge by research and

V-308

Study has made much progress, there remains much more to be done if
comprehensive management plans are to receive the support they need.

San Francisco Bay suffered rather severe degradation before the
"Save the Bay" organizations by their efforts brought the Bay
Conservation and Development Commission into being. As a result,
there is now a comprehensive plan for the preservation, use, and
development of the Bay. The Chesapeake Bay, on the other hand, is
at present little damaged except in local areas generally near the
population centers. Nevertheless, it faces growing problems of
population pressures and industrial development with the problems
involved in being an interstate estuary. This means, of course,
that preparing and carrying out a comprehensive plan of management
must sooner or later be a coordinated effort on the parts of both
the States of Maryland and Virginia.

As can be seen, these two case studies, as brief as they are, again
bring out the need for and the importance of a comprehensive plan
at the State level, a national policy and objectives, augmentation
of programs directed to the estuarine and coastal zone, and the
establishment and implementation of better and stronger regulatory
controls.

These conclusions reinforce the discussion and findings in the study
of the roles of local. State, interstate, and Federal programs in
developing a comprehensive national estuarine program.

V-309
REFERENCES

V-7-1 Cronin, L. E., The Condition of Chesapeake Bay , Trans-
action of the Thirty-Second North American Wildlife and
Natural Resources Conference, March 13, 14, and 15, 1967.
Washington, D.C., Wildlife Management Institute, d. 137-
150 (1967).

V-7-2 University of Maryland School of Law, Chesapeake Bay in
Legal Perspective , prepared as a part of Contract 14-12-
421 with the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration.
Baltimore, Md., University of Maryland, (1969). Mimeo-
graphed Report.

V-311

Chapter 8

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

GENERAL SUMMARY

The Nation's estuan'ne and coastal resources today are seriously
impaired and, in some cases, have suffered impairment which is irre-
versible. Fundamentally, this loss is the result of unwillingness
or inability of the governments sharing responsibility and authority
for their management to do the things necessary to protect these
resources for all beneficial uses today and to conserve or preserve
their maximum future usefulness.

The reasons for this unwillingness or inability are various and
highly complex. Most basic, perhaps, are four reasons:

(1) Shortsighted, imbalanced, or otherwise inadequate
public policies governing the use of these resources up to
now necessarily have reflected the dominant values of the
American people. These traditionally have given a high
priority to economic growth and technological development
without adequately considering the adverse effects upon
the estuarine and coastal environment.

(2) Another reason, undoubtedly, is ignorance concerning
the sometimes fragile and always interdependent nature of
the complex of resources found in the estuarine and
coastal zone.

(3) Fragmentation and conflicts among governmental pro-
grams charged with the management of these resources have

v-3i:

handicapped sound management. Closely related are, on the
one hand, the limited use of plans which in fact coordinate
the fragmented activities of the numerous agencies and
governments involved in the management of these resources;
and, on the other hand, the limited effectiveness of
institutional arrangements now in being which were
intended to overcome this fragmentation through inter-
agency and/or intergovernmental review and consultation or
through joint or cooperative action. Also a contributing
factor is the absence in these programs of policies and
organization focusing specifically on the resources of the
estuarine and coastal zone.

(4) Although governments in the more recent period have
moved to establish essential programs to conserve or pre-
serve these resources, inadequate funding has prevented
these programs from adequately accomplishing their
mission.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

The National Estuarine Management Program must achieve, first, the
determination, in and out of government, to manage the use of these
resources so as to protect them for as many beneficial uses as pos-
sible both now and in the future; and, second, the capability at all
levels of government to do so.

V-313

More specifically, this means that the National Estuarine Management
Program should be directed toward five broad objectives:

(1) The first is development and adoption of plans which
will result in balanced development, conservation, and
preservation of estuarine and coastal zone resources.
Developed for specific estuarine and coastal areas, these
plans should control the use of the resources of these
areas for as many beneficial purposes as possible. Where
some uses are precluded, the plan should allow that mix
of uses which, based on both short and long-range consid-
erations, is judged to be the most beneficial. Once
adopted, it should control the activities of all involved
in managing the estuary or coastal area included in the
plan.

(2) The second objective is the strengthening of govern-
mental regulatory programs and other activities directed
toward implementing and obtaining compliance with the use
and management plan adopted for a specific estuary or
coastal area. Basically, this requires improved manage-
ment authority and organization.

(3) A third objective is the initiation of studies,
research, and inventories in the estuarine and coastal
zone to greatly increase knowledge about these resources
and understanding of their interrelationships and behavior.

V-314

(4) The fourth objective is the adequate funding of all
of the essential governmental programs.

(5) The fifth objective is the development of the public
support on which achievement of the other objectives
ultimately is dependent.

A second conclusion is that the sharing of responsibility and
authority which marks the present approach to the management of the
estuarine and coastal zone also must become an essential feature of
the National Estuarine Management Program. In turn, this means that
the national program should create a Federal-State-local relation-
ship which makes maximum use of the particular and sometimes unique
capabilities which each level of government can bring to bear in a
coordinated and comprehensive effort to wisely manage the resources
of the estuarine and coastal zone. The outlines of such a relation-
ship are defined in the sections which follow.

ROLE OF STATE GOVERNMENTS
SUMMARY

The States today exercise the primary responsibility for the
management of the resources of the estuarine and coastal zone. It
is the States which are primarily responsible for the prevention
and control of pollution in the estuaries and coastal waters. They
hold title to the submerged and tidal lands and are thus in a posi-
tion to control their use and modification. Although most States

V-315

have delegated authority to control land use to their local
governmental units, they legally retain the ultimate authority to
control the use of shorelines and related uplands in the estuarine
and coastal zone and thus to decide whether these lands are to be
used for industry and commerce, parks and recreation, fish and
wildlife habitat, residential housing, or other purposes. They
determine the forms and functions of local government generally in
managing water and related land resources, and the same holds true
for the interstate instrumentalities which, at their option, they
may create for management purposes. Fisheries and other living
estuarine resources are under their direct control. Each State
presides over the legal system which governs private relations and
resolves the conflicting rights, interests, and privileges of its
citizens in the development and use of estuarine and coastal
resources. And, finally, even in those areas in which the Federal
Government exercises exclusive or primary authority, the nature of
this Country's political process gives State groups and officials
substantial power to influence the objectives and the exercise of
Federal policies.

CONCLUSIONS

The powers which the States possess clearly are strategic ones in
achieving balanced development, conservation, and preservation of
the resources of the estuarine and coastal zone. The National
Estuarine Management Program accordingly should continue to vest

V-316

the primary responsibility for the management of these resources in
the States. As this analysis has shown, the States have ample con-
stitutional authority and, in all instances, they already are
administering on-going programs in the estuarine and coastal zone
on which the national program can be built. Through their authority
over local governments, the States also are able to delegate to the
local level that authority which can best be performed locally. As
a corollary, they also can oversee the exercise of local authority
so as to insure that the larger State and national interests in the
development and use of locally situated resources prevail over more
limited or erroneous local perceptions of the public's interest in
these resources. They also are close to the scene and thus better
able than the Federal Government to respond to the unique needs and
opportunities of each estuary and coastal area. At the same time,
however, they are in a better position than local governments to
resist pressures for unwise development.

In order that the States will effectively discharge this primary
responsibility, the tactics of the National Estuarine Management
Program should seek to have each State develop, either directly or
through its local subdivisions, the plan (or plans) which will
control future use of the State's estuarine and coastal zone; and,
further, take the steps necessary to insure compliance with these
plans by its own agencies and its local governmental units. Two
steps are especially essential in this regard. One is the better

V-317

establishment of State-level organization, not dominated by any
particular interest, with the capability of administering or coor-
dinating State-level management activities in the estuarine and
coastal zone. The other is the establishment by the State of more
effective supervision and control over the actions of local govern-
ments in that zone. In addition, the State organization created or
designated for this purpose should have the capacity to integrate
Federal service programs into the State's management activities in
its estuarine and coastal areas and, even more important, to play
a strong advisory role with respect to Federal programs and pro-
jects more directly managing the resources of these areas.

ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
SUMMARY

The States typically have delegated or assigned authority to their
local subdivisions to carry out a broad range of functions which
directly or indirectly may have important effects on estuarine and
coastal resources. Among these significant activities are: (1)
planning and zoning of land use; (2) provision, either directly or
otherwise, of water supply, waste collection and treatment, and
other utilities; (3) construction of port facilities, roads, and
bridges; (4) provision of beaches, parks, marinas, fishing piers,
and other recreational facilities; (5) regulation of the use of
septic tanks in the zone and the administration of pest control and
other public health protection programs; (6) regulation of fills and

V-318

the administration of drainage projects; (7) promotion of industrial
or other economic development; (8) maintenance of property and other
essential records; and (9) administration of local courts to estab-
lish justice and equity in interpersonal relations.

Although the primary responsibility for the management of the
resources of the estuarine and coastal zone now rests with the
States, the above listing clearly demonstrates that local governments
today in fact are making many of the most crucially important deci-
sions which actually govern the management and use of these resources,
Located "on scene" they are themselves major users of the zone's
resources. Moreover, they are highly responsive to public and pri-
vate interests in the nongovernmental sector which also are directly
engaged in developing and using these resources to satisfy human
wants and needs. In both respects, therefore, local governments
today occupy the most crucial spot in the management of estuarine
and coastal resources, because of the consequences, for the good or
ill of the estuarine or coastal resources concerned, of the States'
local assignment of control over local activities.

Local governments naturally desire to promote the economic growth
of the local area and to improve the community's property-tax base
which traditionally has financed most of their activities. However,
each local unit usually is too small to envision or respond effec-
tively to the needs of an entire estuary or coastal area.
Frequently, they also have lacked funds, and therefore the staff.

V-319

to maintain the expertise which is capable of fully understanding
all of the ramifications of local actions upon the larger estuarine
and coastal zone. The result is that all too often local govern-
ments have succumbed to strong economic and political pressure to
proceed with poorly planned or unwise development of estuarine and
coastal resources, or to permit such development by those in the
nongovernmental sector. In succumbing to these pressures, local
governments unfortunately have contributed much to the impairment
of the Nation's estuarine and coastal resources,

CONCLUSIONS

Although the record of local governments in managing estuarine and
coastal zone resources on the whole is subject to criticism, the
Nation's effort to improve management of these resources should
retain a significant role for local governments in the new national
program. The reasons include the already-mentioned "on scene"
relationship and its effect on the ability of local government to
sense and respond to unique conditions, and also its ability to
mobilize the support and cooperation of local civic and private
interests. But they also include the value which the American
people attach to self-government, to decentralization of govern-
mental authority and responsibility, and to local experimentation
and innovation in developing new national programs.

In brief, therefore, the role of local government in the National

V-320

Estuarine Management Program should be to carry out, with State and
Federal support and assistance, and under the State's supervision,
the estuarine and coastal management functions delegated or assigned
to it by each State. This conclusion recognizes that the resulting
local role may vary from State to State. Thus, in some States, a
review of the present combined State-local management capability
and effectiveness may conclude that local governments should
continue to exercise substantially the same functions as they now
do, but also recommend improved supervision by the State. In
others, a review may recommend that the State government assume and
itself directly exercise important components of estuarine and
coastal management authority and responsibility now delegated to its
local governments.

What is essential in most States, if not all, is a better State-
local division of authority and relationship which will enable these
two levels of government together more effectively to discharge the
State's primary responsibility for achieving balanced development,
conservation, and preservation of estuarine and coastal resources.

ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
SUMMARY

Under the Constitution, the Federal Government possesses the primary
authority to conduct foreign affairs and to maintain the national
security, a consideration obviously of major importance in managing

V-321

the estuarine and coastal zone. Moreover, as interrelated parts of
a single governmental system, the Federal, State, and local govern-
ments in this country share in the exercise of most domestic
functions. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Nation's
approach to the management of its estuarine and coastal resources
also has been characterized by important involvement by the Federal
Government. This involvement has reflected not only the primary
authority of the Federal Government in the areas mentioned and its
paramount authority over the use of estuarine and coastal waters for
navigation and commerce. It also reflects numerous decisions by the
Congress, supported by the Supreme Court, that the Federal Government
too has a major responsibility to promote and protect a broad vari-
ety of other beneficial uses of the resources of this zone.

The resulting activities of the Federal Government today in partici-
pating in the management of these resources are extensive and fall
into five broad categories.

First, the Federal Government regulates, either directly or in
support of regulatory activities by the States: (1) the use of
estuarine and coastal waters for the disposal of various wastes; (2)
the placing of structures over and in navigable waters; (3) the
designation of navigable waters as danger zones and for certain uses
such as fishing grounds; (4) the establishment of harbor lines; and
(5) the use of estuarine and coastal waters for the generation of
electric power.

V-322

Second, Federal agencies directly acquire and administer estuarine
and coastal sites for a variety of uses, including habitat to pro-
tect fish and wildlife resources; seashore areas, parks, or other
recreational facilities; military installations; saline water
conversion; and other purposes.

Third, the Federal Government makes grants to the States, local
governments, and others for activities which span the entire range
of estuarine and coastal zone management functions and purposes.

Fourth, most Federal agencies perform functions to assist and support
the use and management of estuarine and coastal resources gener-
ally, and State and local programs in particular. Services include:
(1) preparation of comprehensive or functional plans for the use
and management of water and related natural resources; (2) special
studies, inventories, research, and data collection activities; (3)
information dissemination and other education programs; (4) techni-
cal aid and assistance in a broad range of areas; and (5) provision
of navigation, flood control, beach protection, and other public
works, facilities or services in the estuarine and coastal zone.

Fifth, by enacting statutes such as the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, the Water Resources Planning Act, and other stat-
utes, and by consenting to interstate compacts, the Congress has
provided, or agreed to, procedures and organization designed to
improve the coordination of the programs of different agencies and

V-323

governments in the estuarine and coastal zone.

CONCLUSIONS

The National tstuarine Management Program cannot abrogate the
Federal interests in the estuarine and coastal zone nor the missions
which the Congress, pursuant to those interests, has assigned to
various Federal agencies. Instead, it is imperative that the pro-
gram include the Federal Government as a strong and active
participant. This means Federal action on three fronts.

(1) The first is the full and effective mobilization and
use by all Federal agencies of estuarine and coastal zone
management authority and responsibility which they now
possess by assignment from the Congress. This will, in
many instances, also require increased funding of these
programs by the Congress. It also may require action by
the Executive, both at the Presidential and departmental
levels, to improve utilization of authority now available.

Although all present Federal activities applicable to
estuarine and coastal zone management purposes -- ranging
from service to regulatory functions -- clearly can and
must participate on this front, a number of actions are
especially critical and essential. These include:

(a) Increased funding of Federal construction grants

V-324

for waste treatment facilities to facilitate prompt
implementation of established water quality standards
in estuaries and coastal waters. Funding of all of
the waste treatment facilities needed at Federal
installations to eliminate their contribution to
pollution in these waters also is urgent,
(b) Maximum utilization of other existing Federal
grant programs which can be applied to estuarine and
coastal zone management purposes. Examples are pro-
grams under (1) Section 701 of the Housing Act of
1954, Title III of the Water Resources Planning Act,
and Section 3(c) of the Water Pollution Control Act,
all providing grants for comprehensive planning; (2)
the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, which pro-
vides grants for Federal, State, and local acquisi-
tion and development of estuarine and coastal sites
for conservation and recreation purposes; (3) Section
6 of the Water Pollution Control Act, the Water
Resources Research Act, and the National Sea-Grant
College and Program Act of 1966, all authorizing
grants which can be utilized for research and study
in estuarine and coastal areas; and (4) Section 7 of
the Water Pollution Control Act, providing grants for
the administration of State and interstate water
pollution control programs.

V-325

(c) Full use of direct Federal authority for func-
tional or comprehensive planning to prepare, in
cooperation with the States and others, use and
management plans for specific estuaries and coastal
areas. Completion by the Corps of Engineers of the
comprehensive study of Chesapeake Bay, including the
construction of the authorized hydraulic model of
this estuary, is particularly important. Also urgent
is greater attention in the present framework studies
being conducted under the aegis of the Water Resources
Council and other Federal water resource planning
programs in rivers tributary to estuaries and coastal
waters to the impact of upstream developments upon
downstream estuarine and coastal resources.

(d) Completion and maintenance by the Department of
the Interior of the broad national inventory of
estuaries and their resources initiated by the
National Estuarine Pollution Study and also the
inventory directed by the National Estuarine
Protection Act (Public Law 90-454).

(e) Completion of presently authorized studies bear-
ing on the use and management of estuarine resources,
including the study by the Department of the Interior
under the National Estuarine Protection Act of the
feasibility and desirability of establishing a

V-326

nationwide system of estuarine areas; and the Corps
of Engineers' national shoreline erosion survey
authorized by Congress in Public Law 90-483.
(2) On the second front of required Federal action, the
Congress should enact legislation establishing the
National Estuarine Management Program. Purposes of this
legislation should be three:

(a) To establish the basic policies and objectives
which are to guide that program at all levels of
government.

(b) To provide the Federal incentives which will act
as an impetus for needed action by the States under
that program.

(c) To authorize the new actions which that program
should require from Federal administrative agencies.

The legislation's statement of policies and objectives
should stress the national interest in the balanced multi-
purpose development, conservation and preservation of
estuarine and coastal resources over both the short and
long range. In setting this as the objective, it also
should emphasize the importance of giving priority con-
sideration to non-renewable resources and to maintaining
those resources and uses which are estuarine dependent.
While affirming the States' primary management

V-327

responsibility, it also should make clear the Federal
Government's right and obligation in two respects. These
are, first, to directly manage the use of estuarine and
coastal zone resources where vital Federal interests are
involved. The second is to provide continuing guidance
to the States in their important management decisions.
Such guidance includes not only advice and recommendations
but also the delineation of improvements which the States
are expected to make as a condition of Federal financial
aid and support.

To create the incentives which will provide the impetus
for needed State action, the new legislation should
authorize a new program of grants-in-aid to be used for
estuarine and coastal zone management specifically.
Particular purposes of such assistance should include the
establishment of organization at the State level for
estuarine and coastal zone management, the administration
of that organization during its first years of operation,
the development of comprehensive plans to govern the use
of specific estuarine and coastal resources, and research
and training programs in estuarine and coastal zone
management.

(3) On the third front of Federal action, the President
should issue an appropriate Executive Order or proclamation

V-323

calling upon Federal agencies, the States, and others to
make the maximum possible effort under existing law to
implement the objectives of the proposed national policy
in the interim before the National Estuarine Management
Program can be activated.

ROLE OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INTERESTS

Achievement of balanced development, conservation, and preservation
of the resources of the estuarine and coastal zone for multiple
purposes will become a reality only if the public and private
interests in the nongovernmental sector want and demand it. This
means that these interests now must actively seek the establishment
of the National Estuarine Management Program and, thereafter, give
continuing attention and support to its administration at all levels
of government. It means too that these interests must themselves
actively participate in the administration of that program by taking
part in the preparation of use and management plans for specific
estuaries and coastal areas and through research and education,
experimentation with new management concepts, their own programs to
acquire and administer important sites within the zone to protect
them from undesirable development, and continuing evaluation and
criticism of governmental programs. Compliance with adopted plans
in the activities which these interests conduct on their own in the
estuarine and coastal zone also is absolutely essential.

V-329

Conclusions presented in this chapter are developed in greater
detail in Part III, Recommendations - The Proposed Program, of the
Report of the National Estuarine Pollution Study.

V-331

Chapter 9
SUGGESTED GUIDELINES FOR A STATE MANAGEMENT STATUTE

Numerous representatives of the Coastal States have expressed,
through the public meetings, through State profile presentations,
and through direct correspondence with the National Estuarine
Pollution Study staff a need for suggestions from the Federal
Government as to how the States can develop improved or strength-
ened provisions for the use control of their estuarine resources.
Details on these suggestions are included in the preceding Chapters
2 and 5.

Consequently, the National Estuarine Pollution Study made an initial
attempt to develop such guidelines through a contract awarded to the
University of Maryland School of Law. The result of this contract
was the development of a Model Statute for Chesapeake Bay Basin
Management based upon the existing condition in the adjacent
Chesapeake Bay. This specific geographic area was selected as the
basis for the development of the guidelines because of its wide
range of governmental relationships, characteristics, benefits,
potentials, and use conflicts which exist not only in the Basin
area but also in other major estuarine areas. Therefore, this
suggested Statute, presented in the following pages of this chapter,
is considered to meet many of these problems and to include many
of the basic principles which would be apolicable to other estuarine
areas of the United States; also it is included because it is an

V-332

excellent piece of work. It is of course not presented as this
Study's recommendation for any action by the State of Maryland, or
any other coastal State.

V-333

A MODEL STATUTE FOR BAY BASIN MANAGEMENT:
ADAPTED FOR ADOPTION IN MARYLAND

Prepared by the University of
Maryland School of Law

Professor Garrett Power
Project Director

Daniel A. Bronstein
Associate Project Director

Prepared for the Federal Water

Pollution Control Administration,

Department of the Interior

(in partial fulfillment of Contract
No. 14-12-421)

Henry Stetina
Project Officer

V-334

General Comments

The starting point in drafting "model" legislation is o question-what is wrong with existing
laws and legal institutions? The most frequent response when this question is asked with
reference to Chesapeake Bay is-"fragmentation of authority." It is true that there is no
shortage of Bay government. The Federal Government, the governments of Maryland and
Virginia, the governments of their respective counties and cities, and an interstate compact
commission, all have spheres of governmental authority.

But this is not the crux of the problem. The Federal Government has demonstrated its wi II-
ingness to cooperate with, and to defer to, effective State action. The Federal water quality
program affords a good illustration. The legislatures of Maryland and Virginia have zealously
avoided the delegation of significant powers over the Bay to counties or cities. Although the
Bay is divided between Maryland and Virginia, both have a significantly broad territorial ex-
panse to effectively manage their respective portions. The only extant compact commission
is limited in power to the Potomac fishery.

Hence the problems which exist are to be found primarily within Maryland and Virginia State
government. Existing State legal institutions suffer from two major inadequacies. First, the
State legislatures, clinging vestigially to the nineteenth century, have attempted to adminis-
ter the Bay themselves. Rather than delegating broad managerial power to the executive
branch, they have responded to narrow problems with narrow legislation. These responses
rapidly become out-of-date but linger on as law. In short, the legislatures have refused to
give administrators the "range of choice" necessary for effective management.

Second, these powers which have been delegated by the legislatures have been scattered
throughout the States' administrative apparatus. Various State agencies have duplicating,
overlapping and sometimes inconsistent powers, but in neither Maryland nor Virginia is there
a single agency with the requisite authority to plan and coordinate the administration of the
Boy and its resources.

In recent years the most popular model for meeting the problems of river basin management has
been the Federal-interstate compact. The success of the Delaware River Basin Commission
has led to the negotiation and proposal of similar compacts for the Potomac and Susquehanna
Rivers. Such a management model has certain advantages for the Chesapeake Bay. A compact
between Maryland, Virginia, the United States (and perhaps Delaware) could be given terri-
torial jurisdiction over the whole Bay. Theoretically, at least, the State legislatures could
delegate broad powers to the compact commission which could exercise them in coordinated,
autonomous fashion (free from State legislative interference) for the compact's duration.

But the compact mode] also has disadvantages. It adds yet another tier to the existing surfeit
of Bay governments. It would be difficult to integrate such a compact with the already nego-
tiated and proposed Potomac River Basin Compact which has powers over the esfuarine por-
tions of the Potomac. Finally, it would be difficult to negotiate a compact which cives ade-
quate powers to the governing commission and still would be acceptable to both Virginia and
Maryland. Although Maryland and Virginia hove a common interest in various aspects of Bay
management they also have disparate and competitive interests in preserving the Boy resources
within their respective boundaries exclusively for themselves and their citizens. At best, such
a compact would take years to negotiate; at worst, it would be emasculated through the reten-
tion of powers by the States.

ra

V-335

Because of the disadvantages of the compact format, it was decided to reform State government

ther than supplant it. The legislation which follows provides such a reform, adapted for
adoption in Maryland. Basically it is a legislative delegation of broad planning, regulatory,
administrative and operational powers to a single state agency-The Chesapeake Bay Basin
Department. The Department is given territorial jurisdiction over all waters of the State. This
jurisdiction was decided upon by starting with Bay waters and moving upstream into the fresh
water tributaries of the basin with the realization that fresh water input so intimately affects
estuarine waters that the two cannot be rationally separated. Also involved was the percep-
tion that-since almost all Maryland waters are in the basin except for some waters on the
eostern shore which drain into the bays behind the Atlantic barrier beaches and which present
similar management problems-the Department might as well hove authority over all Stote waters.
Hence the title of the Department is a misnomer, chosen on the theory that the dog should wag
the tail.

The territorial jurisdiction of the Department would, of course, be curtailed upon the adoption
of the Susquehanna and Potomac River Basin Compacts. Assuming the adoption of these com-
pacts, their respective commissions would have primary power within their jurisdictional bounds
but to the extent they permit State regulation and activity the Department would be the Maryland
operative.

The Chesapeake Bay Basin Department is designed to replace two existing State agencies — the
Department of Water Resources and the Department of Chesapeake Bay Affairs. It is also de-
signed to take from the State Health Department the power to regulate discharges of human and
municipal wastes. Its primary role is as a coordinator, planner and regulator. It is charged
with the duty of developing a plan for the utilization and conservation of the waters of the State
and a complementary plan for utilization and conservation of Chesapeake Bay resources. It is
given regulatory powers necessary to assure implementation of these plans. In addition when a
need appears for Statewide development and management (for example, a State run waste accept-
once system) it may own and administer facilities.

Specific Comments

ARTICLE 1

CHESAPEAKE BAY BASIN DEPARTMENT CREATED

This article defines the terms used throughout the act and lays the organizational groundwork
for the new Chesapeake Bay Basin Department. This Department replaces the Department of
Water Resources and the Department of Chesapeake Bay Affairs under the umbrella of the De-
partment of Natural Resources. The Secretary of Natural Resources has powers under other
sections of the Maryland Code to coordinate the activities of the Department with the activities
of other related resource agencies such as the Department of Forests and Porks and Department
of Gome and Inland Fish.

The Director of the Department is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor. Ac-
cordingly the Director will be responsive to the Governor (or his intermediary, the Secretary of
Natural Resources) and the Governor is responsible for decisions of the Department. No com-
missions are established which interfere with this well defined line of responsibility and authority.

V-336

Section 1.204 which provides that all moneys received by the Department shall be paid into
the general fund, in essence abolishes several special funds which now exist (e.g., Fish-
eries Research and Development Fund, Waterways Improvement Fund). It is felt that since
this act represents a broad delegation of authority to the Department, the Department should be
required to clear all expenditures through the ordinary budget process.

Section 1 .302 articulates the relationship between the Department and the Federal Govern-
ment or interstate compact commissions. Powers of these paramount bodies take precedence.

ARTICLE 2

WATERS OF THE STATE

This article charges the Department with the obligation to adopt a plan for utilization of
State waters and gives the Department the powers necessary to implement the plan.

Section 2.201 gives the Department authority to promulgate and enforce quality standards for
waters of the State. Section 2.202 supplements this basic power by authorizing the Depart-
ment to impose other controls such as permits establishing assimilative capacity quotas or
effluent charges.

Section 2.204 is designed to foreclose the possibility of collateral attack on the decisions of
the Department such as happened in Stanton v. Trustees, 233 A. 2d 718 (Me. 1967) where a
downstream riparian secured an injunction against an upstream discharger, even though the
discharger had secured a permit from the State water quality commission.

Section 2.302 carries over the appropriations permit system for the use of water which has
existed in Maryland since 1934. The cross reference to Section 3,203 adds a new wrinkle, by
making clear that the State, through the Director, can require payment for the use of tidal
waters. This affords a useful managerial tool in limiting the placement of thermal loads on
the Bay. Certainly the use of Bay waters as a coolant becomes less attractive to a commer-
cial user if he may be charged the fair market value of such use (one measure of which would
.be the cost of an alternative cooling system).

Section 2.302(c) functions as a "grandfather's clause." Under Maryland law there is some
possibility that pre-1934 users of fresh water and pre-1 966 users of tidal waters have some
vested rights in such waters. See Md. Ann. Code, Art, 96A, Sees. 2, 1 1 as amended 1968,
These rights have never been legally tested. This subsection recognizes that such rights
may exist but places the burden of going forward on the person asserting them.

Sections 2.401 through 2 403 give the Department broad discretion to regulate the operation
of boats. The Department of Chesapeake Bay Affairs presently has similar (although more
circumscribed) powers under Section 1-11 of Article 14B of the Maryland Code. Section 2 404,
however, transfers powers relating to the licensing of boats, presently exercised by Chesa-
peake Bay Affairs, to the Department of Motor Vehicles,

V-337

ARTICLE 3

THE TIDAL REGION

This Article lays the foundation for a series of special regulations over Chesapeake Bay and
the bays behind Maryland's barrier beach on the Atlantic Coast.

Section 3.101 directs the Department to prepare a comprehensive plan for Bay development.
The sort of plan envisioned is the San Francisco Bay Plan already developed in California.

Section 3.201 restates the State's common law ownership of tidal waters and submerged tidal
lands and Section 3.202 specifies the rights of riparian land owners therein. Section 3,202 is
designed to replace Sections 45 through 48 of Article 54 of the Maryland Code. It gives to the
riparian essentially the same rights that the Maryland Attorney General says he has under exist-
ing law. See 50 Op. Att'y. General 452 (1965). Whether in fact, Section 3 202 is a constriction
of riparian rights depends on whether the Attorney General's narrow reading of existing law is
correct.

Section 3,203 provides a procedure through which the Director can transfer the State's interest
in tidal waters and submerged tidal lands. Since the Director is the Governor s man the deci-
sion is the Governor's. It may be used to sell water (for use as a coolant), sand, gravel,
minerals, oi I, gas, etc., or land itself as a site for fi I ling. It represents a consol idation of a
variety of procedures under existing law. It should be noted that the procedure is hedged with
significant safeguards. Before a person can acquire any interest, he must first acquire a per-
mit under the regulatory procedures in either Section 2.302 or 4.302. These permit procedures
give optimum protection to both public and private interests. The special notice procedure
within 3.203 holds open to public scrutiny the Director's (or Governor's) decision of the price
to be charged.

Sections 3.301 through 3.303 provide a new and flexible procedure through which the Department
can control development of Bay shoreline. For example, it might use the power in Section 3 301
to protect non-tidal wetlands or to reserve certain shorelines for priority uses such as water-
related industry or water-related recreation. Section 3.302 provides a technique through which
local governments can preserve their primary land use control jurisdiction by meeting Department
standards. Under Section 3.303 the Department is delegated broad powers to promulgate land use
control regulations which may take the form of zoning, subdivision controls or permit procedures.

Sections 3.401 through 3 404 make a significant change in existing low. They transfer man-
agement of the Bay's fishery from statute to regulation. This will give the Department the
range of choice necessary for efficient and rational management. Section 3 403 mokes possi-
ble a dramatic change in oyster management It permits the Department to shift from a public
to private oyster fishery, in whole or port. The Department is given brood enough discretion
so that It can negotiate mutually advantageous trade-offs with its counterpart in Virginia.

V-338

ARTICLE 4

PROJECTS AND FACILITIES

This Article provides for the regulation, management and operation of projects and facilities
affecting the waters of the State and the resources of the tidal region.

Section 4.201 delegates to the Department police power authority to regulate existing projects
and facilities and Section 4.202 adds special enforcement powers.

Sections4.301 through4.303 establish prior approval procedures for all projects affecting State
waters and the tidal region. Section 4.301 regulates private projects on privately owned land.
Accordingly the Department's approval authority is limited to its police powers. Section 4.302
regulates private projects on what is presumptively publicly owned land or water. Accord-
ingly the Department is given greater discretion in the determination of whether to approve
such projects. Persons receiving a permit are required to comply with the procedure outlined
in Section 3,203. This provides a mechanism for assuring that the State will receive a fair
return for property rights it relinquishes. Section 4.302(c) provides a procedure whereby a
person who can rebut the presumption of State ownership (e.g., the owner of a valid and ex-
tant patent to submerged tidal land) can vindicate his rights if the Department refuses to rec-
ognize them.

Section 4.303 authorizes the Department to regulate projects of other governmental agencies.
When dealing with other State or local agencies the powers ore plenary-the Department is the
supervisor of State waters and the tidal region. When dealing with the U.S. Government or
compact commissions, in the exercise of their valid powers, the Department has only the
power of persuasion.

Sections 4.401 through 4 403 define the Department's role as an operative and financier. It
is empowered to buy, build, manage and operate necessary projects and facilities (e.g., waste
collection systems, waterways improvements, shore erosion control structures, recreation
areas, etc.). It may also contribute towards the financing of such projects and facilities by
other governmental agencies or persons but may only contribute amounts to persons that it
can justify on a cost-benefit basis.

ARTICLE 5

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sections 5 101 through 5 106 outline the internal working procedures of the Department. Sec-
tions 5.102 through 5 104 mandate that notice be given and a public hearing be held before
important Department decisions are made. Interested persons and governmental agencies are
guaranteed an opportunity to present their views.

Sections 5.201 and 5.202 provide for judicial review of Department decisions. The procedures
outlined therein ore supplemented by various other possibilities of review available at com-
mon law.

Sections 5.301 and 5.302 give to the Department civil and criminal sanction which they moy
use in the enforcement of the statute and the regulations promulgated thereunder.

V-339

Repeal, Transfer and Amendment
of Existing Statutes

All references are to the Annotated Code of Maryland, as amended.

Repeal
Article 14B, Sees. 1-4, 7-13.
Article 27, Sec. 485.

Article 43, Sees. 387A, 387B, 389, 393, 394A, 396A, 397.
Article 54, Sees. 45-48.

Article 66C, Sees. 6-13L, 22-30, 33, 234-255, 262-342, 696-717, 756-758.
Article 96A, Sees. 1-58, 76-88.

Transfer

Article 14B, Sees. 4A-4-0 to Article 66-1/2.

Amendments

Article 43

The following sections should be amended to eliminate references to sewage, sanitary
facilities and sanitary districts: 387, 388, 390-392, 394, 398, 402, 404-406A.

The following sections should be amended to substitute "Chesapeake Bay Basin De-
partment" for "State Board of Health": 387C, 395.

Article 62B

Section 5(q) should be amended to divest the Maryland Port Authority of power to regu-
late wharves, bulkheads, piers and piling.

V-340

CHESAPEAKE BAY BASIN DEPARTMENT
Table of Contents

ARTICLE 1 - CHESAPEAKE BAY BASIN DEPARTMENT CREATED

Part One - Purposes and Definitions

1.101 - Purposes

1.102 - Definitions

Part Two - Organization

1.201 - Creation

1.202 - Director

1 .203 - Staff

1.204 - Disposition of Moneys

Part Three - General Powers, Relationship of Department to Federal Government and
interstate Compact Commissions, Severability

1.301 - General Powers

1.302 - Relationship of Department to Federal Government and Interstate Compact

Commissions

1.303 — Severability

ARTICLE 2 - WATERS OF THE STATE

Part One - Water Plan

2.101 - Development, Adoption and Contents

2.102 - Relationship to Other Plans

Part Two - Water Quality Control

2.201 - Water Quality Standards

2.202 - Other Water Quality Controls

2.203 - Existing Discharges

2.204 - Defense in Private Suit

2.205 - Transition

Part Three - Use of Waters

2.301 - General Powers

2.302 - Uses by Persons

2.303 - Uses of Governmental Agencies

2.304 - Transition

Part Four - Boating

2.401 - General Powers

2.402 - Safety

2.403 - Enforcement

2.404 - Transfer of Powers

2.405 - Transition

V-J41

ARTICLE 3 - THE TIDAL REGION

Part One - Plan for the Tidal Region

3.101 - Development and Adoption

3.102 - Relationship to Other Plans

Part Two - Rights in Tidal Waters and Submerged Tidal Lands

3.201 - Ownership of Tidal Waters and Submerged Tidal Lands

3.202 - Riparian Rights in Tidal Waters and Submerged Tidal Lands

3.203 - Transfer of the State's Interest

Part Three - Tidal Shore Lands Controls

3.301 - Designation of Areas of Restricted Development

3.302 - Jurisdiction of Other Governmental Agencies
3 303 - Jurisdiction of the Department

Part Four - Aquatic Life

3.401 - General Powers

3.402 - Licenses

3.403 - Oyster and Shellfish Leases

3.404 • Transition

ARTICLE 4 - PROJECT AND FACILITIES

Part One - General Powers

4.101 - Programs

4.102 - Assistance

4.103 - Recommendations

Part Two - Regulation of Projects and Facilities
4.201 - Regulations
4 202 - Enforcement

Part Three — Approval of Projects

4.301 - Projects on Non-Tidal Waters by Persons

4.302 - Projects on Tidal Waters by Persons

4.303 - Projects by Governmental Agencies

Part Four - Acquisition, Operation, Management and Financing of Projects and Facilities
by the Department
4 401 - General Powers
4 402 - Acquisition
4.403 - Financing

ARTICLE 5 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Part One - Administrative Procedures

5.101 - Rules and Regulations

5.102 - Notice and Hearing Required

V-342

ARTICLE 5 - GENERAL PROVISIONS-Continued

Part One - Administrative Procedures-Continued

5.103 - Notice

5.104 - Hearings

5.105 - Subpoenas

5.106 - No Review by Board of Review

Part Two - Judicial Review

5.201 - Review

5.202 - Appeal

Part Three - Enforcement by the Department

5.301 - Injunction

5.302 - Penal Sanctions

V-343

ARTICLE 1

CHESAPEAKE BAY BASIN DEPARTMENT

CREATED

Part One

Purposes and Definitions

1 .101 - Purposes

It is the intention of the General Assembly in the enactment of this act that the planning,
development, management and conservation of the waters of the State, the Chesapeake Boy,
and all other tidal waters and tidal resources ore the proper responsibility of the State.

1.102 - Definitions

For the purpose of this act, except as may be otherwise required by the context:

(a) "Department" means the Chesapeake Bay Basin Department created by this act.

(b) "Director" means the Director of the Chesapeake Bay Basin Department.

(c) "Person" means an individual, partnership, corporation, joint stock company, firm,
society, association or other unincorporated organization, receiver, trustee, and any officer,
agent or employee of any of the foregoing acting in his capacity as such, but shall not include
governmental agencies or their officers and employees.

(d) "Governmental Agencies" means the Government of the United States, Maryland, and
all other States, their political subdivisions, and every department, agency, commission and
other unit or instrumentality thereof and interstate compact commissions.

(e) "Waters of the State" means all waters, surface and underground, tidal and non-tidal
within the boundaries of the State, the Atlantic Ocean bordering on the coast of the State for a
distance of three (3) miles from the mean low watermark on the coast, and the flood plain of
free-flowing waters determined by the Department as being subject to a fifty (50) year flood
frequency.

(f) "Tidal Waters" means all waters within the boundaries of the State where the tide
:bbs and flows, and the Atlantic Ocean bordering on the coast of the State for a distance of

three (3) miles from the mean low watermark on such coast.

(g) "Non-Tidal Surface Waters" means all surface waters of the State which are not af-
fected by the ebb and flow of the tides.

(h) "Tidal Region" means the entire geographical area embraced by tidal waters and sub-
merged tidal land, and all lands located within one (1) mile of the mean high watermark on
tidal waters, and all lands which are one hundred (100) feet above sea level, or less, in
Somerset, Worchester, Wicomico, Dorchester, Talbot, Caroline, Kent, Queen Annes, Cecil,
Harford, Baltimore, Anne Arundel, Prince Georges, Calvert, Charles, St. Mary's Counties and
Baltimore City.

(i ) "Resources of the Tidal Region" means oil natural resources within the tidal region
including but not limited to, fresh water, tidal water, open space, scenic, historic, wilderness,
wetland and other natural areas, harbors, aquatic life, wildlife, sand, gravel, earth, clay, shell
deposits, minerals, ore, metals, oil and gas.

e

m

V-344

(j ) "Aquatic Animal Life" means all species of finfish, crabs, oysters, clams, terrapins,
lobsters, zooplankton and all other animal species that live or habitually reside in water.

(k) "Aquatic Plant Life" means all species of plants that live in water.

(I ) "Tidal Shore Land" means all land within the tidal region except submerged tidal land.

(m) "Submerged Tidal Land" means all land lying under the tidal waters up to the means
high watermark.

(n) "Project" means any work, service or activity which is determined by the Department
to be 0 separate entity for purposes of evaluation, except that it shall not include the taking of

aquatic animal life.

(o) "Facility" means any real or personal property, structures thereon and improvements
thereof, except that it shall not include vessels.

(p) "Structure" means any assembly of materials above or below the surface of land or
water, including but not limited to houses, buildings, plants, bulkheads, jetties, wharves,
piers, docks, landings, dams, and waterway obstructions.

(q) "Development" means the division of land into two or more parcels, the construction,
reconstruction, conversion, structural alterations, relocation or enlargement of any structure,
or of any excavation or landfill, the filling of submerged land, and any change in the use of
any structure, or land, or extension of use of land.

(r) "Development Regulation" means all regulations which restrict the use and develop-
ment of land, including but not limited to zoning restrictions, subdivisions controls, master
plans and permits procedures placing restrictions on building, construction and filling.

(s) "Filling" means either the displacement of the waters of the State either by the
deposition of sand, gravel, earth or other materials or the artificial alteration of the levels of
such waters by structures, drainage ditches or otherwise.

(t ) "Vessel" means every description of watercraft capable of being used as a means of
transportation on water or on ice except that it shall not include watercraft moored in the waters
of the State at a stationary location on a semi-permanent or permanent basis or sea planes.

(u) "Court" means the Circuit Court of a county or the Baltimore City Court.

Part Two
Organization

1.201 - Creation

There is hereby created a Chesapeake Bay Basin Department, which shall be part of the
Department of Natural Resources.

1 .202 - Director

(a) The Governor shnll appoint, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Natural Re-
sources, a competent person with the qualifications prescribed herein as Director of the Chesa-
peake Boy Basin Department. The Director shall be the head of the Department and shall
personally direct its operations and activities. The Director shall be a person with executive
ability and experience, and shall have an academic degree and knowledge of the general prin-
ciples involved in the administration, improvement, planning, management and conservation of
the waters of the State and the resources of the tidal region. The Director shall devote his
full time to the work of the Department and shall receive such salary as may be provided in the
annual State Budget. The Director shall hold office under and subject to the provisions of Sec-
tion 234(c) of Article 41 of the Annotated Code of Maryland, as amended.

V-345

(b) As the head of the Chesapeake Bay Basin Department, the Director shall, subject
to the authority of the Secretary of Natural Resources as provided by law, be responsible
for the exercise of all the powers and duties conferred upon the Department by the provisions
of this act.

1.203 - Staff

The Director shall appoint the staff of the Department, subject to the authority of the
Secretary of Natural Resources under Section 234(c) of Article 41 of the Annotated Code of
Maryland, as amended, and subject to the provisions of the merit system. The staff of the
Department shall consist of such employees as may be necessary to carry out the duties of
the Department, in such numbers and at the salaries provided in the annual State Budget.
Insofar as the provisions of the merit system provide for disciplinary or dismissal proceed-
ings against employees to be brought by the appointing authority, the Director shall be the
appointing authority unless the Secretary of Natural Resources by written directive provides
that the Secretary shall be the appointing authority. All employees shall be under the super-
vision and control of the Director and shall perform such duties as he may prescribe. The
Director may require any employee who receives moneys to furnish bond in such amount as
the Director may determine.

1.204 — Disposition of Moneys

All moneys received under the provisions of this act from license fees, taxes, fines,
penalties, forfeitures, rent, royalties and other sources shall be paid to the Comptroller of
the Treasury and credited to general funds.

Part Three

General Powers, Relationship of Department to Federal

Government and Interstate Compact Commissions, Severability

1.301 - General Powers

In addition to the powers specifically delegated to the Department by this act, it shall
also have the power to:

(a) supervise, regulate and control the water of the State and the resources of the tidal
region;

(b) exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties imposed by all laws hereafter
enacted relating to the water of the State and the resources of the tidal region;

(c) enter into contracts, and in its own name sue and be sued;

(d) collect, compile, analyze, interpret, coordinate, tabulate, summarize, and distribute
technical and other data, and conduct studies, sponsor research and prepare reports on re-
source problems of the State;

V-346

(e) prepare, publish and disseminate information and reports in relation to the waters
of the State and the resources of the tidal region and on the views, policies and recommen-
dations of the Department in relation thereto;

(f) establish standards to guide the construction, operation and management of projects
and faci lities;

(g) plan, design, acquire, construct, reconstruct, complete, own, improve, extend, de-
velop, operate, maintain, and regulate any and all projects, facilities, properties, activities
and services, determined by the Department to be necessary, convenient or useful for the
purposes of this act;

(h) negotiate for such loans, grants, services, or other aids as may be available from
public or private sources to finance or assist in effectuating any of the purposes of this
act;

(i) adopt, amend and repeal such rules and regulations as it may deem appropriate for
the effectuation and enforcement of this act;

( j) institute an action or actions in its own name to compel compliance with any and
all of the provisions of this act or any of the rules and regulations of the Department adopted
pursuant thereto;

(k) acquire real or personal property and any interest therein as it may deem appropriate
for carrying out its functions under this act, by eminent domain;

(1) hold, administer, maintain and dispose of real and persona I property and any interest
therein as it may deem appropriate for carrying out its functions under this act;

(m) sell or dispose of any of its products or services and moke charges in connection
with the use of any of its facilities;

(n) conduct such investigations and inspections as it may deem appropriate to carry
out its functions under this act;

(o) undertake or contract for with any private or governmental organization, laboratory
or research group, studies, surveys and experiments concerning the water resources of the
State.

1.302 - Relationship of Department to Federal Government and Interstate Compact Com-
miss ions

(a) Nothing in this act shall in any way impair the powers of the United States or of
any agency or department thereof, over public waters. Should any conflict arise between
the powers of the United States and those of the Department under this act, the conflicting
provisions of this act sha II be abrogated to the extent of the conflict.

(b) For all purposes the Department shall be considered the successor to the duties and
powers of the Tidewater Fisheries Commission as such duties and powers are specified in
the Potomac River Compact of 1958. To the extent that the terms of this Compact limit, re-
strict or otherwise conflict with the powers of the Department under this act, the Compact
provisions shall take precedence. After the effective date of this act, the Maryland members
of the Potomac River Fisheries Commission shall be appointed by the Director.

(c) To the extent that any interstate compacts other than the Potomac River Compact of
1 958 to which the State is now or may become a party concern all or part of the waters of the
State, or the resources of the tidal region, the Department shall be the coordinating and en-
forcing agency of the State and shall perform all activities and functions which devolve upon
the State under the compact. To the extent that any such compact may limit, restrict or con-
flict with the powers of the Department under this act, the compact provisions shall take
precedence.

V-347

1.303 - Severability

If any provision of this act or the application thereof to any person or governmental
agency is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or any other ap-
plication oftheact which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and
to this end the provi sions of this act are declared to be severable.

V-348

e

ARTICLE 2

WATERS OF THE STATE

Part One

Water Plan

2.101 - Development, Adoption and Contents

The Department shall develop and adopt and, from time to time, review, revise and
amend a plan for development, conservation, utilization and management of the waters of
the State, and may adopt such plan or any revision thereof in such part or parts as it may
deem appropriate. The water plan shall include, but need not be limited to, determinations
of immediate and long-range needs and objectives, classifications of water uses which or
to be protected and preserved, and projects and facilities, governmental or private, which
the Department determines are necessary or useful for the optimum development, conserve
tion, utilization and management of the waters of the State.

2.102 - Relationship to Other Plans

The water plan shall be complementary to the plan for the tidal region provided for by
Section 3.101 of this act, and the Department, in developing, reviewing, revising and amend-
ing the water plan shall give consideration to relevant portions of Federal, State, regional
and local plans.

Part Two
Water Quality Control

2.201 - Water Quality Stondards

(a) In implementing the water plan the Department, by regulation, shall adopt, and may
from time to time change, the following: water quality standards for the waters of the State;
standards of water quality for particular waters of the State; criteria of water quality for each
classification of water use established by the comprehensive water plan; standards and meth-
ods of preserving, regulating, controlling and improving water quality; definitions of pollu-
tion and identification of pollutants

(b) Standards of water quality and criteria of water quality may relate, but need not be
limited to bacterial, viral, chemical, radioactive, organic, thermal, gaseous, liquid, solid or
soil additions to the waters of the State from any source, or to enrichment of the waters of
the State from any source.

(c) No person or governmental agency shall discharge any effluents into the waters of
the State which interfere with maintenance of the standards and criteria of water quality
adopted by the Department. The Department may, by regulation, require that any person or
governmental agency discharging effluent into the waters of the State shall monitor the quality

V-349

of such effluent and make reports to the Department, or that the Department shall monitor
the quality of such effluent itself and charge such person or governmental agency the ex-
pense thereof.

2.202 - Other Water Quality Controls

(a) The Department may require that any person or governmental agency secure a
permit, as the Department may prescribe by regulation, before discharging effluent into
the waters of the State. In the issuance of such permits the Department may impose such
limitations on the duration, location, nature and quality of the effluent as it may find
necessary for the effective maintenance of the water quality standards it has promulgated.

(b) The Department may, by regulation, require that persons or governmental agencies
discharging effluent into the waters of the State pay a charge to the Department. If the
Department imposes such charges, it shall prescribe, by regulation, reasonable standards
for the determination of the amount.

(c) The Department may, by regulation, require vessels registered in the State to
carry waste collection and disposal equipment of a type suited to reduce the deposition
in the waters of the State of human and other sewage and waste.

(d) The Department may adopt any other regulations necessary for the implementa-
tion and enforcement of the water plan and the water quality standards for the waters of
the State.

2.203 - Existing Discharges

The fact that any person or governmental agency has, prior to the effective date of
this act, been discharging effluent at a given location, in a given quantity or of a given
quality shall in no way be considered to exempt such person or governmental agency fron
any procedures the Department may adopt pursuant to this act to regulate and control ef-
fluent discharges and water quality.

2.204 - Defense in Private Suit

In any suit brought by any person or governmental agency against any other person
or governmental agency for reducing the quality of water or for rendering it harmful or
noxious or for in any way affecting the usefulness of the water, proof that the defendant
is acting within all the applicable regulations and procedures of the Department shall be
a complete defense to the action.

2,205 - Trans ition

All water quality standards, regulations, controls and effluent permits in effect on
the effective date of this act shall continue in full force and effect until changed, amended
or modified by the Department pursuant to the provisions of this act.

V-350

Part Three
Use of Waters

2.301 - General Powers

In implementing the water plan the Department may adopt regulations it deems necessary
for the optimum development, conservation and utilization of the waters of the State.

2.302 - Uses by Persons

(a) No person may use, divert, or appropriate, consumptively or non-consumptively, any
of the waters of the State without first securing a permit from the Department pursuant to such
regulations as the Department shall prescribe, except that the Department may, by regulation,
exempt from the requirements of this Section such uses, diversions or appropriations as it may
reasonably find to have a minimal effect on the waters of the State. The Department shall only
issue a permit if it determines that the contemplated use, diversion or appropriation is in the
publ ic interest as a practicable and efficient uti lization of the waters of the State and will not
adversely affect either the water plan or such part or parts thereof which have been odopted.
Any person issued a permit which entails the use, diversion or appropriation of tidal waters
shall comply with the procedure in Section 3,203 of this act before starting such use, diver-
sion or appropriation.

(b) Permits issued under this Section shall specify the character, location and duration
of the use, diversion or appropriation, the methods to be applied in its execution and such
other conditions, restrictions or qualifications as the Department deems necessary to insure
conformity with the water plan.

(c) Permits issued pursuant to this Section shall not create any vested rights and may
not be sold, assigned or transferred, and do not become appurtenant to land. The Department
shall periodically review such permits at least once every five (5) years and may revise,
amend or revoke them in effectuating the comprehensive water plan and the comprehensive
plan for the tidal region.

(d) Any person having a vested right to use, divert or appropriate any water of the State
by virtue of prior statute or of common law who is refused a permit to exercise such right or
granted a permit with conditions, restrictions or qualifications which derogate such right, may
petition a court as provided in Section 5.201 of this act to determine whether the action of the
Department is an unreasonable exercise of the police power and therefore constitutes a taking
of property without compensation. If the court finds the action of the Department to be a tak-
ing of property without compensation the court shall order the Department to issue an appropri-
ate permit but the order shall not affect the rights of any other person.

2.303 - Uses of Governmental Agencies

No governmental agency may use, divert or appropriate, consumptively or non-consump-
tively, any of the waters of the State without first securing the approval of the Department.
The Department shall, by regulation, prescribe the procedure to be followed in securing such
approval.

V-351

2.304 - Trans ition

All rules, regulations and permits relating to the use, diversion or appropriation of waters
of the State in effect on the effective date of this act shall remain in effect until changed,
amended or modified by the Department pursuant to the provisions of this act.

Part Four
Boating

2.401 - General Powers

In implementation of the water plan and the plan for the tidal region, and to protect public
safety and welfare the Department may, by regulation, prescribe the type, size and description
of all vessels which may be operated on the waters of the State, the place where they may be
operated and the manner of operation.

2.402 - Safety

The Department may, by regulation, impose restrictions on the operation of vessels that
it deems appropriate to protect public safety, including but not limited to, requirements that
vessels carry safety equipment, speed limits and restrictions on water skiing and aquaplaning.

2.403 - Enforcement

The Department is charged with the primary duty of enforcing the provisions of this act
relating to the use of vessels and the regulations promulgated thereunder, and officers, agents
or employees of the Department are authorized to stop and inspect vessels in the exercise of
this duty.

2.404 - Transfer of Powers

All powers and duties relating to the numbering, identification, certificates of title, sale,
assignment or transfer, fees and excise taxes, liens, licensing of manufacturers or dealers of,
for, or on vessels and the reporting of boating accidents, found in Article 14B, Sections 1-10
of the Annotated Code of Maryland, as amended, on the effective date of this act are herewith
transferred to the Department of Motor Vehicles.

2.405 - Transition

All rules and regulations governing the operation and use of vessels in the waters of the
State in effect on the effective date of this act and all laws relating to the operation and use
of vessels in the waters of the State which are repealed by this act, shall remain in effect as
regulations of the Department until changed, amended or modified by the Department pursuant
to the provisions of this act.

V-352

ARTICLE 3

THE TIDAL REGION

Part One

Plan for the Tidal Region

3.101 - Development and Adoption

The Department shall develop and adopt and, from time to time, review, revise and amend
a plan for the development, conservation, utilization and management of the resources of the
tidal region, and may adopt such plan or any revision thereof in such part or parts as it may
deem appropriate. The plan for the tidal region shall generally comprise a report or statement
of development and conservation proposals with maps, diagrams and text, and shall include, but
need not be limited to:

(a) a determination of immediate and long-range needs and objectives;

(b) a land use plan element, showing the existing location, extent and intensity of uses of
tidal shore land and submerged tidal land, and providing standards for the development of such
lands for residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, maritime and fishing
purposes, so as to encourage multiple compatible uses of such land, to effect a reconciliation
of alternative and conflicting uses of such lands and to enhance public access to tidal waters;

(c) a circulation plan element showing the location and types of facilities for all modes of
transportation by land, water and air required for the efficient movement of people and goods
into, about and through the tidal region, including terminals, facilities and rights of way;

(d) a utility service plan element analyzing the need for and showing the future location of
facilities for water supply and distribution, drainage, sewage and waste treatment and solid
waste disposal and provision for other related utilities;

(e) a recreation plan element showing a comprehensive system of areas and public sites
for recreation, including the following, with their locations and proposed development: natural
reservations, parks, parkways, bicycle paths, trails, beaches, vista points and other recrea-
tiona I faci lities;

(f) a conservation plan element for the conservation, development and utilization of na-
tural resources, including open space, fresh water, tidal waters, forests, soils, marshes, wet-
lands, harbors, shore land, submerged land, aquatic life, wildlife, sand, gravel, earth, clay,
shell deposits, minerals, ore, metals, oil, gas and other resources of the tidal region;

(g) an economic development plan element providing for the development and maintenance
of full employment opportunity.

3.102 - Relationship to Other Plans

The plan for the tidal region shall be complementary to the water plan provided for by Sec-
tion 2.101 of this act, and the Department, in developing, reviewing, revising and amending the
plan for the tidal region shall give consideration to relevant portions of Federal, State, regional
and local plans.

V-353

Part Two
Rights in Tidal Waters and Submerged Tidal Lands

3.201 - Ownership of Tidal Waters and Submerged Tidal Lands

The State of Maryland owns all tidal waters and all submerged tidal land except to the
extent that such submerged tidal lands have been transferred by the State by a valid and ex-
tant grant, lease or patent, or by a valid and extant grant confirmed by Article 5 of the Decla-
ration of Rights of the Constitution of Maryland.

3.202 - Riparian Rights in Tidal Waters and Submerged Tidal Lands

Except to the extent given other rights by statute, persons owning land bounding on tidal
waters shall, by virtue of such ownership, only hove the following rights in tidal waters and
submerged tidal lands:

(a) the right of access to tidal waters;

(b) the right to land formed by natural accretion in front of such land;

(c) the right to build in front of such land for non-commercial use, landings, wharves,
docks or shore erosion control structures, any of which upon completion becomes their prop-
erty. The exercise of these rights is subject to the regulatory procedure in Sections 4.201
and 4.302 of this act and to all other regulatory powers given by law to any governmental
agency.

3.203 - Transfer of the State's Interest

Any person issued a permit to use, divert or appropriate tidal waters under Section 2.302,
or to engage in a project under Section 4.302 shall, before starting on such use, diversion,
appropriation or project, present the permit to the Director, who shall be the trustee of tidal
waters and submerged tidal lands owned by the State. The Director shall review the use, di-
version, appropriation or project authorized by the permit and shall determine the extent to
which it requires the use or taking of tidal waters, submerged tidal land or other resources
owned by the State. The Director shall determine the consideration, if any, which the person
shall be required to transfer to the State in return for such use or taking, the nature and terms
of payment and the statements which the person shall be required to furnish the Department,
provided that the Director shall not require any person owning land bounding on tidal waters
to transfer any consideration in payment for the exercise of rights given such person under
Section 3.202. The Director shall set forth his determinations in an order which shall be pub-
lished once a week for two successive weeks in a newspaper having general circulation in
the area of the use, appropriation, diversion or project and the order shall not become final
unless it remains unrevoked ten (10) days after final publication. After the order becomes
final the Director shall be empowered to transfer in the name of the State any interest in real
or personal property necessary for the use, appropriation, diversion or project to be pursued.
Any person who fails to comply with the terms of the order shall forfeit the permit and all in-
terests in real or personal property transferred to him by the Director.

V-354

Part Three
Tidal Shore Lands Controls

3.301 - Designation of Areas of Restricted Development

The Department may, pursuant to such procedures as it shall prescribe, by regulation, de-
s ignote all or any portion of the shore lands of the tidal region as areas of restricted develop-
ment upon a finding that additional controls on land development are necessary within such
area or areas to implement the plan for the tidal region. The Department may, from time to
time, revise or abolish such designations. Any shore lands designated as an area of re-
stricted development may not be used for any purpose other than that for which they were actu-
ally and lawfully being used when they were so designated, except as authorized by the pro-
vision of Section 3.302 or Section 3.303.

3.302 - Jurisdiction of Other Governmental Agencies

Any other governmental agency having land use control jurisdiction over a portion of shore
lands designated as an area of restricted development may submit to the Department develop-
ment regulations governing such portion of shore lands. If the Department finds that such de-
velopment regulations meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the plan for the tidal region
it shall approve them, but the Department shall not approve any such development regulations
unless they provide that, insofar as the Department may prescribe, any changes in, or special
exceptions or variances thereafter made or authorized relating to the use to which any land may
be put, shall not become effective until accepted by the Department. If the Department has ap-
proved the development regulations of another governmental agency, such governmental agency
shall enforce them and the development of land in such area of restricted development may be
authorized as provided therein. Approval may be revoked if the Department finds that develop-
ment regulations are not being adequately enforced or no longer meet the minimum requirements
of the plan for the tidal region due to a revision of such plan.

3.303 - Jurisdiction of the Department

The Department shall, by regulation, prescribe development regulations for any area de-
signated as an area of limited development if the Department has not approved the develop-
ment regulations of any other governmental agency or if such approval has been revoked. Such
development regulations shall implement the plan for the tidal region, and the development of
land in such areas of restricted development may be authorized as provided therein. The De-
partment shall have discretion, by regulation, to, from time to time, revise or abolish such
development restriction in whole or part.

V-355

Part Four
Aquatic Life

3.401 - General Powers

(a) The Department may, by regulation, prescribe the type, size and description of all
aquatic animal life which may be taken from tidal waters or submerged land, the places where
fhey may be taken and the manner of taking.

(b) The Department is empowered to inspect all aquatic animal life taken from tidal
waters or submerged tidal land and all aquatic animal life sold within the State, pursuant to
such regulations as it may prescribe. The Department may, by regulation, prescribe the type,
size and description of aquatic animal life which may be sold within the State or exported
without the State.

(c) The Department may, by regulation, prohibit the importation of any aquatic animal
life from sources outside of the State when there is a reasonable suspicion that such aquatic
animal life might be harmful to the aquatic animal life of the tidal waters.

3.402 - Licenses

(o) The Department shall issue such licenses as it may prescribe, by regulation, which
shall thereupon be required for the taking, buying, selling, marketing, packing, or canning of
aquatic animal life from tidal waters or submerged land, and for boats, vessels and equipment
used for such taking, buying, selling, marketing, packing or canning.

(b) The Department shall, by regulation, prescribe the qualifications necessary for ob-
taining such licenses, the privileges granted by such licenses, the fees for such licenses and
the manner and extent to which such licenses may be transferred.

3.403 - Oyster and Shellfish Leases

(a) The Department is empowered, in the name of State, to lease to any person parcels of
submerged tidal land to be used for protecting, sowing, bedding or cultivating oyster or other
shellfish. The Department shall, by regulation, prescribe the procedures and qualifications
necessary for obtaining such leases, the portions of submerged land available for such leases
and the extent to which such leases can be transferred or assigned.

(b) The Department shall only grant the lease if it deems the lease to be in the best in-
terests of the State, provided that no lease shall be granted which is incompatible with the
water plan or the plan for the tidal region, and that no lease shall be granted which infringes
upon the the rights of any other person under Sections 3.202 or 4 302 of this act, or under
this Section, unless such person gives his written consent.

(c) The Department shall set forth in all leases granted under this Section the duration,
location, size of parcel, consideration, terms of payment and the statements the lessee is re-
quired to make. Any person who fails to comply with these terms of the lease shall forfeit his
rights under the lease.

V-356

3.404 - Transition

Ali laws relating to the taking, buying, selling, packing or canning of aquatic animal life
from tidal waters or submerged tidal land and all laws relating to the importation or exporta-
tion of aquatic animal life to and from the State which are repealed by this act shall remain in
effect as regulations of the Department until changed, amended or modified by the Department
pursuant to this act; except that all taxes on the taking, buying, selling, marketing, packing
or canning of aquatic animal life from t ida I waters or submerged land, and all taxes on the im-
portation or exportation of aquatic animal life to or from the State, in effect when this act is
enacted shall continue in force and effect until changed, amended, modified or repealed by the
General Assembly. The Department, within two years after the effective date of this act,
shall present to the General Assembly a proposed revision of such taxes for its consideration.

V-357
ARTICLE 4
PROJECT AND FACILITIES
Part One
General Powers

4.101 - Programs

The Department shall, from time to time, formulate and adopt programs based upon the
woter plan and the plan for the tidal region, determining the quality and quantity of water needs
of the State and the needs for conservation, enhancement and development of the resources of
the tidal region, and proposing projects and facilities to be undertaken by persons, other gov-
ernmental agencies and the Department in satisfaction of such needs.

4. 1 02 - Assistance

The Department shall provide administrative and technical assistance to persons and gov-
ernmental agencies in the development of coordinated programs for the implementation of the
water plan and the plan for the tidal region and for the planning and design of projects and
facilities in conformity with the water plan and the plan for the tidal region.

4.1 03 - Recommendotions

The Department may recommend to persons or governmental agencies that they acquire,
construct, operate or maintain projects and facilities as the Department may deem appropriate
for the implementation of the water plan or the plan for the tidal region.

Part Two
Regulation of Projects and Facilities

4.201 - Regulations

(a) The Department shall, by regulation, establish standards for the construction, opera-
tion and maintenance of projects and facilities which the Department deems necessary to im-
plement the water plan and the plan for the tidal region, in or upon non-tidal surface waters,
the flood plain of freeflowing waters determined by the Department as being subject to a fifty
(50) year flood frequency, tidal waters or submerged tidal lands, or which ore used to appropri-
ate underground water, to assure the optimum development, conservation and utilization of the
waters of the State and the resources of the tidal region and to protect the public health, safety
and welfare.

(b) No person or governmental agency shall construct, operate or maintain any such pro-
ject or facility in violation of these standards.

V-358

4.202 - Enforcement

The Department may, at reasonable times, inspect any projects and facilities within the
purview of Section 4.201 to determine whether such projects and facilities are being con-
structed, operated and maintained in compliance with the regulations promulgated thereunder.
If the Department finds that such regulations are not being complied with it may issue an order
requiring the person or governmental agency to cease construction or operation, to change his
mode of construction, operation or maintenance or to make necessary repairs or alterations,
so as to comply with such regulations . If such person or governmental agency fai Is to comply
with an order to make repairs or alterations, the Department may make such repairs and alter-
ations and charge such person or governmental agency the expense thereof.

Part Three
Approval of Projects

4.301 - Projects on Non-Tidal Waters by Persons

No person shall undertake any project in or upon non-tidal surface waters or the flood
plain of free-flowing waters determined by the Department as being subject to a fifty (50)
year flood frequency or which will be used to appropriate underground water without first hav-
ing secured the approval of the Department pursuant to such regulations as the Department
may prescribe except that the Department may, by regulation, exempt from the requirements
of this Section such projects as it may reasonably find to have a minimal effect upon the
waters of the State. Projects within the purview of this Section shall include, but not be
limited to, the following:

(a) building, maintaining or modifying of any structure in or upon non-tidal surface waters
or the fifty (50) year flood plain;

(b) constructing, maintaining or modifying any reservoir or pond;

(c) changing or diminishing the course or current of any non-tidal surface waters;

(d) changing the configuration of the fifty (50) year flood plain;

(e) drilling or digging of wells, test holes or other borings.

The Department shall only approve such project if it determines that it wi II not adversely af-
fect the water plan or such part or parts thereof which have been adopted and will not inter-
fere with maintenance of the standards and criteria of water quality established by the De-
partment.

4.302 - Projects on T4dal Waters by Persons

(a) No person shall undertake any project in or upon tidal waters or submerged tidal
lands without first securing a permit from the Department pursuant to such regulations as
the Department shall prescribe, except that the Department may, by regulation, exempt from
the requirements of this Section such projects as it may reasonably find to have a minimal
effect on the tidal region. Projects within the purview of this Section shall include, but not
be limited to, the following:

(1) the building, maintaining or modifying of any structure on tidal waters or sub-
merged tida I lands;

V-359

(2) the mooring of floating structures in tidal waters at a stationary location on a
semi-permanent or permanent basis;

(3) the filling of submerged tidal lands or the disposal of dredged materials in tidal

waters;

(4) the dredging, taking or extracting of any sand, gravel, earth, clay, shell deposits,

minerals, ore, metals, oil or gas or other materials from tidal waters or submerged tidal lands,
except that it shall not include the taking of aquatic animal life.

Before issuing a permit the Department shall consider the potential effects of the project on
the waters of the State and the resources of the tidal region and, giving due regard to the need
for encouraging multiple compatible use of the waters of the State and the resources of the
tidal region and for effecting a reconciliation between alternative and conflicting use, shall
only issue a permit if it deems the project in the public interest, provided that no permit shall
be issued for any project which adversely affects either the water plan or the plan for the tidal
region, or such part or parts thereof as have been adopted, and that no permit shall be issued
for any project which will derogate the rights of any person under Sections 3.202 or 3.403 of
this act or under this Section, unless such persons give their written consent. Any person is-
used a permit under this Section which entails the use or taking of tidal waters, submerged
lands or other resources owned by the State shall comply with the procedure in Section 3.203
of this act before starting such project.

(b) Permits issued under this Section shall specify the character, location and duration
of the project, the method to be employed in its execution and such other conditions, restric-
tions or qualifications as the Department deems in the best interest of the State.

(c) Any person having a vested right in tidal waters or submerged tidal land by virtue of
a valid and extant grant, lease or patent or by prior statute or common law, who is refused a
permit to exercise such rights, or is granted a permit with conditions, restrictions or qualifi-
cations which derogate such right, may petition a court as provided in Section 5.201 of this

act to determine whether the action of the Department is an unreasonable exercise of the police
power and therefore constitutes a taking of property without compensation. If the court finds
the action of the Department to be a taking of property without compensation the court shall
order the Department to issue an appropriate permit but the order shall not affect the right of
any other person or governmental agency.

4.303 - Projects by Governmental Agencies

No governmental agency shall engage in any projects which affect the waters of the State
or the resources of the tidal region without first securing the approval of the Department. The
Department shall, by regulation, prescribe the procedure to be followed in securing such ap-
proval.

Part Four

Acquisition, Operation, Management and Financing of Projects

and Facilities by the Department

4.401 - General Powers

(a) The Department, alone or in cooperation with one or more persons or governmental
agencies, may acquire, construct, operate, maintain and administer such projects and facilities

V-360

as it deems appropriate for the implementation of the water plan and the plan for the tidal
region.

(b) Facilities within the purview of this Section include, but are not limited to the fol-
lowing:

(1) sewage or waste collection systems, treatment plants and related facilities,

(2) systems for the collection, storage, appropriation, transmission, sale or exchange
of waters;

(3) marine terminals and other improvements to waterways for navigational purposes;

(4) parks, recreation, scenic and historic areas including open space, development
rights and easements;

(5) natural areas including wetlands, marsh and other areas suitable for the propoga-
tion of fish and wildlife;

(6) shore erosion control devices.

(c) Projects within the purview of this Section include, but are not limited to, all activi-
ties incident to the construction, operation and maintenance of such facilities and the clearing
of debri s, aquatic plant life and obstructions from waters of the State, the dredging and marking
of channels, and the repletion of fishery resources.

(d) In operation, maintenance and administration of such pro|ects and facilities the De-
partment may act through public or private lessees or concessionaires.

4.402 - Acqui sition

(a) The Department may acquire such facilities by purchase, gift, grant, devise, bequest,
lease, condemnation, exchange or otherwise.

(b) The Department may, in the acquisition of such facilities by condemnation, take
property already devoted to a public use.

(c) The acquisition of interests or rights in real property for the preservation of open
spaces and areas constitutes a public purpose for which public funds may be expended.

4.403 - Financing

(a) The Department may contribute all or a portion of the costs of acquisition, construc-
tion, operation, maintenance or administration of any project or facility by the Department or
by some other governmental agency.

(b) The Department may contribute all or a portion of the costs of acquisition, construc-
tion, operation, maintenance and administration of any project or facility by the Department
in cooperation with one or more persons, or by one or more persons, provided that the Depart-
ment finds that the benefits to the State from such contribution equal or are greater than the
amount of the contribution.

(c) Department contributions may be used to match Federal funds that may be or become
available. •->

V-361

ARTICLE 5
GENERAL PROVISIONS

Part One
Administrative Procedures

5.101 - Rules and Regulations

(o) The Department shall adopt, amend and repeal, and prescribe the effective dates for
rules of procedures for all activities it is authorized to undertake, and for regulations it may
deem necessary or desirable for the implementation and enforcement of this act, or to carry
out its responsibility under this act.

(b) The Department shall prepare and provide for the editing, publishing, compiling and
indexing of all such rules and regulations.

(c) Any person or governmental agency may petition the Department requesting the promul
gation, amendment or repeal of any rule or regulation. The Department shall prescribe by rule
the form for such petitions and the procedure for their submission, consideration and disposi-
tion.

5.102 - Notice and Hearing Required

In addition to when required by other provisions of this act, notice shall be given and a
hearing held whenever the Department makes or takes the following decisions or actions:
(a) the adoption, amendment or repeal of rules and regulations except those relating solely
to the internal management of the Department; (b) the adoption, revision, amendment or repeal
of the water plan or the plan for the tidal region, or part or parts thereof; (c) the issuance, re-
vision or revocation of permits; (d) the approval or refusal to approve of projects; (e) the de-
signation of all or any portions of the shore lands of the tidal region as areas of restricted
development and revisions or abolition of such designations; (f ) the approva I or disapproval
flf development regulations submitted by other governmental agencies and any revocation of
such approval; and (g) the leasing of parcels of submerged tidal lands to be used for protect-
ing, sowing, bedding or cultivating of oyster or other shellfish.

5.103 - Notice

(a) Unless otherwise specified in this act whenever notice is required it shall be given
by publication once a week for two successive weeks in a newspaper having general circula-
tion in the area, or portion or portions of the State to be affected by the proposed action of the
Department. If the purpose of such notice is to give notice of a proposed public hearing, the
notice shall identify the subject or subjects to be considered and specify the time, not less
than ten (10) days after final publication, and place of hearing at which interested persons or
governmental agencies may appear and present their views. In addition to newspaper publica-
tion, notice of the proposed action of the Department, or of the public hearing, shall be posted
in a conspicuous place at the offices of the Department.

(b) The Department may mail a copy of the notice to each person and governmental agency
which the Department believes may be affected by the proposed action of the Department or by

V-362

the action it may take after such pubhc hearing, and may also mail a copy of the notice to
any other person or governmental agency who shall request such notice. The Department may
provide for other means of giving notice to the end that all persons and governmental agencies
having an interest in the subject may reasonably be apprised thereof. Any failure of the De-
partment to give notice as provided in this paragraph (b) shall not affect the validity of any
action taken by the Department.

(c) The notice need not contain the entire text, plan, or detail of the proposed action of
the Department or of the subject matter of the hearing, but shall reasonably identify the same
and state the place at which the same may be examined. Whenever copies of such text, plans,
or details may be provided by the Department, the notice shall so state and shall give the post
office address to which requests for such data may be sent and the price, if any, charged by
the Department therefor.

5.104 - Hearings

(a) The Department shall, after notice and at such place or places as it may determine,
conduct at least one public hearing, whenever a hearing is required by this act. Any person
or governmental agency claiming to have an interest in the subject matter of the proposed ac-
tion by the Department shall be entitled to submit data or views at such public hearing.

(b) The Department in the conduct of hearings may admit and give probative force to evi-
dence which possesses probative value commonly accepted by reasonably prudent men in the
conduct of their affairs and may take notice of judicially cognizable facts and other general,
technical, or scientific facts within its specialized knowledge.

(c) The Department shall adopt rules and regulations governing hearings, including rules
of practice and procedure and may prescribe the form and content of pleadings and other docu-
ments that may be filed with the Department.

(d) Department hearings may be conducted by the Director or such person or persons as
the Director may direct. The Director or any person authorized by the Director may administer
oaths and affirmations, examine witnesses and receive evidence at a hearing. Any willful
false swearing or affirming at a hearing as to any materia I fact sha 1 1 be deemed perjury under
the law of the State.

(e) Any final order, decision or action taken after hearing shall be in writing or stated
in the record and shall be accompanied by findings of fact and conclusions of law.

5.1 05 - Subpoenas

The Director or any persons authorized by the Director may issue subpoenas in the name
of the Department to compel witnesses to appear and testify or to produce books, records,
papers, documents or other tangible forms of evidence relating to any matter within the authority
of the Department.

5.106 - No Review by Board of Review

The Board of Review of the Department of Natural Resources shall have no power to re-
view any order, decision or action taken by the Department.

V-363

Part Two
Judicial Review

5.201 - Review

(a) Upon the petition of any person or governmental agency aggrieved, any final order,
decision or action of the Department made or taken after hearing or with respect to which a
hearing is required, and any other order, decision or action which this act provides shall be
subject to judicial review, may be reviewed by any court of competent |urisdiction. The peti-
tion for review shall be filed within thirty (30) days after the date of such order, decision or
action of the Department. Upon the filing of the petition the Clerk of Court shall forthwith,
by mail, serve a copy thereof upon the Department which shall thereupon file in the court a
certified list of the materials comprising the record of the proceedings and hold for the court
all such materials and transmit the original or certified copies of the same or any part there-
of to the court, when and as required by it, at any time prior to the final determination of the
review.

(b) The filing of a petition for review shall not operate as a stay of the operation of such
order or decision unless so ordered by the Department or by the court for good cause shown.
For good cause shown, and upon such conditions as may be required and to the extent neces-
sary to prevent irreparable injury, the court may take appropriate and necessary action to pre-
serve the status quo or rights of any of the parties, or others, pending conclusion of the re-
view proceedings.

(c) The court without a jury shall hear and decide the review on the record of proceedings
before the Department, and may affirm the decision of the Department or remand the case for
further proceedings; or it may reverse or modify the decision if the findings, conclusions or
decision, are (1) in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions, or (2) in excess of the
authority of the Commission, or (3) made upon unlawful procedure, or (4) affected by other
error of law, or (5) unsupported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole,
or (6) arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. The court may appoint a special mas-
ter to take evidence and make recommendations to the court with respect to any question
roised in a petition for review if the court is of the opinion that the question con not be ade-
quately determined from the record of the proceedings before the Department and that the in-
terest of justice so requires.

5.202 - Appeal

Any petitioner may secure a review of any final judgment of the court by appeal to the
Court of Appeals. Such appeal shall be taken in the manner provided by low for appeals from
law courts in other civil cases.

Part Three
Enforcement by the Department

5.301 - Injunction

The Department may enforce or require compliance with any provision of this act or any
rule, regulation, decision or order of the Deportment mode pursuant thereto, or restrain any

V-364

violation of any such provisions, rule, regulation, decision or order, by injunction or any other
appropriate action brought in the name of the Department in a court.

5.302 - Pena I Sanctions

(a) Any person violating any provision of this act or regulation of the Department, other
than one of a procedural nature or relating solely to the internal management of the Depart-
ment, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine not
exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each offense. Each day during which a violation
occurs shall be deemed a separate and additional violation. The employees of the Department
assigned to law enforcement duties and all other law enforcement officers are authorized and
directed to enforce the provisions of this act and the regulations of the Department, and to
make arrests for violation thereof.

(b) Notwithstanding any criminal liability, any person violating any provision of this act
or any regulation of the Department shal I be civilly liable to the Department for any actual
damage sustained by the Department by reason of such violation.

(c) The penal sanctions herein provided shall not be applicable to any failure or refusal
to pay any charge imposed by the Department.

* * *

Part VI
DEVELOPMENT OF DATA ON THE ESTUARINE ZONE

VI-1
INTRODUCTION

As required by Sec. 5g of the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966,
the National Estuarine Pollution Study, acting on behalf of the
Secretary of the Interior

". . . shall assemble, coordinate, and organize all exist-
ing pertinent information on the Nation's estuaries and
estuarine zones; carry out a program of investigations and
surveys to supplement existing information in representative
estuaries and estuarine zones; and identify the problems and
areas where further research and study are required ..."

To fulfill both the spirit and the letter of the Act, the National
Estuarine Pollution Study acquired and consolidated all available
existing information in the form of the National Estuarine Inventory,
an automated framework for organizing the tremendously large mass of
data assembled. The Study conducted investigations and inquiries
both to acquire and to develop this available information. As a
corollary, the data assembly was also useful in defining areas
where data and information are not available and are needed. The
data gaps, in turn, were used in conjunction with state-of-the-art
studies designed to identify necessary research and study.

Consequently, these two phases of the Study -- assembly of data and
definition of research and study needs -- being so closely related,
are presented together in this part of the report. The first

VI-2

chapter discusses the National Estuarine Inventory, its development,
and its past and future applications. Chapter 2 points out the
major data qaos as shov/n by the Inventory and sets out a pronram for
a needed data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation.

In Chapter 3 the results of the research and study needs investiga-
tions are outlined in some detail.

Two basic programs are outlined in Chapters 2 and 3. The first is to
satisfy the need for basic data: that is, numbers and information
which can be analyzed and interpreted to give information. The
second program is designed to search for basic knowledge: that is,
the understanding necessary to clearly and unmistakably use the basic
data.

The tying together of what-is-known to show what-is-not-known, is a
common denominator in these two programs. Of necessity, some over-
lap appears, pointing up the fact that the search for knowledge
results in data, and the search for data results in knowledge.

Chapter 1 ^^'^

THE NATIONAL ESTUARINE INVENTORY

"In conducting the , . . study, the Secretary ^hall assemble,
coordinate, and organize all existinn pertinent information on the
Nation's estuaries and estuarine zones ..."

Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966

Section 5(g) (2)

The National Estuarine Inventory is the primary repositorv of the
guantitative documentation used in the National Estuarine Pollution
Study to describe the Nation's estuarine system, its uses and -prob-
lems. While the directive calling for this Study did not explicitly
reguire an inventory, the breadth of information required implicitly
demanded inventory techniques, including automation.

The Inventory differs from a basic data storage-and-retrieval system
in three respects: First, the intent is to supply information for
institutional and technical management rather than for scientific
analyses, thus introducing a very wide variety of information rind
also preventing duplication of existing federally- financed data sys-
tems. Second, to increase its value to the estuarine manager, much
material has been entered as statistical summaries rather than in
raw data form; and, third, information wiiich r^oes not readily lend
itself to automation techniques has been "assembled, coordinated, and
organized" by other methods.

VI-4

This discussion describes in some detail the selection of the
descriptors used; the sources of information; how the information
v/as collected, organized, and automated (Figure VI. 1.1); the present
status of the data bank; and the need for, and valuf? of, a manage-
ment information system based on this system.

Figure VI. 1. 1

DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL ESTUARINE INVENTORY

Estuarine Register
Area Designations

Simultaneously

"Pertinent Information"
Definition

Handbook of Descriptors
Development

Data Gathering

Simultaneously

Data Analysis
Out Put

Data Automation
(or other compilation )

VI-5

SECTION 1. THE HANDBOOK OF DESCRIPTORS

The framework around which the Inventory is built is the "Handbook

of Descriptors" (VI-1-1), an outline showing the information necessary

to describe the Nation's coastal areas.

The original list of descriptors, developed within the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA), was reviewed in detail by
other agencies of the Department of the Interior and a number of
state water pollution control and natural resource aqencies. Critical
review by this diverse group helped to build a more comprehensive
data base than otherwise v^ould have resulted.

COMPOSITION OF THE HANDBOOK

The "Handbook" is comprised of the outlines for the two basic types
of management information needed to work with any estuarine system.
It contains sets of blank forms and instructions for their completion
with specific data. First, there must be institutional management infor-
mation consisting of those kinds of information which would be reguired
by a responsible management entity to determine: the most nearly
optimum use balance; the kind of organization which could achieve and
maintain the balance most effectively; whether such an organization
exists; and the existing institutional framework within which it must
work. Such information would include the political make-up, i.e., the
States, counties, municipalities, and special districts involved;
groups with management responsibilities in the system; existing zoning
restrictions; water quality standards; economic make-up of the area;

VI-6

present and historical uses; sources of pollution; and damages to use
from pollution and other causes.

Second, there must be technical management information which includes
those aspects of management v/hich determine best use of an estuarine
system from a scientific and technical standpoint. For example, it
would be useless to manage an estuary for oyster production if the
habitat in its natural state were not suitable for oysters. To
resolve questions of best estuarine use, necessary information v;ould
include the following: size and shape; existing water quality; amount
of water quality degradation; sources and types of wastes; climate,
hydrology, circulation, ecology, present and potential habitat value;
physical modification, batiiymetry, and bottom conditions. The list of
required management information, both institutional and technical, is •
organized into 14 Handbook of Descriptors sections. A brief descrip-
tion of each of these sections and the types of information they are
designed to contain follows:

Section 1 identifies each estuarine subdivision accordino to its type,
location in the United States, including States, counties, congres-
sional districts, and the systems to which it is tributary.

Section 2 describes the physical structure of each estuarine subdivision;
including its size, shape, total water area, area of marshland, climate,
and any artificial circulation-modifying structures in the system.

VI-7

Section 3 gives those areas which are owned by various political
subdivisions, or which are zoned and under the control of special
districts or management comoacts ; areas of parks and other recrea-
tion areas; and a list of the management compacts with particular
interest in the estuarine zone.

Section 4 describes the hydrology of the estuarine systeir, including
data on river flow and identification of major flow regulation
structures.

Section 5 includes economic statistics on population, extent of
urbanization, industrialization, commercial build-up, emnloyment,
etc.

Section 6 describes the oceanography of the area, including tidal
regime, current patterns, and tidal prism.

Section 7 includes water quality information, listing sxtremes and
variations and pertinent typical values in many water quality
parameters.

Section 8 includes information on sedimentation and bottom character-
istics of the area.

Section 9 describes the uses to which the area is put.

Section 10 describes sources of wastes, both municipal and industrial
It also includes a summary of the total amounts of v/aste and an
individual listing of major waste discharges.

VI-8

Section 11 includes statistics on use damages, both in terms of
quantity of use lost and amount of monetary damage.

Section 12 included a list of immediate pollution abatement needs.
Rv'PCA is now in process of developing a system of records maintenance
on these needs and progress in meeting them so this section has
been deleted from the Inventory until a later date.

Section 13 includes the water quality standards as presently approved
for each State, and the acreages reserved for various beneficial uses
as required by the standards.

Section 14 presents a list of past and current studies in the system
identified by date, tyne of study, and the person or organization
responsible.

Each of these major sections contain many individual parameters which
were selected to attempt a full description of pertinent characteristics.

SELECTION OF DESCRIPTORS

Four criteria governed the selection of descriptors:

Availability

Although selected primarily on the basis of importance to management,
where possible parameters reported on a national basis by a Federal
agency v/ere selected. Elsewhere, data in standard professional usage
in the respective fields v/ere used. Provision has been made to include
additional types of data as the state-of-the-art advances.

VI-9
Meaning

Each descrifitor is a valiil ineasurG of some system characteristic

needed for either technical or institutional estuarine manaqemf^nt

purposes .

Compatitiil ity

Each descriptor is cither directly informative or can he conipr^red
or combined i/i Ih other di.-scriptors to ho nieaninqfiil . For example,
excefit in extreme cases, tid(.> ranne alone is not a useful manaqe-
ment statistic; but in combination with the ared of the estuarv, it
can help in determininn flushinq characteristics and overall al)ility
of the system to rid itself of pollutants.

Uniqueness

Each descriptor is a fundamental datum; tl'at is, it cannot be derived

from other information included in the Inventor/.

For two reasons, 1950 has been set is an arbitrary cut-off date for
mist historical data. First, water quality and waste discharge
information, and many kinds of economic data extremely nertinent to
the needs of th.is Study, were rarel / collected before that date.
Second, ecoloqical and bioloqical cfianqes caused by estuarine altera-
tion before that date would scarcely be discernible now, nor could
their causes be traced.

VI-10

SECTION 2. ESTUARINE RERISTEP AREAS

As another means of orqanizinq the pertinent information, a classifi-
cation scheme for the estuarine areas of thp United States was
develooed.

The entire coastline was divided into subdivisions called Estuarine
Register Areas (ERA). (See Figure VI. 1.2)

The object of this division and classification is to seoarate the
coastal area into units within which infomation may be organized
indeoendently. The choice of boundaries for each system was based
on consideration of its water pollution control and resource
management aspects and does not necessarily reflect a scientific or
engineering classification of estuarine systems.

Each coastal system tributary to, or comnosed oartially of, an ocean
or sea is designated a primary system. Estuaries tributary to a
orimary system are secondary systems; those tributary to secondary
systems are tertiary systems; etc. This identification scheme includes
all coastal waters o^ the United States, from the oceans to the limit
of tidal effect. Although somewhat arbitrary, it offers a ineans of
identifyina areas without a cumbersome latitude and longitude arrange-
ment and permits the addition of ERA's as needed.

As a further classification and identification of Estuarine Renister
Areas, a descriotion classification scheme in terms of dominating

vi-n

1
/ \

\ \

/ \

w

/ \

w

/ \

w

^

w

>v

/

\ v

\

^

\ \

\

^

\ 1

\

\ V

^•

\

\ \

/

\

\ I

z

\

\ \

/

/

^-^=^-^^.

\ \]

(0

Z

/

/
/

^%^

\ ^

UJ

1-

/

1 _

_ —

— '

tn

V /

t— ^=r==^=^"V^

>

1 V

05

1 \

I

CD

\ \

3
CO

/ 'O 1
/ 0/ J

\ <T \

V

o

\ < {

\

z

; \\

1 ^ (

\ ^ '

y\

o

1 VV

\ ^

\\

I

1 \\

\

\ \

O)

\ \\

\

\ \

z

\

\ \

\

UJ

\ \<X

\

\ \

1-

\ v\

)

I

\

>

CO

1^ \y

\ - ^^t=

"^

* \

c

UJ

z

1^ y

o

0)

a.

^\ ^

u

o

<

y^ ,

3

1

yi

\ I

UJ

^\ \

i

u.
O

o

\

"7 \

H

\

\

I \

1

X

z

\

V.

UJ

\

)

^^ ^^-^ _ -

,„^

I

^

/^

^v^

o

\

/^ ^— ^ __— -^

b

^

1

in

4^

/

/

/

\

N

V

..^

VI-12

physical shape and configuration was develooed (See Table VI. 1.1
and Figure IV. 4. 23). Basically, the classifications ranqe from a
smooth shoreline to the deep indentation of a fjord. While not
quantitative, this system is workable for the estuaries and
estuarine zones of the United States.

yi-13

TABLE VI. 1.1
Ilorphological Classifications

Type
Number Description

1.1 Smooth shoreline without inlets.

1.2 Smooth shoreline with inlets.

1.3 Smooth shoreline with small epibayr^ients

2.1 Indented shoreline without islands.

2.2 Indented shoreline with islands.

3.0 Marshy shoreline.

4.0 Unrestricted river entrance.

5.1 Embayment with Coastal Jrainage.

5.2 Embayment with upland river flow.

6.0 Fjord.

VI-14

SECTION 3. COLLECTION OF INFORMATION

The sources of information for the list of descriptors were many
and varied. They include nearly all agencies of the Department of
the Interior, many agencies of other Federal Denartments, individual
States, and private entities. Table VI. 1.2. lists the primary sources
of information for each major section of the Inventory. Note that
the types of information obtained from each source are related
directly to its operational missions.

In most cases, the information was obtained by direct request to
the prime source agency. Where a compilation on a regional basis
already existed this created no problems, however, in some cases,
as with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Sports
Fisheries and Wildlife, it was necessary to compile some of the
basic statistics. In most cases, the agencies were extremely
cooperative in supplying the available information. In two cases,
for the States of Alaska and Texas, contracts were negotiated to
obtain Inventory data from widely scattered State files. Thousands
of additional items, however, were obtained from a wide variety of
other sources.

The operational missions of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration make it the primary federal data sourc° for informa-
tion on water nuality related to water pollution waste discharges
and water gualitv standards in interstate waters. The major reoosi-
tory of interstate water pollution data, then, is the FWPCA regional
offices. However, in all intrastate waters the States have primary

VI-15

responsibility for water nollution problems. Thus, they are actually
the primary source for the bulk of water quality and waste discharge
information and in many cases it was necessary for the regional
offices to work through the States for that information.

To nrovide information for in-depth case studies, a groun of
Estuarine Register Areas for which data were known to be available
were chosen and desinnated Selected Estuarine Renister Areas (SEaA)
(Table VI. 1,3). With this designation went first priority for data
collection. Information on these areas represents the most complete
sections of the Inventory.

VI-16

o

■!->

HI

>

3

O

s_
o

CJ

a.

"^ o

c

c:

c:

o

o

o

•r-

• r-

■r—

4->

■!->

4-"

+J

ft3

ca

c

(U

S-

s~

z>

S-

4->

+->

■

+J

to

in

£-

in

•r—

u

•r—

o

•r—

C

14-

C

r—

c

■f—

-t—

•f—

O

•r—

E

, —

£_

>

e

■C

-■>

■o

o

■o

<

1—

[

c:;

>.

<=£

o

o

03

OJ

o

S-.

-tj

in s-

.:i

>

S-

+->

r^

S- +J

^ c:

01

1-

4->

c:

r\i

o c

1 ' c

O

3

c

o

CJ o

•r—

•1 —

t/T

o

CJ>

c/)
O

•r~

— 1 +J

O

U

o

c

c c:

O o

^>

C

•r-

r;3

>.

C'

il

e: o

S-

O

o

+->

C

CJ

a

Ll. -r-

t: 1 u

>

CJ

rj

• r—

>

+-'

4J

-i-j

n CJ

S-

UJ

-rj

■M

S-

3

CO

4- n

c;

•I— L.

r3

o

3

3

•1—

C' r—

C 1

^1

C ;

in

o

r—

C>0

, —

Lu

1

" \

■5 t-

in

c

1 —

c

l/j o

-^

O O

1 —

QJ

o

^"

Q-

-(->

r CI-

Ci

:.; _o

ro

d

Tj

C-

r3

S-

S-

u

•r—

C

CJ

s-

o

C' s-

Z)

H- ^'.J

• f—

in

fO

S-

*»—

<u

r--

C.^ <D

J",

O 3

C-'

3

o

i^~i

+J

L/l

•4->

4- J

r ".

o

t:.j

-(->

+->

O

fO

>. fd

+->

i —

1/1

fO

in

r—

4--

C r:

V-

C M-

o

4-

rtJ

Z t

CD

c

O

t

(J

o.I (_;

a)

C

c

+->

vU

^

c_

o

1 —

03

CJ

TC)

3

fr

3

■P' — •

CI

fO

■t-J

s-

r^

. S-

o

<- ^^

•

u

•

i-

u-,

•

OJ

a

(^; r,

QJ

ro O

I. )

• f—

CI

OJ

U-)

-o

s-

T-i

S-

n. s-

M-

■o

CJ

<u

3

• C-

n

c ) rs

•

4-

•

OJ

T~

•

u.

c-.-i

:. u-

c ^

C ' i -1

:::j

•^.J"

1--'

U-

H-

~>

CO -^

<: —

in

QJ
O

S-

o

+->

ro

OJ

E

S-

-l-J

CJ

CD

S-

o
-l-J

c:

CD

>

o

ro

s_

CJ

o

.(—

10

M-

CL'

• r—

L—l

-M

C

HT'

CD

c

-o

S-

o

J >
J ->
LJ

ro

>>

■M

f-

o

C

"ci.

^j

Ol

ro

•r-

E

s-

-0

CL

C-.

CD

o

o

CjO

^—

<u

ro

;■»

-a

>

C)

+->

c:

cu

o

• r—

ro

r >

CT

f~-

^'>

ro

in

oi

M-

r—

3

+-)

o

o

ro
o

^ '

o

V.J

•f—

i-

;^

!-

..I

10

O

•r—

1 Cj

^

+-)

-3

>>

■*->

ro

CD

o->

dZ

r '-

OO

CI

VI-17

c

C

C

C

o

o

o

o

•r-

• r-

•r-

•r-

•»->

+->

■!->

+J

ra

TJ

ro

ro

s-

S-

S-

s-

■M

+->

+->

+->

in

l/l

00

00

•r-

OJ

•r—

•r-

• r-

eu

C

^-

c

c

c

M-

•^

•r-

•r-

• f—

■ r—

■ r—

E

r—

E

E

E

^—

X3

T3

-"a

■a

"O

■D

<:

' —

<c

c::

CC

•r—

OJ

r—

^"

f^

r—

1 —

~^

u

O

00

o

o

o

10 T-

t-

TD

Ol

l/l

S-

S-

s_

-o

s- >

-t-"

C

S-

+->

4->

•(->

c

OJ s-

c

03

tl

Ol CD

c

c

c

ro

O OJ

o

o

<D U

o

o

o

>>

c: oi

(J

00

C -r-

CJ

o

CJ

1/1

I.

•r—

OJ

oo

•1- >

tu

o

C O)

>>

c

• r—

CD i-

c

c

c

■•->

c >♦-

a;

o

S_

U-

C OJ

o

o

o

r

c

LU •>-

0)

<u

>

• r—

OJ

LJ OT

•r-

o

<u

r—

tj

1/1

S-

+->

^

^—

■13

■l-J

■l->

jr.

>

4- -O

•1—

c

3

13

1/1

ro

M- ^

3

3

3

00

c

o >—

>

0) oo

f—

• r—

• r-

O •*->

r—

r—

,—

• r—

s-

l*_

, —

U-

u

, —

f—

r—

u.

l/l !S

OJ

OJ

r—

O

S-

(/I fO

o

o

o

(U

c

Ul

Q

ftl

to

o.

■!->

QJ

Q. a;

O-

Q.

D-

+->

c

s- -o

o

OJ

S-

i- IZ

s_

-Continued

al Estuari

o c

J^'

4-

c

S-

o

EI

o

i-

t-

S_

o

C_3 ro

S-

O

CT

•r-

0)

C-

O

o o

CJ

QJ

Ol

o.

ro

o

""

+J

(y^

t_)

•r—

+->

-(->

-M

oo

>.-^

Q.

•M

r—

ro

00

>^'—

so

ro

_ro

00

E 00

c:

O 4-

-r-^

a;

M-

M-

e -Q

3^;

i*- OJ

S- -r-

r—

OJ

O)

o

4->

O

O

S- 3

O -M

-' U-

ro

F"

C3

r^

fO

< o.

f—

,—

^~

ro

c

■(->

=3

03

+ J

3

3

n3

ro

ro

3 +->

• •

o

S-

•

fO

U

C/0

ra

(D

• •

S-

s_

t.

ro oo

t/1 CO

•r—

fO

t/T

<u

cu

OJ

QJ

IT) OO

o

V

OJ

O)

; c

-l-J

Q.

S-

"U

O)

s-

S-

T3

-a

-3

S- Ol

• •

ro

OJ

•

3

OJ ^

3

3

> •

QJ

Ol

OJ

3 .r:

rD - ^

•:-

Q

m

.^

Ll-

1—

CQ

CD

ZD ZZ)

U-

Ll-

li-

CJ t—

o

01

Cl.

o

to
cu

10

Z3

o

D_

1/1

4-

Ol

O

CI

ro

1/1

r^

(U

ro

u

r2

s-

3

GJ

o

i/i

t/0

r:)

CJ

OJ

*- -

,_

o

S-

+->

i/i

c:

00

CL'

o

-o

• r—

<_)

s_

T3

ro

3

c

•o

•M

o

c

C/1

•f—

ro

-»->

4->

+->

3

oo

C

1 —

CU

r-~

>,

S-

o

-l-J

s-

Q.

• r—

3

1

c_>

Ol

ro

+->

3

T3

ro

o-

C

•1—

ro

■a

S-

GJ

OJ

+j

I^

4->

00

c:

ro

ro

»— <

O-

c-}

VI-18

TABLE VI. 1.3
Selected Estuarine Register Areas (SERA)
By Biophysical Region

North Atlantic

Penobscot Bay

Merrimack River- Ipswich Bay
Broad Sound (Boston Harbor)
Narragansett Bay

Middle Atlantic

Connecticut River
Hudson River
Raritan River
Delaware Bay
Pamlico Sound

Chesapeake Bay

James River

Potomac River

Patapsco River (Baltimore Harbor)

Patuxent River

Choptank River

Nanticoke River

Wicomico River

South Atlantic

Charleston, S.C. Coastal
Savannah Estuary
St. John's River

Carribean

Biscayne Bay Coastal
Pacific Islands ■"

Kaneohe Bay

Culf of Mexico

Tampa Bay
Apalachicola Bay
Mobile Bay
Biloxi Bay
Mississippi Delta
Barataria Bay
Atchafalaya Bay
Calcasieu Pass - Lake
Galveston Cay
Corpus Christi Bay

Pacific Southwest

San Francisco Coastal
Morro Day
flewport Bay
San Diego Bay

Pacific northwest

Humboldt Bay

Coos Bay

Yaquina Bay

Tillamook Bay

Columbia River

llillapa Bay

Hrays Harbor

Bel 1 i ngham-Anacortes

Hood Canal

Elliott Bay (Seattle Harbor)

Alaska

Gastineau Channel (Juneau)
Cook Inlet

VI-19

SECTION 4. PRESENT STATUS OF THE INVENTORY

Presently, the Inventory consists of some 150 magnetic tapes of data
containing more than 200 million individual pieces of information;
several voluminous compilations of information not amenable to auto-
mation; hundreds of charts, maps, papers, books, and files; the
complete coastline of the conterminous United States on microfilm;
several thousand index cards containing a detailed bibliography; and
considerable documentation ranging from sten-by-step instructions for
coding each column of each data card to multi -volume reoorts on
sedimentation and ecology. It is unfortunate that the above represents
complete and detailed information on no single estuary or estuarine
zone in the United States. In a few cases only one or two crucial
sections may be missing, but for the remainder there are large know-
ledge gaps which will be discussed in Chapter 2 of this Part.
Overall, probably only about one-third to one-half of the existing
pertinent information is stored in the Inventory data bank.

In compiling the mass of data mentioned above, pure research was
found to be rare. The availability of data depends on there having
been a sound economic reason for its collection. Among Federal or
State agencies, for example, data is gathered as a matter of agency
mission and is usually readily available; i.e., the Bureau of Census
and the Office of Business Economics function as data-qatherers
and can provide nationwide information as a matter of course.

VI-20

Elsev/here, data may be collected for a sinole special purpose,
such as a Corps of Engineers project study or an FWPCA technical
assistance study. These usually result in a single report which
may or may not include all the data gathered during the study, and
which almost certainly would not be included in a nationwide
compilation. In the last instance, each datum must be pulled from
widely separated regional or district office files and arranged in a
uniform manner to be useful on a broad scale.

A third large category of available data is that which is routinely
gathered but is not routinely published. Included here are water
pollution surveillance data, daily river flows, dredging statistics,
and many, many others.

The routinely published information was, of course, the easiest to
obtain. The decentralized report files were somewhat more difficult
to acguire. Less significant because of the relatively small
volumes of information involved, but most difficult to acquire, were
the data from special surveys. In all cases, if required data are
not in published reports, it is extremely difficult to locate and
acquire then.

Of the published pertinent information, virtually all has either
been included directly in the Inventory or has been summarized to
be included in some form.

VT-21

Several hundred thousand items from sources other than those
mentioned above have also been entered.

As the process of collectinq information developed, revisions in the
descriptor list became necessary. In certain cases descriptors
listed were not available on a basis broad enouqh to be useful,
and an alternate descriptor which would provide the same type of
information was substituted. In other cases no alternate descriptor
could be selected. Table VI. 1.4 lists these and contains comments on
impact of their loss on manaqenent nlanninq.

In summary, some data are available but have never been comoiled;
some data are available but will never be released; some data
are available in massive quantities bjjt have never been extracted;
and other data have never been taken at all. Numerous examples of
each kind were encountered. Where sufficient data were not avail-
able to describe on estuarine attribute adequately, alternative
data were qathered and analyzed.

VI-22

CJ

<

D.

a.

^ M-

<o

••-> O

Z3

>4-

•r—

r—

o

S >> m

4->

>

to

m oj

0)

OJ

3 -.-

3

O 1-

J

f.5

o

lO

r—

>

c

r—

O «J

<D

OJ

c

>

> c

■o

T-

Irt o

••->

3

o

>,ta

O

3

r- «->

X

J-

•

•^ <o

+J

Ol

I- -o

i/i

m

c

<o

E

c

•r~

VI •—

lU

o

r—

m r—

•♦->

u

w—

Ol ..-

(/■

•f—

UM-

>,

S-

<«-

<u

€/l

o

C -tJ

4-

o

ll>

0)

O

■>-> ro

c

>

<*-

O X

•^-

•r-

C LU

i-

■•->

in

nj

u

OJ

in

3

3

^

•V- •

+J

l-

<1>

c

in

+->

.c

c o

<U

1/1

<J

o -.-

OJ

w

t- +J

<*-

•o

■4-> O

o

in

lO 3

<D

3

U l-

1/1

-C

O

4) +J

Ol

4->

f^

+-> Ul

O-

i-

■— Ol

>,<•-

<n

<t -o

••->

O

>

CO

o

O
CO

LU

Q

CO

w

>

111

-J

CO

<

<t
t—
1/1

1=1

z
«t

q:

o

DC
<_)

>> o -o

.— Q- C
C I/O <T3
O

ii_ a»
1/) -<-

0) 3 •—

irt rt3 *0
lO 0) >—
U 1- f-

o >, c
e JD (o

B en t/1

<t- o
O 91

■•-> CO

<u

c

i-

0) 4->

m

E m

01 <t)

«•

i- O

m

3 O

■»->

</)

t-

m E

ns

i£

u

<4-

in

>>

3 in

0)

r— <o

>

--^1.

O. OJ

t.

0)

5-

3

• <o

lO

J3

vt

«J

u •—

o

^-

CJ
LU
lO

>-

a:
O

•.- l/l •!-

Lu 01 U.

o

Q

<o

O)

I.

OJ f-
jC O
•t-> Q.
O m

0) >
T3 lO

U
<t)
l/l

Ol

c:

OJ

^__

cr

■>->

c

irt

j->

•«—

IT3

c

1/1

o

(U

<J

E

(O

0)

f^

cr

i-

TO

(O

o

c

c

>*-

o

ID

t-

E

c

^->

(O

lO

cr.

^—

c

c

o.

•V—

Ol

+J

••->

■!->

l/l

c

01

•»—

<u

r—

X

E

O

Ol

0)

E

D

o

tt)

<o

o

jr

c

+J

<o

<D

E

-cr

r—

■fJ

1 —

0)

to

>

t-

o

(-

in

<4-

<u

c

■o

0)

1-

•*^

-C

o

in

01

c

I-

>i o

o.

1-

o

E

lO

o

3

+J

u

+->

in

m

3

«£

Oi

E

<*- <D
•r- OJ
O C
O) •.-
Cl.—
l/l 0)

■o
a>
■M o

3 -t-J

-«- <D
E .—

<U -i-

x: in

+J in

o

<D O

■•-• E

<D T-

-o

0)

in I-

••- TO

3 O

o

••-> C
••- 0)

3 E

O)

en

• <o

l/l c

Ol iC

•^ E

+J

1- ItJ

■!->

C M-
Ol o

OJ

T3 I— <U
C «— >

(D <D O)
I- r—

l/l O)
c •—
0) <o
Ol I.
•.- <U

.— ■•-> -o

lO

«t- 5

trt o
■o 0> >—
01 C O)
C O JD

o <u
■o •—

>, O) XI
•— > ID

ITJ 01 ••-

D> l/l lO

O) <U >

-J t~ lO

m

OJ

Ol

c

Ol
ID

c
o

1/1

c
o

l-

.— l-

I — in OJ

3 C Ci

U- o o
t- o
■•-> o

• <D
C M r—
(D •>- ID

I— c o

0- <o o

D^i—

<0 O 0)
(J 4J

O O- ID
•— C ■!->

.,_ in
s_ c ^^
o c •—

ID ID
<D^ I-

+J d O)
ID TD

*-" C7- O)
in c ''^

'•♦-> 1-

f— l/l O)
ID -t- >—
C X f—
O <U 3

1- <«-
O^ It-
ID O 5
J- O

<u >—
<D Oic—

•— "O ID

X3 Ol
ID •— T3

-^ J —
I- O 3

o c o

c +->

<D 3
i- O •—

s- x: <u

3 •»-> >

u T- <u

J ■—

i-

x: +-> 0)

■1-' o x:

OJ c ■»->

x: o

J i- c

O ID

l/l Ol D^
CL C C
3 -f- 1-

0 c x:

1- c: m

01 ID •>-

o. O X2

C ID

•»- O) ••->

c

t/1 '
■.- s-

X ID
0) 3

o- <U

3
O C

■»-• X)

Ol

O ID

•.- ei
ID a>

HI

>«- >.

o x:

u

>, J-

4-> ID
•.- J-

in OJ
l/l -«-
O) x:
o
OJ Ol

c x:
*->

Ol

x: c

c

i-

01

o;

Ol

E

> cr

C

o.

01 c

T—

o

Oi

2-^

C

f—

r—

O •!->

c

01

.a

x: ID

ID

>

•r~

t—

^—

01

in

• 0)

Q.

■o

c

01 t-

o

1 —

o;

^i—

O.XI c

c

^^,

(D

1«

<D O

■

c

OJ

i~~ •«—

"L

■o

o

l-

1- *J

ID

Ol

ID ID

3

■t-J

DlM-

> E

■!->

ID

O)

o

<D C

in

O

J-

o

01

o

in

0) <4-

^—

S-

0)

l- c

r—

o

E

ID ■.-

ID

c

ID

3

01

Ol

C

in 0)

■•->

01

c

O-f—

O

XI

•r—

01

3 ■!->

ID

c

.c

O -M

in

o

+J

S- ••-

O

ID

tvl

* —

Dlr-

+J

x:

i.

o

■tJ

c

Ol

a>

c

E

f—

o.

c

o

o

rvi

01

>

1

Oi

Q

m

^^

c

ID

o

C

•r-

o

+J

•r>

u

Ol

0)

01

l/l

q:

••- oix:

3 ••-'
o

J- -D
x: c

l*-

o

on

OJ

■M

ID

1-

•*-

o

l/l

i-

o

■u

ID

<J

-o

•

c

Irt

•r-

4-»

c

l-

ID

o

4->

•*-D

3

ID

^—

E

r^

o

0)

c

x:

+J

<*-

o

OJ

s-

en

lO

c

0)

x:

in

ifl

OJ

3

x:

1-

>f-

1/1

■o

0)

01

o.

in

■*->

c

O)

1-

l.

3

O

T3

C

rtJ

l/l

4-»

C

0>

u

J-

3

<_>

ID

O

■•*

t/1

>)

x:

o.

>,

1

x:

O-

U3

ID

U

C

Ol

o

o

c:

•tJ

lO

<J

01

0)

(J

l/)0

^^•E

c

3

E > OJ OJ t/1

c in > ■(->
OJ O 01 c: OJ
E CL»— OJ x:

■o T3
OJ c

l/l ID

«»- (J

o •.-

n-

OJ •»-

o^ u

"O O)

OJ o

I — l/l

3

o -

C VI

.^ +J
o

i~ OJ
OJ <4-
.— <4-

•— OJ

3

ID TD

OJ

O -t-J

+-> VI

OJ ■
■D S-
OJ Ol
•»J +J
m c
O) 1-
o^

D D^
3 C
l/l ••-
+J
OJ VI
XI 1-
X
TP O)

'3 >,
O XI

u

in 1
l/l E
c: OJ
o •—

1- X3

■•-> o

U l-
lO Q.

l/l
OJ

OJ
l/l o

•t-J

C OJ

o

■I-' VI

ID S-

> OJ

i~ OJ

01 c

t/1 •*-

c 01

o c

(_> LU

t- o
o

l/l t/1
o.

OJ i-
■Cl o
■U l_)

■o

3
■M
OJ m
-c m

T3 •!-> OJ -^

c in
ID x: ID c

■•-> u o
l/l -»- ■•-

OJ 3 X -M
T flj ID

•M •*- E
••-in C

4-> U ID O

c ••- <*-

ID •»->«♦- C

3 t/1 O f- •

t- C O OJ

■M OJ O C r-

C 4-> ••- ^

OJ O -^ 4-> ID

E ID D. trt t—

•t- 1_ OJ O T-

"O ID O E ID

01 x: X •— >

l/> U OJ ID ID

T3

C

ID

m

•!->

a

OJ

E

■0

OJ

to

c:

0

1

•r-

4->

00

ID

«•

c

C

0

OJ

•^•

E

4J

u

-0

0)

OJ

l/l t/1

VI-23
SECTION 5. PROHLEMS AND SOLUTIONS

Because no section in the Inventor/ contains all of the data deemed
necessary, there follov/s a brief discussion of each Inventory
section in v/hich maior problems were encountered and the measures
taken to overcome them. The results of these actions are reflected
primarily in this renort and not in the data entries of the
Inventory.

Handbook Section 2. Area Description
Problem: 'lany of the necessary data are implicit on
available maps and charts, but very few measurements
of estuaries and their associated marshes and tidelands
have ever been extracted or orqanized. Not even the
II, S. Army Corns of Enoineers v/hich nerforms, or issues
permits for, most of the dredqinn in the Nation, was
able to provide information on spoil areas and fills
therein. No consistent data were available on landfills
of any kind, whether industrial, residential, or sanitary.

Solution: Msinq n. S. Coast and ^.eodetic Survey' naviqation
charts and a 1940 II. S. Coast and Oeodetic Survev of tidal
shoreline measurements, the areas of many estuaries, marshes,
and snoil areas have been hand measured and comniled. 'lany
fills and snoil areas have also been

VI-24

estimated by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife who stress that most of these data are
only estimates, not measurements. Their consis- .
tency, however, constitutes best-source information
and as such they are included in the Inventory.
Hand boo k_ Section 3. Managing Fntities
Problem: Legal ownershio at the federal level is
available information; but state and local ownership,
as well as zoning information, is practically unobtain-
able at other than the level of the responsible organiza-
tions, generally municipality or county. Some soecial
study information on specific areas constitutes most of
the available data.

Solution: Based on material gathered through the Deoartment
of Housing and Urban Develooment and the Bureau of the
Budget, as well as several oublic and orivate renorts and
documents, it was possible to identify almost 200 federal,
interstate, state-federal, county, and sub or multi-county
planning groups who receive federal monies and may have
concern in_. the estuarine zone. This must be regarded only
as a steo in the right direction.

Handbook Section 5. Stage of Development

Problem- Some pertinent statistics on pcnnnmic develon-
ment were found to be available at no lower ^ev^^ t^an ^v
State. 0 number of statistics, shov/n as available in the
Departments of Agriculture and Cnmmerce cpnsus catalogs.

VI-25

were added to the descriptors 1n hones of alleviatinq
the problem. However, examinations of the computer
printouts of both qrouos showed significantly incomplete
or erratic inclusions of information.

Solution: Attack from all available anqles. Some data
are Included from the United States Department of
Agriculture, the Office of Business Economics, reports
contained 1n the "Statistical Abstract of the United
States," and still other Information came from special
reports on specific areas. This section is still not
satisfactorily complete particularly for Alaska and
Hawaii since data on these States is not Included on
current data taoes procured from the Departments of
Agriculture and Commerce.

Handbook Section 6. Physical Oceanography

Problem: Tidal information for the entire coastline is

fairly complete, but actual measurements of currents and

current speeds are sparse. Some Information is available

on major ports and areas where special studies have been

made.

Solution: Since the data have never been taken, this
problem has no present solution.

VI-26

Handbook Section "U Water Quality

Problem: Because there apoarently have been no
consistent monitoring programs carried out on the
federal or state level, most of the available data
Is only for those areas which have serious habitat
or pollution problems.

Solutions: Those areas which lack water quality data
were compared with available "Stage of Development"
data. There Is a strong correlation between lack of
data and lack of population pressures. While demo-
graphic Information Is no substitute for water Quality
data. It does at least serve as an Indicator of potential
problem areas.

Handbook Section 8. Sediments and Sedimentation
Problem: Sampling of estuarlne sediments has apparently
been done principally as a part of a specific U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers project Investigation or as part of
a research project. The majority of this sampling has
been limited to surface samples of the bottom, with only
occasional core samples. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
navigation channel data Is, of course, the best source,
but Is still extremely limited.

Solution: Although little concrete data exists, much has
been written on the subject. Two contracts were lot with

VI-27

U.S. Geolngical Survey to investigate the literature
and additional contracts were let to perform sediment
case studies in estuaries of various types.

Handbook Section 9. Uses

Problem: While commercial use data -ire generally available,
recreational use is not so easilv documented. Only in areas
v;here intensive studies have been made are th3se concrete
data on participation days, boat use, swimming, sports
fishing, etc. The same is true of use by fish and wildlife.

Solution: Examination of related data--fishino and hunting
license sales, the results of creel surveys, the number of
marinas and boat r>lips--permitted extrapolation wherever
feasible. Many of the data included in this area are estimates
by the field staff of the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and
Wildlife and State commercial and snorts fishing agencies.

Handbook Section 10. Sources of Pollution
Problem: While the locations of most of the major \/aste
discharges are J.nown, information on the characteristics of
individual waste effl jents is extremely limited. They are
known accurately only for the largest municipal waste dis-
charges and for waste discharqes in areas which have been the
subject of an enforcement or technical assistance study. In
particular, knowledge of th? characteristics of individual
industrial waste discharges is very poor, anc data on them are
extremely scattered. This is also true of other waste discharges

VI-28

such as agricultiiral land drainage, waste from recreational
facilities, and the specific effects of watercraft wastes in
estuaries.

Solution: The principal waste characteristics of each major
type of industry with locations in the coastal zone were
defined, then combined with known water use by various of
these existing industries, where the processes and types of
treatment are known. The results of such combinations are
very general at best and have been automated in the Inventory
only where actual measurements v^ere encountered.

Handbook Section 11. Use Damages

Problem: Concrete use damages information is very rare.
Although the citizen can easily see and smell the results of
pollution in many areas, documentary proof is another matter.
Only in cases which have been the subject of an enforcement
action of one kind or another, has there been anv real effort
to prove a damage to use. Even then, it has been much easier
to get inform(?tion on commercial damages than on those recrea-
tional or aesthetic use.

Damage to a snecies not of commercial or snorts value is almost
impossible to document, although it mav be critical to tlie food
chain. Most of the renaining information is subjective esti-
mation, by local residents or political entities, which provide
coverage limited by the intensity of local interest in estuary

VI -29

or estuarine zone. Unfortunately, it appears that many of
these estimates were chosen for dramatic effort, rather than
as an actual indication of damace caused.

Solution: An effort has been made to eliminate the wild
estimate and to enter only actual measurements. Data consid-
ered when makinq such an estimate would include such items
as declining water quality, decrease of pollution-sensitive
species and increase of pollution-tolerant species, closed
shellfish beds, etc.

Handbook Section 13. Water Quality Standards
Problem: The water quality standards information for the
entire coastline is complete, but the various States use
different bases Tor classifying their waters and reserving
them for particular uses. The cateqories of use sometimes
do not fit overtly with those shown in the Act which set un
the water quality standards procedures. Also, the standards
frequently refer to an entire water area or to a part of an
area with such vaoueness that obtaining an idea of actual
acreage included is impossible.

Solution: The uses which are allowed were often availdble
and have been entered in the Inventory. The rest of the
problem does not appear amenable to solution at tiiis time.

It is anparent that while there is a wide variety of information on
the estuaries of the L'nited States, thfre are some very large gaps

VI-30

from a management standpoint, fluch water quality, waste discharge,
ecological, and habitat information is simply not available because
there has been no consistent proqram of monitorinq or collecting
basic data in the estuarine zone. Economic data are available down
to the county level for most commercial enterprises, but quantitative
information in terms of recreation and aesthetic values is sadly
lacking. While the resources available to this Study have not permit-
ted a thoroughly exhaustive compilation of data (with the exception
of a few areas), the very large amount of material compiled does
show where the sianificant gans in information are. These naps are
such as to severely limit adequate analysis of quantifiable values
in estuaries as a national entity excent for commercial Iv and
economically reported uses. Some solutions to this problem will be
discussed in Chanter 2 of this Part.

Vl-31
SECTION 6. ALTO'lATION OF THE INVEHTORY

The products of an inventory are neat, I'/ell-orqanized tables, and
lists containing the information required in tne subject area. The
National Estuarine Inventory, tlien, required a technique which
could be used to store, retrieve, and maninulate a wide variety of
information types to describe t!ie iynan.ic conditions of t.ie Nation's
884 era's. The two prerequisites were huge capacity and great flexi-
bility. To satisfy these needs, all Inventory data amenable to tiie
technique are automated.

All of the automated in-f'ormation has been placed on niagnetic taoe,
including both numeric and narrative information. I^etrieval is
possible either by Estuarine rcjister Area number (Table VI. 1.5) or
by the individual descriptor itself (Table VI.l.C), making it possible
to call for any combination of descriptors ^or any combination of
Estuarine "!eqister Areas.

Programming "as also developed to secure printouts in a finished
format so tiiat if necessary, printout from the Inventory could be
photographed directly for inclusion in a report as a table (TA31.E
VI. 1.7) or as computerized plots (Figures VI. 1.3 and VI. 1.4). "ost
of the tables in this report -./ere prepared in this fashion (TADLE
VI. 1.8). The caoability for storinn narrative information also
increases the svstem's usefulness as a resoository for management
information.

Although much qualitative information is automated in the Inventory,

VI-32

some such information is not amenable to automation, or is less
expensive to compile by other methods into an equally useful form.
Specifics on current institutional arrangements and broad scale
descriptive materials are examples.

Access to the available information will be open to all Federal,
State, and local agencies through FWPCA.

VI -33

TABLE VI. 1.6
EXAMPLE OF A PARTIAL ERA RETRIEVAL

NOTES:

(1) The followinq five pages are from the Inventory's
master file summary tapes. The shortened titles and
coded entries shown are used in the master only. Full
titles and code translations will be used in reoional ,
state, or local level retrievals.

(2) The ERA presented. Eel River, California, is neither
the most, nor the least complete. It is fairly typical
of the smaller ERA's.

(3) In addition to the ERA level data shown, other files
contain information on the land areas adjacent to the

Eel River. These include populations, employment statistics,
industrial locations, etc., as well as off-shore oceano-
qraphic and fisheries data.

(4) The pages shown were chosen to illustrate the man-
ner of organization rather than to provide data.

(5) The information contained in the Inventory files is
that qathered to provide quantitative information for the
National Estuarine Pollution Study.

VI-34

o o

o o

_( c

lOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
DOOCOOOCOOOOOOOOOOO
ICOCOO-COOOOrstCOOOO — (D

c

O

< o

-J o

LJ U^

in

i-fh-rpcc — r, (--. ^iT'-t^-tra-c

Z —

C 'T

1^

— I

: oj z 1^

- •— — XI a
I— Z ttClC^_ _*,.

I Oa<lZ— 3 h-t^c

Id- — u,>ujk-'X'0 aa<u.

_.OQ.u) «10<DXC OiC

uj C <

: _( — X

. — ►- I

L/^

•-^ Z X OJ I

C 1-^ I
.. z e. — "-

Oj I/- > ro
--f 3 ij Z c- l/l >

a. r- ►-

LA t

LU ~ l'^ C

-J I— Oj
-J ■ > OJ

Ct<_J <Z_jt-<

u-Q-rit—*! — _i2* ^-. *_

<;> Ct-oZu. Qt H-tt IC
2 — i/^— UJ — cu-Ljji; ii.<u.0Zaf

_i — Ct-i— Z O_j(_''-Ufr:»-0
UJIWU.X3U- L- I<i— r'>

c cc>-<£i.irt/<iii.i3zi_i
Ciyi l-j "- •— ICi/i^ <3
i-t.3:i-_,u.>-* \n — u->

C'^u-'j~fc-<:u-'_>.'r (_)<■-"
laa — Z r;a.>LtCi/>u.i_' —

C3-t-_j—X<iu.— LLUJ — a X

aC~UJo" >-h-I Q.>_J '-U-t-

lu I > z — *_ <j- re .-' c: T

rOu. c a. Xu.2>->-C.i-

.Xvt^X^-_jr, -
* ^ <J ►- < a < i;

^u, OZIt- -1 i-^^u.

jXZ<*aQ. ^LUZCU-'LUIU — <

? r
I- c

s. c

VI-35

UJ Uj

z

O
o o

xooooooooooooooooocoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOtfNO

^ooocc oooocooaDO'Oooir-' — ■4-«o

. < /\ t A ^ <-rt ^ ■iK\ /-^ t^i ^*i ^^r^^^^* iAi^ifln -♦ l/^ j^ ^ ^

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCi)

X *0*»rsr^Cf''0ir0000'*'4'0*r'^000CC C-www_-ww~,

x^f^J^f^J■^-uO'•-lO''OlN<DC■•*■{EoD■co■•-•oc^QDl^^^f*l*'ff'^-ODO^a3--(^.'^»--^lMl

r\i f\i to ■^ -C ^ '

.-1 a * r^ iT a tr •*■

I(^J■4■f^^^J^^^•Olf^r^J(M^•lf^Ou^r-Of^^-'^teDCl^^^l^Jrof^J

) '- OD ff CC (*> -O CD (

C

o

■^ \f\ ^ t-~ tn

a a.
u- <

02

VI-36

z z

U H>

(/I 1/1

X o

o o o o o o o

3 O

c f^' f^ •-• f^ \r —

ooc

X P-

a^ rr. f- rr\ r^ f^ to

z

D

X rvj

f^

c

e o

c o

1 o

X. to

f- J) ^ ^ IT kT in

1 o

X

< o

z

-J o

—

— IN i-v — C

c
o

C-3

o o
z o

o o

< o

I— 1— uj , — «r Lu y
**•-■> uj I '^ S
cr a _i h- Q. ■-• o

UJ >-■ O «t I— QC u-
a. CO LO ac (/I o •—

Lutp—tl— -IIO

»— I— QQ.30.tJO

fo tT 3- -0 r

__ _ J- _ f^

r" iT -O C C fV' C
m iT J f^ rr- i*"i ^

in

■> -J !.*> h- ro H> c
•T' -j^ iT a ii» j~

> C C> C C J- o c

J. p- f ""■ rr, y ■

' -■. 1^ iT. iT U" L

■ r-i f- r^ r- f- I"

' •— f . r- fv "Ni '

■ J' J' ^l -i- -J -

. rv r.' rs r\j '•.i r

<COCOO.0Of

uj c o f^ '^ ■o >r •

CO

<:

■ c r r c r r c- c -^ (^ c'"C(-r-r-'-c c
■J.J■^rv•J■4■^-T'*■■J■•J■■4■•J>*■4■-J■ *-''*-J'
30C oc occc coco CO cc oocc

-cooccocer
.occcoooc

jCOOCOOOO
JOOOCOOOC-

u. o.
z: u.
< >

.^2

< < z

^ Z Z -f

I— Z ^ f\) r\i fv. fsi r\p c c
]c — . f', rv rs. f\, rv r\' iNi f\'

O D

Z

o U-' c o c c cr o o o
^C; fffTfrrim — ^

tt:i-ccccc:ooo

< <

« .^ I I I I I I I I I 1111

„<: _— .^__„— ,__„,_-^ — — — ._.

c r I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I ' I ' ' ' I ' '

►- ccooc'oc'cc Z r ccccccccec

■ J' c: -J- cr

T S. (

) (T cr X a" T X ff^

3C C

- C ■-■' '

r c tr

iT »T C

i--coccccr —

yr-occccC''^
•lOOOCCCCC

T CC rjCT CC OC CC CCTC O-POCCC
•lOOCOOOCOOOCCCOCCCCCOC

VI-37

</l (/I

o o

1/1 1/1

UJ Uj

o c
o o

-J o

afiTsrof^'T-f^a' — c^■J■|^4•0(T■^^lca■lr^^l^^^X(*^mln^c^^-f^-DC^«^cccocolJ^lrcc■£X c

4J

C

o

o c

z o

.(^mpririru-triPiriTi

1— J -r 'X ■

-t ^- J- -T J-

J -^ ^ J- -J- -J ■
r" r> f\ rv rv. f\. f

00

: <L c C' i, cc occoocccocccccrc

■'occf" occ ctro

• c c c c o r r- c c-

■ 'T 'J- ^ 't ^ ■

• c c c r. c I

crcT>a cT-aercTCT c^c"0■a■:^c^crc*(^cT'C7o■?'t7'0'C'(?t^c■a■o■c^crcc^n■c7■o■:^c^a■cr era o-0'tc7''7'C7-

I I I I I I <

' c- C C C C C c" '

c c c c- C' z^ r. r^ o

OCCCOC OC C

■cccc c cocc-ococ ocr-crc

LUfVl^''NJ'V»'^^M'^J'^'^'^''^'^

Jf^l^^J^^J(^J^J(^J^^lP^>f^'(^.^^Jf^Jf\J(^lf^p^»(^J<^^f^J(^c^OCC^J■>rcc'00>J■^)■^-^J

t— :t ct, (rrracrn"!

' t or 'X ar CO cc '

a: a: (T a cd c; ■

-X T o- ir iT k

a: c

s c.

cr C C C C

^ rr. (^, re K

a. C- O r C

r C C O C

< C C C C

C-C C C C C C C C C

C C C O C '

c c r c c '

r^ ff f^ r" (^ r^ p*

-:■ c c c r c c

C o c c c c

o o c o c c

crrocc c-cccjcccrrcc c f-

^-^_ — ^^r, -.j'vfvj'ir'i." f^-' iTc r

^ ^ c coc ^orcc^ccc ccccccc_cr.cccc.ocrrcccc<-c.c
o'-'coccrcoc-cccc-occ^c-crcc crt-oocccccccc-'rNj
coococoocooc ooooooococc ccocococcooc cjtro-

VI-38.

3 1/1

$ °

<

a.

UJ liJ

Z
3

I z

o:

wo < l/l

z

« r >-

U. ff «

vo

UJ o

oc

r

U. UJ

1/1 1-

O UJ

H l/t

Z

U. LU

G. —

OC O

O

o z

UJ

O UJ

(J c

z o
o o

— I- >

O LL QL

< C 3

u. a 1-0

' 2

< o

o o
z o
a o

-J o

-J ^- o

< LO OC

QC < <

UJ o 3

D U O

C

o

uo

u

t/1

i/i

UJ

^

UJ

Qc:

ffi

O

o

3

u

I

tt

<

■^

OJ

LTl

o

>

<

<

1/1

Q

Z

3

o

<

O

o <

z

3 V)

o

UJ

<

-1

o

UJ

z

>

UJ

>

f-

D

<

-5

^

UJ

1/1

cc

o

o

•^ X r
L.-' )- a

o z

H-C of-f^rO'^fT-

»

ifi

on

tr> cc

z

(\'

fv.' --

3

<

-M

o

-- O

i-n

or

o

O ^

U

<

o

O f*l

a.

IM

c

(NJ O

^

rTi

o

fO O

O

e

o <r

c^ :r

^ C

f^

t_) a

00

Z '«
O 4-

;0 c

> o

z c

< q; LU

— 3 D

i_J >- -J

a _i <

UJ z? >

T !_)

X <

CJ o

T <

o z

c u -■

a ■— c
< uO o

o z z c

O C C'

no

J C ^ f\i

a -J < o

r 1^ c

- o i^-
Z X

< ?■ UJ
u- on

I- l^ <

— . • Q.

Q. QC —

a z X

K Q
lO O

C fV

(^ lyi ^

— c c

U. Z f^

C C'

«.- in

•a a o:. cr or. T o-

li.

iXj ^

a. .C «D -o ^ <■ C

I •=

>-

>

< z

Z 3

UJ 0-

Uj .— • (\J (^ ■"! (NJ f

a. a-

Q. C O C C C C

CL

> o>

>- h- r^ r^ 00 tr 03

o

TABLE VI. 1.6 RETRIEVAL OF AIM INDIVIDUAL DESCRIPTOR,
NATIONAL ESTUARINE INVENTORY

C0ASI4L lONi FARM aCIIVlTV •
RV 810-R6GION
BY eSTUARINE PORTION OF STATES

ACREAGE

PERCENT

VALUE-FARM

NUMBER

OF FARMS

OF ALL

PRODUCTS

BIO-REGION

STATE

OF FARMS

1000 AC.

LAND

SOLD-$1000

ATLANT IC

MAINE

5,087

842

21.6

60,706

NEW HAMPSHIRE

1,115

153

22.7

12,191

MASSACHUSETTS

3.149

263

10.7

54,877

127,774

VI-39

MIDDLE ATLANTIC

MASSACHUSETTS

778

58

16.2

13,897

RHTIDE ISLAND

1,100

105

17.9

18,537

CONNECTICUT

2,546

254

17.0

46,513

NEW YORK

1,768

104

4.5

64,763

NEW JERSEY

7,019

675

17.1

150,774

PENNSYLVANI A

3,914

393

26.4

65,240

DELAWARE

4,401

717

54.8

107,631

VIRGINIA

• •

«a

**

6,339

MARYLAND

824

140

45.2

25,742

NORTH CAROLINA

7,768

1 ,014

38.6

77,647

CHESAPEAKE BAY

VIRGINIA
MARYLAND

7,765
12,532

1,388
1,986

32.6
51.5

59,812
169, 185

SOUTH ATLANT IC

NORTH CAROLINA

11 ,441

1,255

27.5

113,292

SOUTH CAROLINA

10,003

1,367

30.6

54,666

GEORGIA

721

295

15.9

3,867

FLORIDA

4,106

2,102

42.6

222,066

CARRIBEAN

FLORIDA

1,511

PUERTAJ RICO

»#•

VIRGIN ISLANDS

• ••

GULF OF MEXICO

FLORIDA
ALABAMA
MISSISSIPP I
LOUISANA
TEXAS

10,620

3,,472

34.6

122,743

3,336

544

29.6

27,633

1,527

167

15.0

2,959

9,217

2,267

26.2

90,633

13,367

8,675

82.1

229,068

TOTAL

38,067

15,125

37.5

473,236

PACIFIC SOUTHWEST

CALIFORNIA

26,772

9,753

48.1

1,00 2,313

TOTAL

26,772

9,753

48.1

1,002,313

PACIFIC NORTHWEST

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

1,270 823 20.0

12,377 1,839 18.5

19,458 1,461 15.5

17,281

78,476

144,850

PACIFIC ISLANDS

HAWAII

GUAM

AMERICAN SAMOA

64.7

187.557

«««

«««

«4*

**»

TOTAL

• ••

• **

«««

«•*

ALASKA

ALASKA [ALL!

382

1,959

0.6

3,771

382

1,959

0.6

3 ,771

• USDA RECQROS-1967

•• NEGLIGIBLE

••• INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE

VI -40

afS

3
C
'^

C

o
u

O
00

LU /^

9>

O uj

O CO

UJ <
CC z

(O

<

Q 1/1

< uu

O -1

tc _

n 2 CM CO -J-

o < nO (\j >j-

-ooo^r~oor--(Nj~ONj-iri(\jr^r\jmir\0

-4- 00

IT* -4" l/> iTi ^^ r-H

(M (^ r- .-I tn o
,-< --I r^ (Nj CO o^

z is\ o^ --I ~t o -^ r-co r^fOvOCT"^ (Mcr-oor-O'-HiA

Q I

CC

< -J

□ <

□D 1-

2 O

O.

Z5

P- 00 vD
O in 00

< >

1- —I
LT, 2

C

CD -J

< <

2 I- -<

O t/) Q^

« < UJ

h- O 1-

< O — '

a: " a:

1- i_)

— o

O 2

UJ — .

cC oo

<

O

<

o

CO

UJ

>

<

o

CD

IX
UJ

>

a

CC

<

•■ Q-
l>0 X

(—

< o
o -<

CO

ac 2

o <
t- I

UJ

_i a:
_j O

< 2:

<
I/)

•> •
1/1 a.
V- X
<

O i/>
CD

a 2
O <
I- X

o

2:

UJ
_1 QC

_J c
< z:

a Q-

I m X

000

^H 5: ^H

<

X

I- o ►-

a: 2

o <

I

a.

UJ X oj
a: Qt
O o O
s: '^ z

< •

00 • • Q. •

► Q- CL X a

uO X X X

(— ir\ UJ

< O O • QC o
Q r-^ .-< f^ O '-^
03 Z
Ct: 2 2 2 2

O < < < Qi <

t- X X X O X

O t- I- I

z •

UJ OJ UJ Ql UJ

_J OC C^ Qt X QC

_J o o o o

< 2: 2: s: in 2:

i/i

<
o

CO

<

• a

Q- X
X I/O

in I—
o • <
^ rri o

CD

2 2 a:

< < o

XXI-

1— I— O □ t- t- o

<
o

CD
Q

o

a.

X i/i on

< <

a o

CO OD

ck: qc

o o

UJ UJ UJ

ac -1 -1 cC oc -I

O -J -J O O -J

z: < < z: 2; <

<
2

00 UJ
I- QC
< O

o 2:

CD -1-

□C Ct 2 -^

o o <
>- X en:
a • I- UJ

X CL >

X UJ o
_l oc

_J o o
< -< z:

Q.
UJ X

a:
o o

Qi 2
O <

X
• t-
a.
X UJ

QC

o a
--< z:

a

I 00 OO

o < <

-H O O

CD CD

Z oC CC

< o □

uu

< Z)

<

1—

>- 0

»—*

<

♦

2 ~ UJ

03

^-

<

Qt ►- QC

2: < <

i/i

s: <

0 0 <

3 Q ~

< ii

U. UJ 3

_J « 0

CD 1/5

- 2 <

00:0:

< <

_) 2 _i

0 0 0

-J —J

< 0 UJ

• _J UJ

< <

0 u Q

Q U. 0

< Q >-
— Z -I

ujcs.X> O 2<0

< l/)Q.l/)UJ QC <_IQC

2 QQ>-'a.i/):^< >i>o<

< 2Ii/iza:ciCO -I'-o
^ ,-, <o'/i<tuo 2>-

i-.l/)UJ_l<>-'X-3>IOl/>UjXl/)

<•— 2>-i>oi/l l-02Clt-<

30 — a:i/)oo3S:sauj20Z>x
<0<<<*— ujujujCDqcuj XOuj

x_i2:z:z:2: z z z z a q. qcooi-

o
—. (J

2 2

1- Q£ -.

« O 2

o X z:

OS l/l <

— < :3 _

> 3 O Q- >

o:

(J
o
on

Z)

CD

Z)
-J

o

ro I-

g

o
o

l/l Q

< 1-

Z)

CC o

UJ a

£E l/>

z: 1/5
3 <

2 •

Q
^- 2

< •—
O

CD O

2

Q "-

a: t-

< <

3 O
O CD

t- V

1/1 t/)

< UJ

O I-

o o

2 O

VI-41

D
O

cc

a.

>

o

I-
z

UJ

>

z

z

— <

cc *~

H .

CO u

<
o

<

Z

CD
<

<

>■ z ■

,_«rH<-H>-4«-li-Hi-H>-H*--«(-Hi-H>-Ht-t<--«r^>-Hr-<rHr-ti-H<--l(-^(Hr-«r-<i~*f--l<--<>-l(-<r-<i--li--)^^Oe3C3^^^^00ai

J,l.^^AK^K^c^rsICNlCaciOlc^Oloor*r-.r--<»coo^C^u^ooaloooor-.oca^-^rrtOLnu^^Q■-^JLn^--•--^K^JLAc^

l^^u^l^J>^^^^r-»f^OlOl'SS■-H.-Hrslrocslcsl^H^■-^l^^.-Hrt.-H(SlK^^^c^.oou^J■Ln^/^^'^r^-^r^JO»^
Tscacacsoca^QTa^at-Ht-ii-Hi— «i-ii-it-*rHi-Hi-ti-<«-t>-<.-Hr-t»-H.-<(-<caca^»-Hi— i^ecncT^CTicncnoiaiLor^

>

LU

-J
CD
<

a: •

0 •

_J

■ 3 -i

:z u

— >- •

< •

< <

z • z

-» z • ■

UJ

;/! Z cc 2

>- 00

0 u.

T'

(/I 0 Ll.' '.

cc s . .

q:

0

0 *

X 0 h-

2: <

LU UJ

< UJ

T

CO sZ * —

£2: % *

0 -»

—1 m

'.UJ z z

—1

< 1— ac -J —

UJ t— 0 0

— liJ 0 (/I Q (J

a: 1— >- t—

X >

■"■-J

7-

* i*: a. — q: —

0 < CJ i/l

< z

< <

<

Z (_) UJ < l-

s: I z UJ

z 0

Z 3-

Z i/l

0

t- 1— Q tJ 0 <

h- UJ 2 cc

1- H-

-J i -< <

> 0

>- LO

r-i

0 < QC — ' < t—

< < — X

< UJ

^

tc z d a: -1 <

3: 0 3 u

(.1 T

0 :3

• < > < .
J < ^

< := •

— ac u.
z o —

CE u. —I <

o — < —

U- -J o z —

— < a. —
_i o «.o <

- u; <I t/l -

,(_> — < —

3 O i^

J O I/)

e < <

tr — I a: — I <_> < < ■

X o

» CJ (_)

c < <
. _J </)
: < z

C Cl. UJ
- < Q.

CC UJ

UJ o Q:

XI— > UJ s <

33 UJ 2
O 3 UJ

UJ 3
J > Q.
: —I ai

: < o

J :s (^

■» t>1 — CE < 3

Z Q < u. :-; .

) z z

: < <

1 to v: ■

J O O O I— t—

: ae z .

c 3 o -

1 u; X :

^ <. <. <

<i <^ i£ :nl -1

< ii < t/1 CO <
^ 1^ _i < <
lO < < — I — I «.

< -I < < z
-I < ^ o

» a >- _) _)

*►- «i < 3 <

3 < ac ai < lo :

< t— o Q- t

u.' Z) X 3 -J <

Z iC CJ — * • Z £

Z3 < Z O I •

-3 >- < O to »^ t

yi Z
< <

VI-42

FIGURE VI. 1.3 A DETAIL PLOT FROM THE NATIONAL
ESTUARINE INVENTORY

TBflND NQ. 24213

EUREKA, CPLlFORNIfl

o

o

LO

o

ixJ

X

•'_)

z

■z.

o

o

' — '

CO

h-

CX

1 —

1 — 1

CL

" — 1

C_)

o

LlJ

or

lO

CL

_)

cr

s:

^

o

o

z

3"

o

o
o

10 11 12

MONTH NUMBER

vi-43

f.

•3

0

a
1

: 1

MOioq pue 0

S

O O O o o o

000000

0

lXJ

Uj ^^

cn ^^ ' ^^ ■

r

U

t/1

r LJ

1 -

C SJ

■ 2
t Uj

■U jj

'i WJ

(r

UJ

— r

'.u

_J UJ
(^ : -
LJ ij
1/1 2

MO|»q

fSI
fM

o o o o o o

000000

0

u

f^

o o o o o o

000000

0 ,

aAoqv

P'w.oe

INJ

o o o o • o

0 • • • 0 •

•

fio( Aawh

o o o o o o

000000

0 1

^ UJ - A.-,;\\

uu ^ X.^

V

muoiucpuntu,

<SJ

-« (SJ (N -« M •

CD 1

(Mffi MOUS

o o o o o o

000000

0 '

aioinioqDiii iq'

IN

(NJ (N fM IN IN IN

«

M

Apnoio

~

tn

Apnop

•M

'H O » « » —

N -•'-' — 0 0

CI

"•10

S

i/\ * rv M ^(Nt

^-r^rtN*

9- .

n*

0 Cj

cr. 2
cr cr

Li_i

> :x

IMfunt oi Mjjtms

<M

r* <^ • fx iNj tfi

"^ '^ "• "^ ''• '^

in

au|q>unf eiqi«>od fo pj

^.

* rt • ■» ». O

m

4

1

1

"•A

+ +
rf> (t^ * (*l d — I
■0 « >n « « <e
O- <M> » » »

f> soo>n •

«n rfN « OrfMft
o> o> 9> o> » V

Si

uoiiDaiia

:

« 1^ « « M M
m o m ^ M -^

<)**■*««

0

(

::|

■ Id r

• fn

• m

0

UJ

'I

•to r

• V> g

■ .■»

• m

■ r\i

_ 0

•o> a:

„|

«, r
• ru

pMds

J2

-H ^ « rrs ODO
^ * i« 4 (N «^

« r' » 0 « >n

/

uo!P»lTp

■*

V a B
X X X V) «n 1/9
>/) tf) >n X X X

S X X X

irt u> ifl X trt X
X B X 1/1 X Wl

X
X

1

^^

p»adi
A]2noq u«»^

«

O* <»>««« tf(

<ft «-H 0 <^ *

HH

%

l|

"I i

•

« rt W lO * rf^

•

^

5

■0 CI r- » « «
« « « ■« <e «

r* • « « 0 0
^ 0 * «(^ r-

■0

2

SSSSZS

NiN opiN rg

«

o

•

«

-J

1

w

"»A

i

^■^^

•m W u|

rf\

o oo o o o

000000

0

0

(o

o o o o o o

000000

.1.4

PLOT

"•A

1

M 0? 91 21 0 A

AiqiQOoi

1/^

O O O O O O

000000

0
0

RE VI
A AND

o o o o o o

000000

/

ttioi titayt

IM

o oo o o o
o o o o o o

000000

000000

0
0

/

FIGU
ARY DAT

««A

« # in UN « «

» » (M> i> O

-1 f* 0 ^» «
.n 0 « in m ■«
0. 0 0. 0 0. 0

16

If!

■»"•«»«<*>

IN <o IN • <> 0
^ m 0 CD in m

in

^ r*» (> C^ Or^

JN 0 0 « in 0

1 1

-A

c* (^ 4 (Ni m (^

rfi -O 4 * * -»

o. o <^ o- » »

m « m .0 « «
(^ 0. 0. 4^ » Q.

• 1*^ '
Z m
< (^ ;

1

Aiqiuoui

S

« o 1^ 1*1 • a>

m m m 0 4 r>

■0
0

b.

O

UI

-J
a.

"•A

* tf^ ♦ < -O ^

» » » » O 9-

• 1^ »^ — > ■*

u in .

'001 oa 09 o^ 0? 0 02
siitnio 3tfiiuu.iju.ii NU.1U -iwtiON

AmiGOQI

uminprew

tf^

_ r^ ^ * _^ O

-. « » » om

0« »M tn 01^ IN

,«>*.« -.0 •

CD '

0

» ff. — -■ rf\ u>
(Nl 1^ m t^ IN -^

» « (^ 0 r^ 0

Ul

I»loi [viuioN

2

fM ^ O.N -no.

« 9 r- » m r^

rM rfS 0 OP- «

"5.

-. fN * -^ 0* ■«

0* -. 00 0 (^ in

•Atp Mifl«p i»rajoN

S

1

1

"•A

— rvj O 17. r. «
0 0 J- * 4 *

o» » o> 0 »■ 0

♦ * + *

r* u^ 0* fM a) r-

* rf> m « ^ ^
c^ i> 0 (^ c^ o>

0 -o

piooay

fst

tf\ .»> tfN rf) go 0

rfi rf^ .r> rf> J> ,0

(N* «»> fsj (M « .0

« « « « lO m

.n

'"A

« +

f-. 1- r- l-l ^ ry

~o ■} •<> « .0 0

0 J, i> ». 9. 0

jN 0 — li^ m J'
.0 u^ rf% yj * ^
0 0> <> »>■ c 0>

■0
>- «

f2l

pjOMH

IN

» IS ee 0" ^ V
oo a n <D 9v «

» m ->J -. CO 0
« 0 <> (^ <o »

«

'*5

i

ARIUOW

5

<a ^ -o -o o<f\

dl

0 0 0 -^ "^ *

;*;cs £^f:^

21 01 8 9 b ? r

Mf'Q

2

« 0 o-^ 0 0

« « -1 « 9> —

■0

fM PM ^ * in 0
■0 < 0 « « -o

■0 0 « 4 0 «

ummpnui

2

r- J fN » ■» 0

-f -4 » in ■« IS

•0

0

«

« « « <D 0>N

rM in IN IN 0 «
« • • o) « h-

qiuow

5

-» w T < n

T < ifl 6 Z Q

1

lUMUH

•oniH

</t

1.

<u

>-

I

o

3
IS

I.

3
CQ

L.

<0

to

<:
00

0)

u

i.

3

o
t/)

VI -44

Table

1 Number

IV.

1.

1

IV.

1.

2

IV.

1.

3

IV.

1.

4

IV.

1.

5

IV.

1.

,6

IV.

1.

,7

IV.

,1.

,8

IV.

,3.

,1

IV.

,3.

,2

IV.

,3.

.3

IV.

.3.

.5

IV.

.2,

.4

IV,

.2,

.5

IV,

.2,

.7

IV,

.2

.8

IV

.2

.9

IV

.2

.10

IV

.2

.11

IV

.5

.4

IV

.5

.7

IV

.5

.8

IV

.5

.11

TABLE VI. 1.8
Inventory Information in Other Parts of this Report

Table Subject
River Flow
Sediments
Climate

Tidal Characteristics
Dominating Environmental Characteristics
Size and Shape Comparisons
Morphological Classifications
Natural Ocean and River V/ater Quality
Population and Agriculture
Industrialization
Land Ownership
Commercial Fisheries
Recreation Shoreline
Commercial Shipping
Cooling Water Withdrawals
Coastal Mining
Navigation Dredging
Marsh Habitat Lost by Filling
Flow Regulation Structures
Artificial Modifying Structures
Total Industrial Wastes
Major Industrial Wastes
Estuarine Systems with Degraded Water
Quality

VI -45

SECTION 7. THE FUTURE OF THE INVENTORY

The National Estuarine Inventory was initially intended only to
satisfy the needs of the National Estuarine Pollution Study. However,
as the project developed, it became apparent that the Inventory, or its
lineal descendant, can be of far-reaching value in the estuarine management,
research, and study.

There are many agencies and groups involved both institutional and
technical management planning, plan implementation, and research in the
coastal zone. They are concerned at all levels--national , regional,
state, county, and local. The Inventory automation system is capable
of supplying all of these groups with data pertinent to their own
different needs with these two advantages: First, available information
can be acquired from a single source, providing a baseline of usable
information with which the planner can begin work immediately. Secondly,
knowledge gaps are identifiable, making it possible for the manager,
the scientist or the technician to concentrate study capability in
areas of true ignorance, directing their efforts to new or complementary,
rather than duplicative, activities.

There is nothing new or unusual about data storage and retrieval systems.
They differ only in the contents that they are written to contain.
There are many in the Federal Government, such as the detailed file of
oceanographic water quality data maintained by the National Oceanographic

VI-46

Data Center (NOOC); the hydrologic information managed by the U, S.
Geological Survey (USaS Hydrologic); the files of water quality
data which FWPCA (STORET) maintains and many others. The majority
of these systems are designed primarily for the scientist and the
technician involved in solving technical problems in the environ-
ment. The Inventory, on the other hand, is written to contain infor-
mation of a more general nature and is intended to serve a different
purpose, that of estuarine management. What this means in the prac-
tical sense, is that the generalized Inventory system draws on the
detailed data systems for part of its supply of raw environmental
data input. The intermeshing of these four systems will be discussed
in Chapter 2 of this Part.

A management information system is of negligible value unless it is
used by the management and planning groups it is intended to serve.
It is anticipated that these will be primarily on the state level, so
a major first step is to develop a working relationship in order to
determine how state agencies can most effectively use the system in
contributing and withdrawing data from it. A pilot study for this
purpose is being carried out with the State of South Carolina. Present
indications are that a successful and mutually satisfactory arrangement
can be developed for continuing application.

Universities and private organizations can also make use of the
information contained in such a management information system by

VI-47

working either through their respective state agencies or directly
with the Department of the Interior.

The development of the Inventory into a continuing management infor-
mation system must be accompanied by an aggressive program of
assistance to user groups, both in learning about the information
available and in making use of it. This can be accomplished through
personal contact, aggressive public service, and demonstrations of
how the information can be used to help solve actual problems.

A management information system such as described here would need to
acquire data on some regular basis from many federal and state
agencies. Much of the information to be collected on the federal
level will come from agencies of the Department of the Interior; so
it would be logical that this system should be a Departmental one.

A management information system is necessary to the timely and
efficient implementation of a comprehensive national program of
estuarine management and the first steps toward establishment of such
a system have been taken as part of the National Estuarine Pollution
Study.

VI-48

SECTION 8. SUMMARY

The Inventory is desiqned to serve management bv nrovidinq infor-
mation over the wide ranae of subject areas required for satisfac-
tory manaqement persoectJve, whereas in-deoth data on individual
subjects is the focus of most other information svstems.

It beqan as a means to organize and coordinate the great variety
and volume of available information pertinent to estuarine manage-
ment. As the program of data qatherinn and analysis progressed,
large data gaps beqan to appear, and it became apparent that the
Inventory would be valuable not only as a source of data but also
as a delineator of data needs.

These needs fall into two categories: that for data which exist and
are available though widely scattered, and that for information
which has never been developed. Sources to fill the first need
have been located and must be tapped and a consistent program of
data gatherinq must be developed to fill the second need.

The highly compressed tabular data presented throughout this report
consists of national and regional summaries of information stored
in the Inventory on ,a local qeograohic basis. A continuinq estuarine
management information system can provide a local. State, regional,
and national management similar current information upon which to
base a program for the preservation, use, study, and development of
the estuarine zone of the United States.

VI-49
PEFERFNCES

IV-1-1 Wastler, T.A., and L.C. de Guerrero, National Estuarine

Inventory Handbook of Descriptors. Washington, D.C.,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Rev., Sept. 19fiR. pp 77

VI-51
Chapter 2

INFORMATION AND DATA NEEDS AS
SHOWN BY THE NATIONAL ESTUARINE INVENTORY

No management program can be effective without adequate knowledge of
the environment to be managed. This is especially true in the
estuarine zone where the biophysical, the socioeconomic, and the
institutional environments are so intimately connected and
interdependent.

The Inventory contains much information on these three separate but
interlocked environments. However, as has been pointed out, it also
contains large areas v/here the required data have not been available.
While the data and information required to fill these gaps are
important in themselves, it is in their interrelationships that their
real importance lies. There is nothing straight-forward in combined
consideration of the biophysical, the socioeconomic, and the
institutional environments, yet this consideration produces the
fundamental rules which guide the course of technical management.

The information gathering and study program shown necessary by the
Inventory is intended to serve one purpose. That is to increase
knowledge of the estuarine zone enough to use, develop and preserve
the estuarine resource for maximum use without undue damage now or in
the future. This program makes no attempt to obtain all knowledge
on the study area; it is directed toward management needs, and

VI-52

therefore basic data collection and studies to supply basic data are
the key features. A study program such as that presented here can
be effective in management only if carried out as an integrated part
of the overall management program.

VI-53
SECTION 1. NONEXISTENT DATA

Compilation of the Inventory revealed that a great many kinds of

essential information have never been collected in sufficient detail

or with a geographical coverage large enough to be useful in overall

management planning, even in resource utilization planning for small
estuarine management units.

Many studies of estuarine environments have been carried out, but these
have almost always been done or supported by mission-oriented agencies
whose activities are directed toward the achievement of specific
objectives. The extremely dynamic conditions usually prevailing
within estuarine systems, combined with personnel and budget limita-
tions, often prevents the collection of all but the most essential
information.

For example, in an enforcement field study intended to determine the
damages resulting from shellfish bed closures, the essential investiga-
tions would require the study of sources of pollution, their effects on
water quality, shellfish habitat damage, and economic damage to the
shellfish industry. A general environmental study (including investi-
gations of sediment type and distribution, fish habitat value, oceano-
graphic features, and recreational use, among others) would probably
have to be foregone because of the lack of people and equipment to
carry them out.

VI-54

This limited approach toward estuarine study has severely limited the
value of the information collected in each study and has made a
duplication of effort inevitable. If, for instance, a fish habitat
study were carried out at a time different from the enforcement study
mentioned above, it would be necessary for the investigators to
obtain water quality information of the same type required by the
previous study, because there would be no other way of knowing if
water quality conditions had remained the same.

The estuarine environments most often studied have been those with
specific problems in need of solution. Those estuarine systems undis-
turbed by man have generally been studied only by sinqle investigators
interested in and able to work on only a few aspects of the
environment. Yet, information on these kinds of systems is needed in
order to understand the changes that have occurred in other estuarine
environments.

The net result of historical estuarine studies has been a large
quantity of partial information collected at different times and dif-
ferent places by different people. Only on a very few systems has a
broad spectrum of synoptic information been collected. While much of
the data collected is indeed still valuable, it is not now possible to
use it to establish key interrelationships among the ecosystem
components. The development of the information necessary to establish

VI-55

ecosystem relationships is a research problem to be discussed in
Chapter 3, but much of this information is required for other
purposes directly related to management needs.

Information to support management efforts is lacking in most of those
information categories which require extensive field survey or study
to secure it.

PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHY

The information needed includes actual measurements of tidal,
current, and stratification phenomena on many different estuarine
systems.

While many estimates of these types of data are available, actual
measurements are necessary to establish the true characteristics of
each estuary. These measurements, together with area, shape, and size
information, will provide the detailed morphological description which
forms the foundation for studies in which the physical characteristics
of individual estuarine management units are described in order that
its capacity for use can be understood, and, of more far-reaching
consequences, the studies in which one estuarine system is compared
with another. A recurrent theme throughout this study--and this report--
is the concept of learning enough about the nature of the estuarine zone
to permit development of study methods applicable to a wide range of
estuarine types.

VI-56

The great amount of effort now being expended in the development of
estuarine mathematical models and the attempts to apply systems analysis
techniques in the estuarine zone are seriously hampered by the lack of
fundamental information on the physical oceanography of estuaries.
The data needs pertinent to this Section are for actual measurements
of tidal, current, and stratification ohenomena.

The obtaining of physical oceanographic information requires both a
program of consistent routine data collection over a large geographic
range and intensive case studies in individual systems.

SEDIMENTS AND SEDIMENTATION

All water, even the tiniest trickle, picks up and bears along minute
particles from its bed. These particles may be invisible to the eye, but
they are there and they are carried along suspended until, at some place
where the current slows and gravity gets the upper hand, they fall to
the bottom of the v;ater course. These particles are ^'sediments" and
the way in which they settle out is "sedimentation."

In some areas of the estuarine zone, natural sediment transport and
sedimentation cause drastic changes. However, natural sedimentation
is generally a long-term process to which the ecosystem can adaot--
that is, if a given species cannot tolerate a natural characteristic
of a given environment, the species would not exist in that environment

VI-57

in any case. A species sensitive to sediments, therefore, would not
normally be present in turbid waters. Generally, then, natural
sedimentation cannot be considered highly damaging to estuarine biota.

Man-induced sedimentation is unfortunately another story. Denuding
an area of earth releases to the hydrologic system an exponentially
large amount of sediments. Rainfall washing over these bare areas
carries sediment loads in slugs into the surface water drainage
system, disturbing the ecosystem with unaccustomed turbidity. It is
frequently when these streams reach sea level --the estuaries--that the
water's momentum is slowed sufficiently to permit the sedimentation
process to take place. The ecosystem is disturbed not only by excess
turbidity, but also by an excess sedimentary covering which coat? the
bottom, smothering many life forms and changing the basic configuration
of the estuary.

Sediment loads in rivers are transient phenomena related to sudden
increases in flow and other climatological conditions. Understanding and
mastering the problems of sedimentation pollution in estuaries requires
a much broader data base than is now available. Much of the necessary
data can be obtained through consistent sediment load and bottom con-
dition monitoring throughout the estuarine zone.

USES AND USE DAMAGES

A body of water may be littered with floating debris, it may be turbid
and foul-smelling , and to all intents and purposes, dead, yet proving

VI-58

a damage to use is very difficult. One reason for the difficulty is
that damage must be measured by the yardstick of the values that were
present when the body of water was clean. If no data from that time
are available, precise quantification may be impossible.

Enforcement of the water quality standards will negate much of the
necessity for proving damage to use, but use damage data is, and for
some time to come will continue to be, the basis for evaluation and
enforcement of water quality standards. The standards criteria —
actual measurements of water quality parameters--in many cases yet have
to be tested for adequacy in the estuaries where so much knowledge is
lacking. This is probably the most important area cf neglected study
indicated by the Inventory.

Use damage identification requires information on many aspects of the
estuarine environment; this is one reason there is so little available at the
present time. It not only requires a detailed study of water quality and
sources of pollution, but it also demands an economic analysis of the
damage involved.

The identification of use damages requires the measurement of various uses
at different times. This kind of information is collected most efficiently
through a routine program of data collection such as that administered by
the Bureau of the Census. Such a program of data collection can not only
show when use damages have occurred, but, when the information is studied
as it is collected, such a routine basic data collection program can orovide
the information to illuminate damaging trends so as to counteract then
before a catastrophe occurs.

VI-59
WATER QUALITY AND SOURCES OF POLLUTION

In the final analysis, the greatest deficiency in basic information on
estuaries is the lack of water quality data, and water quality is one of
the basic environmental conditions a management program should protect.
The collection of water quality information is particularly susceptible
to the kind of partial effort required by the missions of many Federal
and State agencies. It is easy to reduce a water sampling program by
a station or two or a point or two, until the maximin is reached that
the available personnel can do. While this is a necessary approach,
for other users it damages the value of the data collected.

In any system receiving wastes, water quality data are of severely
limited value unless coupled with data on the sources of pollution which
may affect water quality.

To evaluate effects of waste discharges on any receiving body of water
there are certain basic items of information which must be obtained.
This information may be grouped into three general categories. First,
there is the nature of the v/aste material itself; second, there is the
manner of its movement within the estuarine system; and third, there is
the way in which it interacts chemically and biologically with the
estuarine environment.

None of the characteristics of waste discharges are unique to wastes
discharged to the coastal environment. What is unique is that small

VI -60

variations in volume, concentration, or composition of wastes can have
much more impact on an estuarine environment, where wastes may remain
in one area for extended periods of time, than in a freely flowing river,
where wastes are being constantly carried away from an outfall. This
means that waste discharges into estuarine and coastal environments
must be more constantly and carefully monitored than those discharged
into rivers.

The obvious means to acquire information would be 1) a stringent and
wide-spread monitoring program, or 2) development of a mandatory
reporting system for use by individual industrial and municipal facil-
ities themselves. Actual implementation of either method presents
equally obvious problems, however. The vast expenditure of time and
money for routine monitoring of every waste outfall in the estuarine
zone is prohibitive. The enforcement of a mandatory reporting system
also represents more man-hours and money than are feasible to consider.
Yet monitoring is a necessity, su a simple reporting method for all
possible studies and existing monitoring systems must be devised and the
data gathered funneled into a central location for broad-scale analysis.

The adequacy, or lack thereof, of existing monitoring systems can then
be determined and broadened only as absolutely necessary.

The information needed for routine water quality monitoring associated
with pollution surveillance is also needed as basic data input for
management and for basic research. An effective routine monitoring

VI-61

program should therefore integrate all of these needs to avoid
overlapping data collection programs and insure acquiring the broad
data base needed to advance scientific knowledge of the estuarine zone.

A further need related to the advancement of knowledge is basic data
on unpolluted and unmodified estuarine systems; it is the lack of these
kinds of data that hampers many present efforts at evaluating the
effects of past changes on the environment.

Present efforts at water quality monitoring in estuarine systems are
scattered; they are primarily a matter of State concern, and have been
carried out directly by State agencies or through cooperation with
local governments and industries. These efforts should be integrated
into a nationwide water quality monitoring program designed to satisfy
national as well as local needs.

VI-62

SECTION 2. "GRAY" DATA

There is a vast quantity of information which would be extremely useful
at all levels of management if it were readily available. This so-
called "gray" data exists, but it requires a special level of effort
to secure it and put it in a form useful for management purposes.

These are the kinds of information that are collected by Federal,
State or local agencies as a matter of routine operation and merely
filed away when they have served their purpose. For example, routine
water quality measurements over shellfish beds, or a Leach access toll
bridge receipts, or numbers and kinds of Corps of Engineers dredging
permits issued, would all provide pertinent information to estuarine
management if readily available.

These kinds of information exist also in unpublished reports on contracts
designed to satisfy a need. For example, a contractor's report to a
State planning board on the need for more parks might never be published
but would still contain valuable information to estuarine management
if it were readily available. Many unpublished reports and informal
technical memoranda will be released for public use if they can be
found — but they do not appear in indexes or bibliographies; special
efforts are required to find them.

A third kind of "gray" data is information that is available from
published material but requires particular skill or effort to extract
it. For example, the areas and volumes of all estuarine systems in

VI-63

the United States can be extracted from available navigation or
topographic charts if someone will painstakingly measure the areas
at different depth contours.

All of these data sources have one thing in common--the available
information is difficult to find or extract, prohibitively so for
the limited studies characteristic of the historical approach toward
studying the estuarine environment. A much broader approach toward
collecting such information, implemented as part of a national
program, would achieve economy of scale and efficiency in operation
by developing and applying the overall expertise as a centralized
function.

Not all information existing in tne "gray" data is pertinent and
valuable for estuarine management. Examples of the kinds of pertinent
information which exist primarily as "gray" data may be summarized
according to their categories in the "Handbook of Descriptions" of
the National Estuarine Inventory.

MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY lUEUTIFICATION

Part V of this report deals with government entities and their interests
and programs in the estuarine zone. Although the states have prime
responsibility in most waters relating to the estuarine zone, it is at,
or through the county and municipal governments that much of the
implementation of a national plan must take place. This area of
specific responsibility needs more complete definition.

VI-64

The information needs by county are:

(1) Governmental structure;

(2) Its relationship to municipalities within the
county; and

(3) Range of authority concerning the estuarine zone.
The studies required are a thorough literature search on a county-
by-county basis to be supplemented by direct contact where it is not
possible to acquire the necessary information from the literature.

Tne identification of other entities who have managerial authority
over an estuarine zone can help to form the basis for a continuing
institutional management plan. Each segment of the institutional
mosiac must be placed into its proper position, so that each entity
involved can be recognized and can participate at its own level.

Other needed data is information on the types and sizes of estuarine
areas already under active management by any level of government as
well as those areas which are included in zoning and regional planning
districts.

All of these data exist. They are filed away in county court houses,
Chamber of Commerce files, and government record books. An intensive
literature study and files search will be necessary to search out the
required information.

VI-65

HYDROLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY

In order to use a resource effectively, management first must quantify
how much of the resource there is to use. In the case of estuaries--
which, like all water resources, are primarily self-renewing when used
proper ly--the quantity of water, the areas of marsh and associated lands,
and the types of modifications which have been made constitute the
total resource which is presently available. Most of this information
exists, either in available literature or in widely scattered files.

The data required include "Fills", a tiny word, yet it represents the
only final and irretrievable damage that can be inflicted on a body
of water. Information on circulation-modifying structures of other
types— dredged channels, bridges, causeways, small upstream impound-
ments, etc. --are also needed.

It is imperative that records be kept of such construction and that
their effects on a system be carefully monitored. These records and
monitoring data must be studied minutely in order to learn the most
effective and least damaging methods to use when estuarine modifica-
tion is necessary.

Considered separately these small structures--dikes, weirs, locks,
etc. — appear innocuous, yet even one on a stream tributary to an
estuary can have profound effects on salinity levels and current
patterns. Changes in these, in turn, can upset the ecological balance
of an area far out of proportion to tne size of tne regulation

VI-66

Structure itself.

Though these small flow regulation structures, along with their larger
counterparts, the high dams and large impoundments, may be above tide
water, their influence is as important as that of structures within
the estuarine zone itself.

SOCIOECONOMIC DATA

These data describe the basic economic make-up of an estuarine-
associated land area which is usually a county, since the county is
the smallest unit for which data are available. The majority of data
which have been assembled, including those for Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (SMSA's) are relatively gross. They provide an
adequate picture at the State or regional level, but are generally
lacking in the fine grain detail which would be necessary to do an in-
depth analysis of a small area.

Some detail records have been acquired recently and the first step
toward a nationwide economic breakdown of small specific areas on the
coastline should commence with careful study of the material which
is available in-house. A study of this type would serve two purposes:
1) full usefulness would be made of the data records already acquired,
and 2) additional information needs would be clearly pin-pointed.

The continuing need in this segment of information is not so much one
of locating and acquiring additional data. Emphasis should be placed.

VI-67

instead, on constant updating and retention of historical records for
trend establishment, and careful, detailed analyses to present clear
and accurate pictures of any area, large or small.

VI-68

SECTION 3. PROGRAM DEFINITION

Table VI. 2.1 summarizes the important information lacks found during
the initial compilation of the i'Jational Estuarine Inventory, and out-
lines briefly the means by which to acquire each kind of information.

The foregoing discussions showed that the major kinds of available
management information can be grouped into two broad categories:
that information which has never been collected, and that information
which has been collected but not published or released in a usable
form.

on

on

There is a need, therefore, for an overall basic data coUecti
program including a nationwide system of routine field data collecti
and estuarine water quality, pollution source, and ecological monitor
ing as well as a system for the collection of "gray" data. As
corollarys to these, however, there must be a means for handling,
using, and disseminating the information being collected, and there
must be a means for advancing the state of knowledge to increase
management capability.

The need in the estuarine zone is not for three separate programs,
but for one integrated program with the three facets outlined above.
Such a program must also recognize and cope with the realities of

VI-69

UJ

Z

a.

<

c/>

13

;^

1-

O

ai

H

1

O

<

UJ
fO

■p

O

C/3

GC

1- o

<l-

z

Q.

LU

CC

T

C

1-

c/:

UJ

>-d

CQ

uJ

zd

s

V

o

c

X
CO

o

CQ

CO

n

<

z

CO

<

QI

111

LU

>

z

CD

<>

1-

rr

<

o

Q

1-

O

z

Ul

CO

>

CQ —

>

UJ

_l
CQ
<

(J o a> c

•^ X E «

>t- a.

4- *♦- O (U

.*.-<£ ♦J

<0 3 >, fO

^J O 1- c

l/l O IT) O

W. -r-

di <u ^ ■*-»

x: £ ■.- "o

I— t— _i ^

<— TJ E O

,__

4->

>

r—

Tl

r-

T)

U>

c

01

o

s

<r

<u

4^

rr

I.

(TJ

*r>

c

EU

tl

n

•O

T

nc

Q.

L.

C

4->

O

O)

-D

TJ

(.J

fs

:zi

t-

-s

OJ

u

Q-

O)

C

«1

l/l

^

-C

3

J=

«

•<-

:d

Cn-O ^ ■— "O

>»'—

.,- OJ rt3 OJ

> ^ -M O TD

1-

(O Irt 1/1 •«- 3

C -.- 2 1-^

.— E o o

^

3

•^ ■!-> C

• 3 •(/>•«-

^ t/>

s^

U J3 (U

O OJ

OJ cu

■ r- -^J JD

3

(/» QJ x:

c

<u

• Jd *J -o

u> O - o -—

c o t/> ca 3

nj

OJ 11

u

+J • u • in

lA

QJ -C

<TJ m fO >i

OJ

■>- J

U CL E ^ *«

(U cu

-o

-.- fO E •— ■*-•

-o

XI u.

(u a.
3 E

.— E 3 "3 tJ

Ci. in «— rO ■

T3

</l

ifl

^

■3

<.n

irt

c

Ol

<u

1— <o -i- "O w

3 VI U

'O JI ^

U U 4-»

-- C -M U

cu 1- o

(« u 'U "J i_*

4-» «0

OJ m c
tyi E <«

<U 1 -—

O^ 1/1 fO

M

c E o

(_) OJ

J-

c* q:

T3

o. c -a

C^

■F- <T) C

^ fl

tn wi

o o

OJ u c

C 4J

C 'O ■.-

o fl

O E o CT>

•4-

o o ■<-

-r- en C

£5

<

in. E 1/) O.

o

■O C in ^

3

01 'O <u in

I- r—

TJ -f-

*J .— .

TJ CO'*-' C

UJ C -'- O

■ .->■<- •

in E — -t-J u

<U t. 4-> TJ -M

3 fO U f— 0)

4-» m «i

r- «♦- TJ 3

<tj a> ■♦-*

T3 Q. -

f— J^ c

> — C O in

S,o?*

«0 O Q- "O

U .- .- C

r- U *-> • <U

I*- 4_> TJ in 1-

-.- in <u -o 4->

l^^s

U 3 i~ c

OJ "O U HI "O

^ O E

ci c O) i- c

(/I « C ■»-» TJ

J 1 ■— •

C 4-* U

<u in <:

"O UJ

>

5i

VI-70

UJ

13 ^

CO

LJJ

<

z
o

I-
<

Z 2:

ft C/5
> Q

z o

^^

go

CO <

Q T

UJ >

"2

C

o

u

<
Q

O
CO

<
OQ

>
CC

o

LU
>

>

HI

_i
QQ
<

OJ 1- oO o •

C (/> Lrt ■ —

<u a. lyt *-> m

I— C ID 7^

c (/) T) lyi

LLi -I- Q. • L

2f :

QJ -O

VI

OI

i- a>

4->

c

3 I-

u

i/i 1-

o

iA +J

CO

fO 3

CL

O 3

QJ

OI o) cr

-O E 01

s: o

-C

I-

o (-

u

OI

r- i_

o

u

u

c

> -o

■■->

tTJ -O

•D

O ^ QJ

<tj

<1) C

T3

UJ

-^ -o

t- Oi XI

e

(rt m

01

3 OI

Q.->-

i~

O I-

>*- •—

c

0) t/)

QJ

L. -r-

«TJ

>— 4->

3

3

.— U -.-

^

■r- C

cr

T3 O-

<- ■'- J

-*->

4- (U

QJ

4-

C OI

J </l

1-

•O W

(O en

u

<J^ CD C

a>

W1 i~

<D

iA

lA OJ

o> -.-

^

01 3

jD

01

•*-> -Q

•- L.

C

T3 • O

o

■O TJ

■a

i::

3 TJ ■•-»

^i

3

*J 4-> ■.-

Wl

■•->

QJ -r-

irt t) C

T)

i/l

X

t/1

t- J

-O Q

01

-o

3

CU E

u

a* <—

Oi

0)

lA cn

I- TD

TJ

I- Q>

c

u

TJ c:

3 O) 1-

3 ■•-

3

gx

*-. I- o

^-^ 4-

L.

fO OI

m

o

nj

o

I- -»-> i/l

ti

u u

■«-)

i.

T3 -M

OJ ■*-> 4J

QJ -r-

01

■tJ <TJ C

L.

4-) Ul

c

4-)

OJ c:

O

■r- ni

..- o

^

—1 -a

E

-J

■^ E

QJ "O

u •

-— 3

■<- -t-J

CL 01

4- i/l

-o -o

3

C f—

>v cr

iC OJ

O I.

Wl ««-

■M

(Q OJ

■- >.

T3 jD

-o x>

3

?::

*-> X)

U1 QJ

-^J

0) c

Oi

^i!?

C <A

■<- TD

+J QJ

U O

(TJ .—

o ^

U CL

OJ CL

7^

4-> 3

-r- t/1

E L.

1/1

-C U

•<- O

c

01 T3

c

.,-

D

"D O

t- OJ

<o

L.

V

C •<-

n ja

(U

u

(O JJ

-C

4J

TJ

c X

tJ

3

W1 ■—

■1- o

'D

cr

TD 3

tn

in

U-

i.

QJ

QJ O

w^ (U

■t->

0)

T)

a:

QJ I-

•M T3

m

t/1

JT

Q.T-

C

Q

c

=3

O

t/> U

g^

o

O

■o

QJ

•»->

*-» •

j;^

QJ

+->

*♦-

c

-»

Si

■!->

»o

0)

cn

^t

01

3

I- 3

113

t.

■o

i- '-

u

13 1-

■♦->

u

t-

3 O

QJ

4->

*3

S

OJ

a:

3

UJ

c

>.

>>

■o

o

x:

4->

C

*->

Q.

to

-4->

<u

£

'fl

Irt

3

o o

r^

.— Cn

3

4->

c

i

<D O
o c

cr

C

1

u

M 4J

i/>

• 1- (D

u

u ^

ui 01

OJ

■a

M

l-r-

>> W

-•->

T3

OJ

0)

2 *=»

.C CD

tZ

OJ

t/i

iS

OQ.

o.

3

l/l

3

to

ID

r^

CO

CT»

o

VI-71

lU

Z

UJ I-

o

LU
CO

CO

o

<

O
<

z

LU CC

ft w

>- Q

Z O _

o

I

CO
CO

<

CO

o

LU
LU

<
D

o

CO
<
CO

o

O
Q

z
<

X

>-

CO

>

o

I-
z

LU

>

■a

03

3
C
'+3

C

o

>

tu

-J

CQ
<

>.

>»

"O

T3

0*

OJ

OJ

C

>

>

tJ

'O

1-

3

3

OJ

c

0*

lyO

i>o

G

c

c

OJ

M~

«o

T)

cn

in

"O

o

O

<TJ

>* i/i

(V

</)

•— Q.

u

01

.- Q

C7I

cn

r— 3

l~

tn -r-

3 <J^

in

O

in

O

JO

.g

3

OJ -M

X)

0)

OJ

1-

o

*-> c

■o

O

4J

O

01

OJ cn

in

<T3 3

c •

m

o>

m

&>

T3

■0

■M o

•D VI

4->

(J

•*-»

OJ

O) >,

■< OO O

^

<

i/i

<I

■>!

Ll.

u- -o

i_>

i: w

'->

t_J

3

O. OJ QJ

in TJ

Q.

0> OO

o.

0* t/^

»- ■«-»

5i^iS

■f- Q.

,-«

j=

3

-C

»— in

Ll>

u.

»—

X)

u-

h-

O

< <

■M

*~>

*->

C

c

c

<u -o

(O

<D

tJ

t.

■4-» o

■*-»

tti

lo -^

in

i/l

m

OJ

TD U

c

C

c

>,

a. oi

o

o

o

ZJ Q_

o

l_)

o

"

k

>.

i-

O

m

cn

OI

CNJ

CNJ

CNJ

ro

(O

o

1

</l

to

■a

o» (-

w

■♦-»

■o

-«->

■o

OJ

in

■o c

01

I/)

c

3

3

C '•-

u

OJ

<tJ

i*-

c

E

TJ

>

■*->

o

X)

3

c

in

■•-»

TD

>^ <D

cr

c

0

■o -u

OJ

OJ

OJ

0

^

3 tJ

i-

OJ

-C

m

tj

+J

-tJ 1-

4J

o

i

OI

o

1:1.

■0

c

JD

L.

t-

<+- OI

'(J

0>

3

3

CD

O (J

-C

0.

0

C

>.

c

■o

*J

-C

■o

wi O

c

OJ

OJ

(/I

■tJ

3

-o o

3

m

^

>

L.

•♦J

o

X

u

tn

0

L/>

^ OJ

cn

Oi

OJ

OJ

0.

■M ^

c

c

OJ

in

JC

OJ

4-

ij

c

cn

0

L.

O

z.

ll

>.

c

t.

o

o

1

to

(D

■0

(U

a>'3

+J

E

c

OJ

t-

o.

<— o

OJ

0

in

TJ

>>

JH -C

c

c

+J

■u

hj

T3 •

(T3 in •

g

o

0)

OJ

O)

C T3

— «o

E

■a

OJ

1_

to OJ

•-- -C (U

Q.

c

3

*J in

•O O l-

0)

0)

o

OJ

+-»

> U TJ

c

c

4->

u

%.

tJ

>

<o t)

0

fa

u

<0 OJ

4) tn

■»-»

4->

c

TJ

3

OJ

■0

3

3

o

4-)

■*->

■0

^ 0) ^

o

o

m

m

c o>

ci i_ *j

q:

CC

■M

fl

OJ

"

<o n

.

CI

in

o

in

"O 01

u

C Q.

OJ

i/>

<TJ >i

<♦-

u

'D

c

n

'^

u

in

<TJ

■M .— U

OJ

0)

>%

T3

C .— i-

Cl

u

u

OJ

4) 'O Cn

u

Q.

«o

L.

3

E

3

U «+- ^

M-

O

o

■M

3

3 O O

O

in

o

in

cr

U U

O)

ii>

m 0^

c

Of

c

q:

*-• in >,

o

<n

o

>>

i/i

m 3 .—

■*->

(O

c

1

E

'O (-

m

J

o

>,

Oi

Q..— m

u

;-

■*J

<n >—

cn

*J

TJ

1

Loss of
I potenti
1 parti cu

c

OJ
T3

E

o
•♦-

c

3
4-*

in
OJ

C

o

■M

4-»

3

c

in

OJ

■o

>>

u

O

OJ

^

u

tn

a.

OJ

3

■!->

OJ

■z.

tn

0

U

C^

O)

11

T3

<l>

2

*j

3

1-

■0

m

E

to

o

cr

m

c

01

n

to

L.

■a

«a

3

Q

TJ

■»->

L.

c

\

L>^

g

c

OJ

m

<U

o

4->

4->

m

»/t

E

o

rts

l/>

«D

i/l

3)

3

a.

^

CVJ

n

*9-

•—

■—

f—

r—

>,

^

f

+J

tn

Wl

OJ

tn m m
OJ OJ 0)

C C OJ

VI-72

operating a large data collection and dissemination system which
depends on contributions from diverse sources.

The two-years effort in collecting information on the estuarine
zone has led to these conclusions about the problems of locating
and acquiring data:

(1) Most agencies, groups, and individuals will permit
ready access to their files and data records, but lack
manpower and/or incentive to "assemble, coordinate, and
organize" them for the use of other groups.

(2) Large central data systems often have difficulty
acquiring data, because users -- who are also the
potential contributors — frequently encounter problems
caused by system inflexibility and the slowness of
ponderous size, often becoming sceptical of its value and
loathe to contribute information.

(3) All data sources mentioned in Table VI. 2.1, with the
exception of the county governments, have been queried
for this information and have already resnonded to the
greatest extent possible; therefore, the data gaps
existing in the Inventory represent the limits of
present capability in providing data.

VI-73

(4) Experience has shown that frequently there may
appear to be a lack of data when actually the data
exist but in an obscure form or place, or else held
under proprietary restriction.

(5) Data are taken primarily where there is a direct
economic return or a problem associated with an agency
mission.

None of the problems associated with collecting management informa-
tion and efficiently disseminating it to serve management purposes
is unsolvable, but these problems set the framework within which
a program must operate to provide needed management information
to users.

VI-74

SECTION 4. THE RECOMMENDED PROGRAM

A general program to acquire and organize Information on the
estuarlne zone to satisfy management needs should consist of
three equally Important and Interrelated activities:

1. An integrated and comprehensive program of
routine estuarlne zone data collection, including
monitoring of estuarlne water quality and habitat.

2. A centralized system for the collection,
organization, and dissemination of estuarlne
management information in a form directly useful
to managers.

3. A program of applied research investigations
designed to increase knowledge needed for manage-
ment.

BASIC DATA COLLECTION AND ROUTINE MONITORING

The object of this activity is to establish and maintain a
nationwide program of basic data collection and environmental
monitoring in the estuarlne zone of the United States.

Many different agencies operate routine monitoring programs
covering limited aspects of the estuarlne environment. Each of
these operates for a different purpose and is often uncoordinated
with other efforts. Frequently this is simply because there

VI-75

is no mechanism for interchanging information rapidly and
efficiently at the working level so that programs of mutual
benefit can be readily established.

The program recommended here should not compete with existing
monitoring programs, but through providing a valuable service,
should stimulate the interest of other Federal, State, local,
and private entities in working cooperatively toward a nation-
wide program that will make use of the full capabilities of
existing monitoring activities.

A nationwide environmental monitoring system can exist only if
there is centralized knowledge of the program associated with
responsibility and authority for implementation. The routine
data collection efforts of Federal agencies, particularly within
the Department of the Interior, can be organized into a unified
nationwide estuarine monitoring system and coordinated with
similar State efforts through amalgamating into one organiza-
tion the necessary responsibility and authority for carrying out
such a program without interference with the assigned missions
of any agency, either Federal or State.

Within the framework of a unified sampling network, an effective
nationwide estuarine monitoring program can be developed from
existing monitoring programs by combining with this activity the
centralized authority to supplement ongoing programs by:

VI-76

1. providing to Federal agencies funds specifically
allocated for broadening their existing pertinent
programs ;

2. supporting State programs with funds or contract
support for environmental monitoring;

3. carrying out additional monitoring activities
through in-house capability or by contract;

4. supporting research and development activities
designed to improve monitoring capability.

This program should concern itself with the broadest possible
scale of environmental Information, including all categories
of information incorporated into the National Estuarine Inventory,
While water quality, pollution source, and ecological data are
badly needed and require major effort, there should also be
regularly scheduled monitoring of other aspects of the estuarine
environment such as recreational demand and use.

The basic data collection and routine monitoring program should
be an integral part of the overall management information system
required to support management efforts.

MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM

The object of this activity is to provide a continuing institu-
tional and technical information service on estuarine problems.
As such there should be the in-house capability of operating a
large automated data and information library; but there should

VI-77

also be the capability of recognizing data needs, finding and
acquiring data, organizing Information for management use, and
developing new techniques and applications Involving management
Information. Given these capabilities the elements of an
Information acquisition and service program for completing and
maintaining a current estuarlne management information program
follow naturally from the information problem areas outlined
previously.

1. Additional existing unclassified data from the Federal

\ agencies and other sources listed in Table VI. 2.1 should be
compiled by contract or other arrangement. The compilation of
historical data from these sources would be rather massive and
it is not reasonable to expect such agencies to either assign
the task to personnel who are busy with other tasks nor to
acquire the temporary work force required.

2. Reimbursible agreements on contracts should be let with data
contributors and others to provide for updating their input to
the Inventory at specified intervals.

In those cases where Nationwide data blocks have been included in
the Inventory, e.g., mining use, volumes and costs of dredging,
commercial shipping, etc. only updating would be necessary.

3. A simple and direct reporting system should be Implemented.
All studies wholly or partially funded by the Federal Government

VI-78

which deal with the estuarine zone, including associated land
areas (coastal counties, coastal SMSA's or parts thereof) should
be required to forward copies of raw data gathered and reports
completed to a central facility for processing and cataloguing.

The reporting system should require no special form or method
ob submission, but simply copies of material gathered. (At the
field level where the actual work takes place, special require-
ments of data and information submission would require too many
man-hours to be feasible).

This reporting system will serve tv/o purposes. First, it will
serve as an update mechanism for knowledge being gained in the
estuarine zone. Second, it will provide an accurate mechanism
to help prevent duplication of effort among federally financed
programs.

4. All entities wholly or partially financed by the Federal
Government, which monitor estuarine water quality parameters,
including sediments and sedimentation, should be identified, their
sampling station locations pin-pointed, and copies of the data
taken submitted to a central location for processing.

Unified identification of existing stations and analysis of the
data collected would point out current coverage and permit any
expansion necessary to proceed logically and without duplication.

Much of the work of identification of the sampling points used
by Federal agencies has already been accomplished by the U. S.

VI-79

Geoloqical Survey and by the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration. It is among States, university groups, and
Federal grant program receivers that most of the identification
work should be concentrated.

5. Existing similar data systems should be used reciprocally
and cooperatively to store and retrieve various data types.
These systems include the Inventory, STORET, USGS Hydrologic,
and NODC. The compatibility of system concept and structure

of these four systems is such that they can function as comple-
mentary segments of a single large storage and retrieval system.

In data gathering, for example, each organization searches pri-
marily for the type of data which its "software" (that is,
programs — the machines themselves are "hardware") will accept.
It is inevitable that the searches will encounter information
which can be stored in a sister system more efficiently; thus,
a considerable amount of duplication can he saved.

6. Concurrently with data gathering, processing and servicina,
there must be a constant background of analytical data information
investigation to identify special needs and conditions, and to
explore new possibilities and applications, both directly and

by contract.

APPLIED RESEARCH
A program of research and study to advance the state of knowledge

VI-80

in estuarine manaqement is presented in Chapter 3. It is
important to recognize, however, that the research program,
the routine monitoring program, and the information service
program are all integral parts of the overall effort intended
to provide management with the ability to preserve, use, and
develop the national estuarine system of the United States.

SUMMARY

The object of building and maintaining the National Estuarine
Inventory is to aid in the application of existing knowledge
to maintain environmental stability in the coastal lands and
waters of the United States. The program of data and information
collection and handling set out in this Chapter is devised to
be able to supply current and accurate information to the
institutional and technical manager, to the scientist and student,
and to the institutions and agencies who help in the fight to
preserve and maintain our environment. The prerequisites are a
central facility, the men and machines to perform the labor, and
constant application of a vigorous and aggressive public service
policy.

VI-81

Chapter 3
MAJOR RESEARCH AND STUDY NEEDS

SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION

The National Estuarine Pollution Study was specifically instructed
by the Congress to identify problems and areas in which further
research and study are required for the preservation, study, use,
and development of the estuaries of the Nation.

This chapter will discuss these research and study needs in fairly
broad terms. The intent here is to present an overview, providing
a guide towards the ouroose for doing research, the kind of basic
information needed to designate desired estuarine uses and goals and
to support a comprehensive plan of management. Next the knowledge
gaps are identified and the research and study programs needed to
supply this knowledge are developed. Examples of study programs to
satisfy specific goals are outlined and the principles and a system
of managing estuarine research and studies are proposed. Finally,
the recommendations of the combined National Academy of Sciences
Committee on Oceanography and National Academy of Engineering Commit-
tee on Ocean Engineering together with a scheme of priorities are
presented.

By no means does this chapter attempt to present every possible
need. This would be an impossible and pointless effort, for it
is our task and our intent to indicate here the broad areas in

VI-82

which research and study are needed and to encourage those people
who have the most knowledge concerning specific problems to design
and implement the special studies that will increase our knowledge.

The information needed to nrenare this chanter was obtained bv
several aporoaches with the overriding goals being to represent
as broad a diversity of interests and as manv knowledgeable peo-
ple as possible. Many people, numbering in the hundreds, have
contributed generously of their time, effort, and thinking to
make up this chanter. It would be imoossible to mention them
all and Indeed, unfair, because of the variation in quality and
guantity of the various individual contributions and the apnli-
cability of the various recommendations.

Some needs were identified by many oeonle from various oarts of
the country indicating great importance, yet each reconnized need
aopears as only a single item. Other needs sungested by perhaps
only one person, are vitally important in a specific locality but
would not have the same national impact as others.

HOl^ THIS CHAPTER WAS DFVELOPFD
AMD SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The best source of information concerning needed research and
studies in the estuaries is the people who work directly on
estuarine problems on a first-hand basis: the scientists, engi'
neers, planners, and economists in the various universities.

VI-83

institutions, and State and local qovernments who will actually do
the research suggested here. In order to take direct advantage of
this vast reservoir of knowledge and experience throughout the coun-
try, each region of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion was instructed to contact individuals and institutions in its
vicinity who are knowledgeable and were interested in supplying
infonnation to the National Estuarine Pollution Study. The response
to this call for information was generous and provided an extremely
valuable and diversified array of research needs. This qrouo also
suDplied many valuable concents towards establishing a system of
management of research.

In order to sample the thinking of the many organizations of learned
men, letters were written to 15 selected professional societies and
organizations requesting their official ooinions on research needs.
M This group was selected as being representative of those societies
-whose memberships are closely concerned with the problems of estua-
rine water pollution and its abatement. A more comorehensive list
would have introduced considerable redundancy because of the many
other sources of infonnation used. The oraanizations contacted were:

(1) Atlantic Estuarine Research Society

(2) The American Fisheries Society

(3) American Society of Ichthyoloqists and Heroetologists

(4) American Society of Limnology and Oceanography

VI-84

(5

(6

(7

(8

(9

(10

(11

(12

(13

(14

(15

American Institute of Biological Sciences
Ecological Society of America
American Water Resources Association
Water Pollution Control Federation
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Chemical Society
American Geological Institute
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission
Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission
Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Commission

As discussed in detail elsewhere in the reoort, thirty public
meetings were held throughout the country to learn what the pub-
lic desired for their estuaries. Each of these meetings contained
many statements of importance to the develooment of a research
and study program. The transcripts of these meetings were
analyzed in detail. The research and study needs so identified
have been incoroorated into this chapter of the reoort.

In the course of the National Estuarine Pollution Study, many
special study contracts were let. Many of these requested a
discussion of the research and study needs in the snecific area
under consideration. Information so derived has been incorporated
into the preparation of this chapter.

VI-85

The Office of Research and Development of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration sunnlied to the Studv a state-
ment of research needs. This statement was hroad in scone vet
detailed v/here needed. This information also has been incorporated
into this chaoter.

Many of the Federal Government agency nrofiles nresented else-
where in this Studv had a comoonent concernino research activi-
ties and study needs. This information has been incornorated
into this chanter.

Each State orofile has a comparable research activities and needs
component.

The National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of
Enqineerinn has nreoared, throiioh their respective Committee on
Oceanoaraohy and Committee on Ocean Ennineerino, a statement on
the research needed for coastal waste mananement. Because of the
importance of these orouns and the excellence of their suqqestions,
this contribution has been included as its own Section viithin
this chapter. This Section represents the thinl^inc of a consor-
tium of established and recoqnized authorities and tends to sunnlv
a cohesive and interpretive overview of the research and study
needed in the estuarine zones. To a lesser extent, they also
supply a scheme of priorities that will serve all ^^enef^cia^ uses

VI-86

of the estuarine zones most effectively and serve as a guide in
the implementation of the recommendations of the National Estuarine
Pollution Study.

The purpose of this broadly diversified program of data acquisition
was to insure that each of the user groups and conservation interests
would have an opportunity to be heard and to have their recommenda-
tions for a program of research and study needs presented. The
sections that follow will oropose as many of these study needs as
possible and will relate them to the comprehensive program of estua-
rine management presented earlier in this report.

vi-y?

SECTION 2. THE DATA BASE NECESSARY
FOR EFFECTIVE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT

It is becominq qenerally recognized that the basic need in estuarine
zones is a comprehensive management system designed to maximize the
net benefits possible. A great deal of technical and socioeconomic
information is necessary for developing and implementing such a
management system. Unfortunately, present knowledge is inadequate
for most estuarine areas.

The knowledge required for wise and effective estuarine manaqement
must be supplied through cooperative efforts of enqineers, biologists,
economists, and others and incorporated into a conventionalized sys-
tem of data processing and storage. The availability of data from
engineering and ecological studies for socioeconomic analysis should
not be merely coincidental, but should be a carefully planned objec-
tive incorporated into research designs through multidisciplinary
interaction and planning.

The range of estuarine information needed transcends the scope of
biological, physical, and chemical data; it must also include speci-
fic information of demographic, social, and economic significance.
Knowledge of the uses and values of estuarine resources is also a
reguirement of this data base. We must also be fully cognizant of
the institutional arrangements operating in the estuarine zone, for
any management proqram must operate within the legal and political
framework applicable to the specific estuary under consideration.

VI-88

A full and adequate knowledge of these three broad categories of
information - technical, socioeconomic, and political - is inextri-
cably related to establishing goals and assigning uses for individual
estuaries or estuarine regions. The assignation of desired uses of
a natural resource is a basic management decision which reauires the
kinds of information discussed above.

The overall purpose of applied research and study is to provide the
knowledge required to establish and implement and effective compre-
hensive managament program which will achieve optimum beneficial
uses of the Nation's estuaries. This, of course, calls for a
sequence of intermediate steps. The very first thing that must be
done is to collate the currently known biological, chemical, and
physical conditions of each portion of the estuarine zone. This
assemblage of information should also indicate the current uses of
the estuarine zone, its resources, the management situation currently
in effect, and the problems and dangers that exist. This body of
knowledge, the initial data base, is essentially the content of the
National Estuarine Inventory (NEI) discussed at length in Chapters 1
and 2 of Part VI.

The National Estuarine Inventory is based on a series of handbooks
which will fully describe each segment of the estuarine zone. Infor-
mation is recorded under the following classifications:

(1) Identification of Estuarine Register Area

(2) Area description

VI-89

(3) Managinq entities

(4) Hydrology

(5) Stage of development

(6) Physical oceanography

(7) Water quality

(8) Sediments and Sedimentation

(9) Uses

(10) Sources of pollution

(11 ) Use damaqes

(12) Immediate Pollution Control Needs

(13) Water quality standards

(14) Past and current studies

Based on this assemblage of oresent knowledge, we develop a proposed
comprehensive plan of management and designate desired goals and
uses. This, of course, frames the questions of feasibility of such
goals and uses. Reference again to our known data base identifies
the knowledge gaps -- the knowledge we must have to make oroper
decisions on uses and the knowledge which is needed for effective
technical management to provide for the desired uses. Identification
of these knowledge qans then leads rather directly to the development
of the most essential research and study programs. The results of
such proqrams augment the initial data base and orovide the required
information for both political and scientific management. This
sequence is shown diaqramaticallv in Figure VI. 3.1.

VI-90

FIGURE Vl.3.1

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE
COMPREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT

AND

INITIAL DATABASE
(INVENTORY)

1

PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

I

DESIGNATE DESIRED
GOALS AND USES

APPROVED COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

T

IDENTIFY KNOWLEDGE GAPS

I

DEVELOP RESEARCH AND
STUDY PROGRAMS TO FILL
THESE GAPS

I

PERFORM NEEDED STUDIES

I

NEW KNOWLEDGE

I

ESTABLISH AND IMPLEMENT AN
EFFECTIVE TECHNICAL MANAGE-
MENT PROGRAM TO ACHIEVE
DESI RED GOALS AND USES

VI-91

In order to serve its purpose as a management tool, this data base
must satisfy five broad requirements. These requirements are:
(1) baseline knowledge of biological, physical, and chemical data
describing the estuarine zone, (2) knowledge of the institutional
framework governing each portion of the estuarine zone, (3) knowledge
of the demographic, social, and economic factors and their trends
affecting the estuarine zone, (4) an establishment of goals and uses
so that future studies can be relevantly oriented, and (5) an augmen-
tation and synthesis of the previous four adequate to permit estua-
rine management. The next portion of this Section will discuss each
of these requirements in greater detail.

THE NEED FOR BASELINE STUDIES OF BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL,
AND CHEMICAL FACTORS DESCRIBING THE ESTUARINE ZONE

The need for baseline studies is so basic and so obvious that it
frequently is overlooked. Simply stated, a physical, chemical, and
-biological inventory must be conducted of all important estuaries and
as many as possible of those of lesser importance. The purpose of
such inventories would be to establish conditions as they are now; a
baseline against which to determine the nature, extent, and rate of
any future change. Research programs ensuing from this information
would be addressed tov,ard two basic questions: (1) what forces and
combination of factors made each estuary the way it is, and (2) what
must be done to make (or keeD)each estuary the way we want it to be.

VI-92

There are the compelling reasons for establishing baseline conditions
and for developing background information now. An inventory of all
estuarine areas to determine their condition precedes prediction of
their potential for supporting valuable living resources along with
other desired uses. Ue also need to know what is happening to such
areas; how and to what extent they are being altered or threatened.
Biological, chemical, and physical baselines must be established as
a foundation for further studies and evaluations. Some work of this
kind has been done or is under way, but much more remains to be done.

THE NEED FOR SOCIAL, ECONOMIC,
AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

In the final analysis, the success of a management program is mea-
sured in terms of satisfaction of human needs and desires. Thus,
the purpose of a management program is to provide the most benefits to
the most people with the least amount of conflicting use - in brief:
accurate resource evaluation and optimum beneficial resource alloca-
tion. The information needed for this is not as clearly definable
as it is for technical purposes because the uses, values, and goals
are not as quantifiable. This portion of an inventory would detail
historical, present, and proposed specific uses and values within
the estuarine zone; damages to use from pollution and other causes;
demographic distributions and trends; transportation and navigational
facilities; industrial installations, imoact, and values; recreational
benefits and potential, aesthetic demands; economic values associated

VI -93

directl.^' with the esttiarine zopp ; snort and comnercial fishinq
use and value; home develnnnent, and the alternatives and poten-
tial of as yet undeveloped narts of the estuarine zone.

THE NEED TO KNOW THE INSTITUTIONAL AND POLITICAL
ARRANGEMENTS OF EACH PORTION OF THE ESTUARINE ZONE

The institution^)! and political oroanization of each n;\rt nf
the estuarine zone is the framev/ork within which anv nananement
prooram must oneratp. It is thus axion^tic that dptailed Imnw-
ledqe of all aspect? of these arranoenents ire an intrinsic
part of the data hase needed for nanaoenent. Such information
includes: the political make-un of the estuarine z-^ne, i.?., the
States, counties, nunicioalities, and snecial districts and/or
interstate nrouns involved: the lenal responsibilities and
authorities of each of these; nrouns with mana^p^ent responsibi-
lities in the svstem: existinn zoninn information and other
applicable noverninq requlation: water oualitv standards and
status of implementation ; and Federal activities in t^^e pstua-
rine zone.

THE NEED TO ESTABLISH GOALS AND USES

The data base describe-^ earlier is nrerenuisite to t^e establish-
ment of qcals and uses in the estuarine zone. Once these are
established, thev form a vital nortion of the data ^ase because

VI-94

the acquisitipn of further Information is qoverned hy the desired
uses. Hence, we must knov what we want tn achieve. We must
know where we are goinq. Toals and uses for each estuarv and
the various portions within each estuarv nust be established.
Roals must he identified in terms of Inna, n-e'^ium, and short-term
achievements. Uses must be established from an ohiective noint
of view. It must be accented that not all waters are suitable
for all nurnoses. Potential uses, conflicts, and alternatives
for developn^ent must be identified, described, and evaluated.
This knowledqe is essential to the settinn of Priorities for
research, olannino, and other actions.

This brings us to the hardest decision of all, for after uses are
designated and alternatives are identified and evaluated, speci-
fic goals must he established. Then trade-offs must be made and
sacrifices must be endured if, indeed, optimum benefits are to
be achieved. With resnect to all that needs to be done, we must
not lose sight of our objectives. Where will we be able to swim
that we can not now swim; are there places for boatinq where we
do not dare boat now; are our v/ater-front environments unhealthy
or devalued, and if so, should those values be restored; can
and should '-'e safely and successfully groi-' shelKish where thev can
not now be grown; what are the health, recreational, and commer-
cial effects of pollution from large vessels or small boats or
from casual uses of our v/aters; '-/here minht we catch fish that

VI-95

none can now be caught; are there water-borne diseases and what
measures will correct them; what values should we place on the
physical properties of width, depth, and appearance of water
which must be restored or preserved; what will be the long-term
effects of excess plant nutrients? Then, with respect to all
of these and similar questions, we must necessarily balance
against lost values, the burdens which their correction will
create and be sure that the burdens we create are commensurate
with the values regained.

THE NEED TO AUGMENT AND SYNTHESIZE BASIC
KNOWLEDGE TO PERMIT OPTIMUM ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT

The quintessence of any management system is the development of
predictive capability. Having established the goals and uses;
having established the knowledge of the potential, the capabi-
lity, and intrinsic values of our estuaries; we must then know
what will occur in response to a given stress or stimulus or
activity of man or nature. It is this ability of prediction, of
knowing what would be the sequelae of our actions, that will
enable us to truly manage our estuaries in an intelligent fashion.

The way we technically manage a specific estuary depends upon
the goals established for that estuary and on what uses we wish
to make of it. The research program to support this technical

VI-96

management 1s then dependent upon the goals and uses we have selected,
All information gathered and studies performed must be oriented
towards developing predictive capability if the benefits of wise
management are to be attained.

VI-97

SECTION 3. MAJOR KNOWLEDGE GAPS AND A PROGRAM
OF NEEDED STUDY AND RESEARCH

This section introduces the discussion of what must be done to pro-
vide the data base outlined in Section 2 coupled with the analysis,
research, and study required to provide the knowledge and understand-
ing necessary to support a program of technical management. We
intend to identify the major problem areas in which there are large
knowledge gaps and concurrently present research and study programs
that will provide the needed information. We will also discuss the
kinds of research that will supply a basis for decisions that will
optimize beneficial uses of the estuarine resources. The research
programs proposed below are designed to recognize and interpret the
causal relationships that are an integral part of any research pro-
gram of value for management decisions. This understanding of causal
relationships is the key to developing the capability to predict the
-effects of natural and man-induced activities on the estuarine zone,
and, hence, to manage them.

Any discussion of knowledge gaps in major problem areas leads natur-
ally to a description of the broad programs necessary to satisfy this
need for information. Thus, as such gaps are identified, the remed-
ial research and study activities are developed and incorporated into
the appropriate discussion.

There is no attempt to exhaustively list research projects but rather
to delineate the broad areas which need further study. Many of these

VI-98

research and study needs to not conveniently fall into categories or
disciplines. In fact, most of them do not, reflecting the complex
interacting nature of the estuary itself: a complex of air, sediment,
ocean, freshwater influx, marsh, beach, or rock, and the estuary
itself. Because of this, problem areas have been identified largely
on the basis of kinds of approaches that will yield meaningful
results.

A study of all our sources of information, recommendations received,
replies to specific requests, and symposia on research needs leads to
the opinion that our most important knowledge gaps and thus the most
imperative research and study needs lie in the following major areas:

(1) Ecology, taken to include baseline studies, broad
ecological studies, biology, water quality, natural
variability, and interface factors;

(2) Toxicity, taken to include bioassay and methodology,
sublethal effects, and mortality phenomena;

(3) Microbiology, taken to include the regeneration
of plant nutrients, biodegradation of organic wastes,
the phenomenon of eutrophi cation or over-fertilization
to cause nuisance conditions, and pathogenic organisms
to either humans or aquatic organisms;

(4) Physics and mathematics, taken to include hydraul-
ics, sedimentation, effects of structures and physical
modifications, physical and mathematical modeling;

VI-99

(5) Socioeconomic factors, taken to include planning,
econ»mics, law, social and demographic factors and
trends, resource evaluation and allocation, and the role
of technical research and study in supporting a com-
prehensive management plan; and

(6) Ancillary research and study needs, taken to
include environmental monitoring, methodology (both
laboratory and field techniques), data processing,
training needs, and estuarine zone laboratories.

Bearing in mind that each of these categories overlaps the others to
a greater or lesser extent and that no one of them is truly meaning-
ful in the absence of consideration of all the others, knowledge de-
veloped in any one of them must be integrated with the others to
develop the broad understanding of the estuarine zone necessary to
implement a useful management program. The Sections that follow,
'4 through 9, will discuss each of these categories in greater detail
and present a relevant program of study and investigation.

VI-100

SECTION 4. ECOLOGY

Ecology is the science of the interrelationships between living
organisms and their environment. As such, it encompasses all of the
natural biological, physical, and chemical aspects of the estuarine
and coastal zones. The overall complex formed by the community of
organisms and its environment is called an ecosystem. The discussion
below deals with certain aspects of the ecosystem, why these are
especially important in a program of technical and comprehensive
program of estuarine management, and the most urgent knowledge gaps
concerning these ecosystems. The various kinds of ecological research
needed lie in the categories of baseline studies to provide basic
data, broad ecological studies to determine mechanisms and ecosystem
interrelationships, biological studies to elucidate purely biological
phenomena, water quality studies to understand the physico-chemical
environment, natural variations to differentiate against man-made
changes, and interface factors to account for exchanges between the
estuarine ecosystem and its bordering influences.

BASELINE STUDIES

Purpose

The most important gaps to be filled by a baseline study are a
knowledge of the physical and chemical characteristics, identifica-
tion, distribution, diversity, and abundance of resident and
non-resident organisms, exhaustive studies of their interactions.

VI-101

and the underlying causes for these characteristics. This would per-
mit classification of each estuary into a characteristic habitat type
and prediction of the productivity of fish, shellfish, wildlife, and
other renewable resources for each habitat. Properly conducted base-
line studies would increase understanding of the causes and mechanisms
of natural and man-made fluctuations in species abundance. Baseline
studies would be necessary before considering the merit of preserving
certain estuaries in their present condition for future comparative
reference. Perhaps the most valuable benefit to be derived from
baseline studies is information bearing on the key management ques-
tion of how much natural habitat -- estuary, marsh, lagoon -- is
required for the maintenance and production of adequate numbers of
desired species of plants and animals.

Studies of Unpolluted Estuaries

Knowledge of baseline conditions is particularly important in estua-
ries relatively unaffected by man's activities. These oristine areas
serve as controls for ourposes of comparison with bays that have been
modified to various degrees by human activities. It is extremely
difficult to assess changes in the productivity or the decline or
disappearance of economically imoortant soecies without sufficient
background information. In some cases, such chanaes can be attributed
fairly accurately to specific causes such as pollution, over-exoloi-
tation, or natural variation. On the other hand, the general decline
of a species over a wide geographic area, such as the Olympia oyster

VI-102

over much of the Pacific Northwest, suggests subtle ecological changes
which are much more difficult to assess. It would be invaluable to
be able to compare existing water quality conditions in given estua-
ries with conditions as they were fifty years ago. One wonders, for
example, how seasonal and annual stream flow regimes have changed
due to human activities in watershed areas and how such changes have
affected the estuarine environment and hence the indigenuous biota.

Necessary Kinds of Information

The information needed as a base for technical management should be
in the form of an outline describing the Nation's coastal areas. To
resolve questions of best estuarine use, necessary information includes
the following: size and shape, existing water quality, degradation,
sources and types of wastes, climate, hydrology, circulation, ecology,
present and potential habitat value, identification, distribution and
abundance of organisms, physical modifications, bathymetry, and bottom
conditions.

BROAD ECOLOGICAL STUDIES

Scope of Ecolonical Studies

Broad ecological studies are needed to intearate all of the factors
acting to shape the nature of the estuarine zone. We need to expand
the baseline research on estuarine systems to include studies on
nutrient and thermal additions, circulation and transfer of substances

VI-103

and enerqy productivity, species interaction, effects of pollution,
biological indicators of environmental change, and ecosystem analysis.
The broad impact of economic poisons*, must be identified and quanti-
fied. What are the sources, effects, and fate of the various pesti-
cides and herbicides, and how may these effects be mitigated? What
are the details of the life histories and environmental requirements
of estuarine-associated and estuarine-dependent species? Studies
should be conducted to determine the dependence of marine species on
estuarine nursery areas, to measure the impact of inland development
on the estuarine ecosystem, and to determine the quality and quantity
of fish and wildlife habitat areas necessary to maintain present
population levels and to satisfy predicted future use. Studies should
be implemented on rare and endangered snecies of fish and shellfish.
One of the most important gaps remaining is our lack of knowledge of
the dynamics of food chains, the relationships between phytoplankton
on one end of the food chain and fish at the other, esnecially quanti-
tative data on biomass and replacement rates of both benthic and
Delagic invertebrates which are not of economic value themselves but
are important parts of the food chain or, in some cases, are anta-
gonistic to economically important species.

Enerqy Flow in Food Webs

Much study is reauired to determine the absolute and relative contri-
butions of phytoplankton, spermatonhytes such as turtle qrass and

♦Pesticides, herbicides, defoliants, rodenticides, etc.

VI-104

Spartina, and organic detritus to the energy used in these food
chains. This conceot of energy transfer is one of the most impor-
tant aspects to understand in order to efficiently manage complex
estuarine environments, for it is a fundamental property of the
system and provides an extremely valuable approach to evaluation of
the effects of pollution and change. It is essential to be able to
quantitatively describe the energy transfer for individual species,
for trophic levels, and for cormiunities. Constructive manipulations
of the sequential nature of energy transfer and utilization can be
achieved by the application of system models for studies on move-
ments and rates of transfer of selected pollutants within the system,
such as insecticides and heavy metals. Such programs are dependent
upon the availability of rav; data on input to the ecosvstem, biocon-
centration, sedimentation, and output from the ecosystem. One of
the early requirements in any management program should include an
energy budget analysis.

Ecosystem Rehabilitation
Research is needed on the recovery of an area during the course of
cleaning it up. How long does it take, what indications do we have
along the way, and how will cleaner water effect the area; for
example, will there be more fouling and wood borer problems? Is
just the removal of pollution enough to reclaim an area or do we
need to develop techniques for rehabilitating despoiled estuarine
areas and for increasing fish and wildlife production in low value
habitats? How do we reconstruct a marsh after dredging, filling,

VI-105

and channelization projects, If, In fact, we can reconstruct a marsh
ecosystem? Another need Is to establish the time required for an
estuary despoiled by over-fertilization and decreased flushing to
reestablish a normally diverse flora and fauna upon stopoaqo of
nutrient input and increase in flushing rate. This could be accom-
plished by constructing experimental embayments using survey data
available for known polluted areas; and by developing model analogs
based upon existing survey data and experimental results. Progress
on reconstruction and rehabilitation of a desooiled estuarine area
is based again on the information which would result from exhaustive
detailed baseline studies described earlier.

Ecosystem Management

The use of systems analysis techniques to determine the effects of
various changes in the environment and harvesting technioues on
population levels is extremely productive. It seems that some of
the very critical problems of estuarine and continental shelf
resources, such as trash fishing, may be amenable to such analysis.
In no other way can we ever hope to determine what the effect of
removal of a certain portion of a population at a given age would
have on the ability of the population to survive and multiply.
Based on this kind of data, we could satisfy the need to develop
better estuarine husbandry programs, and anuaculture might be more
profitably and productively pursued. Fish production miqht be
Increased by altering currents and by other means, litigating

VI-106

effects of environmental alterations, controlling disposal of waste
products, controlling fish diseases and predators, and developing
genetic strains of desired species more suited to moderately disturbed
habitats might possibly ensue from a sophisticated analysis of the
above factors. Certainly we should know more about the effects of
any changes in the estuarine environment on the increase or build-
up that might be exoected of aquatic weeds, pest species of insects
and other arthropods, and diseases and predator species that may
reduce populations of desirable organisms or inhibit recreational
uses of estuarine areas.

BIOLOGICAL STUDIES

Estuarine biological systems are extemaly complex v/hen compared to
freshwater or truly marine environments. The areas between the
freshwater and the sea remain the biological link betv/een the sys-
stems which, if broken, will result in the elimination of many
valuable resources. The planktonic stages which are characteristic
of life histories of species having commercial or recreational impor-
tance are especially vulnerable to environmental changes.

Sources of Food

The complicated food chains, associated with the polymorphic life
histories of estuarine organisms are poorly understood. For example,
the American oyster, which is often called the most thoroughly stu-
died of all estuarine organisms, can starve in waters containing

VI-107

j large populations of certain unicellular green algae which appear to
be as suitable for food as other green algae on which they thrive.

J There needs to be more definitive work done on the actual sources of

1

food used by various estuarine organisms, oarticularly those of com-
mercial importance, as well as the specific kinds of food. We need
to know how much of the diet of the given species comes from a given
source. This is narticularly true for the detritus feeders. We need

to know how much detritus eaten comes from salt marshes; how much

I

from freshwater sources up-river; how much from submerged aquatic

vegetation; and how much from other sources. Better knowledge in
this area is necessary in order to make intelligent decisions about
how much of a given sort of habitat is necessary to "carry" a given
level of resource. A better understanding and more knowledge of car-
bon fixation by plants in estuaries is necessary, for this is the
basic source of all food for all levels of animals in the estuary.

The Estuary as a Nursery

We need to identify what is in the estuarine environment that makes
it so suitable a nursery for larval and juvenile animals. This in
turn means identifying, among other things, individual steos in food
webs. Enough aspects should be investigated to allow us to make
estimates of energy turnover. We already know that ocean basins are
nutrient traps - olaces where energy is traoced and not returned to
the cycle. What is the role of estuaries in this "running down"
process? Do fine sediments act as traps for organic and inorganic

VI-108

particles which are then used by bacteria, and what organisms miqht
"graze" on the bacteria?

An important link in the food webs of the estuaries is the olankton
serving as a food supply for higher, more predacious organisms.
These higher predators are in the estuary as permanent residents,
as migrants coming in to feed, or as organisms that may use the
estuary as a migratory path going upstream or downstream, during
which time they might be feeding. One often hears of the conser-
vation efforts directed towards such major sport fish as the salmon,
but little emphasis is placed on the conservation of lower members
of the food web which are quite important, not only to forms such as
salmon, but also to all of the other forms utilizing this basic
food stuff of the ocean as a food supply. In brief, we must deter-
mine the degree to which estuarine and off-shore commercially and
recreational ly important fishes, and their resoective food chains,
depend upon the estuary.

Habitat Reouirements

We must determine the fish and wildlife habitat areas necessary to
maintain adequate population levels for future uses in the estua-
ries of food organisms, as well as the desirable species themselves.
This question of adequate habitat has proved to be a very difficult
determination to make, in view

VI-109

of the lack of positive knowledge of the quantitative require-
ments for marsh, as well as other estuarine environments as
nursery and habitat areas for fish and wildlife and for other
purposes. Substantial research must be devoted to this question,
meanwhile attempting to preserve marsh and other coastal regions
to the greatest extent possible through influence on permits for
dredging, filling, draining, or other modifications of estuarine zones,

An extension of the study of necessary habitats would be to
determine in quantitative terms, the importance of the estuary
as a soawnlnq area, and then its importance as a nursery
area. These data on life cycle events, population dynamics,
food chains, nursery, habitat, soawning area values, may exist
already in one form or another, but they are certainly not
generally available. They need to be drawn together in a way
so that they can be used by the resource manager.

WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS

As indicated in the discussion on baseline studies, it is essen-
tial to have a full knowledge of the characteristics of the
receiving waters in the development of a realistic program for
pollution control and water quality management. In most cases,
the pollutional control characteristics are unknown for the
various estuarine areas. These characteristics need to be
established for each estuary. While some basic data concerning

vi-no

expected norms can be Interchanged amonq estuaries, much work
with each individual system is needed to establish the validity
of such interchanges.

Effects of Combined Wastes

Residential, recreational, agricultural, and industrial develop-
ment of the estuarine zones is proceeding at a ranid rate. These
activities frequently result in highly complex waste waters from
many sources that eventually become mixed in the bays and oceans.
While the toxic and other characteristics of some of the indivi-
dual types of waste water have been studied, effects of combined
waste waters, including synergistic and antagonistic effects* are
largely unknown.

Water Quality Requirements For
Fish, Other Aquatic Life and Wildlife

Having learned something of the water quality of the estuaries,
the next step is to ascertain the water quality requirements for
the estuarine and near-shore environment. At the present time,
knowledge in this area is incomplete, with the resulting tendency
to use criteria that have been developed for freshwater systems.
Because of the complexity of the marine system, many of the
measures used in the freshwater environments are of questionable
value or at least difficult to interpret. Although there has

vi-m

been a considerable amount of work done, there still exist gaps in
our knowledqe of water Quality requirements for the various finfish,
shellfish, organisms that comprise their food chains, and other
marine species. Further, much of the work that has been done on
the subject has addressed itself to toxicity limits which determine
the level of various materials that are fatal to marine species.
This approach is undesirable because of the objective for management
of the marine environment is not to determine the minimum level or
quality that can be tolerated, but is to maintain the quality that
is necessary to sustain and enhance the fishery production and other
beneficial uses of marine areas. This requirement is of particular
importance because the estuaries and near-shore zones comprise the
nursery grounds and habitat for 75 percent of the important marine
species.

Water Quality Requirements for Plants

We must be careful to concern ourselves with the plants as well
as the animals present in the marine environment. Environmental,
chemical, and physical requirements of important species of inshore
and estuarine phytoplankton should be determined with reference to
the major cations (sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium), minor
cations (manganese, molybdenum, zinc, vanadium, cobalt, copper,
iron, strontium), anions (chlorine, boron, fluorine, iodine,
nitrogen, phosphorous, silicon, carbonate, ammonium, sulphate,
sulphite, sulphide, bicarbonate, nitrite, and nitrate), vitamins (B^^'

VI-112

biotin, thiamin), light (photo-period, intensity, spectral distri-
bution), temperature (ranges, optimum, rate of change), pH (range,
optimum, rate of pH change adaptation), and eH (ranges, optimum, and
rate of eH change adaptation).

Determination of the amount and chemical identification of
naturally occurring anti -metabolites present in sea water and
determination of their effects upon the abundance and distribution
of important phytoplankton soecies should be made. Information
so derived could be very useful for manaqina water quality that
would inhibit undesirable organisms.

Water Quality Requirements for Recreation

Water quality research should not be dominated by concern for
fish and shellfish alone but should also give a major considera-
tion of water quality requirements for the preservation of aesthe-
tic and recreational uses of the estuarine and near-shore areas.
The need for intensive research on water quality requirements for
recreation is directly related to the optimum recreational carrying
capacity of the estuarine area. This is oarticularly true for the
effect of multipje pollutants acting at the same time in the same
location. Consideration should also be given to oublic health
implications; for example, the present col i form criteria
for oyster production areas is highly questionable in the light

vi-n3

of present knowledge on bacterial re-growth and the relationship of
this indicator organism to the probable presence of disease-producing
organisms.

The Need for Non-harmful Discharges

Waste water quality criteria should be developed to assure that the
discharge of waste to natural receiving waters results in a neutral
or beneficial effect upon the biota of the receiving waters. Many
estuarine animals are capable of ingesting and eliminating heavy
metals without harm when these elements occur in natural ratios.

Artificially induced imbalances, however, can result in ingestion
rates exceeding elimination causing accumulation of heavy metals in
the tissues. For examole, in long-term bioassay tests, severe oyster
mortalities occurred due to minute amounts of chromium, nickel, and
molybdenum originating from a stainless steel water intake line.
The gradual increase of heavy metals and other trace elements over
background values are an outstanding example of a subtle kind of
ecological change in our estuaries. There are many sources of
metallic contamination, some of which are known, others not even
suspected. One wonders, for example, about the quantity of heavy
metals originating from the use of water in households. There are
many miles of copper tubing and galvanized water piping in our
modern urban dwellings subject to corrosion and leaching, releasing
unknown quantities of copper and zinc.

vi-n4

Oil

Because of the increase in oil pollution and the associated use
of oil dispersants, it is urgent that a better understanding of
degradation processes involving both treated and untreated oil
spills be reached without delay. The extent and kinds of effects
exerted by oil dispersants must be known so that appropriate
reactions can be made when an oil -spill -induced emergency occurs.
For example, oil or petroleum concentration, per se^, at high
levels is considered deleterious to the ecosystem and maximum
levels of oil or grease are established for estuaries. However,
evidence from both the Torrey Canyon and Santa Barbara oil spills
indicate that some crudes and petroleum by-products are excellent
substrates for many organisms, becoming part of an enriched food
chain, while others may be either poisonous or have virtually no
food value. Thus, one must know not only how much oil and grease
Is present, but also their compositions and their effects on
important plants and animals. Much of the mortality in these
accidents was caused by the dispersant and not by the crude oil.

NATURAL VARIABILITY

A major gap in our knowledge of estuaries is an understanding of
natural variability. While there is a growing backlog of infor-
mation on natural variability within populations of certain

VI-115

estuarlne animals, the fluctuation of those parameters of the
environment (such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity,
CO2, pH, turbidity, etc.), which are recognized as controlling
mechanisms for pooulation distributions, are poorly understood.
Maximum and minimum values, duration of excursions (period of
Increase, plateau, and decrease), and time trends (ranging in
intervals from hours to decades) in these environmental parame-
ters must be intensively studied so that pollution effects due
to man's activity may be separated from natural environmental
fluctuations. We must also develop knowledge of the natural
variations in water quality that are encountered in estuarine
and near-shore areas in order to provide a basis for inter-
preting changes that are brought about by human activity. Tidal
flats and other estuarine areas rich in various biological forms
are highly productive. There is a continual cycle of life, pro-
duction, death, and decay in these areas which apparently operates
at a much higher level of activity than might be encountered
in fresh water systems. The magnitude of water quality variations,
caused by these natural effects is for the most part unknown.
Without knowledge of natural variations in water quality, it is
nearly impossible to set water quality standards.

Range of Natural Variation

An outstanding illustration of the need for understanding natural
variability is found in the Patuxent River, Maryland, estuary

VI-116

studies. A long term drought has resulted in an intrusion of
a saline wedge into the upper reaches of the river. A power
plant has been introducing thermal effluents into the river.
It has been impossible to distinguish between thermal effects
and effects of the saline wedge (resulting from a long term
natural fluctuation) on the river animals in many instances.
In this case, a history of intensive physical observations,
correlated with occasional biological surveys accumulated over
an extended period of time (such as has been extensively dis-
cussed earlier in connection with baseline studies), may well
have resulted in a basis for separating the natural from the
man-made alterations in animal populations. These observations
need not have been carried out on the Patuxent River itself,
but rather need only to have been concerned with the detailed
documentation of saline encroachment into a brackish system.
Another example of the importance of knowing natural variations
occurs in the bays along Texas, Louisiana, and other areas of
the Gulf Coast. In general, these bays are shallow bodies of
water with large surface areas. They are thus subject to natural
build-up of temperature and salinity. While the fauna of these
areas has adapted to the natural build-ups, the discharge of
heated waters and reduction of freshwater inflows may result
in build-ups to a level above that of any natural condition.
In order to provide a firm basis for the evaluation of the

VI-117

effects of proposed thermal and high dissolved residue content
waste discharges. Investigations into the temperature and
salinity characteristics of each estuarine area are needed.
Correlated with this is the need to understand the biological
principles of estuarine management.

Timing of Natural Variation

For the most part, we know that brackish water is necessary
for the maintenance of a large fraction of our coastal fisheries.
We do not, however, know exactly what are the limits of salt
concentration that will encourage optimal develooment of desirable
species. In addition to this, we have little idea of the optimal
seasonality of salinity changes. Although it is apparent that
a seasonal fluctuation of salinity may be desirable, we scarcely
have an idea as to when it would be best to reduce or raise the
salinity. We do know when certain important food animals reoro-
duce, so we might assume that reduced salinity would be most
optimal at this time, but we do not know what would be the
effects of raised salinities in other seasons. All v/ork of this
kind on natural variations ties back to the baseline studies
proposed earlier in this report.

INTERFACE FACTORS

An important portion of understanding the ecology of the estuarine
system is a knowledge of interface factors. By this we mean

VI-118

the exchanges which occur between the estuarine waters and offshore
waters, the influx of freshwater and other drainage from the land;
between the water mass and the bottom sediments; and between the
water mass and the atmosphere. Another area of interface concern,
the movement of materials between the biological compartment and
the aquatic compartments of the estuary, is the major theme of much
of this chapter and hence will not be discussed here.

Land Drainage-Estuary-Sea Interface

Because the. estuary itself is the interface between the sea and
the land, the ocean-estuary interface and the estuary-land drainage
interface are complimentary in many ways. The alteration of either
one is reflected in the change in effect of the other. In some
cases the estuary is a gradual continum from fresh to sea water;
in others the lines of demarcation are abrupt and well-defined.
The most obvious physical demarcations of land drainaqe-estuary-
sea are based on salinity, thus, the discussion of these two inter-
faces is combined.

It is established that various biological life is dependent on
salinity gradients throughout the estuarine zone. For example, the
high value of the Gulf Coast shrimp industry is dependent on the
bays as nursery grounds; however, the amounts and quality of fresh
water required to support the ecological system of each individual
bay has not yet been established. This is a Dressing research need.

vi-n9

Freshwater Inflows of many of our bays have already been reduced
or altered through construction of upstream water supply dams. In
addition to the obvious effect of increasing salt water intrusion
into fresh water systems of the riverine flows, we must also know
how the estuarine habitat is beinq limited by this increased salinity
due to increased ocean influence and the reduced mass of water in
a more brackish condition. The same question might well be framed
with any of the many other forms of parameter alteration that have
occurred. Temperature increase in critical areas might be extremely
important, perhaps far in excess of the actual amount of water being
affected, for if a critical area is affected, we might find ourselves
with a situation of a "gate" that has been closed and whole areas of
a formerly beneficial ecosystem removed from use by desirable
organisms.

Residual Pollutants

Residual pollutional material such as trace organic compounds and
minerals, pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, etc., are reaching
estuarine areas from either surface runoff or riverine incuts.
The specific kinds, amounts, and effects of these compounds are

VI-120

generally unknown. Investigations are needed to identify and
quantify the residual pollutants and to evaluate thetr pollu-
tional effect. These investigations should include, but not
be restricted to, shellfish tissue build-up of residuals,
tainted fish flesh, destruction of food chains, and inclusion
into other standing compartments of the estuarine ecosystem
such as the sediments, the marsh, or the major rooted aquatic
plants therein.

Contiguous Wetlands

There also needs to be a thorough study of the relationship of
contiguous wetland to estuarine ecological systems, including
the effects of drainage on estuarine water quality. The salt
marshes which are irregularly flooded are especially important.
These are areas which are flooded by tide only at sporadic
intervals, and consequently, there is no regular interchange
of water with the estuary. It has generally been assumed,
and what scanty data are available support the assumption, that
such marshes contribute very little to the estuary in the way
of organic matter and nutrients. The case for the importance
of regularly flooded marshes has been made convincingly and
consequently there is general agreement on the importance of
their preservation.

VI-121

People tend to regard the irregularly flooded marsh as exoendable,
and the pressures for modification of this habitat raoidly are
becoming greater. More data is needed in this area in order to
make informed decisions as to whether or not we can sacrifice large
acreage of the irregularly flooded marsh. One of the most active
programs in these areas has been ditching and draining for mosquito
control. There is considerable disagreement as to the impact and
value of this kind of activity; it can be argued that it is benefi-
cial - while others feel that it is detrimental. Probably a case
can be made for both ooints.

Bottom Sediment - Water Interface

The bottom sediments represent an important element in the balan-
cing of the marine community and must be included in any considera-
tion of estuarine management. Disturbing these sediments by
dredging or by the working of bottom animals such as worm and fish,
can reintroduce materials which have become associated with the
bottom sediments into the water mass. Heavy metals, pesticides,
herbicides, nutrients, oil residues, and many industrial chemical
mixtures are examples of the kinds of materials which become
incorporated into the bottom. For example, lead is found pre-
sent in almost all types of deposits in amounts varying from 70
to 580 parts per million on a dry mud basis. Most of this lead
comes from atmospheric pollution which has passed through the

VI-122

waters, precipitated, and adsorbed to bottom sediments. The
presence of high concentrations of copper varying from 209
to 600 parts per million on a dry mud basis are also found.
These are due to sewage effluents containing human excreta.
Nickel is present in amounts ranging from 290 to 1,300 parts
per million in muds which are polluted with industrial waste.
Investigations of conditions effecting the biological
and chemical release of adsorbed or precipitated nutrients
and toxicants from marine benthic environments are essential.
The bottom sediments also serve as a reservoir into which these
materials may be extracted from the water mass. They can also
serve as the reservoir of carbonate materials which help to
maintain the innate buffering system of marine waters. Thus,
any consideration of the estuarine ecosystem must include full
understanding of the relationship between the bottom sediments
and the overlying water mass.

Air-Water Interface

The fourth major interface, that of the water and the atmosphere,
frequently is ignored in investigations. These interfaces are
characterized by surface films which are areas of concentration
not only of surface active materials, but of bacteria and other
microorganisms as well as inorganic particles of various kinds.
These natural films should be distinguished from layers of oil

VI-123

which are much thicker and possess different properties. They
occur on the sea surface around all Islands and along all
continental shores and, hence, are characteristic of estuarlne
zones. They travel with the wind at speeds approaching the wind
speed and can rapidly concentrate materials along shore lines,
especially on a windward coast. These effects are very Important
In case of associated radioactive pollution, as well as bacterial
pollution. Some of the surface active materials are of natural
origin and are greatly increased by agents that kill marine
organisms. Other film-forming materials result from oil sol 11 age.
The film, from whatever source, changes the transfer rate of
gas through the water surface, the sinking rates of inorganic
particles, and the distribution of small organisms. Research is
required to better understand the origin, distribution, and
importance of surface films.

SUMMARY

^- Baseline studies

1. Inventory biological, physical, and chemical characteristics,

2. Answer key management questions of habitat requirements
(how much and what kind) for adequate numbers of plants
and animals.

3. Studies of unpolluted estuaries are essential for
comparative basis against which to measure changes.

VI-124

B. Broad ecological studies

1. Expand baseline knowledge to provide understanding of
estuarine ecosystems, the effects of pollution.

and environmental changes.

2. Study the mechanisms and course of recovery of an area
after halting pollution as well as methods of re-estab-
lishing a physically damaged estuarine ecosystem.

3. Develop techniques to determine and predict the
effects of changes In the environment on the resources
we want to utilize.

4. Develop better estuarine husbandry programs, augment
aquaculture, and generally Improve estuarine management.

C. Biological Studies

1. Determine food webs and trophic relationships

2. Determine life cycles and the relationships between
estuarine residency and off-shore

fisheries.

3. Determine what it Is about the estuary that makes it
so suitable as a nursery area and quantify habitat
requirements for spawning and nursery function.

D. Water quality considerations

1. Determine water quality characteristics of receiving
waters and develop a realistic program of water quality

management.

VI-125

2. Study the effects of combined wastes, i.e., multiple
pollutants.

3. Ascertain water quality requirements for desired uses.

4. Develop water quality criteria for optimal beneficial
use rather than minimum tolerable quality.

E. Natural variability

1. Determine the natural variability of the biotic
populations as well as of the physical -chemical
environment and water quality.

2. Learn to distinguish between the effects of natural
variability and of man-induced alterations.

F. Interface Factors

1. Determine the amounts and quality of fresh water
required to support the desired estuarine ecosystem.

2. Identify and understand the characteristics, the
phenomena associated with, and the influence of the
estuary-ocean and estuary-fresh water interfaces.

3. Identify and quantify the residual pollutants introduced
by land drainage and their effects.

4. Determine the relationships of contiguous wetlands
to estuarine ecosystems.

5. Determine exchanges between the bottom sediments and the
overlying water mass.

VI-125

6. Increase understanding of the origin, distribution and
Importance of surface films.

7. Determine exchanges between the atmosphere and the
estuarlne water mass.

It Is evident that a fresh new approach to ecological research
Is necessary if we are to gain needed knowledge and understand
estuarlne ecosystems in time for it to be of value for manage-
ment decisions. If the old patterns of investigations are
followed, wherein detailed studies by many investigators are
made on individual species, it is quite probable that answers
will be unavailable in time to be of any real value in shaping
decisions for the management of estuarlne zones. A highly
coordinated approach to this problem is needed. One approach
would be to concentrate research in a number of centers where
a high degree of proficiency exists, developing a system of
coastal laboratories to satisfy both national and regional needs.
Extramural research for the most part would probably be done
under contract to assure appropriate direction in terms of
national goals, bearing in mind, however, that this direction
should take full advantage of consultation and advice from know-
ledgeable scientists and engineers from all segments of the
industrial, academic and oovernment communities.

VI-127

SECTION 5. TOXICITY

All too often data required to Interpret toxic conditions are obtained
solely through field observations after the environment has been
irreversibly changed and an ecological catastrophe has occurred.
Predictions and management decisions based on this kind of informa-
tion are poor at best. The only way that the knowledge needed by
managers to cope with potentially toxic situations can be available
in time to be useful is by having previously established tolerable
levels of pollutants, developed through bioassay techniques, and
appropriately extrapolated to natural conditions. Toxicity studies
would be concerned not simply with levels at which a soecies could
survive, but also at what levels it will reproduce to complete its
life cycle without significant change. From such studies, criteria
could be established much as they are for public health measures,
but relevant to the organisms as well as to man. Only through such
long-range programs can the desirable biologically productive aspects
i| of estuaries be preserved and the other beneficial uses augmented.

SUBLETHAL EFFECTS

There is a growing awareness that, in the long term, the major con-
cern should be for an understanding of sublethal chronic effects in
order that realistic water quality criteria may be developed based
upon the interrelationships within ecological systems. Much of the
presently available data have been derived from acute toxicity tests
on adults without adequate consideration of the chronic effects

VI-128

upon the development of organisms and communities. There is an urgent
need, therefore, for diversified programs to develop new indices of
toxicity at the individual, the population and the community levels,
with emphasis on long-term exposure at sublethal concentrations.

Food Chain Effects

The outright poisoning of various organisms is easily recognized.
Perhaps an even more important problem is the effects of various
toxicants present in concentrations which reduce the populations of
food organisms to such a low level that they are inadequate for the
forms deoendinq on them as a food supply. For example, fish such
as salmon, migrating downstream, will be feeding on their way to sea.
If these young fish are feeding on a sub-adequate food supply, then
they must be in a weakened condition for their subsequent journey
in the ocean and, thus, be more susceptible to attack by predators
and disease than they v.'ould be otherwise. Various kinds of pollution
such as toxic materials or heated effluents could cause such results.

Another food food chain effect is the phenomenon of biological magnifi-
cation. Biological magnification is an additional chronic effect of
toxic pollutants (such as heavy metals, pesticides, radionuclides,
bacteria, and viruses) which must be recognized and studied. Many
animals, and especially shellfish such as the oyster, have the ability
to remove from the environment and store in their tissues substances
present at non-toxic levels in the surrounding water. This process

VI-129

may continue until the body burden of the toxicant reaches such levels
that the animal's death would result if the pollutant were released
into the blood stream by physiological activity. This may occur, as
in the case of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides (such as DDT and
endrin) stored in fat depots, when the animals's food supply is
restricted and the body fat is mobilized. The appearance of the
toxicant in the blood stream causes the death of the animal. Equally
disastrous is the mobilization of body fat to form sex products which
may contain sufficiently high levels of the pollutant so that the
normal development of the young is impossible.

The biological magnification and storage of toxic residues of pollu-
ting substances and microorganisms may have another serious after-effect.
Herbivorous and carnivorous fish at lower trophic stages may gradually
build up DDT residues without apparent ill effect. Carnivorous fish,
mammals, and birds preying on these contaminated fish may be killed
immediately or suffer irreparable damage because of the pesticide
residue or infectious agent.

A great deal of work must be done to determine the significance of
the phenomenon of biological magnification. We must develop techni-
ques for predicting potential hazards before toxic material is
introduced into the environment and economic noisons must be used
so as to minimize the possibility of biological magnification.

VI-13U

BIOflSSAY CRITERIA

Bioassay criteria are sorely needed to determine the effects of
thenral, domestic, and industrial wastes. Synergistic effects
of pollutants must also be known and understood. Once the
tolerance limits of individual species for individual pollutants
is known, the effects of combinations of various toxicants and
physico-chemical water characteristics should be determined,
since combined effects are often worse than the sum of individual
effects.

The Need for Bioassay Procedures
and Field Testing

The ultimate goal should be the development of rapid, practical,
and definitive bioassay procedures. These procedures should be
designed for multi -parameter analysis in order to correlate
the response to a variety of common pollutants and environmental
variations. In this way, effective water quality criteria can
be developed coupled with a capability for predicting biological
effects. A major problem in the development of these practical
bioassay procedures to determine the water quality requirements
of estuarine and marine organisms is the lack of suitable testing
methods. There is always the question about the realism of work
done in a laboratory; that is to say, how truly results so derived
reflect what takes place in nature. Test organisms in the

VI-131

laboratory are certainly not confronted with the complex Inter-
acting factors which occur 1n the natural environment. Under
natural conditions, there may be a rapid reduction 1n the concen-
tration of a toxicant by precipitation, adsorption on soils and
bottom materials, chemical decomposition, reactions with other
substances In the water, absorption by microscopic organisms,
removal by organisms, or biochemical degradation. Accumulation
of toxicants in the food chain and ingestion of food organisms
bearing relatively high concentration of these materials may
Increase the exposure to higher animals.

Laboratory findings on the safe levels of potential toxicants
must be field tested under conditions wherein the organisms in
question are exposed to all stresses occurring in the natural
environment. When developed, tested, and evaluated, field studies
can be used for simultaneously testing the entire community under
natural conditions. Such studies Integrate the effects of biological
magnification; storage; passage through the food chain, accumulation
in bottom materials, competition for food, cover, and living space;
disease, oarasites, and predators; synergism, antagonism, and the
Interaction of materials; and all other complicating factors present
in the natural environment.

To be a truly useful management tool, a catalog should be developed
indicating the tolerance levels of plant, animal, and bacterial
estuarine species for the pollutants so commonly found in the

VI-132

estuaries: sewage, heavy metals, industrial wastes, runoff from
urban and agricultural areas, oils, and a host of other materials
foreign to the estuarine environment.

SUMMARY

Wise management decisions require knowledge of the effects of
potentially toxic substances as determined by long-range bioassay
procedures extrapolated to natural conditions. Environmental levels
of toxicants which do not inhibit any portion of the life cycle,
food chain, behavior, or exert any detrimental sublethal effects
must be determined.

VI-133
SECTION 6. MICROBIOLOGY

Microbiological aspects must be considered in a special category
because of their widespread and diversied influence. Bacteria
serve to oreak down dead organic material and wastes into inorga-
nic nutrients necessary for plant growth. These nutrients in
moderation and in proper balance make possible the normal algal
productivity which, in turn, supports all animal life. In excess
or imbalance, these nutrients permit or encourage eutrophi cation,
the accelerated superabundance of algae to nuisance conditions,
ciacteria are responsible for causing foul odors, unacceptable
bottom conditions, digusting slimes that foul fishermen's nets,
and depletion of dissolved oxygen in the water which drives out
fish anu otner desirable organisms. Bacteria, protozoans, and
viruses are extremely important as disease organisms, both to
humans and to desirable estuarine plants and animals.

ALGAL GROWTH PROCESSES

As more and more studies determine that eutrophication is a major
current or potential concern in our estuaries, it is imperative
that we seek to understand the cause-effect relationships gover-
ning algal growth processes. Both field and laboratory studies

VI-134

are required. Tne actual impact of nutrients on estuarine
eutropni cation problems must be understood. We must establish
the major nutrient concentrations allowable in various estuaries
Dased on watersned characteristics, influent stream concentrations,
and the overall watershed management policies. An approach often
overlooked on this topic is the complementary use of experimental
studies and modeling techniques in which each is employed to direct
the development of the other in the same way as computer analyses
and test flights have interacted in tne space program. Certainly,
more knowledge will have to be developed about the rates and
conditions under which organic material is mineralized by Dacteria
to the active chemical stage where it can be reincorporated into
new plant material .

lCULOGY AiJD ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREME.>iTS
OF MARINE BACTERIA

Detailed knowledge of the environmental requirements and ecological
relationships of marine uenthic bacteria and of attached algal forms
as well as the free-living and more economically important marine
species is necessary to insure that environmental changes allowed
do not effect water-use at a point many biological steps removed
from the initial effect. Studies of factors involved in natural
population succession and natural fluctuations in populations of a
single species and/or a community of species are required when it

VI-135

becomes desirable to control these natural changes. It is certainly
necessary to recognize them as factors affecting management of
natural resources. It must be borne in mind that bacteria themselves
are an exceedingly valuable prey species as well as is the phytoplank-
ton whose development is made possible by the mineralization activity
of bacteria.

The Use of Indicator Bacteria

In order to assess biological contamination and potential health
hazards in estuaries, adequate bacterial assay techniques are
necessary. The use of indicator bacteria, mainly fecal colifomis,
is the major and most widely used detection system. Current
water quality criteria for contact recreational waters place
emphasis on fecal coliform data and consider this group to be a more
realistic indicator than total coliforms of the presence of patho-
. genie microorganisms. It has been the practice to utilize techniques
that are workable for fresh water systems. As a result, the widely
accepted rapid MF (membrane filter) fecal coliform procedure is being
used for salt water bacterial analyses. Only recently have attempts
been made to assess and verify the reliability of such MF techniques
for bacterial assay in salt v^ater. Apparently, interferences and
factors associated with the saline environment cause coliforms and
pathogenic microorganisms to behave differently than when in fresh

VI-136

water. These studies have revealed specific problems and indicate
the need to develop information concerning behavior of these indi-
cator bacteria in salt watdr. Examples of needed work include
improved procedures for specificity and recovery of MF fecal coli-
forms, determination of growth characteristics of fecal coliforms,
and establishment of whether the "after growth" phenomenon exists
in estuaries; establishment of in situ survival patterns of fecal
coliforms in various conditions of temperatures, salinity, and
nutrient levels; establishment of the relationship between fecal
coliforms and pathogens; and development of rapid detection systems
and continuous bacteria assay devices to monitor shellfish waters
and bathing beaches.

Pathogenic Bacteria

Recent studies have shown that Salmonella are more prevalent than
once believed to be. Salmonella have been isolated from polluted
estuarine waters on numerous occasions and have been isolated when
low numbers of fecal coliforms were present. The Salmonella data,
however, are qualitative and give no true indication of densities
initially present in the water.

Because of the repeated demonstration of Salmonella in polluted
estuaries and shellfish harvested from such waters, such organisms
pose a serious potential human health hazard. Methodology for
detection, identification, and quantitation of Salmonella are

VI-137

essential for establishing the presence or absence of these
pathogens. Associated needs are to develop a rapid detection system
for quantifying and identifying Salmonella serotypes; determine the
growth characteristics of Salmonella and establish whether multi-
plication occurs in the saline environment at various temperatures,
salinities, and nutrient levels; develop in situ survival patterns
to determine relative persistence in salt water and establish the
relationship between Salmonella and the fecal coliform group of
bacteria.

The fecal streptococci have provided supplementary data when the
fecal origin of col i forms has been in question and when the recency
of contamination had to be ascertained. Because of specific animal
strains, such as Streptococcus bovis, and Streptococcus equinus,
animal contamination can be detected and separated from human waste
sources. However, as with fecal col i forms, data on the efficiency
of detection and on the behavior of fecal streptococci in salt water
are limited and need to be developed. Desirable investigations should
involve increase in the specificity of recovery media; establishment
of the various conditions of temperatures, salinity, and nutrient
levels; in situ survival patterns of fecal streptococci, establishment
of the relationship between fecal streptococci and Salmonella, and the
development of rapid detection and identification systems amenable to
continuous water quality monitoring.

VI-133

Parallel studies should be done for other disease-causing organisms
such as the viruses and microscopic organisms such as the viruses
and microscopic organisms that produce toxicants such as Clostridium
and Gonyaulax.

Another group of pathogens sorely in need of research and understanding
are those which affect desirable estuarine organisms. Crabs in
Chesapeake Bay have been known to suffer epidemics of viral diseases.
Oysters in the Northeast have been subjected to, and nearly eliminated
from large areas, by the disease MSX. A great deal of work must be
done to determine the extent and variety of these disease-causing
organisms and to develop control measures so that desirable crops
might be maintained. The ability to protect economically important
organisms is essential before aquaculture can be pursued on a profi-
table basis.

SUMMARY

1. The cause and effect relationships of nutrient supply, bacterial
action, and algal growth processes must be better understood.
Environmental conditions inducing and supporting nuisance
eutrophication must be controlled.

2. Detailed knowledge of the environmental requirements and the
ecology of estuarine bacteria should be developed.

3. More must be learned about coliform bacteria as indicators of
pollution. Methodology appropriate for estuarine waters must be

VI-139

made more definitive.

4. Methodology for detection, identification, and quantitation
of Salmonella and other disease organisms must be developed.
The persistence and transmission of disease organisms must be
better understood and methods of control developed.

5. A great deal of work must be done to determine the extent and
variety of organisms which cause disease in desirable organisms,
and control measures developed.

VI-140

SECTinN 7. PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS

The specific kinds of research that must be done within the physical
and mathematical aspects of estuarine mananement fall oenerally into
the broad cateaories of hydraulics, sedimentation, physical modi-
fication and structures, and physical and mathematical modeling.

HYDRAULICS
Scope

The briefest statement of what is needed in hydraulics is an
understandinq of the water dynamics of the estuary, includinq
details of tidal and current reoimes, an evaluation of the
effects of river flow, rates of water exchanoe, characteristics of
flushinn, and all of the other phenomena related to the nature and
behavior of the fluid portion of the estuarine zone.

Flow Characteristics

A starting point in understanding the hydraulics of an estuarine
system would be an analysis of macroscopic ^low and circulatory
patterns includino seasonal discharges from rivers, seasonal
temperature input? from rivers, density aspects (completely mixed
versus stratified estuaries), tidal cvcles, effects of v/ind stress,
effects of upstream reservoir manaoement, of flow nuantity and
gualitv, measurements of direction and maonitude o"^ water masses,
and of velocity relationships.

VI-141

Flushing Characteristics

Closely related to a knowledge of the flow characteristics
of an estuary is a more detailed knowledge of its flushing char-
acteristics. It appears that we know very little about the
true flushing time of many of the contaminating conservative
materials which are in solution. We, of course, can make use of the
freshwater-saltwater relationship to arrive at some estimate of
flushing time, but, it is extremely doubtful whether information so
derived applies to nutrients or such materials as pesticides or
other non-conservative materials. Many of the nutrient chemicals
become trapped in the biomass distributed throughout the estuarine
zone and, thus, nutrients may not be flushed as wpuIH be predic-
ted from a knowledge of the behavior of the water mass. The same
thing can happen with pesticides. For example, studies on the
Mississippi River tend to indicate that pesticides are complexed
onto sediment particles which then settle to the bottom, resulting
in a very high level of pesticides near where sediments build up
and a fairly low level in other areas. In other words, in a bay
or estuary, pesticides and other compounds may tend to be trapped
on sludge or sediment particles and not be passed out into the
ocean. This provides a reservoir of undesirable materials which,
as discussed earlier, may become reintroduced into the water mass
or the biotic compartments. These caveats notwithstanding, an
accurate and quick way of determining flushing characteristics of

VI-142

an estuary would still be extremely valuable. Adequate methods of
quickly determining flushing are imperative before any other studies
can be meaningfully undertaken, because all estuarine characteristics
are regulated to some extent by flushing.

This approach leads naturally to a classification of estuaries by
type describing flushing rates as a definition of salinity patterns,
mixing rates, and extent of salt water intrusion. The true value
of all this would be to develop predictive capability of estuary
flushing which, in turn, will yield understanding of what will hap-
pen to introduced wastes and of the assimilative capacity of the
receiving waters. Such predictions, if reliable, are important in
an estuarial water quality management program. Further investiga-
tion of the feasibility of this should be encouraged.

Mixing and Transport Processes

Mixing and transport processes are important aspects of estuarine
hydraulics. A considerable amount of research on diffusion and dis-
persion of wastes has been done and a body of knowledge appears in
the literature. Many feel that research in these areas has generally
fallen into two classes. It has either been too descriptive to per-
mit the transfer of specific knowledge to other estuarine areas or it
has consisted of a highly complex and idealized mathematical solution tjiat

(

VI-143

cannot be applied reliably to another estuarine area. Although
the technology for predicting probable water quality effects in
freshwater streams has advanced to the point where predictions
can be made with some degree of reliability, the same circum-
stance does not exist for estuarine areas. Applied research to
I develop practical predictive methods is necessary in order that
management agencies can approach water quality problems in a
given estuary without first mounting a large-scale, exoensive,
and time consuming field Investigation to define the assimila-
tive capacity of the estuary through classical methods. Inputs
into such a technique, of course, demand knowledge of the sources,
characters, amounts, and time distribution of pollutiho discharges,
including urban and agricultural land runoff as well as discrete
sources.

At the other end of the estuary is the exchange with the ocean.
The hydromechanical exchange which occurs between the estuary and
the ocean is an extremely complex phenomenon about which little
is known. This is a significant factor in the loss or retention
of water quality constituents in the estuary and is related to
all of the other discussion on hydraulics, sedimentation, and
other physical aspects. All kinds of modeling activity require
qualitative and quantitative data on ocean exchange, particularly
in areas like Monterey Bay which have an ill-defined interface
with the ocean.

VI-144

Ground Water

Not to be overlooked in any Investigation of the hydraulics of
an estuary is an understanding of the ground water to surface
water relationships, including sub-surface water discharges and
salt intrusion. This calls for knowledge and quantitation of
the chemical and physical characteristics of ground water and
ground waterflow in the estuaries.

Ennineprinn Controls on M?tPr 'Vvempnt

A natural sequence of an understanding of the hydraulics of an
estuary would be the utilization of this knowledge in enginee-
ring controls on water movement. Apparently, little work has
been done to take advantage of the energy contained In the
moving water for the puroose of flushing and bottom-cleansing
action. The research question would be: "Is 1t possible to
design engineering works that utilize water movements, includinn,
tidal action for estuarial flushing and bottom-cleansing?"
This question warrants investigation.

SEDIMENTATION

Substantial pollution problems in estuaries result from the
effects of benthic deposits. These in most estuaries represent
a heritage of pollutional materials brought in over the years
by streams, outfalls, and sewer overflows discharging into the

VI-145

estuaries. Research is called for to provide an adequate knowledge
of how to prevent and control the effects of this material. Such
research should be directed to methods for determining the origin
of bottom deposits, their physical characterization, acceptable
measurement techniques, transport phenomena, effect on the ecology
of the system, and the die-away and fate of these materials. The
ultimate question is, of course, how to prevent undesirable sediment-
ation from increasing and how to get rid of existing deposits econom-
ically and efficiently. It may well be that practical solutions to
this problem will not be forthcoming. In this case, dependable
information on the natural die-away characteristics of bottom
deposits would be very desirable. Studies should be made toward
developing biological systems or marine sludges capable of degrading
industrial and domestic wastes discharged into marine waters.

Dredging and Spoil

The pollutional effects resulting from dredging operations is
part of the problem of control of undesirable bottom deposits.
Conceivably, dredging may be offered as the method of choice for
removing objectionable bottom deposits; thus, the disposal of
such dredgings is a matter of importance and additional research
on its handling and disposition should be pursued. Much of the
spoil from conmercial and navigational dredging operations is
deposited in the low-lying marsh areas. As the value of wetlands

VI-146

Increases, other areas for spoil disposal must be developed.

One possibility 1s the use of spoil for reclaiming certain
areas. If this Is possible, the structural prooertles of the
spoil must be Improved so that It will stab1 Hie when placed
In these areas. Methods, procedures, and additives which would
help to stabilize these materials should be Investigated.

Offshore and Near-shore Dumping

Much material Is dumped offshore. Offshore dumping Is a method
of disposal for both solid and liquid materials In the open sea.
It Includes discharge to coastal v/aters, both within and outside
the territorial v;aters of the United States. In shallow areas,
much of this material Is sub.lect to complicated energy forces
which vary from day to day. Wind forces aopear to exert stronger
Influences In shallow areas than are generally encountered In
deeper waters, perhaps further Inshore. Because of this, much
more Information Is needed on wind, tide current, and other
offshore or onshore hydraulic effects before the fate of dumped
materials can be accurately predicted and a program of disposal
wisely managed.

Sources and Rates of Sedimentation

We need to develop new and Improved ways of measuring sedimenta-
tion rates. Including model studies to evaluate methods of

VI-147

curtailing sediment deposition and more effective and beneficial
means of sediment removal and disposal. We need to know what
levels of sedimentation rates are tolerated by organisms, and
what levels are damaging to desirable organisms. Since organisms
are affected differentially by sedimentation processes, rates
of change would have to be studied specifically for key individual
species. Another source of sedimentation is the flocculation
of colloidal suspensions of materials entering sea water with
resulting deposition at the salt water interface. In order to
avoid the problems of silting and deposition of sediments within
lagoons or in channels, we must know more about rates of filling,
mechanisms of clay and silt deposition, and concentration of
organic debris and pollutants in sediments and in marsh vegetation.

STRUCTURES AND PHYSICAL MODIFICATIONS

It is well known that structures and physical modifications within
the estuary may change the hydraulic, biological, sedimentological ,
and many of the other characteristics of the area. While it is
desirable to reduce our activities of this nature, it is probable
that pressures of population and economics will force continuing
estuarine construction. As construction takes place within
coastal areas, many changes will occur in the estuaries. The
effects of these changes should he known before constructing
industrial plants, homes, highways, or airports; dredging canals

VI-148

or draim'nq marshes. This sort o^ infonnation Is esnecially
essential if a r^eaninoful permit review system is to be
instituted and maintained. Phvsical alterations of estuarine
and coastal zones bv dredoinq, fillino, bulkhead construction,
ditchino for mosouito control, and construction of new marsh
requires investioative work that would determine the effects on
water oualitv, the effects on biolooical life, and the effects
on hydraulics. Special attention should be paid in the development
of new harbors to retain or enhance the structual components
necessary for those oroanisns renuirinn Protected waters for
their reproductive activities.

"HYSirAL mn "ATHE''/»TirAL "OpfltM^

Fstuarine svstems will cnntiniie to receive heaw utilization for
all tvnes of nan's activities. Population trends indicate that
coastal areas are attractino a disproportionate nercentane of
our expandinn populations. Viith this trend we also have the
industrial activities necessary to support the economy. At the
present time, v;e can not predict accurately the assimilative
capacity of estuarine svstems, nor can we predict the Seoree
of deqradation ttiat will result from the enoineerino projects
proposed as necessary to proy^(^e the supportinn services for the
social and industrial structure.

VI-149

The solution to these oroblems might well be approached by
simulation techniques. It is urged that efforts be Intensi-
fied to provide physical and mathematical models of estuarine
systems which are being subjected to population and Industrial
pressures. Experience indicates that when such models are
available they are used extensively by Federal, State, and
industrial interests to provide guidance for the proper manage-
ment of estuarine resources.

Two systems of simulation or modeling are normally considered:
the physical model and the mathematical model. Probably the
true utility of the physical model has not yet been established.
The development of such a model for an important estuary has a
great deal of appeal for teaching, demonstration, and to some
extent for control purposes in addition to the oredictive
capability rendered. There is no question that advantages of
such a model are clear for teaching and demonstration. What is
not as clear is the extent to which such physical models may
be employed to predict and solve problems of pollution, sedimen-
tation, physical modification and structures in the estuary.

The use of mathematical models to simulate the dynamic phenomenon
of the estuary has only recently been subjected to rigorous
examination. Research in this area should be encouraged. A
complete appraisal of the relative merits of physical and

VI-150

mathematical models should be made. The advantages and disad-
vantages of each type of model for different purpose studies
should be fully delineated.

Finally, to complete the objective of optimally maintaining or
enhancing estuarine water quality, management models need to
be developed and demonstrated which ifin determine the optimum con-
trol strategy drawing upon all of the aforementioned quality
control techniques.

Physical Models

Physical models can be considered essentially as three types.
One type, and perhans most dramatic and most expensive, is one
in which the complete water mass and its basin under considera-
tion are constructed in a scale keeping with that of the natural
configuration and in which the natural forces working on that
basin can be applied and varied at will. This sort of model
is used effectively by the Corps of Engineers and a great deal
of excellent information has been derived from them. Of all of
the possible modeling alternatives, this is orobably the most
useful and, hence, should be the most widely applied for each
of the major estuaries and minor estuaries of special interest
in the country. Research is needed to obtain similarly reliable
information without going through the expense and time required
to construct these.

VI-151

Another kind of model 1s one In which a specific machine Is
developed and constructed which will reproduce certain of the
natural phenomena In the laboratory. These normally are
flumes, wave basins, or some other single-phenomenon simulating
device.

Utilizing these laboratory simulation devices, the following
studies should be conducted.

(a) Large movable flume tests using the typical
range of littoral drift material (sand and shell)
found along the coast are essential to verify or
modify the various sediment transoort formulas;
determine lower and upper limits for apolication of
such formulas; Improve definition of roughness
coefficient with changing geometry, sand riffles, and
dunes; and determine definite usable values of
entrainment functions and tractive force (bottom
shear stress) .

(b) Utilizing three dimensional wave basins, studies
should be done to help yield first approximation
designs of inlet and inlet model studies to help
locate and determine the size and shaoe of .ietties;
determine effects of winds and waves on tidal flov/,
erosion, siltation, sediment transport, and sand by-
oassino; and check the effects of density currents

VI-152

on flow and sediment transport. Infomatlon of this
kind allows a revision and refinement of Inlet designs.
Studies should be done to determine the effects of chan-
ges In tidal differentials, changes In circulation and
efficiency of mixing, and structural modifications for
controlled water releases, for restoring and Improving
Internal circulation, for enhanced fishery environments,
and for augmented assimilation of treated return flows.

A third method of physical modeling Is to use a portion of an act-
ual estuary. Such model estuaries have the dual advantage of pro-
viding both a natural environment and a means of control over
many variable factors. Model facilities are built outdoors In a
relatively unpoHuted bay near Its mouth. Proximity to the open
ocean assures waters with salinity values sufficiently high to
support a wide variety of organisms the year around. Adjustment
of salinities Is accomplished by adding fresh water from some
nearby source such as a stream. Renewal of the water In the
facility Is by natural tidal action through properly designed tide
gates. Currents of varying velocities are maintained by the use
of recirculating pumps or paddle wheels. Various types of bottom
substrates are provided to meet the requirements of a wide variety
of benthic organisms.

Studies using the above-described model estuary facilities provide
a controlled natural environment for determining realistically the

VI-153

water quality requirements of estuarlne organisms. A corollary
objective Is to determine how various pollutants affect the water
quality requirements of estuarlne organisms and ultimately their
productivity. It Is apparent that properly conducted, comprehen-
sive studies of this type would take a great deal of time, effort,
and money. Significant economies can be achieved In all of the
latter If the model facilities would be successfully minaturlzed.
Other advantages to the use of miniaturized model estuaries Is
greater flexibility In the study of variable factors and a substan-
tial reduction In the quantity of pollutants required for testing.
A basic requirement for such model facilities Is the ability to
maintain on a self-sustaining basis the biota representative of
the parent bay. Accordingly, the Initial phase of study would be
concerned with developing the various size model estuaries to
determine the degree of miniaturization possible without sacrifi-
cing the basic requirements.

Development and use of model estuaries would be especially suited
for supplying much of the water quality Information Identified by
the National Technical Advisory Committee on water quality require-
ments. It also would serve as a bridge between laboratory and
field studies and, as such, assume a priority role as a research
need.

Special Value*; nf Physical ''or^elinn

The value of physical models of the tidal and estuarlne environ-

VI-154

mpnt lies in their nH^ntabilitv o^ use to stuHv ^ i-nVp snectrur^
of nrobler's. Sorp o^ the r^ost sinni-^icant are: ■'^InoHinn Hue to
hurricane surno«;; (^F-Ficienrv 6^ tiHal miyinn and the resultinn
salinity distributions; Hiffii<;ion, dispersion, and -Plushinn of
waste discharnps (sewane, chprr'ical, thernal, etr.) in bavs and
estuaries alono the coast; shoalinn and erosion in bavs, navioation
channels, coastal inlets, etc., dye to dpnosition o-^ dredninn
spoil, and river and coastal sediment povppients; irnroverent and
verification o-*^ de<;inps for navigation channels, estuarine coastal
structures, tidal inlets, ietties, etc. Thev nrovide a Tieans o-^
deterpininn in advance the e'f^'^ects o-^ channel dpepenino, ipttv
extension and construction of ne''' ietties, the effects r^ land
fills and destruction o^ narts of tidal flats, and the pf-'^erts

such nroiects would have on the total nhvsical picture of an
estuarv.

''athepatical 'Models

'''athepatical models have the advantaoo o-f renin' rinn little expen-
sive construction and maintenance, '''hev are basicallv expansions
of onuations o-^ state of various nhvsico-cherical phenomena in
a '''ater course. Thev theoreticallv should allow for proper
consideration o-*" all o-*^ the variahlps, when l^no'-'n. Simulation is
done throunh computer techninues and, hence, has the advantanp
of speed and flpxibilitv. The dra\•'bac^' in the application of these

VI-155

models is the need to know, understand, and quantify every one of
the factors of the system being modeled. In the absence of any
portion of this kind of information, assumptions must be made.
The more complicated a system, the greater the area of ignorance,
the more assumptions must be made, and the less confidence
can be placed in the results. To date, effective mathematical
modeling activities have been applied for some of the more impor-
tant water quality parameters, such as dissolved oxygen, in some
of the simpler estuarine systems. The research need here is to
overcome all of the difficulties and satisfy the drawbacks just
stated. Obviously, this approach should be most valuable if and
when perfected.

SUMMARY

A. Hydraulics

1. Develop complete understanding of the water dynamics of
the estuary, including details of tidal and current
regimes, evaluations of the effects of river flows, rates
of water exchange, and characteristics of flushing.

2. Determine the source, activity, and fate of both conser-
vative (e.g., salt) and non-conservative (e.g., pesticides,
nutrients) materials in the estuary.

3. Classify estuaries according to flushing characteristics
in order to enhance our predictive capability for waste

VI-156

disposal purposes.

4. Increase our knowledge of mixing and transport processes
at the various Interfaces and within the estuarlne water
mass Itself.

5. Determine the significance of ground water Inputs %o the estuary.

6. Develop engineering ability to use water movements,
Including tidal action for estuarial flushing and bottom
cleansing.

B. Sedimentation

1. A wide range of research Is required to provide an adequate
knowledge of how to prevent and control the effects of
pollutional benthic deposits.

2. Develop methods for mitigating the estuarlne damage due

to dredging activity and Improve spoil disposal practices.

3. Increase knowledge of the effects of offshore and nearshore
dumping.

4. Increase knowledge of the sources and rates of sedimenta-
tion and of the effects of sedimentation on the ecosystem.

C. Structures and physical modifications

1. Determine the effects of structures and physical modifications

VI-157

on the hvflrauHc, bioloqlcal, and seHlnentoloolcal charac-
teristics nf the estuarine zone.

D, Physical and mathematical modelinn

1. Develop Physical and mathematical model inci technioues
to the level of Yielding reliable predictive capability
and to determine optimum control strateoies for estuarine
mananement.

2. Pevelop more effective and less expensive simulation
capability.

VI-158

SECTION 8. SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS

Perhaps the most important area in need of research and study
is that of socioeconomic factors broadly grouped under planning,
economics, and law. Unlike the previous discussions on study needs
concerning technical subjects, the research and study needs to
supply information necessary for wise planning is more difficult
to define in terms of separable projects. Certainly, the guide-
lines are more diffuse and the areas of overlap are greater, for
here we are dealing with human factors, with intangible values,
with aesthetics, and with recreational satisfactions. Further,
it is in this area where we must come to grips with the conflicts
existing in estuarine use and abuse. It is in this area where
the hard questions subject to litigation arise, for having
developed all of the information required to support technical
management of the estuaries, we must now amalgamate this knowledge
with a comprehensive plan of management which will provide for
a program of optimum beneficial action.

PLANNING

By definition, the need here is to establish comprehensive long-
range use plans for each estuary, including industrial and recrea-
tional areas as well as wildlife and fishery preserves. A
necessary balance between preservation, study, multiple use, and

VI-159

development of estuarine areas must be achieved in this planning,
and hence, we must also determine methods for developing desirable
uses in areas where none exist now. Because one of the greatest
unrealized values of the Nation's estuaries will be for recreational
purposes, there is a need to identify the optimum recreational
carrying capacities for the various estuarine areas.

It is necessary to increase capabilities for estuarine resources
appraisal, coordination, and planning to assure that research
findings are used to maximum advantage and to assure that all the
possible uses and all the possible available resources will receive
optimum consideration in the multiple use concept of planning,
development, and management of the estuarine zone. Methods must
be developed which will enable the planning agency to answer
questions that relate the cost of treatment applied to waste to
the value of benefits attainable or resulting from such treatment.
While the costs of waste treatments are reasonably v^ell known,
the value of the benefits that would result frequently are less
tangible and their quantification requires first the development
of an acceptable methodology for making such a study.

There is no doubt that increasing pressure will be brought on
estuary planning agencies to beautify shore front land. Land-
scape architects and others trained in land development should do
research towards developing planning criteria.

VI-160

And, as is required in all management schemes, research must be
done which leads up to the development of alternative master
plans for the long term uses of estuarine and land related zones.

ECONOMICS

The economics of conservation and development, and the planned
utilization of estuarine resources must consider all aspects of
the ecosystem as well as human factors. Past and present tech-
niques have seldom defined the beneficial uses of the resource
adequately. Research is needed to develop techniques which permit
the consideration of social, economic, and aesthetic factors as
well as technological factors. Further development of decision
models which can "quantify" these factors on a design or opera-
tional basis is a high priority item in a list of needed research.
A central problem of estuarine resource management is unquestionably
the matter of economic evaluation and resource allocation. It is
ironic that even though management activity is specifically
designed to add to the sum total of human satisfactions and
benefits, it is probably the most mis-handled aspect of long
term resource planning.

Estuarine Resource Evaluation

To define the economic value of the estuaries of the country would
require detailed studies which, while under way, are not complete.
It is possible, however, to project what the loss of the

VI-161

estuarine areas would mean and it may be possible to apportion the
increased value of restored or preserved estuaries on the basis
of current patterns of usage and importance to our society. It
is certain that whatever value may be placed upon the estuaries
today, the value of estuaries can only be predicted to increase
in the future.

We need to develop a sound basis for determining the economic
and social benefits from estuarine areas and tlieir living
resources, both in terms of tangible values and their intangible
returns to society. Land-water use studies to determine the real
value of the estuaries for cormiercial and sport fisheries, recrea-
tion, navigation, and other commercial and industrial uses probably
can be quantified even though there are no thorough statistics
developed to document the exact value of the millions of acres of
bays, estuaries, and coastlines near these estuaries.

For example, in southern California the loss of the estuaries
would destroy the major resource currently available to the bait
fishing industry. It would result in the extirpation of those
fishes which require the estuaries during their life cycle, such
as the striped bass and the croaker. It would result in the loss
of a habitat for migratory water fowl and it would result in the
loss of an important area for public recreation and aesthetic
enjoyment. Recreation includes fishing, swimming, boating, and

VI-162

just being by the water. Aesthetic ^joyment includes the pleasure
of watching persons and animals living in their environment of
the moment as well as the natural beauty of the estuary itself.
We would lose the type habitat required as an example of the
estuarine ecosystem for the education of our students as well as
the opportunity to delve into the mysteries of life in this area
through research. We would lose the example of the zone where
it is most likely that animals left the sea to roam the land.

The estuaries are valuable, not only for their biological resources,
for recreation, commercial harvesting of fish and shellfish, educa-
tion, and research, but also as open spaces and opportunities for
further development such as placing still another road, a marina,
housing, plant sites, highways, or anything for which raw land is
required, or for siting power plants or any other facility for
which large amounts of cooling waters are required. The current
trend is to convert the natural resource of the estuary to some
other use with the elimination of all other options or alternative
uses.

Research and study then is needed in techniques of measuring
estuarine utility which could result in added productivity of the
national econoiriy by providing standards to optimize economic
consequences of estuarine resource activities. Additionally, or
alternatively, since it is likely that the development of

VI-163

realistic evaluation procedures in this difficult area will require
generations of research, recognition of marginal concepts and
extra market utility in the context of risk and uncertainty would
be of immense value to management policy and program formulation.

Pollution Control

In the specific area of water pollution control, studies should
be made on the development of a better information system on the
capitalization of in-place pollution abatement facilities. Ade-
quate reporting of investment data exists only for the period from
1952 to the present, and there is little in the way of reliable
depreciation information relating to sewers and wastes treatment
facilities. Development of historical investment and depreciation
levels would be useful in the development of national investment
policies informed by an adequate awareness of capital requirements.

There is a requirement for research into the effectiveness of the
various pollution abatement strategies. Comparative evaluation
of results of the several program emphases, i.e., various control-
ling jurisdictions, consequences in terms of financial outlays,
water quality preservation or degradation, water utilization con-
straints, would be useful in forming least cost national and
state-controlled programs in the future.

VI-164

Related to this is research into the influence of water availa-
bility and public-policy regarding water use and pollution control
on industrial location decisions. There is evidence that separate
industrial categories are affected by and react to a single set
of water conditions in different fashions, but no comprehensive
survey of response to conditions has been conducted at this time.

There are a large number of conditions where controls must be
developed to deal with diffuse poTlutional influences of natural
runoff (siltation, water-borne pesticides, concentrated urban
runoff, etc.) and where costs have been inadequately examined or
are unknown. Such cost data are essential to formulation of
meaningful abatement programs and their development should provide
a number of research projects. In general, however, these kinds
of information requirements cannot be satisfied by economists
alone, since they require technical determinations demanding
the skill of hydrologists, biologists, engineers, and others.

Economic Planning Units

One of the most immediate needs is for the delineation of suitable
economic planning units for comprehensive estuarine management.
What is the minimum area of the estuarine resource that must be
incorporated into a system before it can be managed effectively?
If suitable economic planning units can be delineated and the

VI-165

economic research can begin, then these management units can be
modified as knowledge of other factors - hydrology, ecology,
geology - becomes available.

LAW

As in the area of economics and planning, it is difficult to
conceptualize the research and study needs involved with legal
aspects of estuarine management in. the same framework as that of
the technical questions. Notwithstanding, a great deal of work
must be done if we are to answer the questions having legal
overtones in the Nation's estuaries.

There is a lack of clearly defined jurisdiction for the manage-
ment of the Nation's estuaries. In terms of conventional legal
categories, the rights of competing parties to resources which the
estuary supports must be determined. Who owns the shoreline and
the bed of the various estuaries? What special rights does the
law give to private owners of land abutting the estuary? What
rights does the law give all private individuals in estuarine
resources? What is the difference between the rights to flowing
waters, to tidal waters, and to marsh areas? What are the consti-
tutional and territorial limitations on the regulatory powers
of the State, the municipalities, and the Federal Government?
This brings us to the need to examine and study institutional

VI-166

barriers that prevent sound and equitable management and utiliza-
tion of estuarine resources, to determine whether they can be
removed. We need to promote new institutional arrangements to
provide a nation-wide protective mantle for estuaries. Studies
of State and local government, law, and policies as they pertain
to ownership, planning, zoning, and land and water use must be
made. Model legislation for the desired results must be developed.

There is the whole new question of the legal aspects of offshore
waters that has been introduced by increased offshore dumping and
long outfalls having effects beyond territorial limits, as well as
the commercial aspects of fishing, oil development, mining, and
other resources exploitation. Concentrated research into the means
for local control of dumps outside the continental United States
needs to be initiated and conpleted. While certain controls can
be exercised at the loading points and during transport of the
materials within continental waters, there is a serious question
as to whether any legal controls can be exercised by State or
Federal authorities over dumps outside the continental United
States. Legal control methods must be developed quickly and
international ramifications must be fully explored.

SUMMARY
A. Planning

1. Planners need information concerning human factors to

VI-167

amalgamate with technical knowledge in order to develop
a comprehensive plan of estuarine management which will
provide for a program of optimal beneficial action.

2. Develop capabilities for estuarine resource identification,
evaluation, and allocation.

3. Develop planning criteria for estuarine use.

4. Develop alternative master plans for long term estuarine
uses.

B. Economics

1. Develop techniques for quantification of social, economic,
and aesthetic factors along with technological factors
which permit the use of decision models.

2. Evaluate all aspects of the estuarine resource and
determine economic and social benefits and costs.

3. Determine the costs of in-place pollution abatement
facilities.

4. Evaluate the effectiveness of the various pollution
abatement strategies and formulate optimum beneficial
national and State controlled programs.

VI-168

5. Determine the Importance of water quality and quantity
and pollution control requirements on categories of users.

6. Delineate suitable economic planning units.
C. Law

1. Define legal jurisdictions for management purposes.

2. Define the rights and responsibilities of parties
competing for estuarine resources.

3. Study State, Federal, and local government law and
policies as they pertain to estuarine ownership, planning,
zoning; and land and water use.

4. Develop model legislation for estuarine development,
study, use, and preservation.

5. Determine the legal aspects of offshore dumping and
outfalls as well as of offshore fishing, oil development,
mining, and other resource exploitation.

VI-169

SECTION 9. ANCILLARY RESEARCH AND STUDY NEEDS

There is a considerable need for knowledge which, while not in direct
support of a system of technical estuarine management, is a signifi-
cant part of the overall research and study program needed. These
might be considered as needs of researchers and include environmental
monitoring and surveillance, methodology (both laboratory and field),
data processing, training, and estuarine zone laboratories.

MONITORING

There is a v/ell recognized need for routinely monitoring the estua-
rine environment to complete and maintain the data base discussed
earlier. A continuing program of environmental surveillance supplies
the information needed to determine water quality conditions and the
effectiveness of water pollution control activities. Surveillance
also indicates the location, nature, and severity of pollution prob-
lems and is necessary to support legal and administrative actions to
abate pollution and other destruction of the estuarine resource.
All of the values of an adequate data base for planning and manaqing
the estuarine resource also accrue to an effective system of monito-
ring. Effective monitoring of marine and estuarine vi/aters reauires
a continuing series of synoptic measurements at strategic locations.
It will require an approach based upon adequate knowledge of the
ecology involved and an understanding of the related nhysical, chemi-
cal, and geological processes.

VI-170

Instrumentation

Field Investigation and research in estuarine and near shore areas
is extremely expensive in terms of manpower, time, and equipment
commitments, thus, research to advance the state-of-the-art of surveil-
lance and monitoring is necessary in order that information essential
for management decisions can be obtained at less cost and in an expe-
ditious manner. Instrumentation must be developed which will simplify
data collection, will be reliable, and will require little maintenance.
With the technological advancement in data acquisition capabilities
such as remote telemetering systems, it is now possible to continuously
record pertinent environmental parameters for extended time periods.
In the recent past, man-hour requirements made such intensive data
acquisition impossible, thereby excusing our present inability to
distinguish man-made alterations of estuarine biota from natural
fluctuations. However, we can no longer use this excuse. We must
initiate intensive long-term estuarine monitoring programs that reflect
existing capability in remote telemetering systems. Although the
equipment price tag is high, it is cheaper in the long run than any
other method and we can no longer afford not to develop this approach.
A valuable system would be one which would warn directly of variations
in monitored parameters which exceed previously determined limits.
This v/ould allow a biological survey to assess Immediate and/or
delayed effects on the biota from natural environmental fluctuations.

VI-171
Positioning Data Collection Stations

Another need is in positioning data collection stations. In order to
assure information relative to our research needs, the selection of
monitoring sites for data collection must be as carefully selected
as sampling sites for current methods of environmental analysis.
While it is recognized that intensive monitoring systems cannot be
deployed in every estuary or coastal area of the United States, all
major geographic and ecological zones should be covered. The develop-
ment of buoy, barge, or other types of field stations offer a basis
for the placing of monitoring systems.

Long Term Synoptic Monitoring

Many short-term (2 to 4 years) baseline ecological studies have been
completed. Their results most frequently resemble a disjointed
mosaic when synthesis for practical application is attempted. One
of the major causes for a lack of unity among such studies is the
"atypical year" or the "atypical area" syndrome which in essence is
an admission that not enough detailed environmental data were taken
before, during, or after such surveys to pin-point the effort in
"ecological time" or "ecological space." Long-term synoptic monito-
ring will identify and satisfy many of the knowledge gaps that must
be filled if there is to be any hope for coordinating and synthesizing
results of estuarine research in the future.

VI-172

Water Quality Criteria

Detailed, open-ended, continuous monitoring of whatever environmen-
tal parameters are recognized as requirements for, or potential
toxicants to, aquatic life and for which appropriate technological
capability exists, is necessary so that natural variation may be
intelligently Incorporated into the establishment of water quality
criteria and the most productive use can be made of our coastal
resources. Existing computer capability allows for selective data
storage and reduction so that long-term trends, such as the saline
encroachment of the Patuxent River, could be documented and a biolo-
gical relationship established.

The major geographic and ecological areas of the United States
should be monitored in a manner that is coordinated with research
Interests. Monitoring capability for future enforcement should be
standardized and developed as a function of the research upon which
enforcement needs will be based.

We have just begun to scratch the surface in the area of enforcing
water quality standards by monitoring the aquatic system Itself.
Substantial research needs to be carried out in both the instrumen-
tation and in the methodology of using instrumentation so that we
can achieve a capability of enforcing water quality standards.

VI-173

ANALYTICAL METHODS

Measurement and interpretation of water quality in the marine
environment is a complex problem and is quite different from
that encountered in the freshwater environment. Background values
of organic and inorganic constituents are for the most part much
higher than those encountered in freshwater. In addition, they
are constantly changing with respect to depth, location, and time.
Estuarine analytical methods frequently are more difficult
technically because of the interferences encountered in analyzing
specific constituents. Even after values are determined, the inter-
pretation of these values frequently is difficult. Some wastes that
remain dispersed or dissolved in freshwater are concentrated in ocean
waters because of precipitation or by wave foaming. Marine waters
' at times have a high concentration of plankton and other forms which
contribute to high natural organic carbon content; measures of BOD,
COD, or total organic carbon as indicators of pollution are extremely
difficult to interpret under these conditions. Research on analytical
methods to resolve these and other problems should receive a high
priority. The emphasis of such research should not be limited
merely to chemical considerations but should incorporate the
elements of significance and interpretation. Encouragement and
opportunity should be provided for the development of new

sampling and measurement methods for marine pollutants ranging
i

from oil, pesticides, herbicides, and radioactive materials to

VI-174

ordinary sewage. Increase as well as decrease in concentration of
these materials can be rapid. The emphasis, therefore, should be on
the development of rapid simple methods inexpensive enough for
practical use.

Methodology is required for describing estuarine ecosystems. It has
been pointed out that there is a need for conducting studies on an
ecosystem basis. Even today, comprehensive ecological studies of
estuaries are uncommon, and most of these are of limited scope. In
order to enhance our progress it is necessary to greatly improve
biological data collection systems. Techniques must be developed which
will develop more significant knowledge with simpler, faster, and more
reliable sampling and analytical techniques. Aerial reconnaissance
of vegetation, distribution and abundance and in situ measurements of
chlorophyll (a measure of standing crop) using a continuous recording
fluormeter are examples of promising possibilities.

DATA PROCESSING

Scientific data describing the various estuarine systems has been
collected for many years. Regrettably, this information rarely is
put into a form in- which it is generally available and useful for
geographic areas beyond that in which the study was done. A specific
need of research workers is for conventionalized methods of observa-
tion and data recording to be made and a central exchange where such
information might be Inserted and extracted by workers of all disci-
plines from all areas of the country. Such a system would rapidly

VI-175
become an encycloDedic form of Inventory. A great deal of thought
and work must be devoted to the formulation of this system and for
the development of a program to manage this system. Studies which
have been conducted for specific purposes in specific areas should
be integrated into a larger mass of information and made generally
available. This system would serve not only researchers, but would
also be an integral part of the information needed for planning,
funding, and managing estuarine areas.

A second area of need in data processing is increased emphasis on
correlating the collection of physical, chemical, and biological
data in estuaries. For purposes of water quality management, des-
criptive data in one of these categories is essentially useless
without comparable information in the other two. A critical core
of data (including temoerature, dissolved oxygen, salinity and pH
profiles, chlorophylls, current velocities, bottom sediment,
characterization, transparency, total sestion, dissolved carbon,
etc.) should be identified as commonly needed in all ecological
studies of estuaries. Federal and federally sponsored researchers
should be required to collect this data at reasonable time intervals
during the course of all estuarine studies. Standard data processing
techniques should be established and copies of information received
should be collected in a central data storage bank.

VI-176

If these two suggested approaches to data collection and data
management are followed, the benefit to be derived by all estua-
rine workers will repay many times over the extra effort and
nuisance required to supply a central source with duolicate
copies of data.

TRAINING

The success of a national estuarine research program will to a
very great extent depend on the availability of well trained
and imaginative manpower that can implement national goals.
Modern approaches to estuarine research will require more people
on laboratory staffs with inter-disciplinary training in quanti-
tative ecology and resource management. A program should be
initiated to encourage scientists in a given discipline to under-
take studies related to estuarine management. Economists should
be encouraged to acquire a basic understanding of hydrology,
ecology, and law. Engineers should be encouraged to study econo-
mics and ecology. Laboratories must now pursue comprehensive
programs combining many disciplines if we are to expect to manage
our coastal resources and their environments effectively. This
approach requires a staff which most laboratories cannot acquire
without additional support. Small laboratories should consider
combining with larger laboratories, at least by using computer
links which could coordinate programs. Training grants or con-
tracts to academic institutions for studies by individuals in

VI-177

different fields related to estuarine management vn'll materially
fill the present qao. Research must be fully coordinated with
management needs and river basin activities to assure optimum
application for all resources.

ESTUARINE ZONE LABORATORIES

The best v/ay to provide the analysis, research, and development
needed for a rational approach to the proper management and
utilization of the estuarine and coastal zone would be to estab-
lish and designate multidisciplinary laboratories with area and
regional interests. While most research and development analyses
must be directed to regional and local coastal zones components,
there are clear national requirements wtiich have been imposed on
agencies of the Federal Government. Consequently, laboratories
must be maintained both by Federal Government and by institu-
tions capable of meeting regional and local needs. This would call
for estuarine laboratories and regional estuarine laboratories.

Federal estuarine laboratories would conduct research necessary
to the implementation of Federal missions and, in addition, could
provide certain facilities for common use in the areas they serve.
Regional estuarine laboratories conduct research, analysis, and
development specifically related to the coastal zones of their
region and would serve as scientific and technical advisors to
coastal zone authorities and appropriate State agencies.

VI-178

The establishment of these laboratories would (a) demonstrate the
Federal Government's recognition of the clear interest of the State
Government in many matters relating to estuarine management and
its recognition that it is in the interest of the national well-
being that appropriate State authorities have as much technically
competent judgment as possible to base their decisions, (b) create
technical organizations to give adequate research and technological
support to the federal decision-making process as it relates to
estuarine matters, (c) recognize through Federal action the
need to support regional estuarine laboratories which can conduct
a vigorous research program, develop the technology for the effect
of utilization of the coastal zone, and assume responsibility for
training the necessary scientists, engineers, and others needed
for estuarine management.

SUMMARY

A. Monitoring

(1) Routine monitoring and surveillance of the estuarine
environment should be pursued.

(2) Instrumentation and techniques should be developed
to simplify data collection, increase reliability, and
reduce costs and time required.

(3) Automatic remote telemetering should be increased and
improved.

VI-179

(4) Monitoring is necessary to satisfy many of the base-
line data gaps discussed earlier.

(5) Monitoring systems should be coordinated with each
other.

(6) Monitoring plays a key role in enforcing water quality
standards.

B. Analytical Methods

(1) Sampling techniques must be simplified and improved.

(2) Methodology must be developed to simplify the interpre-
tation and correlation of collected data.

C. Data Processing

(1) Data processing must be conventionalized and central
data exchanges established.

D. Training

(1) Interdisciplinary training of estuarine workers is
required.

(2) Training institutions should increase coordination
to optimize their activities.

(3) Training should reflect the needs of estuarine
management.

E. Estuarine Laboratories

(1) Federal estuarine laboratories should be established
to conduct research necessary to the implementation of
Federal missions.

vi-iao

(2) Regional estuarine laboratories should be established
to conduct research specifically related to the estuarine
zones of their regions, and to serve as technical and
scientific advisors to appropriate State agencies.

VI-181

SECTION 10. SPECIFIC RESEARCH PROGRAMS

Research is conducted in an estuary, bay, or coastal zone usual-
ly for the solution of a specific problem or for understanding
natural phenomena. Elsewhere in this report, the importance of
baseline studies has been stressed, but in addition to this, there
must be approaches to understanding and solving specific problems
in specific estuaries. The purpose of this Section is to present
three research and study programs that have been performed or are
in progress. This illustration by example demonstrates the way in
which knowledge is developed to meet specific needs of technical
management and, in turn, comprehensive management of the estuarine
zone. In this Section, a baseline study originally designed for
Biscayne Bay, Florida, but applicable to virtually any estuarine
zone will be presented. The second example is a discussion of
a study of the Kaneohe Bay estuary in Hawaii designed as a pre-
liminary study prior to its increased use for sewage disposal,
i.e., a "before" study with a specific stress in mind. The third
specific research program is a proposal for re-establishing a
desirable ecosystem in an estuary after damage has occurred and
the source of damage has been removed. There will be many
similarities in each of these studies, indicating that there is a
basic fund of knowledge necessary regardless of the purpose of a
research activity in an estuarine zone. Each of these proposals
demonstrates the necessity of considering any estuarine zone in
the context of a complete system.

VI-182

BISCAYNE BAY, FLORIDA: A BASELINE STUOY FOR ESTUARINE POLLUTION

The purpose of this Study, designed as a long-term program
for Biscayne Bay, Florida, is to develop the factual knowledge
necessary for the optimum management of that estuarine resource.
As in most of this Nation's important estuaries, man's activities
already have had an effect. There is no pretension that we are
dealing with a pristine ecosystem. Note also that this plan
recognizes the importance of the legal and economic aspects
that exist in real-world resource allocation and management.
It does not attempt to satisfy the basic need for long range
planning, nor does it specifically identify goals. It does,
however, pose the questions that will supply quantified alternatives
from which goals may be selected and plans formulated.

This model baseline study, thus, applicable to virtually
every estuarine zone in the country and is, in fact, practically
a prerequisite to the elucidation of specific plans for
management and development.

VI-183

Surveys to identify existing polllution in the estuary and
in tributary streams

A. Literature survey of existing knowledge

B. Field studies to identify and measure the amount and
seasonal occurrence of pollutants

1. Chemical pollutants

a. Organic

i. economic poisons, e.g., herbicides, pesticides

ii. detergents
iii. oils and solvents from industry

b. Inorganic

i. metal ions

ii. substances that alter the acid-base balance
of the estuary

2. Sewage and waste discharge pollutants

a. excess plant nutrients

b. pathogens, e.g., bacteria, viruses, parasites

c. solid wastes that increase turbidity, form

sludge beds, or settle out to cover over the bottom

3. Fresh water

VI-184

4. Heated discharges

5. Air-borne pollutants

II. Continuous monitoring of significant pollution, as identified

by studies above
III. Identification of sources of pollution. This requires indus-
trial and domestic waste inventories, evaluation of non-
point source pollution such as urban street run-off , erosion,
agricultural run-off, and irrigation return flows, as well as
domestic sewage and industrial discharges. Pollution from
vessels, oil discharges, and accidents Involving hazardous
substances must be recognized along with effluents from
saline water conversion plants and heated water discharqes.

IV. Disposition and fate of pollutants in the estuary; dispersion,
concentration, degradation, precipitation, disposal to the air
V. Field studies of the estuarine environment
A. Physical -Chemical factors

1. Salinity

2. Temperature

3. Dissolved Oxygen

4. Turbidity

5. Water currents, flushing, tidal action, and other
hydraulic features

6. Wave and wind action

VI-185

7. Fresh water inflow

8. Phosphates, nitrates, nitrites, silicates, sugar

9. Sediment deposition, removal, character, and
variation

B. Biological factors

1. Phytoplankton identification, distribution, abudance,
and contribution to the food web

2. Zooplankton; identification, distribution, abundance,
role in the food web, and significance as economically
important species

3. Fixed vegetation; identification, distribution,
abundance, contribution to the food weo and habitat
value

4. Sessile animals - identification, distribution,
abundance, importance in the ecosystem, and economic
values

5. Mobile animals - identification, distribution, abun-
dance, importance in the ecosystem, and economic value

VI. Laboratory studies of the physiology and behavior of plants
and animals under natural conditions and under pollutional
stress.

A. Responses and tolerance of plants and animals to vari-
ations in:
a. Salinity

VI-186

b. Temperature

c. Currents

d. Factors of pollutional impact

e. Other pertinent physical, chemical, and biological
factors

f. 'Combinations of these

g. ndbitat

B. Requirements for optimum production and reproduction of
desirable organisma

VII. Legal, economic, and planning aspects

A. Survey of existing 1aw5» and regulations on pollution
and environmental conservation

1. Adequacy and scope of legislation

2. Enforcement of these laws

3. Identifying needed legislation

?, Fconomic studies to determine the values and benefits of
the estuary

1 . Dollar values

2. Recreational and esthetic values

3. Potential values

4. Benefit/cost relationship of exploitation, both
existing and potential

C. Review and development of long- and short-range plans

VI-187

KANEOHE BAY, HAWAII: A STUDY PRIOR TO
INCREASING ITS USE FOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL

This Study was proposed and coordinated by the Water Resources
Research Center, University of Hawaii. Cooperating departments
of the University include: Agricultural Economics, Public
Health, Microbiology, Geography, Oceanography, Geosciences, and
the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology.

The objectives of the study were:

1. To postulate the ecology of Kaneohe Bay prior to its
use for sewage disposal

2. To determine the present patterns of water quality and
sedimentation in the hay and the effects of present
effluents from land on the important elements of the
biota, separating, to the extent possible, the effects
of sewage effluent discharge and stream discharge

3. To project ecological effects of increased sewage effluent
discharges and altered stream discharges as the popula-
tion of the area increases, assuming present methods of
treatment

4. To outline alternative methods of treatment of both stream
and sewage effluent and stream discharges, and estimate
the effects of their adoption on the ecology of the Bay

VI-188

5. To determine costs of present and alternative methods
of control and treatment of both sewage effluent
discharge and stream discharge

6. To identify and measure the value of other major uses
of the estuary including recreation, industry,

bait fishing, and esthetic aspects versus use of the
bay as a sink and transporting medium for wastes
associated with urban development

The nature of the problems associated with attaining these objec-
tives requires a closely coordinated inter-disciolinary approach.
For simplicity in presentation, the procedures followed in this
Study are described in relation to the several semi -independent
programs that are the respective special responsibilities of more
or less separately identifiable groups of investigators. It
should be recognized, however, that constant interchange of infor-
mation exists among these groups. The separate studies include:
1. Studies of the plankton of Kaneohe Bay; analyses of the diversi-
ty and structure of tropical zooplankton communities.
Included in this work is an attempt to understand the rela-
tionships with the open ocean forms and the interdeoendency
that exists. There would also be detailed analyses of trophic
relationships and energy flow, as associated with enrichment,
transport, and mixing.

VI-189

2. Studies of the fish and benthos of Kaneohe Bay. Determine
the Identity, distribution, and abundance of the f1sh and
benthos of the Bay, and relate these to environmental
factors

3. Sedimentation of the estuary via the watershed:

a. Types of sediment entering the Bay

b. Rate of sedimentation. Including normal and runoff

c. Sediment pattern In the Bay

d. Composition and rate of sediment discharge from the
Bay to the ocean

e. Effects of urbanization and agriculture on erosion
and run-off, and on the resulting sediment pattern in
the Bay

f. Inter-relationships with other studies

4. Bacterial pollution, mineralization processes, and
photosynthetic activity

a. Extent and magnitude of bacterial pollution from
existing sources

b. Mineralization processes

1. Site of activity: water or sediment
11. Microorganisms involved in oxidizing and reducing

processes, including ammonifi cation, sulfate reduction,
nitrification, and sulfur oxidation

VI-190

iii. Chemical and physical parameters
--dissolved oxygen
-pH

--redox potential

--particulate and dissolved organic carbon
--NH3, NO2, NO3, total nitrogen
--total and soluble phosphate
c. Photosynthetic activity

1. Site of activity and light profile of the water

column
11. Productivity rates

ill. Identity, distribution, and abundance of photosyn-
thetic organisms (nhytoolankton, attached nlants,
and bacteria)
Water quality factors

a. Tidal ranges

b. Circulation

c. Salinity

d. Temperature

e. Surface runoff and precipitation vs. evaporation

f. Chemical constituaits of the water and sediment at
selected sites

g. Sewage discharges into the Bay, their strength, volume,
and distribution

VI-191

h. Effects of sewage discharges on algae, coral, and

other biota
Engineering analyses

a. Determine alternative methods for dealing with expected
levels of sewage discharge over time to meet a range

of specified water quality criteria

b. Estimate the investment and operational costs of the
various alternatives for' primary, secondary, and
tertiary treatment of the effluent to meet these criteria

c. Determine methods for controlling stream discharge
at various levels of the watershed and project costs
for each alternative

Identify and quantify the various uses, present and potential,
of Kaneohe Bay and relate the value of these uses to the
cost of fostering them .

VI-192

NEWPORT BAY, CALIFORNIA: REESTABLISHING A DESIRABLE
ECOSYSTEM AFTER PHYSICAL MODIFICATION OF THE ESTUARY

Physical modification of an estuary by construction, dredging,
fining, and other human activities usually triggers ecological
changes followed by a period of readjustment. The natural fauna
and flora initially are impoverished but the area is slowly
recolonized. Recovery may take years and the final result may
not be as desirable or productive as the original community.

Bays and harbors have a specialized biota adapted to estuarine
environments. If a species is eliminated by human activities,
recolonizing individuals must originate from undisturbed popula-
tions in nearby bays. This process usually requires that larval
or juvenile forms from the undisturbed population find their way
into the ocean, survive there, and thence migrate into the modified
bay. It also requires that the modified bay be once again a
suitable habitat for the original Inhabitants. Probability of such
a sequence of events may be low, explaining the long periods generally
required for recolonization of a despoiled area.

This particular study would seek to develop methods for facilitating
this process. The ultimate climax communities in the modified bay
would thus be enhanced both in terms of species diversity and the
production of organisms useful to man. g

VI-193

The case study selected here Is Newport Bay, California because
of the plans being made to develop this area within the next
few years.

Bay development typically Involves replacing shallow marshland
with navigable open water (usually ten to thirty feet deep).
Entirely terrestrial Islands and peninsulas may be left In the
bay or built up by filling. Organic productivity by marsh vegeta-
tion Is eliminated and the food bases remaining for animal com-
munities are either phytoplankton or dimly Illuminated (and hence
sparse) bottom vegetation. Populations dwelling In shallow zones
find their habitat greatly reduced. Deep-water animals have an
expanded habitat, but cannot multiply faster than their basic
organic food resources.

If deep water attached plants existed In the Bay, and 1f they
survive the construction activities, they can colonize the newly
created deeper bottoms. As plant cover develops, habitats and food
resources become available for animal communities. If the proper
plants are absent or lost, or If bottom niumination is low,
attached vegetation may never gain a foothold. Bay life then
depends totally on phytoplankton productivity. Many species, includ-
ing animals sought by man, cannot utilize planktonic food resources.
These forms dwindle or vanish.

VI-194

Whatever the course of events, results add up to bioloqlcal
impoverishment for years or even indefinitely. Man could intervene
in several ways, f-ost importantly, stands of suitable attached
vegetation must be created to provide food bases for animal
communities. If desirable fauna and flora totally nerish during
bay modification, seed stock populations could be introduced to
strategic areas. Last, but by no means least, ecological counsel
could be provided to planning engineers to ensure that the best
nossible decisions are made before bay modification commences.

The proposed plan of study consists of several interrelated studies.
Objectives can best be achieved by developing information in all
these lines of work, more or less concurrently.

1. The important plant and animal species of southern California
bays would be identified and their ecological requirements
determined.

2. Various types of construction used in bays (i.e., riprap,
bulkheads, pilings, artificial islands, etc.) would be
evaluated for suitability as substrata for colonizing organisms.
Criteria of suitability are diversity and abundance of species
associated with the substrates. Evaluations take account

of hydrographic conditions, age of the particular construction,
and other modifying factors.

VI-195

3. To assess feasibility of establishing seed stock populations,
transplantation experiments would be conducted with important
species and with species possessing excellent potential for
enhancing bay environments. Particular attention would be
given to seaweeds such as eelgrass (Zostera marina) that fre-
quently dominate significant stretches of bay floor and provide
important food bases for animal communities. Animal species
that are apt to suffer seriously from construction and dredging
during bay modification should also be studied. The transplan-
tations would be particularly valuable if they can follow actual
dredging and construction operations.

4. Laboratory cultures of potentially useful seaweeds would be
developed. Feasibility of transplanting large numbers of juve-
niles or reproductive bodies (seeds, spores, etc.) from labora-
tory cultures to bay environments would be tested. The purpose
of this study is to develop techniques for establishing dense
stands of attached vegetation over large areas of bay bottom in

a relatively short time. If this can be done, the food bases for
animal communities in freshly created habitats could be brought
into existence rather quickly and should greatly shorten the
period for recovery from operations of bay modification. Inten-
sive work would be done on two or three species known to be
ecologically desirable such as palm kelp (Eisenia arborea) and
eel grass (Zostera marina).

VI-196

5. Feasibility of conserving portions of populations presently
existing in Upper Newport Bay would be studied. As ecological
requirements for the various species become catalogued, a basis
will be available for predicting survival in various hauitats.
Many new environments will be created in Upper Newport Bay (for
example, shallow underwater slopes of artificial islands). Some
of these probably could accommodate organisms presently inhabiting
areas that will become unsuitable. The practicality of relocating
entire populations will be influenced by several variables (ability
of the species to survive transplantation, costs of collecting
and then dispersing the population, etc.). Other study phases of
this project will provide the information required for making
decisisons.

VI-197

SECTION n. A MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR RESEARCH
AND STUDY IN THE ESTUARINE ZONE

The conflicts over estuarlne use are described and documented
earlier In this report. It has been shown that development Is
proceeding so rapidly that there will be little left to preserve
and conserve unless an effective program of comprehensive manage-
ment Is developed and implemented Immediately to protect the
desirable natural qualities of estuaries. A comprehensive manage-
ment program can succeed only if It Is based on knowledge and
understanding of the environment. This knowledge, 1n turn, can
be developed only through a program of research and study In the
estuarlne zone. The purpose of this Section Is to Identify the
principles on which a technical management program of research
and study must be based and to propose the Federal and State roles
in Implementing such a program.

PRINCIPLES OF TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT

The following ten principles underly a program of technical manage-
ment. The Implementation 6f these principles constitutes the frame-
I work of the proposed program of research and study.

Ecosystems as Management Units

Estuarlne resources occur In Interacting complexes. What man
does to one resource can and does have significant effects on
the others. Estuarlne and coastal areas exist as ecological

VI-198

systems, frequently as Integral parts of large river basin complexes.
The systems concept 1s thus the most logical approach to sound manage-
ment of coastal areas. Any plans for the successful development, manage-
ment, and regulation of estuaries In tht United States must be consistent
with the ecological and economic principles by which such systems operate,
with and without modern man. Because estuarine systems differ from the
land systems in having moving fluid, the land laws and practices often
do not provide for sensible management and new laws and practices must
be developed to recognize the limitations and requirements of estuarine
systems. Hence, a management program must Involve a total effort
toward providing a total solution. More often than not, piecemeal
solutions create additional problems, and we find ourselves forced to
commit all of our resources to current crises and not able to prepare
for the more difficult problems of tomorrow.

Programs for estuarine research and study capable of providing total
solutions require not only a multidisciplinary approach but also a
sizeable concerted effort, because the areas are both large and complex.
Estuarine studies are not wholly the problems of one discipline nor of
only a select number of State institutions, but must be carried out by
a number of agencies, both private and governmental. A great deal of
coordination is needed. The magnitude of the problem is such that use
can be made of all interested groups to attain the objectives of optimal
estuarine utilization. The single purpose concept of water resources
which has been generally ab ndoned in the development of our upland
water resources is still being used in the estuarine area. Such public
works as power plants, new ship channels, diked areas, etc., are still

VI-199

being planned and constructed as Individual entitles without regard
to the entire circulation scheme of the estuary. A great deal of
effort must be applied to seek new ideas and even bold ideas for the
management of estuaries as total ecosystems.

The Multiple Use Philosophy

As a general guide, the multiple use philosophy must prevail for future
planning of estuarine use. Maximum consideration must be given to
both public and private enterprise and values in these coastal areas
with particular efforts to accommodate all compatible uses practicable.
In general, the exploitation of a single resource or a use that is
contrary to, or irreversibly precludes other desirable uses, cannot
be permitted. The achievement of a desirable balance a.nong uses was
a principal purpose of the Congress in commissioning the National
Estuarine Pollution Study. However, it needs to be stressed that
public recreation areas, wildlife sanctuaries, national defense areas,
and other situations of this type are usually single-purpose but
frequently desirable.

Evaluating All Potential Uses

Better techniques must be developed for evaluating all potential uses
and combinations of uses for a given estuarine area in terms of optimum
long-run social as well as economic benefits and including aesthetic and
recreational values. Certainly natural science will continue to be an
important area of investigation, but the social and humanitarian aspects
of the natural environment also will have to be evaluated. This will re-
quire definitive economic base studies to define values and uses at all
levels, in common terms which will permit option of various use alternatives,

I

VI-200

While various uses amenable to benefit/cost analysis should be
evaluated In a comparable manner to determine the economic Impact
of various combinations of such uses, uses not subject to the
usual benefit/cost analysis such as fish and wildlife habitat,
open space, aesthetics, and natural beauty should, nevertheless,
be fully considered as an Important aspect of any plan for estuarlne
development. Criteria with which to judge these sorts of values
must be developed and applied equitably along with criteria for the
more readily evaluated characteristics. Commercial developments
considered essential and which are locatlonally dependent on estua-
ries should be planned so as to prevent or mitigate damages to all
other public values. The responsible unit of government should
require adequate protective measures as a condition of approval of
any development plans. As In the establishment of water quality
standards, the determination should be justified in terms of over-
all public or social value rather than solely through conventional
benefit/cost analysis. The various techniques and criteria on
which these sorts of values will be based will require research of
a novel and specialized kind, perhaps abandoning traditional
attitudes.

Conserving and Enhancing Estuarlne Ecosystems

Estuarlne areas must be managed conservatively, leaving adequate
margins of safety for protection from miscalculation, political
error, or extreme natural variations. At the present time, there

VI-201

Is widespread awareness that we can no longer afford to neglect
and destroy estuarine systems which cannot be replaced. The ques-
tion now Is how to accomplish and provide for a sufficient measure
of protection for these areas.

Future development of estuarine areas should provide the environ-
mental niches needed by the Inhabitants of the estuary and for the
use of the estuary as a nursery ground for marine life. Special
precautions must be taken not to Impair the desirable hydrology of
the estuary. Efficient flushing characteristics and Innocuous
sedimentation patterns must be retained or achieved. This need Is
consonant with all the other beneficial uses of natural waters
I except the receipt of waste. Estuarine areas In a state of neglect
and poor use should be restored to functional status within the
concept of an Integrated ecosystem of the whole In-shore region.
Methods should be developed for re-establishing the areas of the
estuarine zone where desired values have been lost. Special atten-
tion must be given to the effect of man upon the water quality of
the estuary, for this Is the most easily controlled of all the
factors In the estuarine economy and yet Is one which will most
seriously effect the aesthetic, recreational, economic, and habitat
value of the estuary during periods of extreme environmental stress.

The concept of natural preserves or wilderness areas is well accepted
In terrestrial environments. It should be expanded and Implemented
in the estuarine environment as well, for, if we are ever to

VI-202

achieve the understanding of estuarlne ecosystems essential for
their wise management and fullest beneficial use. It Is Important
that we set aside and fully protect a series of representative
estuaries along our shores for scientific study and technical
management. Such estuarlne reserves should be established in
several different States, on the east coast, the gulf coast, and
the west coast of the United States, as well as in Alaska, Hawaii,
and the various island possessions. If this action is not taken
soon, we will find that few, if any, estuaries will be left which
will be suitable for such studies. It is particularly urgent that
use for scientific study be included among the beneficial uses of
estuaries.

Coordination of Estuarlne Activities

Close coordination and unanimity of purpose among all agencies.
Institutions, organizations, and Individuals having an interest in
estuarlne areas must be encouraged. This would require cooperation
of Federal, State, and local governments, private enterprise, and
the public. Communication among the various sciences is often
poor, as is communication between the various levels of government
and the private sector. Results of work done by State agencies
frequently are narrowly distributed. State agencies oftentimes
completely overlook or ignore work done by the universities.
Federal agencies working on the national level are frequently una-
ware of the excellent work done at the State and local levels.

VI-203

It Is difficult to over-emphasize the need for the coordination of
data gathering, storage, reduction, and retrieval.

An especially important area of cooperation is between all levels
of government and the universities, for it is the universities
that can concentrate on highly productive research in specific
areas on a long-term continuing program. This has the advantage
not only of the application of some of the best minds in the country,
but also of training the cadre of scientists which will be needed
as was discussed earlier. The government agencies should keep the
universities aware of its needs and help support appropriate
research.

It Is also Important to recognize that several of the United States'
estuarine zones overlap with Mexico and Canada. The Federal and
State governments should coordinate their estuarine research and
management programs related to these areas with Canada on both the
Federal and provincial level and with Mexico on the Federal and
State level. The Great Lakes soon will fall into the definition of
an estuarine protection area and hence all research and man2fgement
programs relating to the Great Lakes should be coordinated between
Canadian and the United States agencies. Federal funding of State
estuarine research projects has and will continue to help coordinate
State and Federal efforts. This funding should be expanded to
include local, university, and private endeavors in the estuarine
zone as well, to increase the scope of coordination.

VI-204

The Importance of Regional Emphasis

A national program for estuarlne study and management should be
developed with strong regional emphasis. The United States should
be divided Into regions corresponding to certain conditions. The
blologlcal-physlcal-chemlcal properties of estuaries should deter-
mine the definition of the regions. Positive estuaries along the
Pacific coast from central California northward would comprise one
region, the ntgatlve estuaries of southern California another region,
the highly variable estuaries of the Gulf of Mexico another region,
the estuaries of the southeast States another region, and the
estuaries of the northeast a fifth region. Chesapeake Bay, south
Florida and the Islands of the Caribbean, Alaska, and Hawaii, are
each unique enough to be separate regions also. These are roughly
the biophysical regions which are described and utilized as a
basis of Information presented earlier In this report. Each region
should have a complete Inventory of what has been done in the past.
Each region should develop a program whereby It would be determined
what the estuarlne resources of that area are now, what changes
may occur to Increase these resources, and what changes may be
allowed in future development without damaging the current and
potential resources of the region.

VI-205
The Need for Public Planning and Regulation

The public sector must take the initiative by developing plans and
enforceable regulations to deal with increasing demands for altera-
tion of land, water, and estuaries, a demand now largely in the hands
of the private sector. Strong and competent organizations, such as
State or interstate compact authorities, are required to administer
these areas, with Federal financial assistance where appropriate,
and always on the basis of sound scientific, legal, economic, and
social criteria. In most cases, such machinery is not available,
nor is the data base on which such machinery must function. Such
organizations must be staffed with people competent to analyze and
develop quantitative environmental models for evaluating alternatives
capable of developing comprehensive plans for carrying out complete
regional programs, or must have ready access to such skills through
a core of consultants, either Federal, multi-State, or private.

The Need for Estuarine Criteria

A system of criteria must be developed to encourage adequate stan-
dards throughout the country covering the allowable extent and
conditions of further physical or other alterations of estuarine
natural values. Such Federal criteria might well employ the con-
cept used in the development of our water quality standards. In
other words, the Federal Government could judge the adequacy of

VI-206

criteria for the technical management of estuarine areas to qualify
for any Federal aid program. Additional Federal funds might be
made available to encourage even higher standards or tp assire
non-degradation policies.

Key Management Roles

The problems of estuarine pollution are essentially of an ecological
nature. The resources which we are most anxious to exploit and the
nuisances which we wish to prevent are primarily biologically based.
The technical management of estuarine systems must be consistent
with natural processes; biological, physical, and chemical, Man's
activities must be fitted into the natural system -- not forced upon
it. All too frequently, the natural environment is mechanically
manipulated for narrowly defined economic purposes, and the value of
natural areas such as estuaries is threatened or destroyed forever,
due to ignoring sound ecological practices. This approach does not
deprecate the essentiality of any discipline, for many of the solu-
tions to biological problems can be achieved only through engineer-
ing expertise. The very framework within which all estuarine uses
occur is the institutional arrangements of the law. It is only the
economist who can recognize market and nonmarket values and supply
administrators this information so necessary for resource evaluation
and allocation.

VI-207

A part of the implementation of key management roles is training
people in estuarine management. The need for answers to the complex
problems of the present is great, and will become even more critical
in the near future. Research projects such as estuarine pollution
studies must provide for supporting new, high-caliber personnel
specifically trained for the difficult tasks ahead. Manpower
deficiencies exist at all levels of estuarine scientists, engineers,
economists, and planners. The lack of funding for training of
personnel will be a prime deterrent to getting the more difficult
research under way expeditiously. Unless such provisions are
included in any management program, complex research programs will
move at a frustrating ly slow pace, if at all.

The Need for an Informed Public

There must be an informed public willing to support policies and
costs leading to the sound technical management of our estuarine and
coastal zones. The techniques of informing the public on problems
of natural resource management are not as well known as may be
assumed by the glib presentations with which we are faced so fre-
quently. Research programs designed toward understanding the
public's need and desire to preserve its natural heritage of a
beneficial environment are essential. The values, the problems,
the achievements of the estuaries must be presented to the public
in terms which are meaningful to the electorate. A repetition of

VI-208

cries of panic and destruction and impending doom serves only to
attract the attention of those people who are already interested
and concerned. We must achieve better methods of educating the
public and preparing them to accept the policies and costs required
to maintain a high quality environment for them and their future
geeerations.

Study of these ten principles reveals the most important objectives
of a coordinated program of research and study. The fact that the
appropriate management unit is the total ecosystem demands that we
fully understand the ecology of estuaries and appreciate the need
for multidisciplinary studies. Maximum effort must be directed
towards implementing the multiple-use concept in the estuarine zone.
It follows from this, that all potential uses must be evaluated.
Special effort must be made to assess nonmarket values in terms
compatible with benefit/cost analysis. Estuarine areas must be con-
served and enhanced; damaged areas should be reconstituted; water
quality must not be degraded; and habitats should not be destroyed.
Natural preserves should be established for study and research.

The various agencies and institutions working in estuaries should
coordinate their activities; results of research should be widely
disseminated. The national program for estuarine study should be
developed with strong regional emphasis based on ecology, geography.

VI-209

and a commonality of problems and objectives. Planning for estua-
rine use and development must be based on broad public benefits
rather than narrow private interests. A system of critia by which
to gauge estuarine quality is necessary. Key management roles
require adequately trained people in ecology, engineering, economics,
planning, and law. Finally, the public must be informed of its
stake in the estuary.

THE FEDERAL AND STATE PROGRAMS IN
ESTUARINE RESEARCH

The primary objective of a program of research and study is to
supply the knowledge, understanding, and predictive capability to
support a comprehensive national program for the preservation,
study, use, and development of the Nation's estuarine zone. To pro-
mote the coordination of research activities with management needs,
a program of responsibilities and role of the Federal and State
government is proposed. These programs are parallel to those
suggested in Part III of this Report because of the essential
sameness of the goals to be achieved. The difference lies in that
the comprehensive program is primarily concerned with the institu-
tional environment, i.e., the framework of law, political
institutions, and organizational mechanisms that man must use to
provide himself the capability to control, develop, and use the
estuarine zone; the research and study program is concerned
primarily with the natural environment, i.e., the framework of

VI-210

knowledge that provides the technical support to achieve the
objectives of the comprehensive program.

The Federal Role in Estuarine Research

The Federal Government is responsible for defining the policy and
objectives of a national research and study program to support wise
comprehensive management of the estuarine zones of the United States.
It is also the responsibility of the Federal Government to (a) imple-
ment its portion of the announced national program, (b) coordinate
the research activities of its appropriate departments and agencies,
and (c) augment and encourage the development of new knowledge by
State and local agencies as well as by educational institutions.
Many of these responsibilities are already receiving attention and
the Federal role is one of continuation and augmentation; those
responsibilities not yet satisfied require new Federal activities.

The overall Federal role in research should be:

(1) To provide the impetus for the enhancement, augmen-
tation, and initiation of a national program of research
needed to support a comprehensive management system and
by offering guidelines for State, interstate, local, and
academic actions consistent with developing needed
estuarine knowledge.

(2) To provide continuing support and guidance through
grants to State, interstate, and local agencies, and to

VI-211

academic institutions, foundations, and individuals meet-
ing the research and study needs of the comprehensive
management plan. Purposes of such grants should include:

(a) Research and study of estuarine problems

(b) Establishment of estuarine zone laboratories

(c) Inventory activities in the States' estuarine
zones

(d) Training of estuarine scientists

(e) Management of programs coordinating research
and study activities of separate institutions

(f) Enhancement of increased non-destructive
estuarine use, such as aquaculture

(3) Continue broad estuarine studies not of a local
nature.

(4) Participate in local and regional studies where
appropriate to augment local and regional research
resources.

(5) Acquire or otherwise develop in cooperation with the
States and their political subdivisions selected estuarine
areas for preservation and study purposes, as specifi-
cally authorized by PL 90-454 and other statutes.

(6) Supply appropriate support required for the optimum
management of flyways, fisheries resources, etc., and

VI-212

perform studies aimed at improving the utility and values
of these areas and stocks.

(7) Coordinate Federal estuarine research activities
and provide means for coordinating these activities with
those of the States, their subdivisions, interstate
agencies, educational institutions, and appropriate
foundations and organizations.

(8) In cooperation with the States, continuously monitor
developments and conditions and evaluate the effective-
ness of the national research and study program.

(9) Maintain a network of Federal laboratories in the
estuarine zone to basic and applied research supporting
estuarine management. The organization of these labora-
tories should be based on natural estuarine areas establish-
ed on the basis of geography, biophysical factors, and
commonality of problems. These laboratories would be
operated by the Federal Government. Their primary purpose
would be to support Federal responsibilities and specific
agency missions. There should be a laboratory in each
designated estuarine area. They would be staffed along
multidisciplinary lines and would attach estuarine problems
along the lines of total system analysis and management.
The initial nucleus for these laboratories would be
established functioning laboratories. Siting future

VI-213

government laboratories in conjunction with this nucleus
would serve the broader needs anticipated in the estuaries.
(10) Support and encourage a network of laboratories
specifically performing research, analysis, and develop-
ment related to the estuarine areas of their region.
These regional laboratories would be under the auspices
of institutions of higher education or affiliated organi-
zations competent to study the estuarine zone. They would
also serve as scientific and technical advisors to estua-
rine zone authorities and appropriate State agencies. The
research activities should be augmented, as appropriate
by participating in consortia and sharing facilities with
other public and private institutions. Provision should
be made for visiting scholars and for training personnel.
The total competence of the regional laboratories should
be broad, including scientists, engineers, economists,
planners, lawyers and the others necessary for total
system analysis and research into estuarine problems and
opportunities.

The National Science Foundation should exercise the Federal
responsibility for designation and core support of the

VI-214

regional laboratories, and review and recommend any

changes in legislation required to carry out this

responsibility.

(11) The Sea Grant College and Program Act of 1966

should be amended to permit grants for construction and

maintenance of vessels and other facilities necessary

for research and study in the estuarine zone.

The State Role in Estuarine Research

The State role in estuarine research parallels the Federal role in
that both governmental entities have the same objectives of
estuarine development, use, preservation, and study. Because so much
of the needed estuarine research is a cooperative function, much of
the previously discussed Federal program also defines the State role.
The essential differences lie in the fact that the States are the
primary management authority in the estuarine zone and hence posess
primary responsibility. As such, they are much closer to the
urgency of specific estuarine problems as well as being able to plan
more accurately for impending ones. The States' role in estuarine
research is thus to. implement its portions of the overall national
program, to coordinate the research activities of its appropriate
agencies, educational institutions, and organizations, and to augment
and encourage the development of new knowledge most applicable to its
estuaries and their management.

VI-215

The overall State role in estuarine research should be:

(1) To provide encouragement for the enhancement,
augmentation, and initiation of a State program of research
needed to support their portion of a comprehensive manage-
ment program.

(2) To provide continuing support and guidance through:

a. Administering grants to interstate and local
agencies and to institutions, organizations, and
individuals meeting the research and study needs of
the States' comprehensive management plan. Purposes
to be served by these grants are:

(1) Research and study of estuarine problems.

(2) Establishment of estuarine zone laboratories

(3) Inventory activities in the States' estuarine
zones

(4) Training of estuarine scientists

(5) Coordinating research and study activities
of the various agencies and institutions within
the State.

b. Cooperative activities between State and other
agencies and institutions

c. Technical advice to local agencies and others

d. Promotion of, and guidance and support to,
cooperation among the various State agencies doing
research in the estuarine zone

VI-216

(3) Perform broad estuarine studies of a Statewide and
local nature.

(4) Participate in studies of interstate estuaries. An
example of this is the activities of the Chesapeake
Research Council composed of the Chesapeake Biological
Laboratory of the University of Maryland, the Virginia
Institute of Marine Sciences, and the Chesapeake Bay
Institute of the Johns Hopkins University. This brings
together a total staff of over 110 scientists to share
information and to undertake cooperative research projects.

(5) Acquire or otherwise preserve selected estuarine areas
for research and study purposes.

(6) In cooperation with the Federal Government, monitor
developments and conditions, and evaluate the effective-
ness of the State research and study program.

(7) Participate fully in the activities of the regional
laboratories described under the role of the Federal
Government.

VI-217

SECTION 12. STUDY ON COASTAL WASTES MANAGEMENT
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES-NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING

INTRODUCTION

In response to a request from the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, the National Acadeiny of Sciences and the National
Academy of Engineering jointly agreed to provide advice to the
Administration on the management of wastes in the coastal marine
environment. A study was carried out by a group of experts assembled
by the Committee on Oceanography of the National Academy of Sciences
(NASCO) and the Committee on Ocean Engineering of the National
AcadeiT\y of Engineering (NAECOE). This group of experts, after a
series of planning sessions, met from July 7 through 12, 1969, to
examine the following questions:

(1) What is known about the Impact of wastes on the
oceans?

(2) What is known about the magnitude of the impact the
marine environment can tolerate?

(3) What is our present capability to predict future
impact of wastes on the coastal ocean environment?

(4) What investigations should be undertaken in order to
Improve our ability to respond to the above questions?

Approximately sixty scientists and engineers deliberated on these
problems at this session. The results of their deliberations will
be in the NAS-NAE report "Wastes Management Concepts for the Coastal
Zone - Requirements for Research and Investigation" (in press).

VI-218

A summary of the recommendations Is presented here. It is the pur-
pose of this section of the National Estuarine Pollution Study Report
to present the most salient features of the recommendations growing
out of that working session.

Early in their deliberations, it became apparent that the four basic
questions listed above could best be approached in terms of the
following subject areas: a) waste discharge and monitoring, b) phy-
sical processes and interactions, c) chemical effects, and d) biolo-
gical effects. The final NAS-NAE report will be released early in
1970.

VI-219

GENERAL RECOMMENDATION

One of the greatest contributions that scientists, especially biolo-
gists, can make to conserving marine values is through furnishing
quantitative guidelines to assist the engineers having responsibility
for designing waste treatment and disposal systems. Also, the design
of waste treatment and disposal systems must become much more scientif-
ically oriented than in the past. Historically such design has been
concerned primarily with maintaining aerobic conditions in the
receiving waters and in keeping these waters safe for human health.
Now that scientific methods are becoming available for assessing a
broad range of marine receiving water values, the engineer's design
should become less based on use of "standard" systems and instead be
tailored to preserve the specific receiving water values of concern.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MONITORING
WASTE DISCHARGES AND RECEIVING WATERS

Monitoring Program

Monitoring of the coastal marine environment for waste components
and their effects on this environment must be considered on the basis
of a total system concept. In this regard, a monitoring system
should serve the following functions:

(1) Provide Intermittent or continuous characterization
of waste Inputs together with the receiving body of water
and Its terrestrial and atmospheric interfaces. This may

Vl-220

be accomplished by means of pertinent physical, chemical,
or biological measurements sufficient to define the signif-
icant nature of the water body throughout a time period
specified on the basis of statistical validity.

(2) Provide a knowledge of all sources of mass movement
Into and residence time within the receiving water body,
establish the significant character* of such sources, and
evaluate the relative contribution of each to the nature
of the water body.

(3) Provide for rapid data evaluation and Indicate the
response procedures appropriate for the given water
condition.

Efforts to characterize wastes and receiving waters should take cog-
nizance of the need for rapid, accurate, and economical methods for
neasurenent of the selected parameters. In addition. Instrumentation
should be adapted or developed to perform the analyses and to trans-
mit or record the observed data. Finally, data analysis techniques
should be developed so that corrective action can be Initiated
promptly.

* The phrase "significant character" for these purposes Is In need of
further definition and this subject Is dealt with In the main part of
this report. Criteria for such classification would necessarily have
to be applied on a case-by-case basis.

VI-221

In any monitoring program the value of observed data depends upon:

(1) Sampling procedures which provide samples representa-
tive of the condition of the air, land, and water Inter-
faces at any point In time.

(2) Sufficient vertical and horizontal control points,
the samples from which will adequately describe the system.

(3) Sufficient frequency of sample collection to validate
the analyses within any pre-selected statistical confidence
limits.

(4) Analytical procedures which are of defined precision
In terms of the parameter being measured.

In recognition of the fact that the character of one restricted water
body or coastal regime Is quite likely different from another, no
recomnendatlon can be made concerning the Items 2,3, and 4 above
without enumerating the definitive characteristics of each water
body. This hopefully will be accomplished by a monitoring program
with sufficient sampling locations and with sufficient frequency to
describe the system within reasonable confidence limits.

It Is realized that any monitoring program designed to meet what
are present, and as well as can be predicted, future needs may
require modification from time to time. It Is, therefore, obvious
that periodic examination must be given to monitoring specifications
to Insure their continuing adequacy and to remove redundancy.

VI-222

Monitoring Waste Discharges

It was concluded that specifications should be developed for a minimum
or core type monitoring program that should be applied to all "signif-
icant" waste discharges. "Significant" waste discharges are not
defined herein; but they are to be defined as part of the reconnended
research and development program. However, they are considered here
to Include but not necessarily be limited to the following candidate
waste materials:

(1) Municipal and industrial waste streams;

(2) Storm runoff and combined sewer overflows;

(3) Water courses containing significant waste materials;
and

(4) Batch waste dumping and barging operations.

It should be recognized at the outset that it is both logical and
likely that all waste discharges, especially minor ones such as the
treated strictly domestic wastes from 100 persons discharging into
open coastal waters, would jiot be classified as "significant." On the
other hand, it should be recognized that many major waste discharges
will require many more analyses than the core minimum program to
characterize properly the waste discharge characteristics.

(1) Objectives; The general objective of the core waste
discharge monitoring program is to provide the minimum
information needed to assess adequately the poUutional

VI-223

contribution of waste materials to the Nation's coastal
environment. Specific objectives would Include but not
necessarily be limited to the following:

(a) To provide quantitative Information on the unit
and total mass emission rates for the common signif-
icant groups of pollutants from significant waste-
generating activity such as municipal. Industrial,
agricultural, natural, and other sburces so that:

[1] Adequate data are available for forecasting
future waste contributions based opon the level
of future estimated waste-generating activity
(population. Industrial production, etc.);
[2] Accurate Input lata are available for use In
various modeling systems to provide estimates of
waste concentrations and their variation In space
and time; and

[3] It Is possible to attempt to correlate or
develop functional relationships between waste
emission rates and waste effects which are prin-
cipally biological In character.

(b) To assess performance on a gross basis of waste
treatment Installations.

(c) To Insure that adequate Information Is available
to permit Improvements In waste treatment and disposal
system design and operation.

VI-224

(d) Other specific needs are met on a particular
problem basis.

The general characteristics of the minimum monitoring program are
described below:

(2) Sampling: All samples (except for grab samples col-
lected for special analyses for high decay rate constituents)
collected for routine analysis should be near-continuous,
proportional composite samples which accurately represent
the characteristics of the waste stream (i.e., floatable,
suspended, and dissolved constituents) with respect to their
true mass emission rates (I.e., lbs/day).

Sufficient samples should be collected to provide an ade-
quate statistical description for both the constituent con-
centration and the mass emission rate of the contaminant.
After the waste has been statistically defined, analyses
not pertinent to the local problem or to the wastes char-
acterization should be deleted.

(3) Analyses : The following analyses should be conducted
on essentially all samples colledted:

(a) Floatable matter - Method needs development

(b) Total and Organic - Methods Adequate
Suspended Solid

(c) Acute Toxicity - Method needs review

VI-225

(d) Persistent Pesticides - Method needs review

(e) Persistent Organic - Method needs development
Compounds

(f) Biostimulants • Method needs development

(g) Gross heavy metals - Method needs development

(h) Col i forms (or - Method under continuous
equivalent) review

(i) Radioactivity - Methods adequate

(4) Supplemental information;

(a) Information on the accuracy and precision of both
the sampling and analytical methods is to be obtained
and reported.

(b) Data should be obtained on the level of waste-
generating activity (i.e., for municipal waste - popu-
lation tributary; for industrial wastes, level of pro-
duction and type - tons of product/ day, etc.) so that

waste discharges can be reported on a unit mass emis-

3
sion rate basis (i.e., lbs SS/capita-day or lbs SS/10

lbs product)

(5) Significant discharge: It should be noted that the
recommended minimum monitoring program is, as stated, the
minimum to be applied to all "significant" waste discharges.
Many significant waste discharges may require numerous addi-
tional characteristics or parameters to be added to the
minimum listing to describe properly the waste

VI-226

characteristics. For example, cooling water discharges may
require numerous additional characteristics or parameters
such as temperature, heat flux, density, etc., to be added
to the minimum listing to describe properly the waste char-
acteristics.

Considerable investigation and study will be needed to
define properly waste discharges that should be specifically
included in the "significant discharge" category. It should
be obvious that a number of considerations are involved in
the decision as to whether or not a particular waste dis-
charge is "significant." Some of the considerations are:

(a) The magnitude (flow and pollutant mass emission
rates of the discharge as compared to:

[1] The available dilution and quality require-
ments of the receiving waters;
[2] The relative magnitude of the discharge as
compared to other discharges in the general area;
and

[3] The defined or undefined character of the
effect of the waste on the receiving water and
beneficial uses.

(b) The relative cost of conducting the minimum "core"
characterization program as compared to:

[1] The cost of at least secondary treatment for
the waste discharge;

VI-227

[2] The cost of alternative and possible Inferior

methods of disposal; and

[3] The potential damage of the discharge.

Specifications for the "significant discharge" category must
be sufficiently general so as not to exclude some specific
and significant discharges of potential ecological damage.

Monitoring Receiving Water

To make a basic assessment of the condition of receiving waters and
the effect thereon of the discharge of treated effluents, the follow-
ing tests are recommended for a minimum core monitoring program for
the water column and sediments (Table VI.3.1). It should be noted
that the core monitoring program is not intended to be applied in its
entirety to all marine waters but only to those bodies of water that
receive "significant waste discharges."

Table VI. 3. 2 presents a summary listing of the recommended core pro-
gran analyses of the waters and sediments and indicates their recom-
mended application to either restricted waters or the open ocean, or
both.

VI-228

CO

— srn

fD

Ol

Q.

rt-

^*

fD

3

-J

fD

3

O

r+

o

to

3
3

-

LO

ro

•

^

■o

O

00

-o

3"

zj-

•J.

3"

*<

fD

o

«<

t/1

3

^ml

</>

o

-J«

O

n

IQ

O

CD

o>

-j>

Ol

O

Ol

cr

(U

(D

CS.

O

cr

•

O)

C.

ture
deve

o-

Ql

•

t3 O

o .

3

cr

•

a. Ol

fD .

rt-

fD

-H

-u

-a

^

■a

<-)

o

-' 3>

00

O

r^ —1

s:

-$ -CD

n

Ot

3-

n:

3-

O r+ W)

-^>

o

t/l fD

Ol

3 c

3

-%

o

r+

»4

m

T3 O to

o

— '

3

rl-

_1. Q,

■o

r+

l/»

1

o

trt

fD fD

to

^«

-..-o

(D

3 3

ro

-J.

-a

o>

^"^

T

o

Q. Q. V>

rt-

-h

3 fD

-s

a> rt-

•^

O

3-

rt-

i

O

fD CO

-^>

O

-J

n- -'•

2

Ol

fD

l/>

<

»+ 3

3

~^

< 01

o

-'•-*)

r»-

fD

rt

(/)

r+

^.

0)

fD fD

c

3

fD rt-

—J

o -••

c

(D

3-

<-h

Q.

-J 3

^j

-J c

Ol

3 o

-?

(/>

(/)

^—^

o

<<

3 <-••

Ol

Q.

^.2

-I

Ol

fD

^4*

3

Q.

O

—i»

r^

fD

*J.

O rt-

N

^.^

ji

<— ^

X

3 O

o

rt-

O

,rt-

-t> -••

^

a>

3

c*

CD

3

^

fD -h

,-J

fO

01 1

^

o

§

fD

3"

Q.

(D

U3

V;

^

—J

T3 3

Q.

<-♦•

O

fD

c+

fD

-J cr

3

o

cr

T

r+

.J*

3-

Q.

^

3-

3

O -<•

o

— i.

n o

*<

o o

3"

m

O

C

O

3 O

3-

3

O 3

cr -h

O

r+

Q.

3

D>

D.

^-^»

03 3

0>

Of

— 'rt-

•o

Ol

Q.

T

fD

<-••

^

1 o>

-J

<-*•

C -i.

3"

o- -f>

(/I

3

fD

fD

o>

rt- to

Ol

-J»

3 3

O

^^ ^^

O"

fD

c:l

Q.

r^

fD J/1

o

o

3 C

rt-

fD O

o>

c

fD

1/1

fD

3"

-J

n-

3

O

O

Ol

a.

rt

a.

X)

o

3 -••

fD

--^C

3

O r^

ro

-J.

in

-o

C

a.

3

~t

*•— *s

3 v>

fD

-I Ol

X)

O

fD

O)

fD O

3

fD

r^

—J* (^

c

3

XJ

-%

r+

ai

-h — '

in

fD

rt- -i

-J

^ — '

a>

fD

fD

a.

-h C

r^

rt-

3-fD

^»

-". fD

ff-

^.^

-i

o

fD

fD Q.

—J.

3-

O O

n

3

n>

3

-J*

a.

X)

n -*

o

O

Q. O

^ 3

^

o

c

rh 3

v>

O.

-1

o

O Ol

ft-

a.

o

0)

Ul vQ

Ol Ci.

-J

-h rf

3"

l-t-

^—^

3

Q. -"

fD

o

n

fD

fD

o </>

M

fD

fD 3

o

3 -I

n

<

-»» r^

fD

JH U3

rt-

Ol ^*

(/)

fD

0)

Ol

rt-

O.

c=

3-

rt- 01

<

« 3

3-

(/I

01 S

tD

fD — '

o>

Ol

c

o> o.

O

r^ -••

-I

-I

Q.

Oi

w» _«.

o.

fD

fD rt-

-J. 0)

(D

c

rt-

r^ 3

<

v-^3-

1

a> 3

.Q

Ol

fD <n

rt-

Ol

— • o.

C

c-f

O

O

—J

Q.

rt

tu

3

Q. m

c

(D

3"

'-^-t>

J?

o

-J- rt-

C7-

Ol

■a

o

3 "■•

3

m o

(D

rl-

rt-

Q.

fD —•

n o

3- TT

Ol

a.

fD

O

3

3"

o

10

X) 3

-^

and community stru
rges (techniques t

<
fD

O

■o

fD
O.

-J

Ol
rt-

fD
Ol
00

rt-

rt-

3-
-J
fD
fD

rt-

3-
O

ca.
00

Ol

a.

fD

X5

c

Ol
rt-
fD

with analysis for
re method developmen

o o
1

o-

rt-

fD

va

fD

n

— 1

o

»

3

cr

!^

^1^

ro

A

3

Q.

<

fD

HH

Q.

•

U)

— 1

•

(D

Mrf

VI

VI-229

■■ - Ti^Vf —

0 fD

0 CL

3 -»•

^.n

0. 3

rt

W»

00

•

t-)

3-

fD

3
^*

n

ro

ca
0'
0

U3

0'

01

—J

1, Physical
(cont'd)

■a Q.

n

CT

0 0)

Q. — cr

,->B)

< Q. 0

-J •

-% •

fD 3 •

UD •

0 fD •

•Q

■a ex

C

— ' 3

01

O)

0 -^

01

C to

«-+■ o

■0

-0

3 0

«/i f> 0

3 >0

g _.. 0
?D rt- rt

n r+

3:

-t

-I. 0

-■• a» c+

rt C

3"

fD

0 3

Cf c+ 3-

_.. Q,

*< 3-

_>. fD

^— ^

1/1

0

CD fO

rt 3

a> - fD

3 -^

<-^

fD

3 fD

^-^ -J

a> rt

3 ~i

o

fD

3

-•• 3

c+ r+

rt -••

•^ s «

IL3

0

0

C+ n-

fD 3- ri-

-•• rt

3 0

C (D

3"

fD

-1 -I

n fD fD

< 0>

3 Q. cr

d. a>

3

0 o>

3- (/>

fO rt

0) (/>

_•• (/>

0

m t+

3 a «-!•

—J*

to rt <B

3 c

X)

-J

fD -••

-«. 3 «/)

rt <

t/» 3" T

"=•;?

c

3 0

X) 3

fD fD

-"• <

fD

01

3

C C -'.

0

0 n Oi

u) 3

0-

fD 3 3

3- CL

-h 7T rt

■a ?D

(U

(/>

r?0

ct- n

3 fD

3 -<•

CD 3

Q.

fD

fD -h

3 — '

— •. tn

S fD 0

0 c+

(D

3

0

fD 0 C

-Q 0

01 (/> 3

-•• (/)

X)

0

3- 0

fD -h Q.

S "*

to to 1/)

— ti

C

fD

3 T

Q. -■•

fD -••

St" ^ =

-I. in

a>

_..U3

(/> -J 3

-0

fD 0 3

0 3"

rt-

0

X) o<

fD U3

3 rt

w -h&

0

fD

-h

C 3

Q. 01

fD -■•

r^ C

fD -■•

fD 0. Of

fD 0

(U £

-J — '
0> O-

zsz

0

< -•• 3

a. 3

0 o> a>

r^

3

fD —

m

0 i« — '

{-)

CO

fD 3

— '*< -••

0

C !-► to

ft CT

fD 01

0 3

Q. -h

3 fD 0

fD

^m.^

Q- f+

T3 cr Q.

fD

C

ro 3

X3

(/I «-+•

3 -*• fD

< r+

— ' Q. O-

c

fD

fD 0 X

tD 3-

0» fD fD

o>

fD -i

3 0.

:::' ">

rt- T3

QJ Ci.

3

<

rl- fD 0

0

fD 0 3

— ' ro

rt-

0) CT

*--aa -h

•0 Vt

Q. to fD

(/>

— •<<

-J

3 c+

_i. fo

^3"

r+

c

Ol CT

fD «l>

^-^rt- Q.

o>

O) 0

a. 0

3 3

rt </> fD

c+ T

r+

rt- 0

o» n-

c+ Q.

fD 0.

0 V*

>^.

— '• 3

cr c-»-

S.^Mi* mUf

n <-»■

<

0 0

— ' 0

3

3- 0 -h

3- C

3 l/>

fD

3 fD
« — 3

fD 3

U3

3 0
-i.-O -J

_i.-a

<-h

c+

0 -J

0

.0 fD

^ fD

fD

-%

-f fO

-J

C -J "O

c 0

0

0)

VQ tfl

0

15 3 2;

fD r+

3-

c*

CU -0

T3

to -•• -J

fD

3

.^.

3 -"•

rt- rt-

3 Q.

-i.

0

-'• -J

0

3 -'•

fD

X)

3

0 ft>

-^

fD a> f^

fD r^
Q. 0

C
fD

0

3 -••

D-

fO 3 — '

a. fD

(/> X

-♦>

01 0

fD

fD

3

rt- 3

3

fD Ifl Q.

fD 0

fD

0

rt-

c*

< rt fD

< CU

fD

1

fD 3

3-

Ol -•• 3

ft) 3

Q.

ua

-J ,01

«j.

—1 3 (/)

— ^ c~^

tn

o>

__ ^

f^

C Q» -••

c to

3

Qi rt rt

Oj

fD

3 0-

0

rt fD '<

r+ S

<

0"

fD

-J

-J. ^

— '. 3"

01

rt-

03

0 0

0 fD

0

3- C

0)

3 -h -'•

3 3

c

01

fD l/>

3

3

Ot

Of

3-

fD

vt

rt 1

3--0

TO

.j<

0

c

3

fD — '

"O

0

3

_^

(/>

o>

-J
0

3

0

rt

0

fD

-J

0

U)

o

3

3
C
fD
Q.

VI-230

Table VI. 3. 2

Summary of Recommended Core Program Analyses
Water Column and Sediments

Analyses

Restricted
Water

Ocean
Water

Water Column

Physical

a. Floatables and Films

b. Clarity

c. Temperature

X
X
X

X
X
X

Biological

a. Col i forms

b. Biostimulants

c. Biomass Characterization*

X
X

X

X
X
X

Chemical

a. Dissolved Oxygen

b. Chlorosity

c. pH

d. Nitrates

e. Phosphates

X
X
X
X

X

X
X

Sediments

Physical

a. Particle Size Distribution

b. Temperature

X
X

X
X

Biological

a. Benthos Characterization*

X

X

Chemical

a. Organic Matter

b. H2S (Presence or Absence)

c. pH

X

X

X

X
X
X

♦Quantitative

VI -231

RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING
PHYSICAL PROCESSES AND INTERATIONS

Initial Dilution and Diffuser Design

(1) Present knowledge of buoyant jet diffusion is nearly
adequate for design of an outfall (including a multiple-
port diffuser) to achieve a prescribed initial jet dilution
and submergence below any given thermocline. However,
further research is needed in a number of areas. Primarily,
there is need for understanding of line sources, and how
well multiple- jet diff users may be represented by line
sources. Although current effects on initial plume
behavior are not well understood, they are not as critical
as density stratification as a factor in predicting initial
dilutions due to jet mixing.

(2) Methods do not exist for predicting the size and shape
of waste fields (of either conventional or heated effluents)
which are developed at the end of the initial jet-mixing
stage. Closely coupled with this is the problem of lateral
spreading due to density differences between the field and
its environment. Research should be conducted on both of
these problems.

(3) For barge dumping of sludges in the ocean, research is
needed on flows generated by suddenly released sinking sludge
in a stratified environment.

VI-232

(4) Control of thermal pollution in coastal waters involves
the same kind of stratified flow problems as sewage disposal.
Inasmuch as large submerged diffusion structures are not in
use yet, some problems of large single jets need special
study, such as the behavior of a buoyant surface jet injected
in a stream perpendicular to the current.

(5) Field studies of flow patterns and dilutions over waste
outfalls are needed urgently to confirm design predictions and
methods. Host of the hydrodynamics of buoyant jet mixing

has been confirmed only in laboratory experiments.

Physical Processes in Estuaries

It is necessary to develop a sound physical basis for quantitative
predictive models of time and space variations of constituent distri-
butions in estuaries. This will require further work on theoretical,
numerical, and physical models, determining the correlation between
the models and field studies. Priorities need to be set based on
the urgency of the practical problem and the relative degree of under-
standing of the particular class of estuary. The most urgent problems
are likely to occur in those estuaries which we know the most about,
primarily coastal plain estuaries.

(1) Further knowledge is required of the relationship of
the mean circulation, tidal currents, and turbulent
exchanges to the river inputs, external tides, external
density distribution, wind, and the shape and size of the
estuary.

VI-233

(2) There is little knowledge of conditions responsible for
the change in an estuary from a salt-wedge to a partially
mixed estuary, or from a fjord to either a salt-wedge or
partially mixed estuary. These conditions need study,
particularly those in fjords.

(3) In the development of models, both theoretical and
numerical models should be stressed as they include the
possibility of the incorporation of biological, chemical,
and physical processes at prototype scales.

(4) The turbulent processes need investigation as their
dependence on density stratification and mean velocity
shear plays a dominant role in the behavior of these
estuaries.

Turbulent Flux and Diffusion

(1) Detailed observational approaches to the problem of
turbulent diffusion are needed. Simultaneous measurements
of turbulent fluctuations in velocity, salinity, and other
properties together with environmental factors such as
shears in mean velocity and stability of the water column
are necessary. Likewise, tracer studies on a scale of 10-100
meters should be carried out under various environmental
conditions.

VI-234

(2) There is need to develop predictive models for gross
spreading of patches and plumes in the ocean from the
combined effects of eddy diffusion (both horizontal and
vertical) and shear in the mean velocity field. The
research in item 1 above will provide a basis for this
development and will allow a better interpretation of
previously reported values of gross dispersion coefficients.

(3) It is recommended that systematic tracer experiments
be carried out in subsurface waters in order to have more
reliable information on the dispersion or rate of speed of
a patch or plume. These experiments should include the
use of artificial tracers, such as fluorescent dye, and
studies of existing waste fields which occur at subsurface
depths.

Physical Processes in Coastal Areas

(1) To achieve a proper understanding of coastal circulation
on all scales, a program of collection of oceanographic and
meteorological data is recommended. The observations should
be made over a long enough period of time to reveal all
periodicities up to and including annual. Although such a
program could be carried out by multi-ship operations,
moored arrays of instruments capable of sampling the entire
water column would probably be better. Such a program should

VI-235

permit evaluation of wind, river inflow, tide, and internal
waves as transport mechanisms.

(2) To improve our ability to predict the fate of pollutants
introduced into estuaries and coastal waters under specific
environmental conditions, a study is recommended of the
effects of intermediate scale variations in the current
pattern on the time varying concentrations of waste compenents
at various distances from the source, using tracers such as
fluorescent dyes as well as waste components from existing
outfalls.

(3) It is recommended that the large-scale processes which
lead to exchange of coastal water with oceanic water be
studied. One possibility is the development of a fluorometer
capable of sampling at all depths which is an order of
magnitude more sensitive than at present so that large-scale
dye tracer experiments could be carried out economically.
Another possibility is a search for a more economical tracer.

Decay of Non-Conservative Constituents
as Related to Physical Factors

A series of controlled field experiments should be conducted to study
the non-conservative properties of such constituents of wastewater as
enteric bacteria and other toxic substances discharged into coastal
and estuarine waters. As soon as reliable detection and enumeration

VI-236

techniques have been developed these studies should be expanded to
include pathoqenic viruses.

Interactions Between Floatable and Settleable
Components of Wastes and Physical Factors

Floatables are defined here as those materials which appear at the
air-water interface. These materials may appear in the form of float-
ing particulate matter (detritus), surface films (monolayers, duplex,
or lenses), scum, and foam.

(1) Studies should be conducted to ascertain the prevalence,
properties and character of floatables of wastewater and
sludqe origin (including barged materials) in coastal waters
and in estuaries. The substances comprising the various
forms of the floatables (particulate matter, films, scum,
and foam) should be identified as to primary source.

(2) Investigations should be made to determine the means
by which the floatables are collected and compressed into
slicks or streaks on the water surface as well as the
natural mechanisms available for transporting the materials
in the water, surface.

(3) Studies should be made to ascertain methods of treating
or handling the wastewaters and sludges to reduce or eliminate
problems of surface pollution.

VI-237

(4) Studies should be conducted to evaluate the movement
and dispersion of releases of sludge at sites currently in
use, such as in the New York Bight and off southern
California. These studies should include, but not
necessarily be limited to, investigation of the methods
of introducing the sludge, i.e., by barge or outfall, and
the transport mechanisms, including settling and resuspen-
sion, which influence the distribution and spread of the
materials.

VI-238

RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING CHEMICAL FACTORS

Research Preserves

Because of the enormous complexity of the physical, chemical, and
biological interations in marine ecosystems, there should be a system
of ecological classification of natural coastal systems that can be
used to make first approximations of the impact of specific types of
wastes on them. Such classifications may require new geochemical
surveys of coastal systems, but in large part could be erected from
extant knowledge.

The classification of coastal systems should be used to select and set
aside type preserves for experimental use, for such purposes as
stressing the environment to determine the effects of the stress and
the rate of recovery of the system when the stress is removed. Such
study areas would allow the carrying out of experiments that might
not be permissible in areas not so set aside, and would prevent the
intrusion of other human influences. The stresses applied might
include the addition of growth-suppressing substances, nutrient
substances, heat, etc. The study areas would be provided with adequate
laboratory facilities for intensive investigation and manipulation.

Type systems to be set aside should include tropical, temperate, and
boreal systems, and would include open coastal areas, salt marsh
estuaries, tidal estuaries, salt-wedge estuaries, mangrove swamps, and
fjords. They should encompass systems of varying depths, sizes, and

VI-239

geonorphology to permit the collection of data to construct mdels
useful for coastal waste management. We consider this to be a matter
requiring immediate attention.

Chemical Processes Involving
Dissolved Inorganic Constituents

(1) The concentrations and the forms of trace elements
believed to be biologically significant In the waters and
sediments and their concentrations In organisms In dif-
ferent areas should be determined. The forms In which
these elements occur affect their availability to
organisms. Areas that should be examined are near the
mouths of large rivers and coastal areas where fresh water
Inputs come primarily from waste water discharges. The
elements of concern would probably Include but not be
limited to copper, zinc, cobalt, chromium, arsenic,
molybdenum, selenium, mercury, cadmium, and lead.

(2) The degree of complexing of trace metals by the
organic and Inorganic constituents of wastewater effluents,
sea water, and estuarlne waters should be evaluated In
both laboratory and field studies. Temperature ranges In
the natural environment as well as In the vicinity of
thermal outfalls should be represented In the experimental
program. Not only may the degree of complexing prove
significant In controlling the behavior of the metal ions.

VI-240

it may be pertinent In understanding the action of organic
residues. The forms in which the metals exist are import-
ant factors in their biological activity.

Chemistry of Particles and
Processes in Sediments

(1) Experiments should be carried out to establish the
effects on soluble components, particularly waste solutes,
of flocculation, aggregation, coprecipitation, and sorption.
A study should be made of the physical -chemical factors and
the role of organisms in affecting the flocculation rates of
sediments In estiaries and coastal waters. Pertinent vari-
ables appear to be in the degree of dilution •/ fresh water
suspensions entering sea water, the levels of organic
matter, the pH of the mixture, the oxidation potential, the
relative percentages of different clay minerals and other
solid phases, the mlting characteristics of the flow, and
the temperature.

(2) The rates of aggregation and sedimentation of organic
particles in the marine environment should be studied. Such
factors as pH, temperature, organic-metal ion complexing at
organic particle surfaces, and the concenftration of
inorganic particles should be evaluated. Organic debris
appears to play a role in transporting trace metals to the
sediments. The organic debris may associate with inorganic

VI-241

particles, thus affecting the sedimentation of Inorganic
phases (oxides, clays, silica).

(3) The biological and chemical transformations occurring
In polluted and unpolluted sediments should be determined
with particular reference to nutrients aid trace elements.
These studies should Include considerations of concentration
gradients, movement of water at the sediment Interface, eddy
diffusion, and the release of gas on the rates of transport
from sediments to the water column. Also included should be
the effects of changes from oxidizing to reducing conditions
and vice versa.

(4) Adequate procedures must be developed for distinguishing
among Inorganic particles, living organisms, and deal organic
matter, both In the water column and In the sediments.

Nutrient Chemistry and Biochemical Changes

(1) The fluxes of nitrogen and phosphorus In all phases of
the cycles affecting the marine environment should be
explored. The study should not overlook the fluxes due to
rooted benthic plants, birds, and humans.

(2) An understanding should be developed of the amount and
character of dissolved and particulate organic matter In
the ocean. Its origin. Including the contributions from

VI-242

rivers and waste discharges, Its spatial distribution, and
Its biological significance.

(3) A study of the factors that control the qualitative and
quantitative aspects of phytoplankton blooms In estuarlal
and coastal waters should be carried out.

(4) The effects of additions of nutrients (phosphate,
nitrate, silicate) and oxidlzable carbon on the primary
productivity and on the resulting organic load In restricted
coastal environments should be determined. The relative
effects of the Individual nutrients are Important consider-
ations. The rates of oxygen exchange between the atmosphere
and other sources (e.g., ferric oxide In sediments) and the
coastal waters should also be studied. These studies will
help predict to what extent re-aeration can compensate for
the oxygen demand caused by the Introduction of oxidlzable
carbon and nutrients from waste outfalls. Factors such as
wind stress, depth, pressure head, density gradient and
stability, and surface films such as petroleum should be
considered.

(5) The biochemical mechanisms for concentration of trace
components by the biota, the subsequent effect of this con-
centration on the organisms Involved, and the transport and
and further concentrating of these trace comptnents as they
move up the food chain should be determined.

VI-243

(6) Subtle, non-lethal effects of waste oroducts on
physiological and biochemical processes, such as enzyme
Induction or inhibition, ion transfer across membranes,
and chemosensitive reception should be studied. Such
effects may significantly influence the growth, reproduc-
tion, development, or survival of marine animals in ways
not detected by conventional assay or toxicity tests or
population studies. It is in this area of sub-lethal
effects that ocean disposal of wastes may encounter its
most serious problems.

The Chemistry of Specific Pollutants

(1) In view of increasing pollution by oil leakage and
bilge washings from ships, by catastrophic events such as
shipwrecks, and by oil seepage and operating wells on the
continental shelf, research is needed on:

(a) natural biochemical processes responsible for
degradation of oil films or oil droolets;

(b) techniques of analysis for detecting and
characterizing low concentrations of oil in water
and for identifying sources;

(c) the effects of different oil dispersants in
degradation of the oil, the toxicity of dispersant
and dispersant-oil mixtures to marine organisms,
and the uptake of the oil, dispersant and/or disper-
sant-oil mixtures in the food chain;

VI-244

(d) the effects of added s6ttl1ng agents on bottom
characteristics and on benthos, and the fate of oil so
deposited;

(e) fractionation of oil films on exposure to
environmental influences, and the fate of residual
materials in the sea; and

(f) the effect of oil films on the air-sea oxygen
exchange; and interference in processes of biological
productivity, such as changes in light penetration
and mixing.

(2) The fluxes of synthetic organic chemicals into the
ocean through sewage outfalls, rivers, atmosohere and
biota should be determined. Priorities should be given
to potentially hazardous or deleterious materials such as
pesticides, detergents, fuel residues, certain solvents,
etc.

Chemical Consequences of Man's Physical Activities

(1) The effects of human activities (such as forestry,
agriculture, terrestrial and marine mining, dredging,
impoundments, etc.) on the flow of inorganic suspended
matter to the oceans and on the distribution and character
of the sediments should be determined. Among the potentially
significant effects are those on transparency of overlying
waters, oxygen demand from reducing sediments, transport

VI-24b

or release of nutrients including trace elements, altera-
tions of the benthos, silting of harbors, and erosion of
beaches.

RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING
BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS

Current waste disposal practices have often resulted in obvious
deterioration of certain estuarine and coastal marine environments.
Adequate techniques are not at hand for definitive assessment of
all of the important impacts of wastes (including domestic and
industrial effluents) imposed on coastal waters. Nevertheless,
there is a strong sense of urgency to adduce now whatever useful
information can be obtained with existing methods. Four areas
urgently need increased attention.

(1) Studies should be made immediately of existing out-
falls and disposal areas of a variety of magnitudes in
several distinct marine biogeographic provinces. These
studies and relationships derived from them must serve as
an interim basis for improved evaluation of the accepta-
bility of new disposal facilities and sites. They must
include at least the following:

(a) Quantitative floral and faunal surveys in the
immediate vicinity of discharge, within the measura-
ble zones of influence and at reference sites.

(b) Sludge fields (when present)

VI-246

[1] Measurement of the temporal and soatlal
dimensions of sludge fields
[2] Chemical analyses of sample sludges from
various outfalls with emphasis on substances
likely to have biological importance, and
[3] Measurement of the rates of biodegradation
and utilization of sludge components by marine
organisms ^
(c) Determination of the dissolved inorganic and
organic substances resulting from coastal discharges
and their effects by means of

[1] A chemical inventory of components,

[2] Bioassays of both effluents and affected

waters for toxicity and stimulation, and

[3] A study of primary productivity and other

community responses in affected waters.

(2) A detailed examination of the public health signifi-
cance of coastal discharges should be made, including;

(a) He-evaluation of the adequacy of traditional
fresh water biological indices in marine waters and
in organisms consumed by man, and

(b) Development and application of improved indices.

(3) Research on the biological concentration of waste
components by marine organisms should be expanded and
intensified. Special attention must be given to organisms

VI-247

involved either directly or indirectly in the food chain
of man, without sacrificing adequate attention to the
complete environment.

(4) The input of DDT into the marine environment by the
United States should be eliminated. In order to avoid a
repetition of the DDT type of problem, we further recommend
that any material that combines the properties of mobility,
chemical stability, low solubility in water and high
solubility in lipids be kept out of the marine environment
unless it has been proven not to have the broad biological
activity that is characteristic of DDT.

(5) The U.S. Government should provide encouragement and
funding for increased graduate education in the combined
fields of oceanography, ecology, and engineering in order
to provide the manpower and competence necessary for
ensuring rational use of the nearshore ocean and estuaries.
In order to make this effective, certain other fields,
especially taxonomy and marine chemistry, must also be
encouraged and funded.

(6) The U.S. Government should take the initiative, in
cooperation with the States, in development on a broad
regional basis of a long-range plan for the uses of the
coastal waters and estuaries that would be affected by
wastes. The plan should project uses for at least 10 years
from the current year and be subject to periodic review

VI-248

and adjustment. The area considered should extend as far
from the coast as wastes are likely to have significant
effects. The plan should include designation of uses and
the setting of standards of tolerable pollution consistent
with the uses. This planning must take into account the
total water resources of each region.

(7) Long-range, properly designed, detailed, quantitative
studies of the structure and dynamics of animal and plant
communities and their relationship to waste disposal in
carefully selected areas should be established and supported.
These areas should include those that are relatively little
affected, those being affected at an increasing rate and
those that are already seriously affected. Some of the
studies should be done in designated and protected marine
preserves. All should be related to the uses defined in

the long-range plan.

(8) Programs of physiological studies to define the
tolerable limits of pollution for each of the specific
uses envisioned for the zones designated in the long-range
plan should be established and supported.

(9) Programs of systems analysis and model development
that will improve prediction of the biological effects
of various possible combinations of waste treatments,
disposal systems and uses of the receiving water should
be instituted and supported. As more data become

VI-249

available from the studies suggested above, models can
be continually refined.

(10) All proposals for new installations, modifications
or activities that may result in major changes in the
amounts or nature of the pollutants should be reviewed to
determine whether quantitative ecological studies of the
biota are required, both before and after the change. If
such studies would lead to greater protection of the biota
or provide better bases for regulation, adequate funds for
them must be included in the budget. Enough time must be
allowed for careful studies, especially those to be done
before the change is made. The data from such studies
would increase the accuracy of models and would strengthen
the objective bases for setting standards.

(11) The U.S. Government should encourage the coordina-
tion of wastes management over large regions in order to
obtain more economical and efficient treatment. This will
allow better use of the limited supply of high quality
manpower, improve management of waste disposal and allow
better control. It will lead to better regulated, and
probably reduced, effects on the biota of the receiving
waters.

(12) All of the preceding programs must be subjected to
frequent, independent assessment by outside experts in
the fields concerned.

VI -250

(13) Because the biological impact of many pollutants is
international, the U.S. Government should accelerate
negotiations looking tov/ard international control of
pollution of international waters by both airborne and
waterborne toxicants.

(14) The U.S. Government should consider and act effec-
tively upon the ultimate disposal problems and the biolo-
gical effects of new products of any kind which, after
release in the commercial market, could result in the
impairment of the biological values of the marine environ-
ment. The burden of proof of biological effects must
rest with the manufacturer.

VI-251

SECTION 13. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this Chapter is to identify the estuarine problems
and areas requiring further research and study. The discussion
represents a synthesized consensus of the leading estuarine scien-
tists, engineers, planners, and economists in various universities,
organizations and Federal, State, and local government agencies;
fifteen professional organizations in the forefront of estuarine
research; the public, as determined in thirty public meetings;
several special studies; the Office of Research and Development of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration; and the combined
Committee on Oceanography of the National Academy of Sciences and the
Committee on Ocean Engineering of the National Academy of Engineering,

A great deal of technical and socioeconomic knowledge is necessary
to support a comprehensive program of estuarine management. This
knowledge must be supplied through multidisciplinary efforts. The
knowledge thus developed must include: (1) knowledge and understan-
ding of the biological, physical, and chemical factors of the estua-
rine zone, (2) knowledge of the institutional framework governing
each portion of the estuarine zone, (3) knowledge of the demographic,
social, and economic factors and their trends, (4) establishment of
goals and uses so that future studies can be relevantly oriented,
and (5) an augmentation and synthesis of the previous four adequate
to enhance estuarine management.

VI-252

The most important knowledge to be gained is an understanding of
the estuarine environment adequate to permit the recognition and
interpretation of causal relationships which, in turn, provides
the capability to predict the effects of natural and human activi-
ties in the estuarine zone and hence supports a program of technical
management. The research programs which will yield this information
are in the categories of:

(1) Ecology, taken to include baseline information,
broad ecological studies, biology, water quality, natural
variability, and interface factors.

(2) Toxicity, taken to include bioassay needs and
methodology, sublethal effects, and mortality phenomena.

(3) Microbiology, taken to include the regeneration
of plant nutrients, biodegradation of organic wastes,
eutrophication, and pathogens.

(4) Physics and mathematics, taken to include hydraulics,
sedimentation, effects of structures and physical modifi-
cations, and physical and mathematical modeling.

(5) Socioeconomic factors, taken to include planning,
economics, law, social and demographic factors and trends,
resource evaluation and allocation, and the role of tech-
nical research and study in supporting a comprehensive
management program.

(6) Ancillary research and study needs, taken to include
environmental monitoring, methodology (both laboratory and

VI-253

field techniques), data processing, training needs, and
estuarine zone laboratories.

VI-255
Chapter 4
SUMMARY

Two major efforts in the National Estuarine Pollution Study

have been directed toward two interlocking goals. One has

been the development of the National Estuarine Inventory,

which stores the masses of information gathered to satisfy

the directive, ". . . . The Secretary shall .... assemble,

coordinate, and organize all existing pertinent information . . . ."

This data assembly has also led to definition of large data gaps.

The second effort has been to investigate by various methods
the state-of-the-art in estuarine sciences in order to "... .
identify the problems and areas where further research and study
are required . . . ."

The programs submitted in Chapters 2 and 3 of this Part appear in
several instances to overlap. In those cases the intention is not
to develop two different programs, but to develop a single program
to serve two different needs. The difference lies in the rather
subtle implications of the two terms "basic data" and "basic
knowledge". These are symbiotic terms, for without the one, the
other does not exist.

The National Estuarine Inventory itself has proven to be a valuable
tool in several respects. Although its prime function is to pro-
vide information for estuarine management, it can also serve several

VI-256

other purposes including the following:

1) A central storehouse of basic estuarine
information;

2) A delineator of data information needs;

3) A link between existing Federal data systems;

4) A mechanism for evaluation of estuarine-related
programs (such as sampling networks); and

5) A device to provide data for estuarine systems
analysis studies.

In the final analysis, the Inventory and the programs outlined
in this Part are designed and submitted as integral parts of a
national program of rational management, preservation and use
of the nation's estuaries and estuarine zones.

***

Part VII
COLLECTION OF SUPPORTING INFORMATION

VII-1

INTRODUCTION

The preceding parts of this report represent in relatively brief
form the efforts of the National Estuarine Pollution Study, act-
ing on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior, to "assemble,
coordinate, and organize all existing [available] pertinent infor-
mation on the Nation's estuaries and estuarine zones ..." as
dictated by Sec. 5g of the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966.

The source information was obtained from many different sources,
constitutes a tremendously large mass of materials, and includes
published and unpublished material in the technical and scientific
literature. The quantitative data in the sources was abstracted and
consolidated in the form of the National Estuarine Inventory, de-
scribed in Part VI.

In general the sources can be grouped into four categories -- trans-
scripts of estuarine study public meetings. Federal and State
profiles, estuarine study contractors' report, and the reference
collection. The sources are described, herein, only in general
terms because of the already voluminous nature of this report.
The preceding parts contain references only to those documents
which constitute an intergral part of the text. A list of all the
documents would unduly burden the report and the reader.

TRANSCRIPTS OF PUBLIC MEETINGS

During 1968 and 1969, the National Estuarine Pollution Study

VII-2

conducted 30 public meetings across the Nation to provide a forum
of contacting and receiving the views from the public and private
sectors and also from individuals not already contacted and wish-
ing to present their views on the current situation in the estuarine
zone. The actual proceedings of these meetings were recorded and
most of the transcripts have already been assembled into individual
volumes for use in preparing this report and also for future
reference. The assembly has been handled by the Study's regional
representatives. Since the transcripts represent the actual state-
ments by the attendees, selective distribution has been made to those
people involved or interested in the conduct of the Study. A limit-
ed number of additional copies are being retained for future reference.
Volumewise the transcripts amount to several thousand pages of copy.
These transcripts are referred to as Transcripts of the Estuarine
Study Public Meetings in the place where they were held. A list of
the meeting sites, dates of occurrence, and analysis of them are
included in Chapter 5 of Part V. A few of the transcripts has
been sunmarized in the form of brief brochures covering the high-
lights of the particular meetings. A limited number of these
brochures are retained for reference.

AGENCY PROFILES

Information on the estuarine-related programs and responsibilities
received from the Federal agencies participating in the Study, and
from the coastal State governments have been summarized in the form

VII-3

of profiles which were used in the preparation of the chapters in
Part V dealing with the roles of the Federal and State agencies.
These profiles have been retained in manuscript copy for reference
but not for distribution,

CONTRACT REPORTS

During the course of the Study, some 22 contracts, including re-
imbursable agreements, were awarded to other Federal agencies,
academic institutions, investigatory organizations, and individ-
uals to develop documents surveying a particular phase of the total
scope of the Study. All of the contracts were designed to result
in reports, retained in manuscript copy, for analysis and use in
preparing the chapters, primarily in Part IV, of the report. These
documents, because they are in manuscript copy and represent
selected, isolated phases of the total scope of the Study, have
not been released or prepared for distribution by the Study.
However, press releases and information sheets on these contracts
have been prepared and distributed. The project titles and name
of contractor are as follows;

(1) University of North Carolina -- State-of-Knowledge on
Estuarine Ecology and the Effects of Pollution on Estuarine

Ecosystems.

(2) University of Washington -- Socio-Economic, Institut-
ional and Legal Considerations in the Management of Puget
Sound Estuarine Resourses.

VII-4

(3) University of Maryland -- Analysis of Legal Problems
Related to the Development and Management of Chesapeake
Bay Resources.

(4) Florida State University — An Analysis of the Socio-
Economic Values of Apalachicola Bay, Florida.

(5) University of Rhode Island — Socio-Economic Study
of the Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island.

(6) Florida State University — Identification and
Analysis of Biological Values of Apalachicola Bay, Florida.

(7) Gulf Universities Research Corporation -- Case Studies
of Estuarine Sedimentation and its Relation to Pollution
of the Estuarine Environment [Mississippi Delta; Galteston,
Texas; Mobile Bay, Ala.; and Tampa Bay, Fla.]

(8) Water Resources Research Center of the University
of Hawaii -- Study of Estuarine Pollution in the State
of Hawaii .

(9) Institute of Water Resources of the University of
Alaska -- Alaska Estuarine Inventory and Cook Inlet Case
Study.

(10) Office of Business Economics, Department of Commerce •
Demographic and Economic Trends Analysis.

(11) U. S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior -
Studies of Estuarine Sedimantation.

(12) U. S. Bureau of Mines, Department of the Interior --
Mining Statistics for Coastal Areas.

VII-5

(13) Office of Saline Water — Relationship of Saline
Water Conversion to the Estuarine Environment.

(14) Texas Water Quality Board -- Socio-economic, Land/
Estuarine Study of Galveston Bay, Texas.

(15) Bendix Marine Advisors, Inc. — A Case Study of
Estuarine Sedimentation and its Relation to Pollution of
the Estuarine Environment [San Diego Bay, Calif.]

(16) Alpine Geophysical Associates — A Case Study of
Estuarine Sedimentation and its Relation to Pollution of
the Estuarine Environment [Raritan Bay, N.J.]

(17) Ralph Stone and Company, Inc. — Community Planning
in an Estuarine-Oriented Community (San Diego Bay)

(18) The Franklin Institute — Selected Abstracts of
Storm Water Discharges and Combined Sewer Overflows.

(19) Infinity, Ltd. -- Cast Studies of Pollutional
Damage to Estuaries .

(2C) Harold F. Wise & Associates — A Study of the Effects
of Population Trends and Industrial Trends in the Estuarine
Zones on Pollution in the Estuaries.

(21) Battelle Memorial Institute — Socio- conomic Values
of the Nation's Estuarine System.

(22) James B. Ayres — A Case-History Study of the Mass-
achusetts Estuarine Management System.

VII-6

REFERENCE COLLECTION

Finally, the published and unpublished documents perused by the
Study, directly and indirectly, probably amount to at least 5,000
reports, conservatively. Of this number approximately 3,000 have
been cataloged and indexed as to the general type of material in-
cluded. For possible future use, the Battel le Memorial Institute
developed a computerized information retrieval program for estuarine
documents which would allow the automatic retrieval of documents,
related to the method used for the quantitative data in the Nation-
al Estuarine Inventory.

ations princi
agency, the Department of the Interior has
basic responsibilities for water, fish, wildlife,
mineral, land, park, and recreational resources.
Indian and Territorial affairs are other major
concerns of America's "Department of Natural
Resources."

The Department works to assure the wisest
choice in managing all our resources so each
will make its full contribution to a better
United States — now and in the future.