[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]







                         Coastal and Ocean
                        Resources Planning


                                                                  An Assessment
                                                                     of Oregon's
                                                              Coastal and Ocean
                                                                 Resource Issues
                                                                              and
                                                         Management Capability


                                            A Basis for Needed Program Change-
                                                and Federal Coastal Management
                                                  309 Priority Funding Assistance


                                                                 Prepared by the
                                           Oregon Coastal Management Program
                                                                          for the
                              Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Management
                               National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                                   U.S. Department of Commerce




         GB                                                     January 17, 1992
         458.8
         .C63
         1992









                                                                                  Contents







                                                              Section                                         Page
                                                              Executive Summary                                 iii
                                                              Introduction                                        1

                                                              Cumulative Effects of Development                   3

                                                              Coastal Hazards                                   15

                                                              Wetlands                                          29

                                                              Ocean Resources                                   35
                                                              Low Priority Enhancements                         45















                                                                        of C@;c Library



                            Oregon Co .astal Program Section 309 Assessment                         , I
                                                                                                    .I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
           H
                                                                                                    t








                                                                                   Executive
                                                                                   Summary




                An Assessment of Oregon's Coastal and Ocean
                R-e-source Issues and Management Capability

                Oregon's Coastal Management Program (OCMP)               mer traffic counts on Highway 101 climbed while
                has its roots in plans and policies developed in the     winter counts remained low. The possiblity of oil,
                early 1970s. In 1977, Oregon's program was the           gas and mineral development loomed offshore.
                Nations's second to be approved under the federal        Salmon returns to some coastal watersheds
                Coastal Zone Management Act. The OCMP con-               dropped while fishermen waited frustrated.
                sists of three major elements: overall statewide         In early 1990, DLCD began a program to assess
                planning goals, local government comprehensive           coastal growth issues and determine whether or
                plans and ordinances, and state agency programs.         how Oregon's Coastal Management Program
                Since 1977, all cities and counties have adopted         could be improved. Some 230 questionnaires
                comprehensive plans and ordinances, and state            were sent to local governments, interest groups,
                agencies have prepared plans and programs to             and involved citizens seeking views on major
                carry out state planning goals to manage growth          resource management problems or issues. State
                and protect coastal resources. The Department of         agencies were also surveyed.
                Land Conservation and Development (DLCD),                Fifty-two respondents identified a variety of
                Oregon's coastal management agency, administers          management issues and problems. These fell into
                the statewide goals, coordinates the various coas-       five major topics: population growth; economic
                tal program elements, and assists local govem-           development; ocean mineral development; water-
                ments.                                                   shed and ocean fish habitat; and HighwaylOl im-
                During the late 1980s Oregon's coast began to ex-'       provements. Many respondents suggested
                perience profound change. Some communities               program changes or improvements.
                grew rapidly with an influx of retirees and recrea-      Oregon's assessment was initiated well ahead of
                tional development. Others lost population as the        the "309" process begun by Congress in the 1990
                timber industry shrank and mills closed. Demand          Reauthorization of the Coastal Management Act.
                for oceanfront building lots continued unabated          But the two programs dovetail. Responses to
                along with requests for seawalls and riprap. Sum-




                                          US T)7-Djrtrnint of Commerce
                                                             --rvic@_,s cnnxtar Tibrary                                     W
                                                          llo'7)@-,ca 2@vonuo
                                          C__16Dton, .5C          29405_2@.'13





                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  DLCD's coastal questionnaire and state agency              Oregon's priority topics because significant
                  survey clearly show that four "priority enhance-           management problems exist. Survey results show
                  ment" topics listed by Congress in Section 309             that the other four 309 topics are not a high
                  are of major concern to Oregon. These are:                 priority for Oregon because they are adequately
                  cumulative effects of development; coastal                 addressed with existing programs.
                  hazards; wetlands; and ocean resources. These are


                  High Priority Improvements

                  Cumudative Effects                                           ï¿½ Population Growth
                  of Development                                             Population growth and demographic changes have
                                                                             had significant impacts in some coastal com-
                  Oregon's coastline extends nearly 350 miles from           munities. Lincoln County, on the central coast,
                  the Columbia River to the California border.               and Curry County, just north of the California bor-
                  While the coastal zone extends from the crest of           der, are "hot." Both had population increases of
                  the Coast Range Mountains to the sea, the land             10-15 percent. Even where poulation totals have
                  available for development is mostly confined to a          stayed relatively stable, there are shifts in
                  narrow strip along the ocean shore, on level rem-          demographics as the retirement sector grows and
                  nant marine terraces, and on hillsides and filled          the manufacturing sector shrinks. Retirement in-
                  lands next to coastal wetlands and streams. The            come C'transfer payments") is now the largest
                  available land base is further reduced by subtract-        economic income sector on the coast. Increased
                  ing land owned by the state and federal govem-             tourism and related facilities, including displace-
                  ment, agricultural lands, flood plains and                 ment of full-time residents with weekend or vaca-
                  commercial timber lands. Thus, Oregon's coastal            tion rental housing, is a second factor affecting
                  development pressures are directed to a relatively         coastal growth and housing availability. The result
                  small but very diverse and valuable land base.             has been increased demands for social services, a
                  Coastal growth creates more than physical im-              loss of affordable housing and rapidly escalating
                  pacts on the landscape and natural resources.              land values.
                  There are impacts to the economic and social                    Priority Program Enhancement: Provide
                  structure of the many small communities of the                  technical assistance to local governments
                  coast. The confluence of two opposing trends                    to plan for and manage development in the
                  have created significant shifts in population in                coastal zone, with emphasis on 1)
                  some communities. An influx of retirees, attracted              demographics of retirement and tourist-
                  by the high environmental quality and slower                    based communities; 2) key growth areas;
                  pace of life, has occured at a time when younger                3) service needs for a changing population
                  working families are leaving due to job losses in               structure; and 4) maintaining affordable
                  the traditional resource based industries. In all               housing.
                  coastal areas, the increasing reliance on tourism,
                  which depends on high environmental quality,                 ï¿½ Infrastructure Needs
                  means local economies are skewed to a three                New development on the coast requires roads,
                  month summer period with earnings tending to               sewage treatment facilities, and water supplies. In
                  the lower end of the wage scale. Finally, Oregon's         many small communities, growth has outsripped
                  coastal communities tend to be small and are over-         the capability of local governments to provide ade-
                  whelmed by sheer numbers and scale of develop-             quate services. Most communities on the Oregon
                  ment proposals; they simply do not have the.               coast, whether incorporated or not, have neither
                  financial resources or technical expertise to              adequate public facilities to accomodate growth
                  evaluate these proposals and assess cumulative im-         nor resources to plan for and finance needed ser-
                  pacts.                                                     vices. Comprehensive plans and ordinances to
                                                                             manage growth need to be updated and include
                                                                             public facility plans to meet increased population.




                  iv






                                                           Executive Summary


                Financing options are extremely limited due to                  policies and regulation of development in
                cutbacks in available federal funds and a 1989                  hazard, wetlands, and sensitive habitat
                citizen initiative to limit local government proper-            areas.
                ty taxes.                                                   ï¿½ Water Quality
                     Priority Program Enhancement: Prepare                Oregon's 1988 Oregon Statewide Assessment of
                     public facilities plans, identify funding            Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution shows that
                     mechanisms, and construct new facilities to          nearly all coastal streams are affected by at least
                     accomodate new development while                     one nonpoint source problem or another. Coastal
                     protecting environmental values through              lakes are subject to somewhat different stresses
                     environmentally sensitive siting and design.         than the pollutants common in the coastal
                  ï¿½ Threats to Natural Resources                          streams; some coastal lakes are plagued by plant
                Development displaces coastal habitat and related         growth fed by nutrients from surrounding septic
                natural resources. The increasing value of real es-       tank drainfields. Although groundwater aquifers
                tate along the oceanfront, around estuaries and           are not specifically affected by nonpoint source
                lakes, and on forested coastal terraces makes             pollution today, they are vulnerable to the cumula-
                more likely the development of habitat in areas           tive effects of future resource uses. The Assess-
                previously considered too expensive or dangerous          ment demonstrates that every nonpoint pollution
                to develop. Resources affected by this conversion         problem originates from a land use or resource
                include wetlands, beach cliffs, beach sand supply,        management action.
                a variety of plant and animal species, including          Much of the Assessment is based on observation
                some which are threatened or endangered, and              and perception, rather than on verified data. Com-
                coastal watershed water quality.                          munities will not devote efforts to solve problems
                     Priority Program Enhancement: Improve                they don't believe exist.
                     protection of sensitive resources threatened               Priority Program Enhancement: Increase
                     by development pressure, particularly                      the water quality monitoring network in
                     lands along the ocean shore, around lakes                  coastal basins to substantiate and charac-
                     and estuaries, and along stream corridors.                 terize nonpoint source problems identified
                  ï¿½ Planning for and Managing                                   in the 1988 Assessment, and to provide a
                     Cumulative Impacts                                         basis for specific nonpoint source control
                Coastal cities and counties will continue to plan               programs or projects.
                for and monitor growth through the comprehen-             Oregon's nonpoint water quality problems could
                sive plan process. The 1991 Oregon Legislature            be most effectively addressed at the basin, or
                significantly strengthened state law requiring all        watershed level. A watershed approach would use
                cities and counties to keep plans current through a       the resources and expertise of the existing sector-
                process known as Periodic Review. DLCD will               based programs. It would link land uses in the
                work closely with each city and county on the             watershed to water quality, and would make effec-
                coast to ensure that local plans are reviewed and         tive use of citizen committees to build community
                updated in a timely manner to address impacts             understanding and support for water quality im-
                from development.                                         provements. Limited staff and financial resources
                                                                          currently restrict opportunities to use a watershed
                  0  Priority Program Enhancement: Monitor                approach. As a result, existing water quality
                     the quantitative and qualitative changes in          programs are not well integrated into local com-
                     coastal natural resources and other                  prehensive planning processes.
                     "quality of life" indicators.                              Priority Program Enhancement: Organize
                     Priority Program Enhancement: Assist                       an integrated, comprehensive, citizen-based
                     coastal local governments to review and up-                watershed approach to protecting water
                     date comprehensive plans and ordinances                    quality in coastal basins and target prob-
                     to meet growth and changing conditions, in-                lem watersheds first.
                     cluding public facility plans, and improved




                                                                                                                               V






                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  Local citizen committees are an excellent way to            based approach by a lack of financial resources.
                  involve citizens in long term basin-wide monitor-                Priority Program Enhancement: Financial
                  ing and understanding of water quality problems,                 assistance to local governments and state
                  and in developing community support for water                    agencies to implement the federally-re-
                  quality programs and non-regulatory solutions. To                quired Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control
                  be successful, however, citizen-based programs re-               Program. Oregon will use a comprehensive
                  quire extensive education, information, problem                  watershed approach, based on citizen invol-
                  identification, and consensus-building. Such les-                vement and community problem-solving,
                  sons have been demonstrated in Oregon in the na-                 and will use various state and federal
                  tionallY recognized Coquille River basin project,                water quality control resources.
                  part ofthe EPA Near Coastal Waters initiative.
                    ï¿½  Priority Program Enhancement: Establish                CoasW Natuml Hazards
                       citizen committees in coastal watersheds to            The Oregon coast is an extremely dynamic en-
                       foster community recognition of nonpoint               vironment where many natural forces and active
                       source problems; to promote personal                   geological boundaries meet. Development is con-
                       resource stewardship; and to build support             strained by many types of natural hazards, includ-
                       for changes in comprehensive plans, local              ing erosion, landslides, tsunamis, flooding, storm
                       ordinances, watershed rehabilitation and               surge, and earthquakes. Nevertheless, coastal
                       enhancement projects, and public aware-                property values have increased dramatically and
                       ness.                                                  homes, condominiums and motels are being built
                    ï¿½  Priority Program Enhancement: Provide                  as close to the ocean's edge as possible with little
                       financial and technical support for a                  regard for the geologic forces at work. As the
                       citizen-based watershed approach to                    least hazardous sites are developed, development
                       protecting water quality.                              is proposed for increasingly hazardous sites with
                  Developing effective programs to link nonpoint              attendant increase costs, both public and private.
                  source pollution, water quality, and local com-             Cities and counties are the level of government in
                  prehensive plans will face several obstacles even           Oregon which review and approve proposed
                  if the watershed approach is logical. First, local          development in their jurisdiction. Typically, most
                  governments, which control land uses in coastal             local governments are well prepared to review
                  watersheds, have not historically been involved in          proposals in natural hazard areas. They lack tech-
                  preventing or reducing nonpoint source pollution.           nical or quality control standards to guide prepara-
                  Second, state and federal programs to protect               tion or review of geotechnical consultant reports
                  water quality are often mistrusted and unpopular            which accompany, and often justify, development
                  at the local level. Finally, many of the activities in      proposals. Lack of review policies and standards
                  the coastal zone that result in nonpoint pollution          leaves local governments without the ability to as-
                  are not subject to local (or state) permit reviews          sure that hazards have been adequately identified,
                  (for example, grazing on streambanks and erosion            assessed or addressed in the project proposal.
                  from grading or road building).                             Local governments have no standards or proce-
                                                                              dures to ensure that hazard avoidance is the first
                       Priority Program Enhancement: Assist                   option and sirtictural solutions the last resort. As a
                       local government planning and develop-                 result, individual developments are routinely ap-
                       ment agencies to become more aware of op-              proved with inappropriate protective structures.
                       portunities to prevent nonpoint source
                       pollution through local plans and regula-                   Priority Program Enhancement: Assist
                       tions.                                                      local governments to develop and imple-
                                                                                   ment technical standards for geotechnical
                  Oregon has local comprehensive plans in place,                   reports and standards for reviewing,
                  technical expertise in water quality, and a record               analysing, and using geote6nical informa-
                  of innovative work with citizens in watershed pol-               tion in making decisions about develop-
                  lution problems. However, Oregon is hampered in                  ment proposals.
                  implementing this more comprehensive, citizen-




                  Vi





                                                             Executive Summary


                 Public agencies must be able to incorporate new             caused by sand dunes and certain bog areas on
                 scientific understanding of underlying geologic             uplifted coastal terraces. Nearly eighty percent of
                 processes into programs and plans to manage                 Oregon's coastal wetlands have been lost, mostly
                 growth and development on the Oregon coast.                 as a result of diking and draining estuarine
                 Geologists have only recently confirmed that all            marshlands for agriculture. The remaining coastal
                 of western Oregon is likely to experience a                 wetlands are scattered and valuable.
                 catastrophic subduction zone earthquake with                In 1989, the Oregon Legislature enacted a major
                 especially severe consequences for the coast.               wetlands statute to coordinate the vaC ,us wetland
                 Likewise, while some coastal landslide areas have           regulatory and planning programs which had
                 been known for years, the existence of long-term,           developed over time. The new law requires the
                 slow moving tension faults and landslide areas on           state to adopt a definition of wetlands consistent
                 coastal terraces has only recently been deter-              with federal law and develop a statewide wetlands
                 mined. Similarly, the detrimental effects of                inventory. Oregon currently relies on the National
                 seawalls on beach sand supply and beach loss                Wetlands Inventory (NWI) prepared by the U.S.
                 have been determined only in the past several               Fish and Wildlife Service. This inventory is not
                 years. Local governments and state agencies have            sufficiently detailed to provide the kind of site-
                 not yet had time or technical expertise to use this         specific information envisioned by Oregon's wet-
                 new information to prepare new policies and                 land strategy. Because wetland regulation is
                 amend plans.                                                related to land use, topography, streams, and other
                      Priority Program Enhancement: Provide                  features, this inventory needs to be conducted and
                      new geologic information to local govern-              entered into a digital GIS format to allow better
                      ments to ensure that comprehensive plans               analysis and utilization by local governments and
                      and ordinances and state agency programs               state and federal agencies.
                      address the potential for catastrophic
                      earthquakes, tsunamis, ocean inundation,                    Priority Program Enhancement: Prepare a
                      landslides, and other chronic natural                       coastal component of the statewide wet-
                      hazards.                                                    lands inventory with a computerized GIS
                                                                                  data base to supplant the existing National
                 Much of the information on natural hazards affect-               Wetlands Inventory data.
                 ing the Oregon coast is new and few in the                  As a first step in implementing the 1989 wetlands
                 general public are aware of the risk. Those who             law, an interagency program is preparing a
                 have become aware have expressed an interest in             methodology to assess the the unique functional
                 knowing more and taking action to address poten-            values of wetlands in the Pacific Northwest. The
                 tial effects. Further, as knowledge of natural              methodology will be used to prepare a wetlands
                 hazards affecting the Oregon coast has improved             classification system. State and federal agencies
                 and expanded, the need for local officials to have          will incorporate the methodology and classifica-
                 some level of technical expertise has increased.            tion system into their programs, policies and
                      Priority Program Enhancement: Increase                 regulations.- Local governments will use them to
                      the level and quality of information avail-            prepare wetland conservation plans or to meet
                      able to the public and to local officials              Goal 5 requirements for identifying and protecting
                      about coastal natural hazards and their ef-            wetlands.
                      fect on existing and future coastal develop-                Priority Program Enhancement: Complete
                      ment through workshops, technical                           wettand assessment methodo1gy and wet-
                      bulletins, audio-video presentations and                    lands classification s stem as a basis for all
                      other means.                                                                       y
                                                                                  state agency and local government
                 Wedwx1s                                                          programs to protect wetlands.
                 While Oregon's rugged coastal mountains receive             Local governments are encouraged by the 1989
                 upwards of 80 or more inches of rain annually,              wetlands law to prepare wetland conservation
                 coastal wetlands are limited primarily to narrow            plans. These wetland conservation plans are in-
                 flat river valley bottoms, estuaries, coastal lakes         tended to provide local governments and state



                                                                                                                                   Vii






                                         Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                 agencies with an opportunity to consider protec-          ment extends well into the ocean realm hidden
                 tion of wetland resources in a broader planning           beneath the waves. Marine life abounds from
                 and environmental context. An approved wetland            coastal streams and estuaries seaward across the
                 conservation plan will become the basis for state         continental shelf and down the continental slope.
                 permits and local development approvals and               Human use is the greatest near the coastline
                 mitigation proposals under the statewide planning         where a variety of resources are most at risk, in-
                 program. However, the extra costs to local govem-         cluding marine mammals and seabirds, intertidal
                 ments of preparing a wetland conservation plan            species, and clean ocean water. Offshore oil and
                 are an impediment to participation.                       gas and marine mineral development may not
                      Priority Program Enhancement: Financial              occur until the future, but other resource use con-
                      and technical assistance to local govern-            flicts and lack of detailed management programs
                      ments to prepare wetland conservation                threaten the health of Oregon's ocean environ-
                      plans and incorporate these plans into               ment and renewable marine resources.
                      local comprehensive land use programs.               The Oregon Legislature took action in 1987 and
                 Restoration of coastal wetlands will focus on es-         1991 to establish ocean planning laws and allo-
                 tuaries where most loss has occurred. The first           cate state resources to the task. A plan for ocean
                 step of such a program will be identifying es-            resource management within the 200 mile U.S.
                 tuarine areas appropriate for restoration. Then the       Exclusive Economic Zone off Oregon has been
                 wetlands methodolgy, above, and existing infor-           prepared and adopted by the state. Ibis Ocean
                 mation on estuarine functions will be used to             Plan emphasizes stewardship of ocean resources
                 develop techniques and standards to guide actual          and protection of marine habitats. The state there-
                                                                           fore has a sound legal and policy framework for
                 restoration field work.                                   addressing ocean resources management issues.
                      Priority Program Enhancement: Identify               Oregon needs a more detailed plan    and im-
                      and prioritize estuarine areas for restora-          plementing programs for the state's territorial sea
                      tion to wetlands; develop standards and              to address a variety of issues and problems raised
                      policies to guide restoration work in es-            during preparation of the Ocean Plan. An Oregon
                      tuarine areas; use demonstration projects            territorial sea plan, as required by the 1991 legisla-
                      with monitoring to assess success.                   ture, will provide a mandatory framework for
                 Because many coastal wetlands have been lost              local, state, and federal agency plans, programs,
                 and serious development pressures continue to             rules and regulations to manage ocean resources
                 threaten those which remain, coordination be-             within Oregon's territorial sea. An Oregon ter-
                 tween local governments and state agencies, such          ritorial sea plan, when approved by
                 as DSL, DLCD and DEQ, is increasingly impor-              NOAA/OCRM as part of Oregon's Coastal
                 tant. This state guidance to city and county offi-        Management Program, Vl' ensure that federal
                 cials can help ensure that local plans reflect water      agency programs and decisions are consistent
                 quality standards under the EPA, that local               with the plan.
                 decisions on individual wetland development re-                Priority Program Enhancement: Prepare
                 quests are considered in a broader coastwide con-              and adopt a fully enforcable plan and im-
                 text, and that statewide wetlands goals are met.               plementing measures to manage Oregon's
                      Priority Program Enhancement: Work                        territorial sea resources, uses, and ac-
                      with local governments to provide informa-                tivities.
                      tion, coordinate agency programs and                 Certain of Oregon's marine resources, chiefly
                      policies and develop local ordinances and            marine mammals, seabirds, and rocky intertidal
                      regulations to protect wetlands.                     areas, are at risk from encroachment on critical or
                 OmmResouxves                                              sensitive habitat and depletion or destruction of
                                                                           food resources. Some of these sites are habitat for
                 Oregonians understand that the diversity, com-            migratory gray whales, the threatened Steller sea
                 plexity and productivity of the coastal environ-          lion and other endangered species. Oregon must





                 Viii





                                                            Executive Summary


                develop interagency management plans and                   plan. Oregonians want to remain involved in and
                programs, public awareness and education efforts           continue to be informed and educated about ocean
                and mandatory enforcement measures where                   resources planning and management issues.
                necessary to protect these resources.                        0 Priority Program Enhancement: Continue
                     Priority Program Enhancement: Adopt                        to provide citizens with information about
                     site specific management plans and protec-                 ocean resources and opportunities to par-
                     tion measures for critical marine mammal                   ticipate in ocean planning.
                     and seabird habitat.                                  The responsibility to manage the resources and
                Substantial improvement is needed in the scien-            values of the Pacific Ocean off Oregon is not
                tific inventory information base necessary for             limited to the state alone. Many federal agencies
                Oregon to prepare and adopt a territorial sea plan         have responsibilities and authorities for resources
                and implementation measures, including ad-                 and activities even inside Oregon's territorial sea.
                ministrative rules for Goal 19. Oregon has estab-          Protection and proper management of these
                lished an ocean resources geographic information           resources is a shared responsibility whose costs
                system to store, retrieve, and analyse information         must be bom by both levels of government. These
                from a variety of sources.                                 costs are not insignificant. But the loss of ocean
                     Priority Program Enhancement: Conduct                 resources would be even greater. Federal agencies
                     coordinated ocean research programs to ac-            must assist the State of Oregon, and all states, to
                     quire needed information.                             protect a common resource.
                     Improve ocean resources GIS capability to                  Priority Program Enhancement: Coopera-
                     support ocean planning and management                      tion and financial assistance from federal
                     decisions.                                                 agencies, including the Office of Ocean and
                Hundreds of Oregonians participated in prepara-                 Coastal Resources Management, National
                tion of the 1990 Oregon Ocean Resources                         Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and
                Management Plan. Public support was crucial to                  Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey,
                1991 legislation establishing an Ocean Policy Ad-               Environmental Protection Agency, and the
                visory Council and reqquiring a territorial sea                 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to plan,
                                                                                manage, and protect ocean resources.


                Low Priority Enhancements
                The-- 3-09- Assessment also examined four other is-        Oregon coast. In addition, there are 645 identified
                sues: public access, marine debris, special area           points of access to the ocean shore, 406 access
                management plans, and energy facility siting.              points to estuarine shores, and 99 sites providing
                While Oregon continues to implement programs               access to coastal lakes. Respondents to the coastal
                aimed at all four, none are considered to be               questionnaire did not identify public access as a
                priorities for improvement at this time. Either sig-       priority management problem.
                nificant problems do not exist, or there are effec-        State and local governments are working on
                tive mechanisms in place for dealing with them.            public access improvements within existing
                   ï¿½ Public Access                                         programs including the federal 306A program ad-
                Ninety per cent of the Oregon coast is in public           ministered by DLCD, and boating facilities
                ownership: 262 miles of sandy beaches and 64               funded by the state Marine Board. Some coastal
                miles of rocky headlands. The other 10 percent is          governments are adding new requirements to their
                either estuary mouths or ocean shoreline in                comprehensive plans to protect existing public ac-
                private ownership over which the public retains a          cess sites.
                paramount right of access. Thus Oregonians have              ï¿½ Marine Debris
                legal access to virtually the entire length of the         Oregon's Pacific Ocean shoreline receives its


                                                                                                                                 ix






                                          Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  share of debris brought ashore by winds and                Only two major energy facilities have been sited
                  waves. For years, beachcombers have delighted in           in the past twenty years, a liquified natural gas
                  hiking the early morning beach after a storm to            (LNG) storage tank on Yaquina Bay in Newport
                  hunt glass floats from Japanese fishing vessels.           and a "wind farm" electric power facility at Whis-
                  Today, however, much of the debris is less roman-          key Run north of Bandon.
                  tic plastic debris. Twice a year thousands of              Most "major" energy facilities are sited and regu-
                  Oregonians scour the beaches and collect tons of           lated by the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Coun-
                  trash. However, available beach cleanup data sug-          cil (EFSQ. State law does not allow local
                  gests that Oregon has far less of a beach debris           governments to veto the siting of facilities regu-
                  problem than other states. That perception is rein-        lated by EFSC. However, state law requires EFSC
                  forced by response to the OCMP questionnaire               to "coordinate" its decisions with affected local
                  which indicated that marine debris was not an im-          governments. This is done by EFSC appointing
                  portant issue on the coast.                                the local government as a "special advisory body"
                  Nevertheless, various organizations are conduct-           and requesting its comments.
                  ing "grass roots" programs to reduce or clean up             ï¿½ Special Area Management Planning
                  debris in Oregon. For example, the port
                  authorities in Astoria, Newport, and Charleston            Special area management plans are typically used
                  operate their own recycling and debris disposal            where statewide or regional land use planning is
                  programs for sport and commercial fishing ves-             not available to regulate land use, protect resour-
                  sels. Oregon's bottle recycling law, begun as a            ces and resolve disputes. In Oregon, the entire
                  citizen ballot initiative, has reduced the "bottle"        coastal zone, from the crest of the Coast Range
                  component of the state's beach debris.                     Mountains to the valleys to the ocean white with
                                                                             foam (apologies to Irving Berlin), is covered by
                    ï¿½ Energy & Government Facility                           comprehensive and coordinated "special area
                      Siting                                                 management planning". All lands and waters
                  The siting of major energy and government                  governed by coastal cities and counties are sub-
                  facilities, often important to the state or nation as      ject to local comprehensive land use plans. In par-
                  a whole, frequently stimulates local opposition.           ticular, separate planning efforts were conducted
                  However, these facilities are not typically                for each of Oregon's 21 major estuaries as sub-
                  proposed for the relatively remote Oregon coast.           components of the comprehensive plans.
























                  X









                                                                          Introduction





                Beginning in the spring of 1990, the department                state policies urging a "go-slow" approach
                began a systematic examination of both coastal                 and because state-federal studies showed high
                resource management problems and the desired fu-               biologic values and low mineral potential off
                ture course of the Oregon Coastal Management                   the south coast.
                Program.                                                       Concerns over Highway 10 1 are being ad-
                We systematically surveyed other state agencies                dressed thmugh an ambitious HighwaylOl
                participating in the coastal program as to their               corridor planning process involving local
                areas of concern. We also sent out a questionnaire             governments and citizens sponsored by the
                to over 230 local governments, interest groups,                Oregon Department of Transportation.
                and involved citizens. We asked them to identify          Other major resource management issues iden-
                major resource management issues. The 52                  tified by the coastal questionnaire need attention:
                respondents identified management issues as-              protecting fish habitat, wetlands, and ocean resour-
                sociated with the following five major topics:            ces; and addressing the cumulative effects of
                population growth; economic development; off-             population growth, and planning to avoid coastal
                shore mineral development; fish habitat; and High-        hazards. The department is working with other
                waylOl improvements.                                      state and federal agencies and local governments
                Since then, the department and other state agen-          to make sure that programs to address these -
                cies have begun to address some of these issues.          priority issues are coordinated and cost-effective.
                     The department is developing an "urban               The '"JW Pkpg@
                     growth management" program to help com-
                     munities gr-appling with rapid population            Coincidentally, in October of 1990, Congress
                     growth.                                              created the "309 Program". Oregon has a head
                                                                          start on qualifying for needed "309" funds be-
                     In April 1992, the department will cosponsor         cause of our own early strategic planning and the
                     a 2-day conference on growth and develop-            circulation of the questionnaire on coastal
                     ment on the Oregon coast in Newport.                 resource management issues.
                     Offshore oil and gas and hard mineral ex-
                     ploration has been halted off Oregon due to





                                          Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  Aswssmeiat                                                listing of priority program enhancements.
                  Each of the eight 309 Program improvement is-             Based on responses to the coastal questionnaire
                  sues is individually discussed below. For each, a         and on state agency assessments, it appears that
                  legislative objective (the Congressionally stated         four of the 309 improvement issues are, in fact, of
                  objective of the 309 Program) is stated at the            major concern to Oregon. These are: cumulative
                  beginning of the discussion. The legislative objec-       effects of development, coastal hazards, wetlands,
                  tive is the overall standard against which the            and ocean resources. These are considered
                  Oregon management program is being measured.              priorities because significant management
                  The legislative objective statement is followed by        problems exist.
                  14 resource assessment" and "management assess-           At this point, it appears that the other four 309
                  ment" discussions. These discuss the status and           Program issues are not high priorities for Oregon.
                  trends of the resource and current management             The reason is that either no significant manage-
                  programs. The intent is to determine whether any          ment problems exist or that Oregon already has ef-
                  problems exist and what general solutions may be          fective mechanisms for dealing with public
                  possible.                                                 access, marine debris, special management plans,
                  Each assessment concludes with a summary and              and energy facility siting.






















                  2








                                                             Cumulative and
                                             Secondary Adverse
                                                                                               Effects





                         Legislative Objective

                         Adopt procedures for assessing, considering, and controlling cumulative
                         and secondary adverse effects of coastal growth and development. Include
                         the collective effect of various individual uses and activities on coastal
                         resources, such as on coastal wetlands and fishery resources.

                Resource Assessment
                           ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- ----------------------------------------- ...... .. ..


                The purpose of the assessment is twofold: (1) to          Oregon Department of Transportation recently es-
                assess major trends in use or development of coas-        timated an overall population growth for  me coast
                tal resources which may be affecting the health of        of 15 percent over the next twenty years    .
                the coastal environment and the livability of coas-       The effects and the management of population
                tal communities; and (2) to assess whether                growth were the major issue raised by respon-
                management policies are adequate to control and           dents to the department's coastwidt questionnaire
                manage these effects in the future.                       about coastal management issues. E) This same
                Population Cxmwdu                                         problem was also the "most compelling finding"
                                                                          by an Oregon Sea Grant c       study of coastal
                The Lea&V CoasW L%sue                                     communities in transition @s While population
                Recent census data (1) show that Oregon's coastal         growth is accepted as a reality, managing the pace
                zone experienced only a 2 percent overall popula-         of growth and making certain it occurs in ap-
                tion increase between 1980 and 1990. However,             propriate locations is strongly felt. Respondents
                some counties and cities grew as much as four-            expressed concerns about the effects of growth
                teen percent in population. Furthermore, the              that are spelled out in detail below: that growth



                                                                                                                             3





                                              Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                   may overwhelm our ability to cope with it by ex-                climate, its oceanfront setting and its proximity to
                   ceeding the capacity of our infrastructure and af-              California. Lincoln County is especially popular
                   fecting the housing supply. Respondents are                     because of its oceanfront setting, the availability
                   concerned that the state and local governments                  of supporting services and its proximity to the
                   develop and implement more effective tools to                   Willamette Valley and Portland. The growth re-
                   manage growth.                                                  lated problems these areas are experiencing are an
                      ï¿½ Demographics: Retirement                                   indicator of problems likely to be faced by other
                        and Tourism                                                coastal communities in the coming years as
                   Retirees are the principal component of the rapid               development pressures continue and accumulate.
                   population growth on Oregon's coast. Based on                     ï¿½ Service Needs for a
                   recent census data for Clatsop, Ti amook, Lin-                       Changing Population
                   coln, Coos, and Curry counties, M the "sixty-five               The increasing older population will create new
                   and above" age group increased by 33 percent be-                and expanded needs for health care, transporta-
                   tween 1980 and 1990. That age group now makes                   tion, housing, and related services which cater to
                   up 19 percent of the coastal population. The com-               the needs of the elderly. The state and coastal
                   bination of an attractive environment, affordable               communities need a better long-range picture of
                   housing, reasonable tax rates and necessary sup-                the demographic makeup of coastal communities
                   porting services makes coastal communities an at-               and the supporting facilities that are likely to be
                   tractive retirement location. The coast generally               needed. Coordinated planning among local
                   provides small town living opportunities with                   governments, health facility providers, and the
                   reasonable proximity to larger metropolitan areas.              state is needed to make sure that these needs are
                   This trend is likely to continue or even increase               properly addressed.
                   given projected increases in the number of retire-                ï¿½ Maintaining Affordable Housing
                   ment age people and the likely continuing relative
                   affordability of housing in coastal communities.                The increased popularity of the coast has reduced
                   Oregon proximity to California will also be a                   the supply of affordable housing. Prices and rent
                   major factor.                                                   levels of existing housing units have been bid up
                                                                                   by increased demand. Virtually all new housing is
                   Increased tourism is a second factor affecting                  being built for middle- and upper-income buyers
                   coastal growth. The state's economic development                and renters. The cost of housing, particularly for
                   strategy has required multi-county regions of the               average employees in the tourist industry, is be-
                   state to collaborate to develop and implement a                 coming very expensive. Low-end housing is also
                   common "regional strategy". AR but one of the                   being converted to second homes for out-of-town
                   regions on the coast have selected tourism as the               owners.
                   major component of their economic development
                   strategy. This effort has and will continue to result           1hfi-dstmcttnv Needs
                   in increased development of largely seasonal
                   tourist oriented businesses and the development                 New development creates a need for new and ex-
                   of a year-around "second home" weekend popula-                  panded public facilities and services. Most of
                   tion.                                                           Oregon's coastal communities are small and have
                                                                                   not experienced or successfully managed raid
                      ï¿½ Key Growth Areas                                           growth in the past. This creates both a need for
                   The effects of coastal development are apparent                 new facilities and services and development of
                   in all oceanfront communities, but they are most                the capability at the local level to plan, finance
                   pronounced in the urban areas of Lincoln County                 and built needed facilities. These problems are ag-
                   and Curry County. These two counties have ex-                   gravated by a statewide reduction in property tax
                   perienced the highest rates of growth on the                    rates which has reduced revenues traditionally
                   coast-10 and 14 percent respectively since                      available for facility construction.
                   1980P) They are likely to continue t receive the
                   most pressure for new development T7)                           Roads, sewer and water plants and other in-
                                                                                   frastructure 110 support new development may
                   Curry County is popular because of its temperate                cause mom damage to the coastal enviromnent:



                   4





                                                  Cumulative & Secondary Adverse Effects


                   -   Roads run along or cross the ocean shore, es-             plans and ordinances do not adequately assure
                       tuaries and coastal wetlands. Widening roads              that appropriate safeguards are in fact in place. At
                       may unavoidably mean destruction of some                  the same time, the state has gathered new informa-
                       sensitive areas.                                          tion which suggests that hazards to oceanfront
                    0  New sewage treatment plants generally must                development from flooding, erosion and
                       locate in low lying areas near existing                   earthquakes may be greater than previously
                       development. Agriculture lands and wetlands               believed. As a consequence the staie needs to
                       have been lost to such development in the                 reconsider its policies for development, particular-
                       past.                                                     ly in hazardous areas. (This particular issue is dis-
                                                                                 cussed ftirther in the Coastal Hazards section of
                       Coastal stream flows and fisheries can be hurt            this report.)
                       by dams and water plants which take water
                       from streams as well as from new sewer                    Development mid M=Vement
                       plants which may overload streams with                    Thmats to Naturul Resoun"
                       treated effluent.                                         Natural resources in the coastal zone are under
                  Careful planning can reduce the need for improve-              pressure from both land development and manage-
                  ments and their harm on the environment. For ex-               ment practices on farm and forest lands.
                  ample, access management alone can reduce the                  Urbanization along the coast has resulted in in-
                  need for highway or road widening. Innovative                  creased pressure to develop along the ocean
                  wastewater treatment techniques, such as con-                  shore, rivers, and wetlands, and to convert farm
                  structing or enhancing wetlands to provide for ter-            and forest lands to urban uses. Filling of coastal
                  tiary wastewater treatment can accommodate new                 wetlands and rivers has been substantially
                  infrastructure in a way which is compatible with               reduced but the long-term effects of past activities
                  protection of the natural environment.                         is not fully known. Also, concerns are increasing
                  Existing state land use planning program rules re-             about more subtle effects, such as urban runoff on
                  quire detailed public facility planning by cities              estuarine water quality. State and local govern-
                  with 2,500 or more population. These require-                  ments need to more fully address these issues. Ad-
                  ments may need to be revised or expanded to in-                dressing these issues may involve:
                  clude smaller local governments, particularly                     * Revision of comprehensive plans during peri-
                  those which cater to tourism.                                       odic review (either in response to new infor-
                  Existing OCMP policies have assured that land is                    mation or new state policy initiatives) such as
                  planned and zoned to provide for higher density                     wetland conservation plans.
                  and affordable housing. However more effort is                    * Revised statewide anning goal or rule re-
                  needed to assure that affordable housing in fact                                         Pi
                  gets built.                                                         quirements; particularly for regulating
                                                                                      shoreline development and land use patterns.
                  Developmentof                                                     9 New or revised state agency authorities in
                  Sen4five Lwids                                                      response to specific problems or issues.
                  The increasing value of oceanfront real estate                    ï¿½ Beach Sand Supply
                  makes more likely the development of areas pre-                Development along the shoreline together with on-
                  viously considered to expensive to develop. This               going natural processes has resulted in placement
                  is especially true of lands at the edge of coastal             of beachfront protective structures along many
                  terraces, along the beach, and along coastal wet-              developed pbrtions of the coast. Sea level rise and
                  lands.                                                         foreseeable erosion and flooding events make it a
                  The existing OCMP program only allows develop-                 certainty that much of the presently developed
                  ment in hazardous areas if the development can                 coastline will be protected by revetinents at some
                  be shown to be adequately protected from the                   time in the future. Although the state policies
                  hazard. There are growing concerns that existing               prohibit revetments in undeveloped areas and
                                                                                 limit them elsewhere, concerns remain that the




                                                                                                                                          5





                                          Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  continued construction of revetments will increase        bird's survival. Research on the murrelet and its
                  erosion and narrowing of Oregon's beaches.                habitat needs is in progress.
                  Manyin the development community continue to              The silverspot butterfly requires a combination of
                  question both the severity of potential flooding          old growth forests and salt-spray meadows for
                  and erosion events and whether placement of               food and shelter. Salt spray meadows support cer-
                  revetments will harm the beach. An Oregon Sea             tain flowers upon which the butterfly feeds.
                  Grant er@ition of current shoreline policies is           Residential and golf course development of the
                  underway.     This includes gathering additional          remaining open meadows are major conflicts.
                  information on the effects of shorefront protective       Habitat enhancement plans which preserve and en-
                  structures on beach erosion.                              hance portions of the salt spray meadow for the
                    ï¿½ Threatened & Endangered Species                       butterfly are accepted and apparently effective
                                                                            ways to enhance butterfly habitat and allow for
                  Numerous threatened or endangered species are             development. Butterfly habitat is known to exist
                  directly affected - either positively or negatively       and has been dealt with near Gearhart in Clatsop
                  - by development activities along or near the             County and at Big Creek in Lane County.
                  ocean shoreline. One plant, the pink sand verbena,
                  and one animal, the snowy plover, thrive only in          Certain salmon species are the third group of or-
                  open sandy areas along the ocean shore or beach      .    ganisms at risk from the cumulative and secon
                  The snowy plover nests just above the high tide           dary effects of continued development. Native
                  line and is potentially threatened by most kinds of       salmon stocks are threatened not by land develop-
                  human activity. Both the verbena and the plover           ment so much as by the cumulative effects of the
                  have lost habitat as a result of the spread of            following activities: (1) timber and agricultural
                  European beachgrass (Ammophila arenaria) along            management practices in coastal watersheds; (2)
                  Oregon's oceanfront over the last 50-75 years.            increased harvest pressure; and (3). construction of
                  The presence and spread of beachgrass has                 hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River water-
                  dramatically reduced the amount of open sand              shed without adequate upstream and downstream
                  above the high tide line, crowding out both the           passage facilities for the salmon. )While manage-
                  plover and the verbena.                                   ment practices have dramatically improved, the
                                                                            cumulative effect of years of past abuse have
                  Remedial actions for both the plover and the ver-         brought many runs of salmon to the brink of ex-
                  bena involve removing beachgrass. Ironically,             tinction, which has motivated the federal govern-
                  habitat for both species has been most successftil-       ment to consider a "threatened and endangered"
                  ly enhanced through placement of sandy dredged            designation.
                  material on the beach. Future remedial actions
                  will likely build on this experience and may in-          The state has made major strides to address water-
                  clude eradication of European beachgrass in               shed management issues in the coastal zone. The
                  selected locations. However, locations must be            Forest Practices Act has been and is being revised
                  carefully selected in order to avoid increasing the       to provide adequate buffers along coastal streams
                  potential for flood or erosion damage to                  and to implement other measures to minimize
                  oceanfront buildings.                                     damage to fish habitat. The state's Salmon and
                                                                            Trout Enhancement Program - called STEP -
                  The silverspot butterfly and the marbled murrelet         has involved citizen groups in a stream-by-stream
                  are endangered species which depend on old                effort to restore habitat and reestablish successful
                  growth forest habitat located very near to the            runs of native fish. Minimum stream flows and in-
                  ocean. The murrelet, a very fast flying small bird,       stream water rights for fish are being established
                  nests in trees in old growth and fishes along the         to 'protect fish runs and other instrearn uses. While
                  nearshore. Little is known about the bird's popula-       more needs to be done on upland management
                  tion or habits, and future research is needed to          practices, other factors beyond local and state con-
                  know how to enhance the population. Most of the           trol, such as international open ocean fishing prac-
                  known nesting areas are in national forest lands          tices and retrofitting hydroelectric dams with
                  along the coast. Consequently, the management of          adequate fish passage facilities, are needed if
                  forest lands is an important factor affecting the         these efforts are to succeed.




                  6






                                               Cumulative & Secondary Adverse Effects


                 Water Quality                                              identifies several nonpoint source problems
                                                                            and their likely causes - in the coastal basins.
                 One important component of the cumulative and              However, much of the assessment is based on ob-
                 secondary effects of all activities in the coastal         servation and perreeption, rather than on verified
                 zone - not just development activities - is                data. While confidence in the observations is
                 water quality. Water quality itself can indicate the       high, the existence of problems still must be
                 severity of land and resource uses in the coastal          verified before the Assessment. can be used as the
                 zone. Rapid growth can indeed have adverse ef-             basis for specific nonpoint sourrce control
                 fects on water quality, but simple daily use of all        programs or projects. Further, identified problems
                 resources and areas in the coastal zone also               must be validated by communities before pollu-
                 results in persistent water quality problems.              tion control programs can anticipate success. In
                 The coastal onshore hydrologic system is made              short, communities will not devote efforts to solve
                  p of rivers, estuaries, lakes, and groundwater            problems they don't believe exist.
                 aquifers. It can be thought of as a single, con-           The 1988 Assessment shows that nearly all coastal
                 u

                 tinuous, deep sheet of water - much or most of             streams are affected by at least one nonpoint
                 which is underground - that gravitates from the            source problem or another. Turbidity, erosion,
                 crest of a basin to the ocean by the easiest avail-        sedimentation, and nutrients are the most
                 able path. So any activity that affects water              prevalent nonpoint source problems in coastal
                 quality in one part of the system invariably affects       streams. Many strearns have insufficient stream
                 the remainder of the system downstream. The ef-            structure. A few streams show high pathogen
                 fect of a single "pollution event" on the whole sys-       counts, elevated temperatures, or low dissolved
                 tem is usually minor, but the cumulative effect of         oxygen.
                 thousands of such "events" could disrupt the in-
                 tegrity of the entire system, and thus threaten the        The 1988 Assessment also shows that coastal
                 life forms and communities it supports. The fact           lakes are apparently subject to somewhat different
                 is, thousands of such events occur daily in                stresses. According to the database, coastal lakes
                 Oregon's coastal basins.                                   are more affected by pesticides and toxics than
                 Virtually all of Oregon's coastal waters are af-           the pollutants common in the coastal streams. In
                 fected to some degree by pollution. Yet even               addition, though, increased aquatic plant growth
                 within the network of resource management                  in some coastal lakes has been attributed to in-
                 programs, some of this pollution can be ignored:           creased nutrients entering the lakes. And if
                 pollution does occur naturally, and some pollu-            aquifers are not specifically affected by nonpoint
                 tion, while caused by human activities, does not           source pollution today, they are vulnerable to the
                 affect water uses.                                         cumulative effects of future resource uses.
                 However, most pollution problems cannot be ig-             The assessment indicates that the causes of non-
                 nored. They either constitute health risks, reduce         point problems in coastal basins include surface
                 the vitality of aquatic life, or more generally            erosion, landslides, road location, removal of
                                                                            vegetative cover, and a variety of water flow and
                 restrict the ability to use the waters. Many non-          channel alterations.
                 point source (NPS) pollution problems - that is,
                 the cumulative effects of thousands of minor pol-          In general, nonpoint source water quality
                 lution events - fall into this group: they simply          problems are land-based resource use problems
                 cannot be ignored. Thus, a primary task in any             which manifest themselves in the water. In addi-
                 strategy to reduce nonpoint source pollution will          tion to causes identified in the assessment are
                 be to identify water quality problems that can be          problems of failing septic systems or residential
                 solved through a variety of individual and com-            development that is too dense for the watershed;
                 munity efforts.                                            problems of using pesticides too close to the
                 Nonpoint source pollution seriously affects                watervourse, or of not leaving a vegetative buffer
                 several water bodies in Oregon's coastal basins.           between certain uses and the stream; problems of
                 The 1988 Oregon Statewide Assqjment of Non-                earth movement resulting from construction ac-
                 point Sources of Water Pollution        specifically       tivities, or improper surface drainage of nutrient-


                                                                                                                                  7





                                          Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  producing activities. Ibe list could go on. in            point source pollution, slowing the division of
                  short, every nonpoint pollution problem has a             farm and forest lands, halting the extension of
                  land use or resource management cause.                    urban services into rural areas, increasing the
                  In the context of community planning and                  protection of estuaries and wetlands, and so on.
                  development, many of these land use and                   Moreover, there have been fewer demands in the
                  resource management issues related to water               past to use coastal waters. Now, with the use of
                  quality have been overshadowed by the need to             coastal resources in general - and coastal waters
                  address more pressing cumulative impacts. Com             specifically - expected to increase dramatically
                                                                       -    in the 1990s, the cumulative effects of many ap-
                  munities have been properly devoted to reducing           parently harmless activities must be addressed.


                  Management Assessment
                                           ------------- ----------- ---------- -----

                  Implementation of Oregon's coastal management             housing, and for protecting and enhancing the
                  program is resulting in the refinement of policies        coastal environment. The existing program
                  and techniques for managing cumulative effects            provides a mechanism for local governments; to
                  of coastal development. However, more needs to            update their plans in response to this new informa-
                  be done.                                                  tion - through periodic review.
                  The state and local government efforts described          The department is continuing its assessment of
                  below provide an opportunity to pursue cumula-            coastal issues with local governments, state agen-
                  tive effects issues. The department, as the state's       cies, and other groups and interests involved in
                  lead agency for coastal management, has a key             the coastal management program. This ongoing ef-
                  role to play in coordinating and integrating these        fort will provide a basis for discussion and further
                  efforts. Coordination and integration can assure          efforts to reflne coastal program policies to better
                  that the efforts do not work to cross purposes.           address cumulative effects of development.
                  Population Gmwth Pmssur-es                                Other agencies are also involved in long-range
                                                                            planning efforts to better address cumulative ef-
                  The department has completed a detailed analysis          fects of development. The Division of State Lands
                  of urban growth patterns around the state includ-         (DSL) is encouraging local governments to
                  ing the Brookings area. The results of this study         develop wetland management plans. DSL will
                  show that substantial amounts of residential              also be assessing wetland trends statewide to es-
                  development are continuing to occur just outside          tablish regional priorities for wetland mitigation
                  of urban growth boundaries despite policies               and restoration projects (see wetlands discussion
                  which encourage development to occur within the           below.)
                  boundaries. The department is now beginning to
                  develop proposals for rule and statute changes to         The Oregon Department of Transportation
                  implement the results of this study.                      (ODOT) is developing a corridor plan for the
                                                                            Pacific Coast Highway, Highway 101. Planning is-
                  More information is needed on the unique                  sues facing Highway 101 mirror the broader coas-
                  demographic character of the Oregon coast and its         tal agenda. Coastal population growth and
                  implications for future planning. We know the cur-        especially expanded tourism place new demands
                  rent trends for retirement and tourist development        on the coast's major transportation route. These
                  on the Oregon coast. We need an analysis of state,        demands must be sorted out in a way which main-
                  regional, and national trends in these areas to           tains and enhances the coastal environment
                  know if rates of growth in these industries will
                  remain the same, grow more rapidly, or slack off.         The Governor's priority for promotion of "Liv-
                  We then need to translate this information into an        able Communities" is also an important planning
                  assessment of planning needs, such as for public          effort which parallels the coastal program. "Liv-
                  facilities planning, for maintaining affordable           able Communities" is intended to address the is-



                  8





                                               Cumulative & Secondary Adverse Effects


                sues of rapid population growth in a way which             Water QuLaRty Programs
                accommodates growth but retains the quality of
                life to which people have grown accustomed.                  ï¿½ State Agencies
                A minimum response to the "Livable Com-                    Oregon's system for addressing water quality
                munities" initiative would be to monitor and col-          problems is the responsibility of several programs
                lect data on the changes in coastal natural                within the Oregon Department of Environmental
                resources due to population growth. Specific               Quality (DEQ). DEQ participates as a full "net-
                measures or indicators could be established which          worked" partner in the Oregon Coastal Manage-
                could be used to research the status, trends, and          ment Program. Among other responsibilities,
                forecasts for key "adverse effects areas". Data on         DEQ administers programs for groundwater
                certain parameters are currently being collected,          quality, water quality in lakes and estuaries, and
                such as population and demographic patterns.               for nonpoint source pollution control .(5-i DEQ's
                What is needed are data related to quality of life         programs reflect distinctions between the com-
                and to natural resource quality; such as acres of          ponents of the hydrologic system for reasons of
                wetlands and riparian habitat; and development in          convenience and familiarity.
                hazardous areas. As another example, the Oregon            DEQ's water quality programs perform the follow-
                Progress Board has recommended numerous data               ing differing functions: water quality monitoring;
                collection parameters that coull,,@e used to               water quality assessments; water body prioritiz-
                monitor coastal natural health .     These measures        ing; research, planning, and education; and coor-
                monitor clean air, water, and land, as well as             dination among other programs and agencies.
                agricultural lands, forest lands, wetlands, and en-        Each distinct water quality program contributes to
                dangered species.                                          these statewide planning and coordination func-
                Achieving the "Livable Communities" objectives             tions. As a result, the state uses limited resources
                in the face of shrinking public funds will be a            to address severe problems and to protect par-
                challenge. One potential solution may be an in-            ticularly valuable waters.
                creased use of qualified citizen volunteers to per-        Oregon's Nonpoint Source Management Plan
                form many of the needed planning tasks. This is a          identifies and sets priorities for work tasks that
                positive manifestation of the dramatic increase in         are to be accomplished as staff and budget resour-
                the retirement section of the coastal population           ces allow. With additional financial resources, em-
                during the last decade. A recent Oregon Sea GrNt           phasis on problems in coastal basins could be
                case study of coastal communities in transition            increased. The increased coastal emphasis could
                provided the following conclusion regarding                result in the creation and support of citizen com-
                volunteerism:                                              mittees to monitor water quality, the identification
                     One of the things that this study discovered          of specific water quality problems, and the iden-
                     was that the subject coastal communities have         tification of water quality-related changes needed
                     the potential to take advantage of currently          in local comprehensive plans and their implemen-
                     underutilized human capital. That is to say,          tation.
                     new residents who have recently settled in            DEQ has twice produced statewide assessments
                     these communities bring with them many                of nonpoint pollution problems,pe most recent of
                     skills and unique capabilities. Particularly          which was completed in 1988 . " The assess-
                     among the retired population, individuals with        ments provide an excellent starting point for com-
                     strong technical and professional back-               munity discussions on nonpoint problems. But
                     grounds can make significant and meaningful           unfortunately, when most local comprehensive
                     contributions to the community's economic             plans were being developed, the cumulative water
                     and social milieu. Leaders in these com-              quality impacts of land uses were overshadowed
                     munities mustfind innovative ways to draw             by more immediate problems. So at this point, the
                     these new citizens into positive contributions,       Assessments have only been referenced by or in-
                     the provision ofpublic services and support of        corporated into a few coastal comprehensive plans.
                     community activities.                                 The 1988 Assessment must be updated or supple-


                                                                                                                                  9





                                          Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  mented before it can become a basis for com-              less, local plan policies and provisions to protect
                  munity decisions about water quality problems.            lake water quality now need to be updated with
                  However, state and local agencies do not have the         new water quality and land use data.
                  resources required to extend water quality           4-   DEQ recently completed one of only three near-
                  monitoring programs so as to help identify and ad         coastal water quality demonstration projects in the
                  dress basin-wide nonpoint source problems. So             nation. The project focused on the Coquille River
                  Oregon's water quality strategy is to work on the         basin, where nonpoint sources contributed to
                  most difficult problems first, and to immediately         water quality degradation. The Coquille project
                  protect high-quality waters. Given the limited            was built on extensive public involvement in the
                  resources compared to the magnitude of                    form of a Community Advisory Committee. The
                  problerns, any broad effort to further identify and       committee helped identify problem areas, par-
                  control persistent water quality problems will            ticipated in monitoring activities, and advised
                  have to rely on extensive education, information,         DEQ of practical solutions to the identified
                  problem identification and consensus-building.            problems. The committee is now developing a
                  Since Oregon's local water quality projects in-           "Strategic Watershed Plan", which will identify
                  variably rely on public and local government par-         priorities for the next decade. Since point source
                  ticipation, citizen committees provide an excellent       problems in the basin have now been rectified, the
                  opportunity to begin long-term basin-wide citizen         more complex nonpoint source problems are
                  monitoring programs.                                      being evaluated to determine the highest priorities
                  Oregon's nonpoint source control program cur-             for future projects.
                  rently relies on "designated management agen-             The Near Coastal Waters demonstration project
                  cies" for its implementation. These agencies are          successfully developed and supported a citizen-
                  typically involved directly in managing a                 based approach to solving water quality problems.
                  resource, whether by regulation, leasing, or techni-      It provides one model for continued citizen-based
                  cal assistance. Thus agencies are in an excellent         coastal water quality improvement programs in
                  position to use - or require the use of - "best           coastal basins. It also demonstrates that com-
                  management practices" for reducing nonpoint               munity support and understanding am critical to
                  source pollution. For example, the Oregon Depart-         the success of nonpoint source pollution control
                  ment of Forestry, the Oregon Department of                programs.
                  Agriculture, and the Bureau of Land Management
                  are all involved in nonpoint source pollution con-        In summary, Oregon's state-level water quality
                  trol by virtue of their work with forest and agricul-     programs are structured, first, according to water
                  tural land management. Many state and federal             body type; second, to address specific water
                  agencies are involved in addressing the cumula-           quality problems; and third, to participate in a
                  tive water quality effects of coastal resource uses.      process to identify water quality priorities
                  However, only one - DEQ - has the reduction               statewide. Limited financial resources have
                  of water pollution as its primary responsibility.         resulted in a strategy of addressing only the worst
                  DEQ also has a water quality program for small            water quality problems, and of restricting the use
                  coastal lakes. The lakes program is currently char-       of the more effective citizen-based watershed ap-
                  acterizing the limnology of seventeen coastal             proach. The different programs are not well in-
                  lakes, so that water quality can be correlated with       tegrated into the local comprehensive planning
                  land uses in lake watersheds. The current objec-          process. The separate prograins are effective at ad
                  tive of the lakes program is to synthesize current        dressing identified water quality problems, and
                                                                            they provide a strong foundation for an integrated
                  knowledge about coastal lakes into a model that           "watershed approach" to water quality problems
                  can be used by local planning officials to deter-         at the local level.
                  mine the optimum level of different land uses in a
                  lake watershed. Protection of coastal lakes                 ï¿½ Local Governments
                  receives more attention in local comprehensive
                                                                            Three factors complicate the involvement of local
                  plans than do riverine nonpoint problems, but this        planning and development authorities in nonpoint
                  is probably due to the fact that lake shores are          source pollution control.
                  under tremendous development pressure. Nonethe-




                  10






                                                  Cumulative & Secondafy Adverse Effects


                  First, local governments have not historically                      tunities to prevent nonpoint source pollution.
                  been involved in the reduction of nonpoint source                0  Providing integrated state-level support for a
                  pollution. Local authorities do review a consider-                  citizen-based watershed approach to protect-
                  able number of land use and development ac-                         ing water quality.
                  tivities, but their review has traditionally been
                  restricted to the protection of other community                  0  Increasing public awareness of the water pol-
                  values. Minimizing urban sprawl, maintaining                        lution that results from a variety of individual
                  land in viable blocks for farm and forest uses, and                 activities.
                  prohibiting the inappropriate use of shorelines,               Finally, an effective nonpoint pollution control
                  among many other issues, have all required con-
                  siderable resources at the local level.                        program must represent the coordinated efforts of
                                                                                 several agencies to address problems systemically
                  Second, state- and federally-driven programs to                at the local level
                  protect community values can be unpopular at the
                  local level. They can be seen as the imposition of               ï¿½ New Federal-State-Local Programs
                  solutions on problems that don't exist. Oregon's               Congress recently passed legislation which can
                  experience has been that the only valid way to                 make for a closer working partnership between
                  manage an environmental protection program is                  DEQ's various water quality programs and the
                  to organize a citizen-based process that results in            Oregon coastal program. The legislation amended
                  a community's definition of its problems. This les-            the Coastal Zone Management Act to add the
                  son has been learned in both the water pollution               Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program. It is
                  and local comprehensive planning programs.                     also called the "Section 6217" program, named
                  Finally, many of the activities in the coastal zone            after the section of the amending legislation.
                  that result in nonpoint pollution are not subject to           The "6217" program is likely to use "manage-
                  local (or state) permit reviews. Virtually                     ment measures" to control the introduction of non-
                  thousands of everyday activities affect water                  point source pollutants into coastal waters,
                  quality as a matter of course. Lawn fertilizer, pet            particularly from agriculture, forestry, and urban
                  wastes, used crankcase oil and antifreeze, and im-             sources. Since many of the measures identified by
                  properly stored household chemicals are common                 federal agencies may already be in use in
                  pollutants whose use or disposal are, appropriate-             Oregon's present water quality control programs,
                  ly, not regulated by water quality officials. It is            Oregon's strategy in meeting the federal mandate
                  not administratively or politically possible to regu-          will rely heavily on community information and
                  late all of these activities.                                  problem-solving efforts. The coastal nonpoint
                  Thus there are three significant challenges to                 source control will provide Oregon with an oppor-
                  reducing the cumulative effects on water quality               tunity to integrate various state and federal water
                  of land and resource uses in the coastal zone:                 quality control resources - expertise, grants,
                                                                                 data, programs, and project contacts - into a sys-
                       Helping local planning and development                    temic watershed approach to address persistent
                       authorities become more vigilant for oppor-               coastal water quality problems.


                  Priority Program Enhancements
                                                                            -------------------- - ------------------------- ------------------------- -----------------
                                                                             --------------------


                  The category of cumulative and secondary effects               revisions. It will also work closely with the
                  is a priority for OCMP improvement.                            relevant state, local, and federal efforts mentioned
                  The major process for refinement of Oregon's                   above to assure that they are aware of other ef-
                  coastal program remains the periodic review and                forts and are fully incorporated in local plan up-
                  update of city and county comprehensive plans.                 dates.
                  The department will provide leadership through
                  its work on urban growth management policy





                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  Population Growth Pressures                                      dating of plans to respond to this new infor-
                                                                                   mation. A full discussion of periodic review
                  Oregonians are concerned about the future of the                 will be provided in the Strategies.
                  Oregon coast. They wonder what their com-
                  munities and environment will be like 50 years                   Develop and refine tools to better manage
                  from now. They recognize that the beauty, natural                and control urban development in the coas-
                  resources, and way of life of the coast will con-                tal zone. For example, small tourist com-
                  tinue to lure new residents and businesses. At the               munities on the coast could be encouraged
                  same time they also recognize that this continued                to do public facility planning.
                  growth could destroy or alter the very qualities                 Increase the use of qualified volunteers to
                  and values of the coast they know and love.                      perform needed studies, analyses, and
                  Increasing year-around population growth, a high                 other planning activities.
                  seasonal and weekend influx of tourists and                      Provide better protection of sensitive
                  second home owners, and the depopulation of                      resources threatened by development pres-
                  formerly viable timber-based communities have                    sure, particularly lands along the ocean
                  all increased demands for social services and                    shore.
                  caused a loss of affordable housing. New develop-
                  ment has created a need for new and expanded                     Encourage environmentally sensitive siting
                  public facilities, like roads and sewer treatment                and design of new public facilities in the
                  plants. The siting of such facilities can cause the              coastal zone, particularly sewer and water
                  loss of sensitive fish and wildlife habitat.                     facilities and roads.
                  The increasing value of oceanfront real estate                   Monitor the quantitative and qualitative
                  makes more likely the development of areas pre-                  changes in coastal natural resources and
                  viously considered too expensive to develop due                  other "quality of life" indicators caused by
                  to natural hazards or the mitigation of environ-                 the cumulative effects of increasing popula-
                  mental damage. Residential development has                       tion growth.
                  been occurring outside of urban growth boun-
                  daries, often on agricultural and forest lands.            Water Quafity
                  Numerous "threatened and endangered" plant and             A recent state water quality assessment shows that
                  animal species have been losing habitat due to             nearly all coastal streams are affected by at least
                  development activities.                                    one nonpoint source pollution problem. Many
                  Several improvements could be made to the                  coastal lakes are also affected, and groundwater
                  Oregon Coastal Management Program:                         aquifers are in danger. However, lack of staff and
                       Develop better information on economic                financial resources have prevented state water
                       and demographic trends to assure develop-             quality managers from making more use of effec-
                       ment needs are accommodated with mini.                tive citizen-based watershed management ap-
                       mal loss of sensitive lands and resources.            proaches. Consequently, current state-level water
                       State agencies and local governments need             quality programs are fragmented among different
                       an analysis of state, regional, and national          "hot spof 'pollution problems, and are not well in-
                       trends in these areas to know if rates of             tegrated in local comprehensive planning proces-
                       growth in these industries will remain the            ses.
                       same, grow more rapidly, or slack off. We             Several improvements could be made to the
                       then need to translate this information into          Oregon Coastal Management Program:
                       an assessment of planning needs, such as                    Verify the existence of nonpoint source
                       for public facilities planning, for maintain-               problems. This will allow the Assessment to
                       ing affordable housing, and for protecting                  be used as the basis for specific nonpoint
                       and enhancing the coastal environment.                      source control programs or projects. Fur.
                       NOTE: Fortunately, Oregon law em-                           ther, identified problems must be validated
                       powers the Coastal Program, through the                     by communities before pollution control
                       Periodic Review process, to require the up-




                  12





                                               Cumulative & Secondafy Adverse Effects


                      programs can anticipate success.                           citizen-based water quality improvement
                    ï¿½ Increase the water quality monitoring net-                 program. Community support and under-
                      work in coastal basins. A primary task in                  standing are critical to the success of non-
                      any strategy to reduce nonpoint source pol-                point source pollution control programs.
                      lution will be to identify water quality                 . Help local planning and development
                      problems that can be solved through a                      authorities become more vigilant for oppor-
                      variety of individual and community ef-                    tunities to prevent nonpoint source pollu-
                      forts.                                                     tion.

                    ï¿½ Review, supplement, and substantiate the                 0 Provide integrated state-level support for a
                      data on nonpoint source pollution                          citizen-based watershed approach to
                      problems in coastal basins.                                protecting water quality.
                    ï¿½ Increase emphasis on an integrated, com-                 0 Increase public awareness of water pollu-
                      prehensive approach - a watershed ap-                      tion that results from a variety of in-
                      proach - to protecting water quality in                    dividual activities.
                      coastal basins.                                          - Increase financial resources to implement
                    a Target problem watersheds and water                        the federally required Coastal Nonpoint
                      quality problems in coastal basins.                        Pollution Control Program. Oregon's
                      Increase community perception and recog-                   strategy will rely heavily on community in-
                      nition of nonpoint problems in coastal                     formation and problem-solving efforts.
                      watersheds.                                                Oregon will integrate various state and
                                                                                 federal water quality control resources -
                      Increase coordination and integration of                   expertise, grants, data, programs, and
                      water quality programs and land use plan-                  project contacts - into a comprehensive
                      ning programs at the local level. The Near                 watershed approach to solving persistent
                      Coastal Waters demonstration in the Co-                    coastal water quality problems.
                      quille River basin provides one model for a

                 References

                 1. Center For Population Research & Census.                Sources of Water Pollution". Portland, Oregon.
                 Population Estimates For Oregon, 1980-1990.                August 1988.
                 Portland State University. Portland, Oregon.               5. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.
                 March 1991.
                                                                            "1990 Water Quality Status Assessment Report
                 2. Good, James. "Draft Shore Protection and                (305b Report)". Portland, Oregon. (no date)
                 Oceanfront Land Use Practices In Oregon: A Criti-          6. Oregon Department of Land Conservation &
                 que". Oregon State University. Corvallis, Oregon.          Development. "Analysis of Coastal Questionnaire
                 1991.                                                      Responses". Salem, Oregon. July 1991.
                 3. Martin, Michael et al. Coastal Oregon Com-              7. Oregon Department of Transportation. "Draft
                 munities In Transition: A Case Study Approach.             Demographic & Economic Forecasts, 1990-
                 Oregon State University. Corvallis, Oregon. July           2012". Salem, Oregon. August 1991.
                 1991.
                 4. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.             8. Oregon Progress Board. Oregon Benchmarks:
                 "1988 Oregon Statewide Assessment of Nonpoint              Setting Measurable Standards For Progress.
                                                                            Salem, Oregon. May, 1990.






                                                                                                                                 13



                             Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment                          .I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    1
            14
                                                                                                    1








                                                                                           Coastal
                                                                                         Hazards





                        Legislative Objective

                        Prevent or significantly reduce threats to life and destruction of property
                        by eliminating development and redevelopment in high hazard areas,
                        managing development in other hazard areas,, and anticipating and
                        managing the effects of potential sea level rise.

                Resource Assessment


                The Oregon coast is subject to a spectrum of             and landsliding are events that fall into this
                natural hazards associated with processes that           category. Being local in nature, the effects of
                occur across a range of spatial and temporal             chronic hazards are generally less severe. How-
                scales. For the purpose of discussion, a distinction     ever, their wide distribution and frequent occur-
                can be made between "catastrophic" and                   rence makes them a more immediate concern.
                "chronic" coastal natural hazards.                       The nature of both catastrophic and chronic
                Catastrophic hazards are those which are regional        hazards that affect the Oregon coast is described
                in scale and scope. Instantaneous events, such as        below.
                earthquakes, tsunamis, and hurricanes, fall into
                this category. Although the occurrence of such           Catastmpblc Hazards
                events may be infrequent, their effects are severe.        ï¿½ Earthquakes, Coseismic
                Events more gradual in nature, but which have
                severe region-wide effects, such as sea level rise           Subsidence, Tsunamis
                and subsidence, also fall into the catastrophic          The regional tectonic setting of the Oregon coast
                hazard category.                                         is that of a convergent margin, where the oceanic
                                                                         Juan de Fuca Plate plunges below the continental
                In contrast, chronic hazards are those which are         North American plate at the Cascadia subduction
                local in scale and scope. River and ocean flood-         zone. Seismic activity in both plates represents
                ing, beach and dune erosion, sea cliff recession,        some risk, however the greatest potential for a



                                                                                                                            15





                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment

                   major catastrophic.earthquake event in the Pacific         9.1 range.(18,20) Damage from such an event
                   Northv t is associated with subduction zone seis-          would not only include that resulting ft-om ground
                   micity.Ml                                                  shaking, but also that resulting from earthquake-
                   Although there is no historical record of a major          induced liquefa     n, landsliding, subsidence, and
                   catastrophic earthquake event in the Pacific               tsunami. MaU         has outlined a scenario for
                   Northwest, a body of evidence very recently has            such an event. At the onset, severe ground shak-
                   been developed which strongly suggests that                ing occurs for several minutes. During this time,
                   major subduction zone earthquake events do                 amplification and liquefaction effects occur in
                   occuralong the Oregon coast. This evidence in-             areas of unconsolidated, saturated sediment. Mas-
                   cludes the discovery in Washington and Oregon              sive ancient landslides are reactivated. Significant
                   estuaries of sedimentary sequences consisting of           structural damage to buildings, and the closure of
                   marsh deposits overlain unconformably % i@tgrj             roads and bridges all along the coast would result
                                                                              from the occurrence of these events alone.
                   tidal niuds and/or tsunami-derived sands. I I . )
                   These deposits, suggestive of rapid subsidence             Rapid, coastwide subsidence on the order of 0.5-
                   and marine inundation, exhibit affinities to those         1.5 meters also occurs in association with the sub-
                   produced in response to the 1960 Chilean and               duction zone earthquake. Although flooding
                   1964 Alaskan subduction zone earthquakes. Other            associated with subsidence would occur immedi-
                   evidence for major subduction zone earthquake              ately in some low-lying areas, the effects of sub-
                   events includes submarine "turbidity current"              sidence are more likely to be manifest over the
                   deposits. Such landslide-induced deposition has            longer term as increased flooding and coastal
                   been shown to have occurred simultaneously over            erosion during storms. This scenario is further
                   large distances, suggestin6 tfigering by a single          complicated by the likely occurrence of locally
                   large scale seismic event.       Geodetic data,            generated tsunami arriving at the coast within a
                   which indicate that uplift is occurring and strain is      half hour a.%y initial ground shaking. A study by
                   accumulating along the entire length of the                Hebenstriet ) estimates the size of such a tsunami
                   Oregon coast, also sugff@! TJ @eismic activity ac-         to be on the order of 6-12 meters in height prior
                   companies subduction.       2 , 6 Finally, native          to run up. Maximum destruction from such a
                   American legends and archaeological evidence               tsunami would occur along the shorelines of bays,
                   are consistent with a history of major catast@op%          estuaries, and low lying sand barriers. These areas
                   earthquake events in the Pacific Northwest.(l ,            would experience immediate flooding and
                   Radiocarbon dating of buried marsh deposits, tree          erosion.  (18)                                                    1
                   ring dating, and sedimentation rates, have all been        As Madin       notes, the possible occurrence of
                   employed to estimate how often major earthquake            such a catastrophic event is undoubtedly a con-
                   events occur in the Pacific Northwest. Estimates           cem for emergency managers, land-use planners,
                   obtained from such analyses suggest that the last          and public officials of coastal communities. Many
                   major catastrophic earthquake event occurred ap-           communities critical facilities, such as schools,
                   proximately 350 years ago, the average return in-          hospitals, and emergency response centers, are lo-
                   terval is on the order of every 300-500 years, and         cated in areas that are likely to be damaged by an
                   return intervals range from mi3dy
                                                         , mhort as 270       earthquake or associated tsunami. Yet, most
                   years to as long as 850 years           71 These ob-       people remain unaware that the possibility of a
                   servations have led investigators to conclude that         magnitude 8 or greater earthquake even exists, let
                   there is a distinct possibility that a major               alone the truly catastrophic nature of such an
                   catastrophic earthquake event could happen in              event.
                   Oregon in the near future.                                      NEED: Support efforts that lead to the
                   Based on Pacific Northwest geodetic data and                    refinement of our scientific understanding
                   analogies to other great subduction zone                        of the nature of major subduction zone
                   earthquakes (e.g. Alaska, Mexico City, and Peru),               earthquake events. In particular support
                   investigators have suggested that the magnitude                 research efforts that further the under-
                   of a subduction zone earthquake event in the                    standing of areas along the Oregon coast
                   Pacific Northwest is likely to be in the Mw 8.0 to              that are most vulnerable and how impacts




                   16







                                                                 Coastal Hazards


                      in these areas can be minimized. Support                contrast, the central Oregon coast is being sub-
                      efforts to increase public awareness of the             merged by the rising sea at a rate of about 1-2
                      likelihood and nature of a major                        mm/yr. As Komar points out, these rates are small
                      earthquake event in the Pacific Northwest.              when compared to those common along the East
                 With respect to tsunamis, the import of nonlocally-          and Gulf coasts. Further, much of the Oregon
                 generated tsunamis should not be overlooked. The             coast is fronted by sandy sea cliffs rather than low
                 most common source of significant tsunamis                   lying costal barriers. As a result, inundation and
                 reaching the Oregon coast comes from                         shoreline retreat accompanying sea level rise are
                 earthquakes in and around Alaska. Although the               less of a direct threat to Oregon coastal com-
                 occurrence of such tsunamis along the Oregon                 munities than they are to those situated on the
                 coast is sporadic and unpredictable, two have                East and Gulf coasts.
                 struck the coast in recent years. This includes the          Although local tectonic conditions moderate the
                 tsunami generated by the Good Friday Alaska                  potential threats to coastal Oregon associated with
                 earthquake in 1964, the largest recorded tsunami             sea level rise, the coastwide differences described
                 to hit the Oregon coast. During this event, four             above have been @hown to affect the patterns of
                 drownings and $700,000 in damage occurred. The               coastal erosion.(' ) For example, Komar and
                 damage involved the washing of logs and                      Shih(16) have examined the relationship between
                 driftwood into motel units and the temporary                 the extent of cliff erosion and relative sea level
                 flooding of low-lying areas.                                 changes. They found that the greatest amount of
                      NEED: Support efforts that lead to the                  sea-cliff recession has occurred on the central
                      refinement of our understanding of which                Oregon coast where the rate of relative sea level
                                                                              rise is the greatest. Apparently, the cliffs in this
                      areas are most vulnerable to a tsunami,                 area are subject to more frequent direct wave at-
                      and what impacts a tsunami is likely to                 tack and as a result their buffering capabilities are
                      have in these areas.                                    minimized. Should an accelerated rise in global
                   ï¿½ Sea Level Rise-Su6idence                                 sea level occur during the next century in
                 The occurrence of a major subduction zone seis-              response to greenhouse warming, such effects
                 mic event and its accompanying effects are only              would be magnified.
                 part of the cycle of tectonic activity that occurs at              NEED: Monitor research on global sea
                 the convergent margin. The extremely brief                         level rise, particularly as it pertains to the
                 periods of sudden change that characterize a                       accelerated rates and effects of sea level
                 major seismic event are separated by extended                      rise. Support efforts to refine our
                 periods of gradual earth movement. During these                    knowledge of local effects of sea level rise.
                 quiescent intervals uplift of the coastal margin oc-               As such knowledge increases, public aware-
                 curs as strain accumulates prior to its release in a               ness of global-sea level rise can be aug-
                 major seismic event.                                               mented.
                 Recent investigations suggest that, although uplift             ï¿½ Hurricanes
                 is occurring along the entire length of the Oregon           The Oregon Coastal Zone is at little to no risk
                 coast, elevation changes are not uniformly dis-              from the hazards associated with hurricanes. How-
                 tributed. ne smallest rate of uplift has occurred            ever major storms, with hurricane force winds and
                 along the central Oregon coast. Higher rates of              7 meter high break'      waves, batter the coast al-
                 uplift have occurred alo            @e northern    and                            @N
                                              . Y_T416,                       most every w nte
                 southern Oregon coast7f I            These differen-                        i r.      The beach and upland
                 tial rates of uplift become significant when the ef-         erosion, ocean and riverine flooding, and property
                 fects of present-day sea level rise are                      damage associated with these events is considered
                 superimposed upon them. Komar(M examined                     below.
                 the rate of land-lcvel change relative to the chang-         ChrollicHazards
                 ing global sea level. He found the northern and
                 southern Oregon coasts to be rising faster than the          A prominent feature of chronic natural hazards
                 rate of rising sea level by about 0. 1-0.2 mm/yr. In         along the Oregon coast is their variety, both




                                                                                                                                    17





                                            Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  within and between the headland-bounded littoral              coupled with high water levels return to the off-
                  cells that together makeup the Oregon coast.                  shore the sand that has accumulated on beaches
                  Episodic beach and dune erosion is the major                  and dunes during the summer period of low
                  problem in some littoral cells. Commonly such                 waves. Changes in the direction of wind and Iit-
                  erosion varies spatially as well as temporally.               toral drift within the "closed" littorNOFT Ile are an
                  Homess at one end of a littoral may succumb to                integral part of this seasonal cycle.       '@'Souther-
                  storm waves, while at the same time homes at the              lies, which move sand towards the northern ends
                  other end of the same cell face burial due to sand            of the littoral cells, are dominant in the winter.
                  inundation. At any given time, erosion within an              Northerlies, which move sand towards the
                  entire littoral cell may be concentrated at single            southern ends of the littoral cells, are dominant in
                  site located at the head of a rip current embay-              the summer.
                  ment. ]h other littoral cells, or other parts of ht-          Shifts in storm paths and temporary rises in sea
                  toral cells, the major problem is landsliding and             level associated with the with El Nifto events,
                  sea-cliff recession. In these areas wave-induced              have been shown to exacerbn Pj@elqAonal pat-
                  beach erosion per se may be a contributor to such
                  problems, but be a minor problem in and of itself.            terns of erosion and accretion.              Specifi-
                  The myriad of events that fall under the category             cally, all along the Oregon coast following the
                  of chronic hazards act cumulatively. However,                 1982-83 El Nifio, accretion was found to have oc-
                  their effects are discussed independently below.              curred at the northern ends of pocket beaches
                                                                                while the southern ends experienced major
                     ï¿½ Coastal Flooding-Storm Surge                             erosion. Erosion experienced at Alsea spit is
                  According to the Federal Emergency Management                 directly attributable to the northward deflection of
                  Agency (FEMA), the rive coastal counties of                   the channel that occurred during the 1982-83 El
                  Coos, Clatsop, Tillamook, Lincoln, and Curry                  Nifio. Additionally, erosion problems that still con-
                  have nearly every type of flood hazard found in               tinue at Netarts Spit have been attributed in part
                  the Northwest. In the three northern counties                 to the depletion of sand from the nearshore zone
                  (Clatsop, Tillamook, and Lincoln), flood hazard               that occurred when the same 1982-83 El Niflo         (7)
                  areas are nearly all developed. Most of this                  event swept sands into Netarts Bay. Also, Good
                  development occurred before the adoption of                   has found a direct correlation between peaks in
                  flood hazard regulations. In 1990, both Tillamook             shore protection structure activity and El Nifto
                  and Clatsop counties were declared disaster areas             events.
                  by President Bus   @41S a result of coastal and               During winter stonns large rip currents are a char-
                  riverine flooding.                                            acteristic feature of nearshore circulation along
                  Flooding on the Oregon coast is attributable to               the Oregon coast. Rip currents may exacerbate
                  several factors including heavy rainfall, steep               shoreline erosion locally, by hollowing out
                  topography, low bedrock permeability, and exten-              shoreline embayments in the process of funnelling
                  sive flood plains. Catastrophic flooding is                   sand offshore. Erosion in the le6 of tip currents
                  projected by FEMA as the 100 year flood. FEMA                 can be very rapid, removing up to 100 feet of
                  forecasts the 100 year flood based on historical in-          property in two or three weeks. A major episode
                  formation on rainfall and a detailed analysis of              of erosion that occurred at Siletz Spit in 1972-73
                  flooding patterns in each community. Each                     and involved the loss of homes and subsequent ar-
                  municipality on the coast is subject to a 100-year            moring of the spilPs been clearly associated
                  flood. Along the ocean shore the 100 year flood               with rip currents.     Similarly, rip currents are
                  level forecast is derived from information on high            likely to have contributed to erosion that occurred
                  tides and wind-driven storm waves. The projected              at Nedonna BeacP ig 1977-78 and Netarts Spit
                  elevation of such a flood along the Oregon coast              since 1982-83.     ,'L
                  varies depending on shoreline characteristics, and            Although beach and dune erosion is generally as-
                  ranges from 19-29 feet above mean sea level.                  sociated with storm events, other factors have
                     ï¿½ Beach and Dune Erosion                                   also played a role. The earliest erosion problems
                  Erosion on the Oregon coast is confined mainly to             on the Oregon coast were associated with the con-
                  the stormy winter months. The high winter waves               struction of jetties at the entrances to bays and es-


                  18






                                                                    Coastal Hazards


                  tuaries.(10) A notable example of erosion due to                 along their geaward-dipping, relatively imperme-
                  jetty construction is the severe erosion and breach-             able, basal mudstone contact. Storm waves, par-
                  ing of' Bayocean spit opposite Tillamook Bay.                    ticularly when concentrated at rip embayments,
                  Construction of the north jetty led to drift interrup-           contribute to this instability by removing sediment
                  tion. `17his caused the beach to accrete on the north            from the base of the cliffs as well as under-cutting
                  side of the jetty and erode on the south side of the             the cliffs themselves. Development, including ex-
                  jetty. In the process the community of Cape                      cavation and alteration of drainage patterns that
                  Meares experienced major losses to erosion and                   accompany site preparation, also contributes to
                  the resort community of Bayocean Park was com-                   slope instability in some instances. In other instan-
                  pletel, lost to the sea.                                         ces, cliff recession results simply from the erosion
                        Y
                  Although erosion associated with the winter storm                that accompanies physical weathering of uncon-
                  phase of the seasonal beach cycle is a primary                   solidated cliff surfaces. The creation of beach graf-
                  concern, the import of hazards resulting from ac-                fiti on cliff surfaces even plays a significant role
                                                                                   in accelerating cliff erosion processes in some
                  cumiflation of sand on beaches and dunes primari-                heavily used areas.(16)
                  ly during the summer months should not be
                  neglected. At Pacific City, one home has been                    In some littoral cells, the primary source of sand
                  comp4etely buried by sand. Sand inundation cur-                  comes from these eroding cliffs. The customary
                  rently threatens homeowners at this and several                  response of a private property owner in Oregon
                  other locations on the north coast. The practice of              faced with eroding oceanfront property is to in-
                  using European beach grass for dune stabilization                stall some type of shore protection structure
                  may be a contributing factor to the sand inunda-                 (riprap revetment or seawalls). The installation of
                  tion problem.                                                    these structures essentially "locks-up" new sour-
                    ï¿½ Sea Cliff Recession                                          ces of sand to the beach. Rising seas in our heavi-
                                                                                   ly developed marine terrace-backed beaches may
                  Many Oregon coast beaches are backed by                          ultimately result in the loss of sandy ocean beach,
                  uplifted sea cliffs composed of unconsolidated                   especially during the winter months.
                  Pleistocene marine sandstones overlying older
                  seawa,rd-dipping Tertiary silt and mudstones.                         NEED: Encourage coordinated research ef-
                  Development in many coastal communities is lo-                        forts that lead to an increased under-
                  cated in these areas and therefore cliff recession is                 standing of the suite of chronic natural
                  a significant problem in these areas. Half of the                     hazards that affect the Oregon coast.
                  central Oregon coast, for example, is undergoing                      NOTE: Particular attention should be
                  cliff erosion and slope failure of some kind. The                     given to those efforts that address inter-
                  recent. loss of four developme%P this area is at-                     and intra-littoral cell process variability
                  tributable to landslide activity.                                     and its effects on coastal stability in an in-
                                                                                        tegrated manner. Augment academic re-
                  Sea cliff recession in the form of landslides,                        search by volunteer or other types ofdata
                  slumps, and sloughing results from a combination                      collection and inventory effort& Increase
                  of eff'ects. Heavy and prolonged winter rains                         public awareness of chronic natural
                  saturate the porous sandy unconsolidated sedi-                        hazards.
                  ments. They then become susceptible to sliding

                  Management Assessment

                  PolicyFramework                                                  statewide goals. Three of these goals contain
                                                                                   policies which govern the location of new
                  ne statewide land use planning program in                        development along the ocean shore. The general
                  Oregon, administered by the Department of Land                   objectives of the policies contained within these
                  Conservation and Development, has required                       goals are to direct development away from hazard-
                  cities and counties to adopt comprehensive land                  ous areas, preserve and restore protective func-
                  use plans and zoning ordinances to implement




                                                                                                                                              19





                                            Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                   tions of the natural shoreline, and prevent or mini-         and where appropriate the restoration and enhan-
                   mize threats to existing populations and property            cement of riparian vegetation.
                   from coastal hazards.                                          ï¿½ Goal 18 (Beaches and Dunes)
                     ï¿½ Statewide Planning Goal 7 (Areas                         This goal sets specific standards for regulating
                       Subject to Natural Disasters and                         new development in beach and dune areas. The
                       Hazards)                                                 goal prohibits residential developments and com-
                   This goal requires that development not be                   mercial and industrial buildings on beaches, ac-
                   planned or located in areas of known hazards or              tive foredunes, on other foredunes which are
                   subject to natural disasters without appropriate             conditionally stable and that are subject to ocean
                   safeguards. The goal defines hazardous areas as              undercutting or wave overtopping (areas of
                   areas that are subject to natural events that are            erosion or velocity flooding) and on interdune
                   known to result in death or endanger the works of            areas (deflation plains). Development in these
                   man, such as stream flooding, ocean flooding,                areas and in other beach and dune areas can only
                   erosion and deposition, landslides, earthquakes,             occur when it can be shown that the proposed
                   weak foundation soils or other hazards unique to             development is adequately protected from any
                   local or regional areas. Plans are based on an in-           hazards and adverse impacts are minimized.
                   ventory of known areas of natural disasters and              Under Goal 18, riprap and other structural means
                   hazards. It is important to note that Goal 7 does            of erosion control are only allowed on shorelines
                   not prohibit development in areas subject to                 that were developed by January 1, 1977. For the
                   natural hazards, rather, it recommends limits on             purposes of this goal requirement, development is
                   the density or intensity of uses based on the de-
                   gree ofhazard present, and requires that ap-                 defined as houses, commercial and industrial
                   propriate safeguards be used when locating                   buildings, and vacant subdivision lots which are
                   development in hazardous areas.                              physically improved through construction of
                                                                                streets or the provision of utilities to the lots, or
                     ï¿½ Statewide Planning Goal 17 (Coas-                        areas where special exceptions have been ap-
                       tal Shorelands)                                          proved. Even in "developed" areas, shore protec-
                   This goal requires that land use plans implement-            tion structures are permitted only when it can be
                   ing actions and permit reviews consider critical             shown that visual impacts and impacts on ad-
                   relationships between coastal shorelands and                 jacent property are minimized, beach access is
                   resources of coastal waters, and of the geologic             maintained, and long-term or recurring costs to
                   and hydrologic hazards associated with coastal               the public are avoided.
                   shorelands. Coastal cities and counties have been            Under Goal 18, the breaching of foredunes is
                   required to inventory coastal shorelands areas, in-          prohibited, except for temporary breaching in
                   cluding those areas adjacent to estuaries, the               emergencies, such as to drain floodwater from
                   ocean and coastal lakes, areas subject to flooding,          upland areas. Dune grading in oceanfront velocity
                   coastal headlands, and areas of geologic stability           flood zone (V-zones) is also prohibited by the
                   for lands within 1000 feet from the shoreline. At a          federal flood plain management program. Dune
                   minimum areas subject to ocean flooding, lands               grading or sand movement necessary to maintain
                   within 100 feet of the ocean shore and 50 feet of            views or prevent sand inundation is allowed under
                   an estuary.or coastal lake must be identified as             Goal 18, but only if the area is committed to
                   coastal shorelands. In local plans policies and              development or is part of an urban growth bound-
                   uses of these areas have been established accord-            ary, and then only as part of an overall foredune
                   ing to standards in the goal. Goal 17 also requires          management plan. Requirements on what must be
                   that land use management practices and nonstruc-             considered and included in a dune management
                   tural solutions to problems of erosion and flood-            plan are identified in the goal.
                   ing be preferred to structural solutions. Where
                   shown to be necessary, water and erosion control               ï¿½ The Oregon Ocean Shore Law (ORS
                   structures must be designed to minimize adverse                  390.605 -770) and Removal/Fill Law
                   impacts on water currents, erosion and accretion                 (ORS 196.800 -990)
                   patterns. This goal also requires the maintenance,           In addition to the statewide planning goals, these



                   20






                                                                Coastal Hazards


                 two laws are also relevant to managing develop-             insurance purposes, whereas Oregon's Goal 18 re-
                 ment on hazardous coastal areas, as they jointly            quirements do prohibit development in areas sub-
                 regulate the installation of shore protection struc-        ject to wave overtopping. This includes those
                 tures. The ocean shore law, or the "Beach Bill",            areas identified on flood insurance rate maps as V-
                 requires that a permit be obtained from the Depart-         zones. Problems have arisen because V-zone
                 ment of Parks and Recreation for all "beach im-             maps are cursory in some areas and outdated in
                 provements" west of a surveyed beach zone line.             others.
                 The beach zone line was established at the 16 foot               NEED: Improve or update flood insurance
                 elevation as surveyed in the late 1960's and can                 rate 'IV-zone" maps.
                 only be changed through a legislative amendment.
                 The removal/fill law and implementing regula-               With respect to hazard avoidance and mitigation,
                 tions contain specific standards and requirements           the effectiveness of Goal 7 is predicated upon two
                 for riprap and other bank and shore stabilization           critical assumptions: (1) that local jurisdictions
                 projects. Administered by the Division of State             are able to accurately identify these hazards and
                 Lands, jurisdiction extends on the Pacific ocean            adequately asses the risks to proposed develop-
                 shore to the line of established upland vegetation          ment; and (2) that "appropriate safeguards" can
                 or the highest measured tide, whichever is greater.         and have been instituted which adequately
                 These laws contain standards including those                mitigate the hazard.
                 which require that alternatives to structural shore
                 protection methods be considered and adverse im-            With the exception of flood hazards, Goal 7 has
                 pacts to adjacent properties be minimized. Fur-             not been very effective in either preventing
                 ther, permit decisions are required to be consistent        development from locating in known hazard areas
                 with provisions of the local comprehensive plan.            or in providing adequate safeguards. Most com-
                                                                             munities identified the most obvious or well
                 Policy Evaluation                                           known hazards and established hazard overlay
                 Coastal cities and counties have responded to               zones. In most of these zones, developers are re-
                 these goals, statutes, and rule mandates with plan          quired to have site-specific geotechnical reports
                 provisions and implementing ordinances that regu-           prepared as a precursor to development. However,
                 late development in hazardous areas through a               there is little control of the quality of the geotech-
                 variety of techniques. These techniques include             nical reports. There are no minimum standards for
                 hazard overlay zoning, beach and dune overlay               the types of information to be included in these
                 zoning, site-specific geologic report requirements,         reports. There is no independent or other peer
                 setbacks, and density bonus awards to developers            review of these reports. There are no requirements
                 who avoid hazardous areas. The effectiveness of             for a registered geologist/certified engineer to
                 these techniques and the policies they are in-              demonstrate competency in coastal processes or
                 tended to implement, with respect to the objec-             coastal engineering. (There have been cases
                 tives of directing development away from                    where developers have "shopped around" for the
                 hazardous areas, preserving and restoring the               desired technical recommendation). As a result,
                 protective functions of natural shoreline features,         decisions on whether development should occur
                 and preventing or minimizing threats to existing            in a known hazardous location or whether struc-
                 populations and property, is considered below.              tural solutions to shoreline erosion are necessary,
                                                                             tend be deferred until a later time. Local govern-
                 Each of the flood-prone municipalities has ad-              ments are put in the position of relying on the
                 dressed flood hazards under Goal 7. Local zoning            professional opinion of the developer-hired
                 ordinances have been adopted which meet or ex-              geologist or engineer as the sole basis for such a
                 ceed the Federal Emergency Management Agency                de6sion.
                 (FEMA) flood plain standards. It is interesting to          Unfortunately, there are several examples illustrat-
                 note that the FEMA velocity flooding area (V-               ing the failure of this policy. The most notable is
                 zone) standards do not prohibit development in              the condominium constructed on an activ
                 areas subject to ocean flooding. They prescribe             landslide at "Jump-off Joe" in Newport.(A, 24)
                 standards to alleviate the flood hazard and are in-         Despite a geotechnical report asserting the site
                 tended to reflect the appropriate hazard level for




                                                                                                                                    21






                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  couldbe stabilized, foundation failure forced the           to problems of erosion, the "appropriate
                  condemnation and ultimate demolition of the                 safeguard" of choice for development in an area
                  building before construction was even completed.            susceptible to erosion is the installation of an en-
                  Other examples of homes that were constructed               gineered shore protection structure. Even under
                  on active landslides following recommendations              the best of circumstances, the review standards
                  of site-specific geotechnical investigations and            for shoreline protection structures are vague.
                  that were subsequently damaged or destroyed in-             Also, because little attention is paid to shoreline
                  clude Cedar Shores Beachland Estates, and the               protection structures after their approval, the effec-
                  Woodell residence. 4)                                       tiveness of these structures over time is unknown.
                        NEED: Develop and implement specific                  While these structures continue to be installed, it
                        criteria to ensure that local jurisdictions,          is only recently that there has been any attempt to
                        through quality controlled site-specific              evaluate their individual or cumulative impacts on
                        geotechnical reports, are able to accurately          sand supply, beach erosion, or public access and
                        identify hazards and adequately assess the            beach safety.
                        risks to proposed development. Increase                    NEED: Develop and implement specific re-
                        the local officials' technical expertise in                quirements to ensure that hazard
                        evaluating hazards and the quality of                      avoidance takes precedence over hazard
                        geotechnical reports.                                      mitigation as an appropriate safeguard in
                  Goal 7 requires that development not be located                  the location of new development. Develop
                  in known hazard areas without "appropriate                       and implement requirements to ensure
                  safeguards". However, this term is not defined at                that nonstructural solutions to shoreline
                  the state level. Similarl although Goal 17 states                erosion are employed when they can be
                                           Y,                                      shown to adequately protect development
                  a preference for land use management practices                   already established in hazardous areas.
                  and nonstructural solutions to problems of                       Provisions insuring that adverse impacts
                  erosion, the goal language is vague and does not                 and cumulative effects are adequately
                  constitute a requirement, per se, to use nonstruc-               evaluated before shoreline protective struc-
                  tural solutions. Consequently, although a series of
                  64soft" options (such as setbacks, relocation,                   tures are emplaced should form an integral
                  renourishment, vegetative enhancement and dune                   part of any such "appropriate
                  building) may be available, implementing ordinan-                safeguards/alternatives" requirements. En-
                  ces in the local plans lack any requirement to                   courage research efforts aimed at evaluat-
                  demonstrate that such options have been properly                 ing the individual or cumulative impacts of
                  evaluated and ruled out as a means to mitigate the               shore protection structures on sand supply,
                  hazard prior to approval of a "harj"@ption such                  beach erosion, public access and beach
                  as riprap revetments and seawaus.                                safety. Analyze hazard areas in association
                                                                                   with increasing coastal populations,
                  There is a strong indication that Oregon's land                  development patterns, and practices need
                  use management policies as currently imple-                      to be analyzed.
                  mented have actually increased the proliferation            Hazard avoidance, through the application of coas-
                  of engineered shore protection structures. In the           tal construction setbacks for development along
                  Siletz littoral cell, for example, it has been shown        the ocean     t is a preferred "appropriate
                  that "hard" protected beach front incre6.,ed from           safeguard!?p 0) State policies that prohibit new
                  14 percent in 1967 to 42 percent today ) An emer-           development on beaches and dunes which are sub-
                  gency, either perceived or real, has usually been           ject to wave overtopping and undercutting also
                  reached by the time structural shoreline stabiliza-         restrict development in other hazardous areas.
                  tion is required. As a result, state and federal            However, they do not prescribe a setback. S?p) e
                  regulatory agencies' requirements to consider al-           jurisdictions have prescribed setbacks. Good
                  ternative solutions and assure that adverse im-             found in the Siletz littoral cell that 44 percent of
                  pacts are minimized are often overlooked. Thus,             the new homes constructed encroached upon the
                  despite a stated policy preference for land use             recommended oceanfront setback line. This has
                  management practices and nonstructural solutions            occurred in part because these setbacks, which are



                  22






                                                                Coastal Hazards


                 determined on a case-by-case basis, have been                prescribed circumstances were adopted in 1984.
                 waived upon receipt of a developer-hired                     However, only one foredune management plan
                 registered geologist/certified engineer geotechni-           has been approved since that time. This plan was
                 cal report. Problems with this approach were                 the result of a pilot dune management study at
                 noted above.                                                 Nedonna Beach that the department conducted. In-
                 Even in instances where prescribed setbacks have             tensive dune management at Nedonna Beach, that
                 been observed they have not been completely suc-             has included grading, has not damaged the in-
                 cessful. Good17.1 found in the Siletz littoral cell          tegrity of the foredune or increased the potential
                 that 30 percent of the lots that encroached upon             for flooding. Rather, a wider, more continuous
                 the required construction setback subsequently re-           foredune has been created that is likely to provide
                 quired a shore protection structure, while only 15           enhanced ocean storm and flood protection. Two
                 percent of the lots that complied with the setback           communities have recently prepared draft
                 requirements subsequently required a shore protec-           foredune management plans. Although the lessons
                 tion structure. While Good's results show that lots          learned from Nedonna Beach pilot project were in-
                 where setbacks were followed have not had as                 corporated into a "how-to" dune management
                 many problems as those that have encroached                  guidebook as a means of facilitating foredune
                 seaward, he suggests that the problems ex-                   management plans, the department has had to and
                 perienced by both groups demonstrate that the set-           is continuing to prepare further guidance for these
                 back provisions are unrealistic. Results of a                two communities on what needs be addressed in a
                 recently completed FEMA-funded Department of                 foredune management plan.
                 Geology and Mineral Industries pilot project on              Despite Goal 18 restrictions on foredune grading
                 historical erosion rates appear to confirm Good's            in the absence of an acknowledged foredune
                 suggestion. Apparently, because erosion along the            management plan, a number of property owners
                 Oregon coast is episodic, highly localized, and              have illegally graded dunes to maintain the views
                 often results from a combination of effects, it has          from their oceanfront homes. Some have done so
                 been difficult to determine accurate erosion rates           without any permission, while others have ex-
                 and, therefore, appropriate setbacks. A gradual              ceeded terms of approved permits.
                 retreat-based methodology for determining set-                    NEED: Eliminate the ad-hoe alterations by
                 back may be applicable to East and Gulf coasts,                   individual property owners, by supporting
                 but has not been found to be applicable in
                 Oregon.                                                           community preparation of foredune
                                                                                   management plans. Increase technical as-
                      NEED: Develop a methodology to deter-                        sistance on dune management policies and
                      mine appropriate oceanfront coastal con-                     techniques, the development of volunteer
                      struction setbacks, and implement in local                   groups that can assist in the cost-effective
                      ordinances. NOTE: The development of                         collection of necessary baseline data, and
                      such a methodology is a necessary prereq-                    the preparation of model enforcement or-
                      uisite to the development and implementa-                    dinances.
                      tion of effective "appropriate                          It is apparent from much of the preceding discus-
                      safeguardstalternativeel requirements                   sion that a coastal shorelands designation has not
                      referred to earlier.                                    always provided the high level of protection in-
                 Under Goal 18, foredune management planning                  tended in the goals. As noted above, many of the
                 has had limited success. Frustration with the                oceanfront portions of the goal requirements are
                 vagueness of policies, prohibitive costs for ac-             vague, and consequently there are few effective
                 quisition of the required technical expertise, and           implementing ordinances in the local plans. With
                 the lack of local enforcement and/or inadequacy              few exceptions, development along the oceanfront
                 of enforceable ordinance has left communities                (except for beaches and dunes) seems to be
                 facing sand inundation problems with little incen-           treated essentially the same as development
                 tive to carry out foredune management plans.                 anywhere else in the state. As a result, develop-
                 Goal 18 policies allowing dune grading under                 ment has not been prevented from occurring in
                                                                              some hazardous coastal areas and little regard has




                                                                                                                                     23






                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  been given to the unique values of coastal                 earthquake, and a thorough examination of
                  shorelands.                                                policies and practices that may need to be applied
                  Compounding this problem is the fact that, much            to areas susceptible to the hazards associated with
                  of the coast was developed to some extent prior to         a major earthquake event is yet to commence.
                  adoption of the goals and acknowledgment of the            Greenhouse warming and global sea-level rise are
                  local Comprehensive plans. Under the Goal 2 "ex-           concepts that were probably unheard of at the
                  ceptions " process, areas which were built and             time the goals were first being considered. It was
                  committed to development have been exempted                not until 1989, that the Oregon Department of
                  from certain other goal requirements. As a result,         Energy began a coordinated effort to identify pos-
                  development has been allowed to infill in pre-             sible impacts on the state from global warming
                  viously "developed" yet unbuilt and potentially            and recommend how the state should respond. A
                  hazardous areas.                                           report, Possible Impacts on Oregonftom Global
                  A recommendation following from the recently               Warming, was prepared and recommendations for
                  held Coastal Natural Hazards conference in New-            actions were developed in 1990. One of the
                  port is that special area management planning, in          proposed actions was to "assist local govern-
                  the form of littoral cell management plans, be con-        ments, especially on the coast, to review and im-
                  sidered for coastal shorelands. Such special area          prove comprehensive plans to consider fully the
                  management plans already exist for estuaries in            effects of sea level rise and to take actions to
                  Oregon. The idea of littoral cell management plan-         direct private development and public facilities an
                  ning is appealing because it would provide a               away from areas that may be flooded or affected
                  mechanism whereby distinct segments of coastal             by sea level rise." However, communities and
                  shoreland, with related characteristics, could be          state agencies have not yet factored global warm-
                  given detailed consideration in a coordinated man-         ing and rising sea levels rise into their decision-
                  ner. The need for such detailed, coordinated               making because they lack of available resources
                  management is likely to increase as increasing             needed to affect change.
                  development demands clash with conservation                It should be noted that a coastal natural hazards
                  goals.                                                     policy working group, comprised of local scien-
                  The conce t of littoral cell management is appeal-         tists, local government officials, state regulatory
                             P                                               agencies, private property owners, and environ-
                  ing for another reason. It could provide the basis         mental organizations among others is being
                  for the implementation of a more comprehensive             formed to examine natural hazards policy in
                  policy framework of coastal zone management.               Oregon. This group intends to evaluate the effec-
                  Oregon's policies governing the location of new            tiveness of existing policy and policy implementa-
                  development along the ocean shore were                     tion in light of new scientific information.
                  developed in the 1970s. It is apparent from the            Problem areas will be identified, including re-
                  resource assessment above that the scientific un-          search and information needs, and suggested
                  derstanding and appreciation of the diversity of           policy options and implementation procedures
                  coastal natural hazards has greatly improved in            will be developed.
                  the ten to twenty years since those policies were
                  adopted. As a result, policy gaps exist in Oregon's             NEED: Provide more precise, coordinated,
                  coastal zone management framework,                              and comprehensive management of coastal
                  The multiplicity and interdependency of processes               natura@ hazards in Oregon. Focus immedi-
                  controlling chronic hazards such as beach erosion               ate improvement on effective implementa-
                  and cliff recession were not appreciated at the                 tion of existing policies and the expansion
                                                                                  of hazard inventories. Develop and imple-
                  time the goals were developed. The role of plate                ment policies that enhance and expand the
                  tectonics was just beginning to be revealed. The                existing coastal hazards management
                  importance of these discoveries to earthquake                   framework, including a review of recom-
                  hazards in Oregon is only just beginning to be un-              mendations stemming from broad-based,
                  derstood. Most people have yet to become aware                  independent efforts to evaluate and im-
                  of the possibility of a magnitude 8 or greater                  prove the existing framework.



                  24






                                                               Coastal Hazards


                 Priority Program Enhancements

                 Managing coastal natural hazards is a priority for              reports to ensure that local jurisdictions
                 OCMP improvement.                                               are able to accurately identify chronic
                 Development on the Oregon coast is threatened                   hazards and adequately assess the risks
                 by many types of natural hazards, including                     they pose to proposed development.
                 erosion, landslides, tsunamis, flooding, storm                  Develop and implement a detailed "ap-
                 surge and earthquakes. State and local policies                 propriate safeguards/alternatives" analysis
                 governing the development of property bordering                 procedure to ensure that hazard avoidance
                 the ocean coastline and the installation of shore               takes precedence over hazard mitigation,
                 protective structures have attempted to direct                  structural solutions to shoreline erosion are
                 development away from hazardous areas,                          tried as a last resort, and the consideration
                 preserve and restore protective functions of                    of adverse impacts and cumulative effects
                 natural shoreline features, and prevent or mini-                is an integral part of any such procedure.
                 mize threats to existing populations and property               Develop and implement new policies that
                 from coastal hazards.                                           enhance and expand the existing coastal
                 Program improvement needs have been        'identified          hazards management framework and lead
                 through out the body of this text. These identified             to more precise, coordinated, and com-
                 needs can be grouped into three general                         prehensive management of coastal natural
                 categories: 1) policy development and implemen-                 hazards in Oregon.
                 tation; 2) technical knowledge and inventory infor-
                 mation; and 3) communication and education. The            TecluiicEd Knowledge mid
                 paramount need is to make progress on the policy
                 development and implementation front. However,             Inventory Information
                 it is recognized that success cannot be achieved           The distinct possibility that a major subduction
                 on this front without making progress in the other         zone earthquake could occur at any time has only
                 two. For policies to be effective, they must have a        recently been discovered. As a result, little
                 sound technical base and broad public acceptance.          detailed information is known about areas which
                  Needs" in each of the three improvement                   may be susceptible to earthquakes as well as other
                 categories are summarized briefly below.                   catastrophic hazards. Also, methodology applied
                                                                            elsewhere to determine oceanfront setbacks has
                 POHCY Development mid                                      been found to be of limited use along the Oregon
                 Implementation                                             coast. Finally, little is known about the adverse im-
                                                                            pacts and cumulative effects of structural shore
                 Little quality control exists in the preparation of        protection methods on the Oregon coast. Priority
                 site-specific geotechnical reports. As a result,           program enhancements include the following:
                 hazards are not always adequately identified.                   Improve understanding of which areas in
                 When hazards are identified, hazard mitigation in-              Oregon are most vulnerable to major sub-
                 volving structural solutions is the preferred                   duction zone earthquake events, tsunamis,
                 safeguard..As a result increasing amounts of the                and sea level rise, and how adverse effects
                 shoreline are being armored with little attention to            in these areas can be minimized.
                 the adverse impacts and cumulative effects of
                 these actions. Further, recent advances in scien-               Improve understanding of chronic natural
                 tific understanding of the coastal natural hazards              hazards that affect the Oregon coast, and
                 that affect Oregon have not been integrated into                develop methodologies to determine ap-
                 the existing management framework. Priority pro-                propriate oceanfront coastal construction
                 gram enhancements include the following:                        setbacks from these hazards.
                      Develop and implement quality control                      Improve understanding of the individual
                      criteria for site-specific geotechnical                    or cumulative effects of shore protection



                                                                                                                                   25






                                         Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                       structures on sand  supply, beach erosion,          technical expertise has increased. Priority pro-
                      public access, and beach safety.                     gain enhancements include the following:
                  Conmumication and Educadon                                 0  Increase public awareness of the entire
                                                                                spectrum of coastal natural hazards that
                  Because much of the information on natural                    affect the Oregon coast.
                  hazards affecting the Oregon coast is so new, few          0  Increase public involvement in policy
                  people are aware of the risk they face. Those who
                  have become aware have expressed an interest in               evaluation and data collection efforts.
                  knowing more and doing something. Further, as              -  Increase local officials' level of technical ex-
                  knowledge of natural hazards affecting the                    pertise in chronic natural hazards tha't af-
                  Oregon coast has improved and expanded, the                   fect the Oregon coast.
                  demand on local officials to have some level of


                  References
                  0XIAMMM

                  1. Adams, J., 1990. Palcoseismicity of the Cas-          Program report, 87p.
                  cadia subduction zone: Evidence from turbidites          10. Komar, P.D., 1979. Physical processes and
                  off the Oregon-Washington margin. Tectonics              geologic hazards on the Oregon coast. Beaches
                  9:569-583.                                               and Dunes Handbook for the Oregon Coast,
                  2. Atwater, B.F., 1987. Evidence for great               Oregon Coastal Zone Management Association,
                  Holocene earthquakes along the outer coast of            Newport, Oregon.
                  Washington State. Science 236:942-944.                   11. -, 1986. The 1982-83 El Nifto and erosion
                  3. - and Yamaguchi, D.K., 1991. Sudden,                  on the coast of Oregon. Shore and Beach 54.-3-12.
                  probably coseismic submergence of Holocene               12. -, 1991. Ocean processes and hazards along
                  trees and grass in coastal Washington State. Geol-       the Oregon coast. Proceedings of Coastal Natural
                  ogy 19:706-709.                                          Hazards Conference, Newport, Oregon (in press).
                  4. Currin, George. September 10, 1991 letter from        13. - and Enfield, D.B., 1987. Short-term Sea-
                  FEMA to Rocky McVay, Curry County Board of               level changes and coastal erosion. In Sea Level
                  Commissioners,                                           Fluctuations and Coastal Evolution. Nummedal,
                  5. Darienzo, M.E. and Peterson, C.D., 1988. Coas-        D., Pilkey, O.H., and Howard, J., ed. SEPM Spe-
                  tal Neotectonic field trip guide for Netarts Bay,        cial Pub. #41:17-27.
                  Oregon. Oregon Geology 50:99-106.                        14. - and Good, J.W. 1989. Long term erosion
                  6. --, 1990. Episodic tectonic subsidence of late        impacts of the 1982-82 El Nifto on the Oregon
                  Holocene salt marshes, Northern Oregon central           coast. Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on
                  Cascadia Margin. Tectonics 9: 1-22.                      Coastal and Ocean Management 3785-3794.
                  7. Good, J.W., 1991. Shore protection and                15. -, Good, J.W., and Shih, S.M., 1989. Erosion
                  oceanfront land use practices in Oregon: A criti-        of Netarts Spit, Oregon: Continued Impacts of the
                  que. Proceedings of the Coastal Natural Hazards          1982-83 El Niflo. Shore and Beach 56:11-19.
                  Conference, Newport, Oregon (in press).                  16.. - and Shih, S.M., 1991. Sea-Cliff erosion
                  8. Grant, W.C. and McClaren, D.D., 1987.                 along the Oregon coast. ASCE Conference Coas-
                  Evidence for Holocene subduction earthquakes             tal Sediments '91, Seattle.
                  along the Northern Oregon Coast. EOS 68:1239.            17. Kraus, N.C. and McDougal, W.G., 1991. Shore
                  9. Hebenstriet, G.T., 1988. Local Tsunami Hazard         protection and engineering with special reference
                  Assessment for the Juan De Fuca Plate Area.              to the Oregon coast. Proceedings of Coastal
                  U.S.G.S. National Earthquake Hazard Reduction            Natural Hazards Conference, Newport, Oregon




                  26







                                                              Coastal Hazards



                 (in press).                                               23. Sayre, W.O. and Komar, RD., 1988. The Jump-
                                                                           Off Joe landslide at Newport, Oregon: history of
                 18. Madin, 1., 1991. Seismic hazards on the               erosion, development and destruction. Shore and
                 Oregon coast. Proceedings of Coastal Natural              Beach 57:15-22.
                 Hazards Conference, Newport, Oregon (in press).
                 19. Peterson, C. D., Darienzo, M.E., and Clough,          24. -, 1989. The construction of homes on four
                 C., 1991. Recurrence intervals of coseismic sub-          active landslides in Newport, Oregon: Unbeliev-
                 sidence events in Northern Oregon bays of the             able but true! Proceedings of Sixth Symposium on
                 Cascadia margin. Final Technical Report to the            Coastal and Ocean Management, ASCE, Charles-
                 Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral In-              ton.
                 dustries 7/9/91.                                          25. Vincent, R, 1989. Geodetic deformation of the
                 20. Pezzopane, S.K., Weldon, R.J., Johnson, A.G.,         Oregon Cascadia Margin. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of
                 and Scofield, D.H., 1991. Seismic acceleration            Oregon, Eugene 86p.
                 maps from Quaternary faults and historic seis-            26. Weldon, R.J., 1991. Active tectonic studies in
                 micity in Oregon: Final Technical Progress Report         the United States, 1987-1990. U.S.:National
                 to the Oregon Deparunent of Geology and                   Report to International Union of Geodesy and
                 Mineral Industries 7/9/91.                                Geophysics 1987-1990, Contributions in
                 21. Redfern, Roger. 1986. Nedonna Beach                   Geophysics, Am. Geophys. Union 890-906.
                 Foredune Management Study: Technical Report,              27. Woodward, J., 1990. Paleoscismicity and the
                 Oregon Department of Land Conservation and                archaeological record: Areas of investigation of
                 Development.                                              the Northern Oregon coast. Oregon Geology
                                                                           52:57-65.
                 22. Rosenfeld, C.A et al., 1985. Alsea Bay Interim
                 Report. Oregon State University.































                                                                                                                              27



                             Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment                          .I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    1
             28
                                                                                                    I









                                                                                       Wetlands





                         Legislative Objective

                         Protect, restore, or enhance existing coastal wetlands base or create new
                         coastal wetlands.


                 Resource Assessment
                 ......................................................... "M

                 Despite the fact that Oregon's mountainous coas-          tides or storm conditions, low salt marshes which
                 tal region can receive more than 80 inches of rain        are inundated on a daily basis, fide flats which are
                 a year, there are only limited wetlands in the            alternately drained and flooded with the daily
                 region. The rugged mountains of Oregon's coastal          change of tides, and eelgrass beds which provide
                 zone are incised by youthful strearn networks             a distinct, productive habitat within the tidelands.
                 which carry runoff rapidly to narrow river valleys        The value of these estuaries has been well
                 and then to sea through estuaries which are               studied; they provide significant spawning, rear-
                 drowned river mouths. Early settlers found that al-       ing or feeding areas for a variety of marine fish
                 most all the level land even remotely suitable for        and shellfish. The plants in the surrounding mar-
                 farming or settlement was on the narrow flood             shes turn solar energy into food energy, the engine
                 plains of coastal rivers or the marshlands sur-           which drives biological productivity of the entire
                 rounding coastal estuaries. Thus, these native wet-       estuary.
                 land areas, both freshwater and saltwater, were           Oregon's estuaries have suffered the brunt of wet-
                 the first to be diked, drained and converted to           land losses. It is estimated that nearly 90 percent
                 agricultural or other uses.                               of documented coastal n1ands losses are a result
                 Estuaries have a variety of wetland plant and             of diking for agriculture. 2  Only the Columbia
                 animal communities, depending on the reach of             River estuary has had a etailed evaluation of es-
                 tide (salinity), inflow of freshwater, and current        tuarine habitat changes,(9) and to date, no accurate
                 velocity. Technically, estuarine wetlands include         statewide inventory of historic losses of coastal
                 high salt marshes furthest from the main channels         wetlands has been compiled. Since the implemen-
                 and which may be flooded only during highest              tation of local estuary management plans through




                                                                                                                                29





                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  the Oregon Coastal Management Program, the                 draining was not completed, around lakes formed
                  loss of estuarine wetlands has virtually stopped.          by sand dunes where the aquifer rises and falls
                  Of the 19,500 acres of tidal marsh in Oregon only          seasonally, and certain bogs on level, uplifted
                  113.2 acres (0.6 percent) is designated for                marine terraces with hard clay soil which prevents
                  develq ment.                                               percolation and drainage to the water table below
                         p
                  Freshwater wetlands are found along the margins            the "hard pan." Each of these freshwater wetlands
                  of coastal river floodplains where diking and              provide different habitats which support unique as-
                                                                             semblages of plants and animals.


                  Management Assessment
                  MWORMW500                                                                                                                      I
                  IRgul Fouxulation                                                and adopt wetland conservation plans as part
                  Oregon's wetlands policy is guided by two fun-                   of their comprehensive plans to provide a
                  damental state statutes, a federal law, and                      basis for- future permits and protection;
                  Oregon's statewide planning goals.                               the presumption that estuary plans previously
                                                                                   adopted by coastal local governments comply
                  Responsibility for implementing wetlands policy                  with the legislative standards for wetland con-
                  is divided among the Division of State Lands                     servation;
                  (DSL), the Department of Land Conservation and
                  Development (DLCD), the Department of En-                     0  exemptions for norTnal farming and ranching
                  vironmental Quality (DEQ), the Department of                     activities in already altered wetlands;
                  Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), and local govern-                   0  a requirement for the state to adopt standards
                  ments through comprehensive plans and ordinan-                   for mitigation of wetland loss.
                  ces. DLCD is responsible for coordination among
                  all agencies.                                                 ï¿½ 1971 Removal-FiR Law
                     ï¿½ 1989 Senate BiR 3                                     Since 1971, Oregon has regulated both removal
                  The 1989 Oregon Legislature enacted Senate Bill            and filling of material within waters of the state
                  3 to ensure that the many different wetland                under the authority of the state Removal-Fill Law.
                  programs and responsiblities of the different state        This law requires a permit from DSL for the
                  and federal agencies and local governments were            removal, filling, or altering of 50 cubic yards or
                                                                             more of material within waters of the state, includ-
                  coordinated. This law clarified the relationship be-       ing wetlands. The state's regulatory coverage of
                  tween wetlands planning and the regulatory per-            waters was extended to tidal wetlands in 1974 and
                  mitting process and provided a coordinated                 nontidal wetlands in 1986. In recent years, atten-
                  approach to wetlands management. Key                       tion has shifted to freshwater wetlands. The
                  provisions of the statute include                          Removal-Fill law provides for
                     ï¿½ a requirement to define "wetlands" consistent            0 evaluation of cumulative impacts when per-
                       with that used under the Clean Water Act by                 mits are reviewed by DSL;
                       the COE and that the state use a single,
                       uniform method for marking wetland boun-                 -  administrative rules for certain exemptions;
                       daries;                                                  0  creation of artificial wetlands to compensate
                     ï¿½ a requirement that the DSL establish and                    for damage to existing wetlands;
                       maintain an inventory of the state's wetlands.           a  conditions on Removal-Fill permits to require
                       DSL is currently using the National Wetlands                buffers, setbacks and other measures to
                       Inventory (NWI) produced by the U.S. Fish                   protect wetlands;
                       and Wildlife Service which is not as detailed
                       as needed, especially on the coast;                      a  compensation to the state for damages under
                     ï¿½ the option for local governments to prepare                 a permitted activity, including restoration of



                  30






                                                                       Wetlands



                      degraded wetlands;                                    government plans and provide both a process and
                      civil, criminal, and adminstrative enforce-           an actual regulatory framework for wedand
                      ment of the law, including fines up to $ 10,000       protection. On the coast, three goals are of par-
                      per day.                                              ticular importance to coastal wetlands:
                 The strength in the Removal-Fill Law is that it is              Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic
                 easily understood and applied, unlike the Section               Areas and Natural Resources, broadly re-
                 404 standards of the federal Clean Water Act.                   quires local governments to identify the "loca-
                 However, there are a few "gaps" in wetlands                     tion, quantity, and quality" of wetlands,
                 protection under the Removal-Fill Law. When no                  evaluate their significance, and adopt
                 permit is involved, the law does not give DSL ex-               measures to protect them. Few local govern-
                 plicit authority to require buffers to protect wet-             ments have had the resources to fully carry
                 lands and or regulate the removal of vegetation                 out the inventory process envisioned under
                 from a wetland. Also, drainage of wetlands is not               Goal 5.
                 regulated unless at least 50 cubic yards of                     Goal 16, Estuarine Resources, has provide the
                 material are altered while draining. This has been              policy basis for local governments to prepare
                 a problem in instances in which the functions and               and adopt estuary management plans based
                 values of wetlands have been seriously impacted                 on the delineation of various estuarine habitat
                 by drainage even though less than 50 cubic yards                areas. This estuary plan approach has resulted
                 of material were altered.                                       in protection of all but a few percent of
                   ï¿½ Section 404 of the Clean Water Act                          Oregon's remaining estuarine wetlands.
                 This is a federal law adminstered by the U.S.                   Goal 17, Coastal Shorelands, directs local
                 Army Corps of Engineers. Oregon could, but has                  governments to conserve, protect, and, where
                 not, assumed responsibility of the Section 404 per-             appropriate, restore or develop coastal
                 mitting process. However, the COE and DSL                       shorelands which include the majority of wet-
                 have a joint application process that coordinates               lands previously diked for agricultural or com-
                 required state and federal permits. Recent                      mercial uses.It is anticipated that, as more
                 proposed changes to the Federal Manual for Idcn-                plans are developed and the advantages of
                 tifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands,                this process become well understood, many
                 has resulted in confusion about the permitting                  more jurisdictions will choose to develop
                 process. As of January 1, 1992, Oregon elected to               plans. As described later, Oregon has received
                 evaluate permits under the 1989 federal manual                  some federal grant money to pass on to local
                 while the COE is using a 1987 manual, pending                   jurisdictions which wish to begin wetland con-
                 adoption of a proposed 1991 manual.                             servation plans.
                   ï¿½ Mitigation Banking                                     An Integmted State Program
                 In 1987, the Oregon Legislature enacted a statute          Oregon statute requires the integration and coor-
                 to provide for mitigation banks and create wetland         dination of statewide planning goals, local com-
                 sites in advance of future permitted wetland los-          prehensive plans and state and federal regulatory
                 ses. Operation of the mitigation bank system is a          programs in an effort to promote the protection,
                 responsibility of the Division of State Lands. To          conservation and best use of wetland resources.
                 date, the state has established one 38 acre mitiga-
                 tion bank in the Lower Columbia River Estuary.             Several state agencies, DSL, DLCD, DEQ, and
                 This mitigation bank process has not been put into         ODFW, have joined with federal agencies and
                 wide effect due to a lack of funds.                        local governments to develop an integrated
                   ï¿½ Statewide Planning Goals                               statewide wetlands management strategy. 'Me
                                                                            state has received a grant from EPA to help this
                 Oregon's statewide planning goals provide                  process.
                 specific policy direction to local governments and
                 state agencies for identifying and protecting wet-         Oregon's wetlands strategy, once implemented,
                 lands. These goals are implemented through local           will help local, state, and federal agencies in-



                                                                                                                                  31





                                              Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                    volved in wetland regulation and management to                  Wetland conservation plans are optional and are
                    more effectively coordinate and provide mutual                  developed through a cooperative effort involving
                    support among various programs. The strategy                    the local community, DSL, DLCD, other state and
                    will embody the recommendations of the National                 federal agencies, and interested citizen grourrs and
                    Wetlands Policy Forum to achieve no net loss of                 individuals. At the current time, four coastal com-
                    wetlands and will provide for public input to gain              munities are developing wetland conservation
                    local public support for the program. The com-                  plans. Several other jurisdictions wish to develop
                    ponents of this comprehensive and integrated wet-               plans also, but do not have financial resources to
                    lands management strategy include the following:                do so. State agencies are also hampered in their
                      ï¿½ Wetland Assesement Methodology                              participation in this process due to resource limita-
                    Existing methodologies to evaluate and classify                 tions.
                    wetland functional values have been developed                     ï¿½ Wetland Water Quality Standards
                    based     ,marily on East Coast literature and condi-           Oregon, like all states, must develop water quality
                           R
                    tions.    Development of a unified methodology                  standards for wetlands by the end of fiscal VN3
                    focused on the Pacific Northwest region is critical             to meet federal Clean Water Act and U.S. EPA
                    to effective implementation of wetland conserva-                regulations and guidelines. The Oregon Depart-
                    tion plans and mitigation requirements. An inter-               ment of Environmental Quality (DEQ), with EPA
                    agency technical team has been convened to                      grant assistance, will establish wetlands water
                    prepare this new methodology                                    quality criteria and set beneficial uses for each
                      ï¿½ Wetland Classification System                               wetland class consistent with the state's wetland
                                                                                    assessment methodology and wetlands classifica-
                    The completed assessment methodology will be                    tion system. Standards will initially be narrative
                    employed to classify the state's wetlands accord-               but will be refined to include biological and
                    ing to site-specific wetland inventory type, func-              numerical criteria when available. Anti-degrada-
                    tions and values, landscape level attributes and                tion policies, use designations and water quality
                    risk factors. This classification system will be                criteria will also be developed specifically for wet-
                    developed by an interagency technical team with                 lands and incorporated into state water pollution
                    input and guidance from local governments and                   regulations.
                    technical experts.                                                ï¿½ Water Quality Monitoring and
                    The wetlands classification system will be incor-                   Disturbed Wetlands Evaluation.
                    porated into state wetlands regulations and will be             Oregon is seeking to bolster the scientific
                    used by all state agencies and local governments                credibility and reliability of its wetland conserva-
                    to identify and protect wetland resources. Wetland              tion strategy. DEQ, with funding assistance from
                    mitigation, protection, and management policies                 EPA, is developing water quality data to assist in
                    and regulations will be based on wetland value                  evaluating the function of disturbed wetlands and
                    classes.                                                        monitoring how well the assessment methodolgy
                      ï¿½ Local Wetland Conservation Plans                            relates to water quality. Data is being collected in
                    City and county governments play a pivotal role                 three areas: disturbed sites; representaive sitin in
                    in identifying and protecting wetlands through                  the classification system; and sites statewide to
                    local comprehensive plans. Under 1989 Senate                    test the assessment methodology.
                    Bill 3, local governments are encouraged to per-
                    pare wetland conservation plans that plans for wet-             PublicInformation
                    land protection, surrounding land uses and                      Information to the public and local government of-
                    site-specific permit issues may be addressed at the             ficials is crucial to Oregon's strategy. Both IXCD
                    same time. These plans will contain a detailed in-              and DSL are producing technical and program in-
                    ventory and assessment of wetlands and will                     formation materials about wetland planning and
                    designate wetland areas for protection, conserva-               management in Oregon. DLCD is publishing a
                    tion or development. Wetland conservation plans                 tecnical bulletin to aid local governments to plan-
                    will also provide for full replacement through                  ning for wetland resources and DSL is producing
                    mitigation of any planned wetland losses.                       information about the new wetland inventory



                    32






                                                                  Wetlands



                 standards, how to develop a wetland conservation         workshops were held statewide by DSL, in con-
                 plan, and about wetland restoration. Oregon State        junction with DLCD, to explain wetlands science
                 University Sea Grant Program is rewriting its pub-       and regulation to local planners, realtors,
                 lication "Obtaining Permits for Wetland and              developers, attorneys, interested citizens, and per-
                 Waterway Development," designed for prospec-             sonnel from affected agencies. These workshops
                 tive permit applicants.                                  found widespread interest, were well attended and
                 In addition to printed materials, eight public           revealed a need to expand this sort of outreach.

                 Priority Program Enhanceme-nts                              - -------                 ------------------- -- --- --

                 Wetlands management is a priority for OCMP im-           Several improvements to the Oregon Coastal Pro-
                 provement.                                               gram could be made:
                 Oregon's coastal wetlands are especially in need            0 Prepare a coastal component or the
                 of protection and restoration; approximately 80               statewide wetlands inventory with a com-
                 per cent of original wetlands have been lost,                 puterized GIS data base to supplant the ex-
                 primarily to agricultural uses around estuaries.              isting National Wetlands Inventory data.
                 Oregon's coastal local governments are well                 - Complete wetland assessment rnethodolgy
                 suited to identify and protect local wetland resour-          and wetlands classification system as a
                 ces through comprehensive plans and ordinances                basis for all state agency and local govern-
                 but require technical and financial assistance                ment programs to protect wetlands.
                 through the coastal management program.
                 Citizens in coastal communities can play a sig-               Financial and technical assistance to local
                 nificant role in wetland conservation both on a               governments to prepare wetland conserva-
                 community and a personal basis.                               tion plans, incorporate these plans into
                 Oregon'state wetlands strategy will, when fully               local comprehensive land use programs,
                 implemented, coordinate several state and federal             and involve citizens in wetland protection.
                 statutes, various state agency programs and local             Identify and prioritize estuarine areas for
                 government comprehensive plans and regulations.               restoration to wetlands; develop standards
                 Oregon's 1989 comprehensive wetland law aims                  and policies to guide restoration work in es-
                 to ensure no net loss of wetlands and requires                tuarine areas; utilize demonstration
                 completion of wetland inventories, development                projects with monitoring to assess success.
                 of a wetlands classification system, preparation of
                 local wetland conservation plans, restoration of              Work with local governments to provide in-
                 lost wetlands, wetland water quality standards and            formation, coordinate agency programs
                 other measures. However, many of these program                and policies and develop local ordinances
                 elements are not yet developed because of a lack              and regulations to protect wetlands.
                 technical and financial resources available to the
                 state.
























                                                                                                                             33





                                        Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                 References


                 I. Adamus, P.R., and L.T. Stockwell. 1983. A            4. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
                 Method for Wetland Functional Assessment:               Development. 1987. The Oregon Estuary Plan
                 Volume I. Critical Review and Evaluation Con-           Book. 126 pp.
                 cepts. 181 pp.                                          5. Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon
                 2. Boule', M.E., and K.F. Bierly. 1987. "History        Department of Parks and Recreation. 1989.
                 of Estuarine Wetland Development and Altera-            Oregon Wetlands Priority Plan. 75 pp.
                 tion: What Have We Wrought"? The Northwest              6. Thomas, Duncan W. 1983. "Changes in Colurn-
                 Environmental Journal 3(l):43-62.                       bia River Estuary Habitat Types Over the Past
                 3. Fishman Environmental Services. 1987. Es-            Century." Report to CREST. 51 pp.
                 tuarine Mitigation Evaluation Project: Mitigation       7. Akins, G.J., and C.A. Jefferson. 1973. Coastal
                 Site Evaluation Notebook. Department of Land            Wetlands of Oregon. Oregon Coastal Conserva-
                 Conservation and Development and the Division           tion and Development Commission. Florence,
                 of State Lands.                                         Oregon.























                 34








                                                                                                  Ocean
                                                                                  Resources





                         Legislative Objective

                         Plan for the use of ocean resources.

                 Resource Assessment


                 At the very western edge of North America,                which shaped Oregon's coastline formed a narrow
                 squeezed between rugged coast range mountains             continental shelf over which sweep.the complex
                 and the vast dynamo of the Pacific Ocean, the             currents of the Pacific Ocean. In this sixty mile-
                 Oregon coast is a visually stunning, ecologically         wide zone, ocean currents interact with river
                 diverse, and environmentally rich landscape. For          runoff, respond to winter storms and summer
                 three hundred twenty miles, these forested coastal        winds, flow over underwater hills and create a
                 mountains, incised by narrow, winding valleys,            biological environment which is richly produc-
                 provide a visual backdrop and an economic                 tive, heavily used, but only faintly understood.(4)
                 mainstay for Oregon's coastal communities. This           Marine life abounds from the shore across the en-
                 coastline, world-renowned for its scenic beauty,          tire shelf and down the continental slope. Close to
                 supports a thriving tourist industry and attracts in-     shore, human use ... and abuse ... is greatest. The
                 creasing numbers of new residents. Broad es-              rocks, islands and underwater reefs provide a mix
                 tuaries ringed with saltmarshes, long sandy               of abundant habitat for fish, shellfish, plants,
                 beaches, cobble-strewn pocket coves, high rocky           mammals and seabirds. Farther out, a multitude of
                 Cliffs, offshore rocks and reefs, sand dunes, and         fish and shellfish thrive on the broad sand and
                 meandering coastal streams weave a dense, com-            mud-covered plains, around rugged canyons and
                 plex environmental pattern in this beautiful,
                 ecologically diverse region.0)                            rocky banks, and in the unseen layers of water far
                                                                           below the surface. Oregon's ocean fishermen take
                 Oregonians are beginning to understand that the           their catch virtually everywhere over the continen-
                 diversity, complexity, and productivity of this           tal sh5lf and slope during all seasons of the
                 coastal environment extends to the ocean realm            year.( ) Marine mammals and sea birds routinely
                 hidden beneath the waves. The geologic collision          leave their shoreside rookeries and forage far off-




                                                                                                                               35





                                              Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                   shore at the shelf's edge.                                      tion to prepare management plans, establish
                   Marine scientists have pieced togethe      Ir a broad out-      resource programs, and adopt enforceable
                   line of this complex environment puzzle but are                 measures to carry out plans and protect resources.
                   missing many pieces, especially knowledge about                 Some information is available to form a manage-
                   the impacts of human use. The ocean does not                    ment framework and make broad preliminary
                   yield its secrets easily; marine scientific research            decisions. But substantial new field woric is P-,-
                   is time-consurning and costly. Governments at all               quired to obtain scientific inventory information
                   levels, local, state and federal, are not yet attuned           sufficient to prepare a territorial sea plan, special
                   to the need to investigate and manage ocean                     area management plans, resolve site-specific
                   resources on a sustained, comprehensive, coor-                  resources or use conflicts and adopt rules and
                   dinated basis.                                                  regulations.
                   But in the mid 1980s, Oregonians came to under-                 The need for additional scientific information off
                   stand that the State of Oregon must take the initia-            Oregon is widely and commonly recognized by
                   tive to plan, management and protect ocean                      marine scie4U.14 d                       ers throughout
                                                                                               ,ngj. ji agency manag
                                                                                                4     2 1
                   resources off the coast of Oregon or see them lost.             the region.           In 1988, the Department of the
                   The ocean encompasses a variety of distinct                     Interior Minerals Management Service held a
                   resource categories with related management                     three-day symposium on Environmental Studies
                   regimes and needed program changes. This assess-                in the Oregon/Washington OCS planning area.
                   ment groups these resources into six different                  That symposium concluded that the region is
                   resource topics and combines both a resource as-                biologically rich, environmentally complex, and
                   sessment and management assessment for each                     that agencies do not have fundamental infornia-
                   topic.                                                          tion necessary to plan for OCS leasing or make
                                                                                   subsequent exploration or development decisions.
                   ABiologicaUyRicli                                               Major research and study recommendations were
                                                                                   developed on a )ide variety of marine resources
                   Marine Envimirimmt                                              and conditions.(4 In 1990, the Pacific Northwest
                     ï¿½ Description                                                 OCS Task Force, a joint task force of Department
                                                                                   of the Interior, the states of Oregon and
                   The ocean environment off Oregon is itself, in all              Washington, and northwest Indian tribal fish com-
                   its complexity, a resource. Within this environ-                missions, approved an environmental studies pro-
                   ment many distinctive oceanographic conditions                  gram prepared by a scientific advisory committee
                   (e.g. seasonal upwelling of cool, nutrient-rich                 which addressed %)broad and pervasive data
                   waters; the Columbia River freshwater plume;                    gaps in the region.
                   energetic winter storms) interact to create rich,
                   primary marine food web supporting Me biologi-                  Federal marine research programs have not histori-
                   cal productivity of the Oregon ocean."This                      cally been oriented toward management needs of
                   productivity extends from coastal estuaries 35 to               most concern to states on the nearshore continen-
                                                                              (9)  tal shelf. Basic bathymetric and geophysical
                   80 miles seaward across the continental margin.                 reconnaissance of the Exclusive Economic Zone,
                   The area is periodically affected by warm water                 focused far offshore and in deep ocean, provides
                   pulses known as El Nifio which originate in the                 little information useful to nearshore management
                   tropical western Pacific Ocean and which induce                 problems. Oregon's ocean resources planning and
                   significant changes in marine productivity and                  management efforts have been frustrated by lack
                   species composition. The Oregon ocean area is an
                   44 ecotone," a broadly fluctuating boundary area be-            of information to address     1101) cult management is-
                   tween the colder subarctic waigs to the north and               su@s in the nearshore area.
                   warmer waters off California.                                         NEED: A coordinated effort among federal
                      ï¿½ Management Issues                                                agency marine research and management,
                   The primary ocean management issue facing                             state research and management programs
                   Oregon (and all states and federal agencies), is                      and academic research programs to maxi-
                   the lack of sufficient scientific inventory informa-                  mize research effort and support a variety


                   36






                                                             Ocean Resources


                      of information needs.                                minerals revealed overwhelming support for con-
                      NEED: Improved scientiflc inventory infor.           servation and development of renewable, living
                      mation to support ocean resources plan-              resources. Yet there is little systematic informa-
                                                                           tion and understanding of majine habitats to sup-
                      ning and management, including:                      port diverse and increap1gly complex ocean
                      ï¿½ detailed bathymetry (bottom topog-                 fisheries management. Mapping of fish catch
                        raphy) of the territorial sea with em-             areas in computer GIS format displays informa-
                        phasis on rocky reef areas;                        tion on catch but does not show spawning, nurs-
                                                                           ery, or recruitment areas. Increasing demand for
                      ï¿½ delineation of seafloor habitat areas, in-         fish products means more fishing pressure on ex-
                        cluding rocky reefs, cobble fields, gravel         isting stocks, development of new fisheries for
                        beds, sandy bottoms, mud bottoms;                  previously unexploited stocks and potential con-
                                                                           flicts among fishing sectors and other ocean
                      ï¿½ characterization of seasonal and annual            66 users." State and federal agencies frequently
                        changes in nearshore ocean currents, in-           make fisheries allocation decisions with inade-
                        terchanges with estuaries, topographic ef-         quate information and fishery agencies have his-
                        fects of headlands, banks and reefs;               toricaUy focused on regulation of catch rather
                      ï¿½ description of habitat requirements and            than management of habitat. State and federal
                        identification of areas used for breeding,         agencies currently lack regulations or manage-
                        rearing, and feeding of marine mammals             ment programs for new or exotic specieb. V
                        and seabirds, with emphasis on                          NEED: Improved information base on:
                        threatened or endangered species;
                      ï¿½ the distribution and abundance of key                   0 population dynamics, life histories,
                        fish, shellfish, and plant resources, with                spawning, rearing, and recruitment of
                        emphasis on habitat interrelationships;                   commercial fish stocks and relationship
                                                                                  to marine habitat areas;
                      ï¿½ information on existing ocean uses and                  0 predator-prey and trophic relationships
                        conflicts with wildlife or other resource                 to support commercial fish stocks;
                        uses;
                      ï¿½ seasonal migration, distribution and                    0 distribution, abundance, life histories,
                        abundance of fishes, mammals and birds;                   and population dynamics of nearshore in-
                                                                                  vertebrates and plants of potential com-
                      ï¿½ characterization of species-habitat                       mercial or recreational interest.
                        relationships.                                       0  NEED: Management programs for harvest
                 Divene AL-wim Fisheiies                                        of marine fish and invertebrates not pre-
                                                                                viously harvested, including aquaculture
                   ï¿½ Description                                                and introduction of new species.
                 A variety of habitat conditions and seasonal                0  NEED*: Management techniques and
                 oceanographic fluctuations provide the basis for a             programs to address conflicts and interac-
                 diverse fish population. More than 80 species of               tions among fisheries sectors and with
                 marine fish are caught off Oregon including sal-               threatened or endangered wildlife.
                 mon, halibut, tuna, Pacific whiting, pink shrimp,
                 Dungeness crab, Dover and English sole, ling                   NEED: Marine habitat research areas of
                 cod, black cod, several varieties of rockfish, and             representative habitat types to better un-
                 other "groundfish" species. Commercial and                     derstand the role of specific habitats in
                 recreation ocean fisheries provid s nearly 20 per-             overall fisheries production.
                 cent of coastal earned income.0%                          Importazit Seabird Habitat
                   ï¿½ Management Issues
                 Oregonians want and expect a healthy marine fish-           ï¿½ Description
                 ing industry. Hearings on offshore oil, gas and           Oregon's nearshore area (within three miles) has




                                                                                                                               37





                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                  approximately 1400 rocks and islands; 33 of these           near the mouths of estuaries. Two species of sea
                  have been identified in the Oregon Ocean Resour-            lions, the Steller (northern) and California, harbor
                  ces Management Plan as sensitive habitat for                seals and a few but increasing number of elephant
                  birds or mammals. Although Oregon's coast is                seals haul out or breed along the Oregon coast
                  about one-quarter of U.S. Pacific coastline length,         Porpoise and dolphins live in ocean waters over
                  over one-half of all seabirds breeding along the            the continental shelf and beyond. Several rock
                  Pacific coast do so on Oregon's rocks, islands,             and island areas, including Rogue, Orford and
                  and headlands. Several bird species are listed as           Simpson reefs on the south coast and Three Ar-
                  "threatened" or "endangered" and require special            ches Rocks on the north coast are crucial rookery,
                  management consideration. In addition, ocean up-            resting or feeding sites for sea lions and seals.
                  welling and the Columbia ver plume make rich                These and other rock and island sites are probably
                                                                                                              more diverse habitat
                  offshore bird feeding areas.                                remnants of much larger 4P41
                     ï¿½ Management Issues                                      along the Oregon coast.0. U.,
                  Increasing threats to seabird habitat sites from              ï¿½ Management Issues
                  people include disturbance from trespass on foot,           All marine mammals on Oregon's coast are
                  close overflight by military and civilian aircraft          protected under the federal Marine Mammal
                  (including sight-seeing tour flights), fishing or           Protection Act. Some are listed under federal. law
                  diving activities in waters adjacent to rocks, and          as "threatened" or "endangered," including Steller
                  personal water craft. Specific mp agement                   sea lions, elephant seals, and gray whales.
                  problems vary from site to site.( ) Fragmented              Steller sea lions represent a unique management
                  jurisdictions and responsibilities among several            challenge for the State of Oregon. Oregon's
                  state and federal ageisies requires close coordina-         population of these sea lions, which live on rocks
                  tion and cooperation. ) Education and informa-              and islands within the state's territorial sea as part
                  tion to the public is crucial to reducing trespass
                  and intrusion. Funds are lacking in all agencies to         of the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Reffige,
                                                                              appears to be relatively stable and healthy. How-
                  respond to seabird issues.                                  ever, precipitous decline in the Steller population
                     ï¿½ NEED: Buffer zones, seasonal closures or               in Alaska has resulted in listing the species as
                       other appropriate management techniques                threatened throughout its range. Continued popula-
                       to protect the unique resources of specific            tion declinf @n Alaska will result in listing as en-
                       rocks, islands or reef complexes from dis-             dangered. ( I  Several of Oregon's Steller habitat
                       turbance and environmental degradation.                sites are the focus of urchin fishery activities, and
                     ï¿½ NEED: Coordinated efforts among af-                    are attractive for other fisheries, including recrea-
                       fected state and federal agencies to ensure            tional users, as well. Oregon must work closely
                       that existing rules, regulations, and                  with federal agencies to devise programs to
                       programs are used to the maximum extent                protect and i&rage Oregon's Steller sea lion.
                       possible.                                              populations.
                                                                              In addition, other rocks and islands with relatively
                                      Marine                                  easy shoreline access have significant human
                     ï¿½ Description                                            trespass and consequent problems with distur-
                                                                              bance or harassment of mammals, especially
                  The waters, rocks, islands, headlands and remote            during summer pupping periods. Non-regulatory
                  sandy beaches of the Oregon coast and territorial           management (education and awareness) are cru-
                  sea are important habitat for many marine mam-              cial if shoreline sites are to be protected as more
                  mals. Gray whales are an increasingly familiar              and m,?re people move to or visit the Oregon
                  sight from coastal vantage points during winter             coast.( )
                  and spring migration; some appear to be year                     NEED: An interagency management plan
                  round residents, feeding in rocky nearshore reef                 for critical habitat areas of the Steller sea
                  areas. Other whales, blue, sperm, minke, and                     lion, including rock and reef haulout gind
                  humpback migrate past Oregon farther offshore.                   rookery areas, feeding areas and interac-
                  Orcas sometimes feed on fish, seals and sea lions





                  38






                                                             Ocean Resources


                      tions with other ocean users, including com-         Clean ()Ce= Water
                      mercial and recreational fisheries, aircraft
                      overflight and human trespass.                         ï¿½ Description
                      NEED: Buffer zones, seasonal closures and            Oregon's ocean waters are relatively clean.
                      other management techniques to protect               Oregonians want to keep them that way. They are
                      the unique resources of specific rocks, is-          swept by the southward-flowing California Cur-
                      lands or headlands from disturbance and              rent during the summer which is displaced along
                      environmental degradation.                           the nearshoT * , winter by a north-flowing David-
                                                                                       . 1r
                                                                           son Current.    There appears to be significant in-
                      NEED: Coordinated efforts among af-                  terchange between estuaries and the nearshore
                      fected state and federal agencies to ensure          ocean. The Columbia River transports sediments
                      that existing rules, regulations, and                and pollutants into the Pacific Ocean and creates a
                      programs are used to the maximum extent              surface qr,   e of freshwater far offshore in the
                      possible.                                            summer.      Other coastal rivers, the Umpqua,
                                                                           Siuslaw, Nehalem, Coquille, Coos and numerous
                 Sexi4tive Shomlim Ay%eas                                  smaller coastal streams also deliver pollutants and
                                                                           sediments to the nearshore marine environment.
                   ï¿½ Description                                             ï¿½ Management Issues
                 Oregon's coast has numerous rocky intertidal
                 areas easily accessible at low tide. These intertidal     There is very little information on existing marine
                 areas contain dense, diverse assemblages of               water quality conditions, little or no monitoring
                 marine plants and animals unique to the intertidal        and no standards for judging impacts to marine
                 zone. Many of these si     are within or adjacent to      water quality. A few cities and industries (pulp
                 designated state parks.lf,@)                              mills) discharge treated effluent directly into the
                                                                           ocean. All others discharge into estuaries or
                   ï¿½ Management Issues                                     rivers. Increasing coastal population will require
                 Tide pools are very attractive to coastal visitors        increased sewerage capability. Questions of
                 because they offer a glimpse of life beneath the          whether ocean outfalls are more desirable than es-
                 sea. Several sites, near heavily traveled U.S. High-      tuarine outfalls and the conditions for siting out-
                 way 101, are readily accessible during extreme            falls are complex and unanswered. Neither the
                 low tides of summer when there are many visitors          state nor the federal government has a program to
                 to the Oregon coast. Some sites receive over-             establish baseline parNneters for monitoring
                 whelming numbers of visitors and are being                marine water quality. )The discharge of foreign
                 destroyed or severely damaged by foot traffic and         ballast water from large cargo ships into estuaries
                 ignorant collecting. A variety of management and          raises the issue of whether and under what condi-
                 protection measures, including area closures, sig-        tions discharge into the ocean would be
                 nage, alternative education opportunities and infor-      preferable. There is virtually no information on
                 mation sites, have been proposed but all will             background conditions of eithernarine or
                 require coordija@ed programs with adequate fund-          ocean waters to make decisions.
                 ing to achieve.                                             -  NEED: Water quality baseline data for
                      NEED: Coordinated, interagency, site                      selected ocean sites.
                      specific management plans and regulations              0  NEED: Data on estuarine and nearshore
                      to protect intertidal areas.                              ocean exchange, including pollutant dis-
                      NEED: Increased public information                        charge.
                      materials and programs to educate coastal              a  NEED: Standards for evaluating marine
                      visitors about tidepool resources and need                water quality and regulating the placement
                      for protection.                                           and discharge of municipal sewerage into
                                                                                the nearshore marine environment.








                                                                                                                               39






                                         Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                 Management Assessment
                                                        ---------------------- - - --------

                 Oregon has a broad framework for planning and             and Dev?lopment published The Oregon OCEAN-
                 managing ocean resources. This framework is               BOOK,( ) a comprehensive overview of the
                 composed of state laws, agency programs, plans,           geologic and oceanographic setting and living
                 a process, political commitment and public sup-           marine resources of the Pacific Ocean off Oregon.
                 port. However, this framework needs to be filled          Written and illustrated for the lay reader, the
                 in with more specific plans, implementation               OCEANBOOK provided a synthesis framework
                 measures and better information to effectively            for understanding more detailed scientific informa-
                 manage and protect Oregon's ocean resources.              tion about ocean resources or evaluating impacts
                 The elements of Oregon's ocean management pro-            from future ocean. uses. Preparation of the
                 gram include:                                             OCEANBOOK was supported with federal funds
                 Statewide Mmning Goal 19                                  under the coastal zone management program.
                                                                             0 NEED: Update and expansion of the
                 OM=Resources                                                  OCEANBOOK to reflect improved under-
                 Oregon's long-standing commitment to ocean                    standing of Oregon's marine resources and
                 resources protection and management was                       environment.
                 reflected in the work of the Oregon Coastal Con-           ï¿½ Oregon Ocean Resources
                 servation and Development Commission which,                  Management Act of 1987
                 in 1975, adopted a policy of managing continental         The 1987 Oregon Legislature, through Senate Bill
                 shelf resources.                                          630, enacted the Oregon Ocean Resources
                 In 1977, Oregon's Coastal Management Program              Management Act    ip, ow Oregon Revised Statutes
                 was approved by the Secretary of Commerce as              196.405-196.515( ) and created the Oregon
                 meeting the requirements of the federal Coastal           Ocean Resources Management Program. The pur-
                 Zone Management Act of 1972. The OCMP con-                pose of the program is to plan for the coordinated,
                 tains Statewide Planning Goal 19, Ocean Resour-           comprehensive management of ocean uses and
                 ces which, in addition to a broad policy statement,       resources off the Oregon coast. 77he law includes
                 includes two major requirements: 1.) that local,          legislative policies for ocean management, includ-
                 state or federal decisions about the use of ocean         ing a primary policy which articulates in law the
                 resources must give priority to the long-term             meaning of statewide planning Goal 19, Ocean
                 benefits of living marine, renewable resources            Resources. The legislation created a Task Force,
                 over use of nonliving, nonrenewable resources,            required it to assess ocean resources, their uses
                 and 2.) that ocean resource decisions, including          and management and prepare a plan for managing
                 agency programs and plans, must be based on               ocean resources. The plan was required to be
                 scientific "inventory information" sufficient to          adopted by the Land Conservation and Develop-
                 describe and understand the impacts of the                ment Commission as part of Oregon's Coastal
                 proposed activity.                                        Management Program.
                 Goal 19 has been broadly interpreted and applied            ï¿½ The Oregon Ocean Resources
                 through the Oregon Ocean Resources Manage-                   Management Task Force
                 ment Plan (below). Goal 19 has not been imple-            The Task Force created under Senate Bill 630 was
                 mented through administrative rules because of            broadly representative. Seven state agencies, three
                 lack of necessary information (see Resource As-           public members, representatives of local govern-
                 sessments, above).                                        ments, fishermen, oil and mineral industries, ports
                      NEED: Administrative rules to carry out              and Indian tribes were appointed. Federal agen-
                      Goal 19, Ocean Resources.                            cies were invited to participate and several
                                                                           provided crucial assistance. Hundreds of citizens
                   ï¿½ The Oregon OCEANBOOK                                  were directly involved through workshops and
                 In 1985 the Department of Land Conservation               public hearings. Hundreds more received a peri-
                                                                           odic newsletter of activities and information.





                 40






                                                                Ocean Resources



                 The Task Force turned its attention first to issues          ocean resources.
                 of oil and gas development raiWd by proposed                 The Ocean Plan contains two principle recommen-
                 federal OCS Lease Sale #132.@@') It reviewed avail-          dations:
                 able information about ocean resources and condi-
                 tions and concluded that Oregon's biologically                     Oregon must address growing demands on
                 productive and highly dynamic ocean is not the                     ocean resources through a coordinated ocean
                 place for oil and gas development. This con-                       policy council under the leadership of the
                 clusion eventually led to the President's June,                    Governor and linked to Oregon's coastal
                 1990, cancellation of an oil and gas lease sale                    management program,
                 scheduled for 1992. The Task Force also found
                 that Oregon needs far more scientific information                  Oregon must prepare a plan for managing the
                 to allow future marine mineral exploration.                        ocean resources and uses within the state
                                                                                    three-mile territorial sea.
                 Of greater consequence, however, the Task Force
                 heard directly from hundreds of citizens, fisher-              ï¿½ Senate Bill 162:
                 men, scientists, state and federal agency resource                 The Ocean Policy Advisory Council
                 specialists that Oregon's ocean resources are im-            The 1991 Oregon legislature accepted the recom-
                 periled by overuse and misuse, uninformed                    mendations of the Task Force and established the
                 management decisions, lack of adequate regula-               Oregon Ocean Policy Advisory Council with a
                 tion and uncoordinated programs among state and              dual mission: to prepare a territorial sea plan for
                 federal agencies even V there is no oil, gas or              Oregon and to coordinate management o             ean
                 mineral development.( 1)                                     resources within Oregon's territorial sea.    RfThe
                 The Task Force learned that increasin numbers                legislature mandated that state agencies must act
                                                          9                   consistently with the plan once the plan is adopted
                 of people use the ocean, especially nearshore, for           as part of Oregon's coastal management program.
                 commercial or recreational harvest of fish,                  Thus, the territorial sea plan will, itself, constitute
                 shellfish, and marine plants. Oregon's coast hosts           a mandatory, enforceable mechanism for manag-
                 more and more people pursuing a variety of                   ing ocean resources. Likewise, when the ter-
                 marine recreation. Growing coastal cities must dis-          ritorial sea plan is approved by NOAA/OCRM as
                 pose of additional municipal sewage into estuaries           an amendment to Oregon's federally approved
                 or ocean. Ships and barges, some hauling oil,                Coastal Management Program, it will provide an
                 chemical or toxic cargoes, ply this nearshore area           enforceable standard for determining whether
                 and into coastal harbors. Marine mammals and                 federal agency programs and activities are consis-
                 seabirds, including the threatened Steller sea lion,         tent with Oregon's ocean management program.
                 are under increasing pressure from human distur-             The territorial sea plan will also provide the basis
                 bance.                                                       for the Department of Land Conservation and
                   ï¿½ Oregon Ocean Resources Manage-                           Development to adopt administrative rules to im-
                      ment Plan                                               plement statewide Goal 19, Ocean Resources.
                 The Task Force p    r  ared an Ocean Resources                  - NEED: A plan for Oregon's territorial sea
                                     . W
                 Management Plan which was adopted by the                           as a framework for local, state, and federal
                 Land Conservation and Development Commis-                          agency programs, rules and regulations.
                 sion in late 1990 as part of the Oregon Coastal                 a  NEED: Approval by NOAA/OCRM of the
                 Management Program. The Ocean Plan has not
                 been submitted to NOAA/OCkM for approval                           territorial sea plan as an element of
                 under the federal Coastal Management Act; how-                     Oregon's Coastal Management Program.
                 ever, the Oregon Department of Justice has deter-                  NEED: Administrative rules, special area
                 mined that the Ocean Plan is binding on state                      management plans, educational programs
                 agencies. The plan addresses uses, resources, and                  and other agency programs to carry out
                 management within the 200-mile U.S. Exclusive                      the territorial sea plan.
                 Economic Zone, establishes broad policies and
                 makes numerous specific recommendations to im-
                 prove management and protection of Oregon's




                                                                                                                                      41






                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                     ï¿½ M-search and                                          Information System (GIS) Service Center. nte
                       Iniormation Development                               Oregon legislature has appropriated funds over
                  Neither state nor federal agencies have adequate           three successive bienniums to support the state's
                  scientific baseline and inventory information to           ocean GIS capability. In addition, Oregon has
                  prepare management plans and programs or                   developed a working relationship with NOAA's
                  specific implementation measures such as rules,            Strategic Assessments Branch to utilize the COM-
                  regulations, or standards to_Vrotect and manage            PAS information management system developed
                  Oregon's ocean resourccs.(V) Under statewide               for use within NOAA and by cooperating states.
                  planning Goal 19, Ocean Resources, local, state            In both cases, development of an information
                  and federal units of government are required to ac-        base useful for regional or local scale planning
                  quire inventory data to support plans and                  and management is hampered by deficient da,ta,
                  programs. During preparation of the Ocean Plan             as outlined above.
                  1987-1990, Oregon discovered the following:                     NEED: Additional scientific inventory and
                     ï¿½ available information on ocean conditions, en-             resource information as listed in Resource
                       vironment, and resources is often unavailable,             Assessments, above, and as described in
                       sparse, fragmented, imprecise, out of date or              the research plans of the Oregon Depart-
                       limited to relatively small areas;                         ment of Fish and Wildlife. Information
                                                                                  gaps are extensive and will take time and
                     ï¿½ specific resource management problems can-                 funds to fulfill.
                       not be defined or resolved through new laws
                       rules, regulations or programs without far bej_            NEED: Commitments by federal agencies
                       ter information than currently available; and              with marine resource management respon-
                                                                                  sibilities affecting Oregon's territorial sea
                     ï¿½ information has not been gathered in a sys-                to increase data gathering and research ef-
                       tematic way to support management                          forts and to coordinate these with the
                       decisions.                                                 Oregon ocean resources management pro-
                  The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife                      gram.
                  (ODFW) has taken the lead in identifying and                    NEED: Increased coordination between
                  coordinating new studies of ocean resources and                 Oregon's ocean resources GIS and all
                  environment off Oregon. In 1989, ODFW com-                      branches of NOAA to enhance Oregon's in-
                  pleted a two year effort to prepare an overall re-              formation base for management and to im-
                  search plan for the management of livp manne                    prove NOAA's data base about Oregon's
                  resources over the continental margin.      This                ocean resources
                  comprehensive strategy was developed in coopera-
                  tion with an interagency advisory panel and tech-            ï¿½ PubHe and Agency Support
                  nical commenters from throughout the region.               Several factors contributed to the success of Task
                  The plan lays out broad strategies to minimize en-         Force and subsequent legislative action creating
                  vironmental risk and describes detailed studies to         an Ocean Policy Advisory Council. A crucial ele-
                  describe ecosystem processes, assess biological            ment was the participation in all phases of the
                  resources, and understand environmental effects.           Task Force work by many citizens, from the coast
                  In turn, this plan has become the foundation for a         as well as statewide. This involvement heightened
                  more focused integrated study of nearshore                 public awareness and provides a base of support
                  marine @Oitats and reef communities of southern            for work on Oregon's territorial sea to improve
                  Om8ull.      This integrated study will be the             protection and management of ocean resources.
                  framework for a variety of academic and state and          Similarly, all affected state agencies and many
                  federal agency studies in the region.                      federal agencies seized the opportunity to enhance
                  In addition to working toward obtaining new                or build programs to address their resource respon-
                  ocean information, Oregon has built an integrated          sibilities and participated fully throughout the
                  computerized ocean information system to store,            Task Force process. This interagency cooperation
                  retrieve, synthesize and analyses information.             and coordination has built a common under-
                  This system is located within the state Geographic         standing and high level of trust for working on is-


                  42






                                                               Ocean Resources


                 sues within Oregon's territorial sea.                             tion in all phases of the ocean planning
                   ï¿½ NEED: Continued and expanded public                           process.
                      awareness of ocean resource issues and the                   NEED: Improved outreach to schools,
                      planning process.                                            libraries, organizations, and local govern-
                   ï¿½  NEED: Opportunities for public participa-                    ments to provide informational materials
                                                                                   about Oregon's ocean resources program


                 Priority Program Enhancements

                 Ocean resources use planning is a priority for              sensitive habitat and depletion or destruction of
                 OCMP improvement.                                           food resources. Oregon must develop interagency
                 Oregonians place high value on a healthy marine             management plans and programs, public aware-
                 environment and productive ocean resources. This            ness and education efforts and mandatory enforce-
                 is reflected by legislative action in 1987 and 1991         ment measures where necessary to protect these
                 to establish ocean planning laws and allocate state         resources.
                 resources to the task and by the participation and                Priority Program Enhancement: Adopt
                 interest of citizens in the 1987-1990 ocean plan-                 site specific management plans and protec-
                 ning process. Oregonians want to remain involved                  tion measures for critical marine mammal
                 in and continue to be informed and educated                       and seabird habitat.
                 about ocean resources planning and management               Substantial improvement is needed in the scien-
                 issues.
                                                                             tific inventory information base necessary for
                      Priority Program Enhancement: Continue                 Oregon to prepare and adopt a territorial sea plan
                      to provide citizens with information about             and implementation measures, including Ad-
                      ocean resources and opportunities to par-              ministrative Rules for Goal 19.
                      ticipate in ocean planning.                               0  Priority Program Enhancement: Conduct
                 Oregon has a sound legal and policy framework                     coordinated ocean research programs to ac-
                 for addressing ocean resources management is-                     quire needed information.
                 sues but needs a more detailed plan and programs               0  Priority Program Enhancement: Improve
                 for the state's territorial sea to address a variety of           information management capability to sup-
                 issues and problems. An Oregon territorial sea                    port ocean resources planning and manage-
                 plan, as required by the legislature, will provide a              ment decisions.
                 mandatory framework for local, state, and federal
                 agency plans, programs, rules and regulations to            The responsibility to manage the resources and
                 manage ocean resources within Oregon's ter-                 values of the Pacific Ocean off Oregon is not
                 ritorial sea. An Oregon territorial sea plan, when          limited to the state alone. Many federal agencies
                 approved by NOAA/OCRM as part of Oregon's                   have responsibilities and authorities for resources
                 federally-approved Coastal Management Program,              and activities even inside the territorial sea.
                 will ensure that federal agency programs and                Protection and proper management of these
                 decisions are consistent with the plan.                     resources is a shared responsibility whose costs
                      Priority Program Enhancement: Prepare                  must be born by both levels of government. These
                      and adopt a plan and implementing                      costs are not insignificant. But the loss of ocean
                      measures to manage Oregon's territorial                resources would be even greater. Federal agencies
                      sea resources, uses and activities.                    must assist the State of Oregon, and all states, to
                 Certain of Oregon's marine resources, chiefly               protect a common resource.
                 marine mammals, seabirds, and rocky intertidal                 - Priority Program Enhancement: Coopera-
                 areas, are at risk from encroachment on critical or               tion and financial assistance from federal
                                                                                   agencies, including the Office of Ocean and




                                                                                                                                     43





                                         Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                      Coastal Resources Management, to plan,                  manage, and protect ocean resources.


                 -References                                                           --------

                 1. Parmenter, Tish, and R. Bailey. The Oregon           7. Cicin-Sain, Biliana, et al. Improving Ocean
                 OCEANBOOK. Department of Land Conserva-                 Management Capability in the Pacific Coast
                 tion and Development. Salem, Oregon. 1985               Region: State and Regional Perspectives. National
                 2. Good, James, and R. Hildreth. Oregon Ter-            Coastal Resources Research and Development In-
                 ritorial Sea Management Study. Oregon State             stitute. Newport, Oregon. 1990.
                 University. Corvallis, Oregon. 1987.                    8. Technical Subcommittee, Pacific Northwest
                 3. 1987 Oregon Legislature. Senate Bill 630.            OCS Task Force. Environmental Studies for
                 Salem, Oregon. 1987.                                    Washington and Oregon Relative to Lease Sale
                                                                         Planning Area 132. Seaside Oregon. 1990.
                 4. Minerals Management Service. PROCEED-                9. Oregon Ocean Resources Management Task
                 INGS: Conference/Workshop on Recommenda-                Force. The Oregon Ocean Plan. Portland, Oregon.
                 tions for Studies in Washington and Oregon              1991.
                 Relative to Offshore Oil and Gas Development.
                 Los Angeles, California. 1988.                          10. 1991 Oregon Legislature. Senate Bill 162.
                 5. Oregon Ocean Resources Management Task               Salem, Oregon. 1991
                 Force. Interim Report to the Joint Legislative          11. National Marine Fisheries Service. Final
                 Committee on Land Use. Portland, Oregon. 1988.          Revision: Recovery Plan for the Steller Sea Lion.
                 6. Bottom, Daniel I., et al. Management of Living       Seattle, Washington. 1991,
                 Marine Resources: A Research Plan for the               12. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
                 Washington and Oregon Continental Margin.               DRAFT: Integrated Study of Nearshore Marine
                 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,                 Habitats and Reef Communities of Southern
                 Portland, Oregon. 1989                                  Oregon. Newport, Oregon. 1991


























                 44







                                                                               Low Priority
                                                                    Enhancements





                  Public Access


                  Legislative Objective                                       Another 406 sites and 99 sites exist for "perpen-
                                                                              dicular" access to fgastal estuaries and coastal
                  Attain increased opportunities for public ac-               lakes respectively.
                  cess to coastal areas with recreational, his-               Another assessment of the current adequacy of
                  torical, aesthetic, ecological, or cultural                 public access to coastal water bodies is the
                  value. Include consideration of current and
                  future needs forpublic access.                              department's recent OCMP questionnaire. It in-
                                                                              cluded "public water access" as one of the 28
                                                                              management issues to be ranked for improvement.
                  ResourmAssessment                                           Public acceeA was ranked a distant 15th for im-
                  Along Oregon's 362 miles of ocean shoreline,                provement.
                  there are 262 miles of sandy beaches and 64 miles           MwiagementAwws@nt
                  of rocky headlands which are acceMble to the
                  public and set aside for public use. That                     ï¿½ Laws
                  amounts to 90 percent of the ocean shore. This ex-          As mentioned above, Oregon's "beach I aw            es-
                  traordinary situation was created by the 1967               tablished lateral public access along 90 percent of
                  Oregon Beach Bill. That legislation established             the state's ocean shore. The beach law was sub-
                  public ownership of the intertidal area and a               sequently challenged in state courts and its con-
                  public easemen       the "dry land" area below the          stitutionali was upheld at the state's highest
                                  18T                                                     @, 1)
                  vegetation line.                                            court level.
                  The Oregon Beach Bill created "lateral" access              There is a current case in state court which will
                  along the ocean shore. "Perpendicular access is             give the court another opportunity to affirm the
                  needed to allow the public to get to the shore              beach law. This is the "Stevens" case. It involves
                  from the uplands. Oregon enjoys 645 points of               a proposed motel seawall which would encroach
                  1. perpendiFlIlar" public access along its ocean            on the privately-owned area of public easement
                  shoreline.                                                  created by the beach law. State and local agencies




                                                                                                                                    45






                                              Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                    denied the needed permits, and the applicant ap-               Department of Fish & Wildlife acquired six ac-
                    pealed on grounds of an unconstitutional "taking".             cess sites for $95,000, constructed six boat ramps,
                    The defendant state government was upheld at the               and received two donations of land for access, in-
                    trial court level. Currently, the case is being ap-            cluding a 145-acre parcel with one mile of river
                    pealed to the Court of Appeals, and most likely to             frontage valued at $210,000.(9)
                    the Supreme Court. Oral argument before the Ap-                  ï¿½ Access Management Plan
                    peals Court will occur near the end of February                As mentioned above, the Department of Parks &
                    1992. "Me department will continue to monitor
                    this case and its implications on public access to             Recre tion is developing an Oregon Beach Access
                    the ocean shore.                                               Plan.(@ As part of that planning effort, State Parks
                    In 198.4, the department amended the statgide                  and the department prolff      ,ed an inventory ofcoas-
                                                                                   tal access sites in 1989.      Since then, State Parks
                    planning goal #17 for coastal shorelands.          The         has been using the inventory data to identify
                    amendment addresses public access to all coastal               priority acquisition sites to provide increased or
                    water bodies. It requires two things. First, existing          improved public access. A preliminary but un-
                    public access in coastal shorelands must be                    published draft has been produced. Additional
                    "retained or replaced if sold, exchanged or trans-             work is needed to calculate acquisition costs,. land
                    ferred." Second, if a shoreland "right-of-way" is              use effects, local comprehensive plan com-
                    vacated to allow redevelopment, public access                  patibility, etc. Unfortunately, agency budget cuts
                    must be provided across the affected site. Local               have reduced the staff level for       s effort and it is
                    government's are incorporating this new require-                                                   V
                    ment into their comprehensive plans. This is                   currently "on the back bumee,.( )                                       I
                    being done during the scheduled periodic reviews                 ï¿½ Protection of Resources
                    of local plans.                                                     and Property Rights
                      ï¿½ Acquisition                                                Natural resources are protected from damage due
                                                                                   to human access in the same manner as from any
                    Public access site acquisition and improvement on              other land use covered by the Oregon Coastal
                    Oregon's coast is an ongoing activity by several               Management Program. In adffon, Oregon's,
                    agencies.                                                      recently adopted Ocean Plan ) requires access to
                                                                                   be "restricted, if necessary, to protect endangered,
                    In 1989, the department and the Department of
                    Parks and Recreation, a full partner in the Oregon             threatened, and sensitive species or their habitats
                    Coastal Program, produced a detailed inventory                 Conclusion
                    of all public access sites te the ocean shore, es-
                    tuaries, and coastal lakes.     State Parks is analyz-         Public access is not a priority for OCMP improve-
                    ing the inventory data to identify priority areas for          ment.
                    further access acquisitions. Unfortunately, this ex-           Oregon does not lack for public access to its coas-
                    ercise has stalled for lack yf adequate staff resour-
                    ces within Parks'budget.( 1)                                   tal water bodies. State law and ongoing acquisi-
                                                                                   tion programs have provided a great deal of
                    Several other state agencies have been funding                 access. In addition, minor refinements are being
                    site acquisitions and improvements during the last             made to the existing programs. For example, local
                    biennium. The department, for example, used                    comprehensive plans are being amended to
                    $192,000 in federal "306A" grants to local.age          @75_)  protect existing public access. Also, a limited
                    cies to acquire or improve eight access projects               amount of new access acquisition and develop-
                    between 1989-91. The State Marine Board                        ment is happening through programs at the depart-
                    provided $688,000 in state and federal [gnds for               ment and at State Parks.
                    12 improvement projects on the coast.( )Me






                    46






                                                         Low Priotity Assessments


                 Marine
                 Debris


                 Legislative Objective                                     problem. Respondents ranked "marine d bris" a
                                                                           distant 16th out of 22 suggested coastal manage-
                 Reduce marine debris which enters the                     ment issues. Most of the support for this ranking
                 nation's coastal and ocean environment.                   came from "citizen activist" respondents rather
                 Manage uses and activities which con-                     than local governments or coastal business inter-
                 tribute to the entry of such debris.                      ests.
                 PwsourmAssm9nient                                         AanageinentAwwsment
                                                            (3)            Oregon's place in the "marine debris story" is, of
                 Oregon's recently published Ocean Plan                    course, well known. The now internaeilral beach
                 provides the following general description of the         cleanup program began here in 1984. A pilot
                 marine debris problem in the state:                       recycling program started at the Port of Newport
                 "Nondegradable debris, such as plastic and glass,         for the commercial fishing fleet has served as a
                 enters Oregon's ocean from a variety of sources.          model for dozens of similar recycling efforts at
                 Prior to the recent MARPOL agreement to reduce            other ports on the West coast and throughout the
                                                                           nation. The nation's first of nine state "bottle
                 marine debris.... the primary source was the dump-        bills" began here, and has reduced the "@ottle"
                 ing of garbage at sea by domestic and foreign mer-        component of the state's beach debris.
                 chant marine vessels, military vessels,
                 commercial fishing vessels, cruise ships, and             Today, the above activities continue. Once a year
                 recreational vessels. Even though the amount of           in the fall, the Oregon Department of Fish and
                 debris from vessels is decreasing under MAR-              Wildlife and one or more nonprofit organizations
                 POL, much plastic remains at sea. Rivers also             sponsor a beach cleanup day. Data on quantity
                 bring debris from urban areas and highways.               and type of debris are collected and forwarded to
                 Beach users contribute marine debris by littering."       the nongovernmental Center For Marine Conser-
                 One measure of the marine debris problem in               vation for tabulation.
                 Oregon is the types and quantities of debris col-         In the spring, another beach cleanup day occurs.
                 lected from the state's beaches. In the fall of           This one is sponsored in part by the Oregon
                 1990, 44,007 pounds of debris were collected              Department of Parks & Recreation. They provide
                 from 135 miles of Oregon's bea    @@cs during the na-     cleanup equipment and publicity to support the lar-
                 tional beach cleanup campaign.( That represents           gely local cleanup efforts. Unfortunately, no data
                 an average of 326 pounds of debris per mile of            are collected during this cleanup.
                 Oregon shoreline. Within the 50 states and Dis-           Regardless of the real effect of these cleanup ef-
                 trict of Columbia, the national avera   e was 703         forts on reducing the "debris stream", they serve
                 pounds of debris collected per mile.' ) Comparing         an invaluable function of maintaining public
                 the average cleanup rates for Oregon and the na-          awareness and of giving the public a sense of
                 tion, one can conclude that Oregon's beaches that         "doing something about it".
                 day were 54 percent cleaner than the national
                 average. Of course, such a conclusion assumes             Concerning "debris prevention", the port
                 that Oregon beach cleaners were as efficient as           authorities in Astoria, Newport, and Charleston
                 those in the rest of the nation (they may even            operate their own recycling and debris disposal
                 have been more efficient).                                programs for sport and commercial fishing users.
                 Another measure of Oregon's marine debris prob-           These are locally initiated programs; they are not
                 lem is the response to the OCMP questionnaire             required or funded by state government. The
                 (see questionnaire description above). Actually,          types of debris being retrieved include cardbo
                 this is more a measure of people's perception of a        metal, wood, wire and cable, plastic, and nets.
                                                                           Unfortunately, no quantitative data are available.




                                                                                                                               47






                                           Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                   Another debris prevention effort is the Net Recy-          tion efforts by OSU Sea Grant were a significant
                   cling Program being conducted by the Marine                part of the successful effort with the pilot recy-
                   Habitat Project of the Pgcific States Marine'              cling project at the Port of Newport. However,
                   Fisheries Commission.( ) This program is operat-           OSU Sea Grant is not conducting any marine
                   ing in ports from Alaska to California; Astoria is         debris education activit s as part of its current
                   the single Oregon port participating. The program          1991-93 programming.    @@i Marine debris education
                   is using federal Saltonstall-Kennedy grants and            has been taken on nationally by the Center For
                   EPA grants to set up economically efficient recy-          Marine Conservation.
                   cling mechanisms for used fishing nets. Grant              Within Oregon state and local governments, there
                   monies are also being used for net recycling re-           is no agency with a mission or mandate to
                   search at Oregon State University. The                     .4manage" marine debris.
                   university's engineering department has been con-
                   tracted by the Marine Habitat Project to develop           coxidusioTl
                   an efficient technological means for separating
                   gillnets by the type of nylon resin used in their          Marine debris is not a priority for OCMP improve-
                   manufacture. Such separation will greatly im-              ment.
                   prove the nets economic value to potential plas-           Oregon's pioneering efforts in marine debris
                   tics recycling operators.                                  management were developed without assistance
                   A third debris prevention mechanism in Oregon is           from the OCMP. Furthermore, the "grass roots"
                   the state's littering laws. ORS164.775 et seq. vir-        nature and spirit of those pioneering efforts are
                   tually prohibits any debris discharge in state             being perpetuated in the ongoing marine debris
                   waters or on the beaches. Enforcement is done by           programs and, again, without an OCMP require-
                   the state police department and the local police           ment. There is no reason to spoil this success by a
                   departments. In 1990, no enforce   T ent actions by        government mandate of "marine debris preven-
                   local departments were reported.( ) During the             tion" through the state's coastal management pro-
                   same period, the state police reported 9 en orce-          grain.
                   ment cases; in 1989, there were 15 cases.(T)l              Available beach cleanup data suggests that
                   The Department of State Police has also increased          Oregon has significantly less of a debris problem
                   its instruction and direction given to coastal             than the rest of the nation. That perception is rein-
                   police cadets and game personnel regardin     @2@    n-    forced by respondents to the OCMP questionnaire
                   hanced enforcement in the bays and ocean.                  who did not feel marine debris was as important
                   The littering enforcement data above suggest that          an issue as many others on our coast. Neverthe-
                   enforcement is not an effective tool against               less, debris reduction programs are being carried
                   marine debris proliferation. Public education is           on in the state without OCMP or other govern-
                   often used as an alternative to regulation. Educa-         ment mandates.

                   Special Area Management Planning

                   Legislative Objective                                      cial area management planning".
                   Prepare and carry out special management                   City and county comprehensive land use plans
                   plans for important coastal areas.                         have been developed for all of the upland area in
                                                                              the coastal zone. These plans comply with
                                                                              Oregon's statewide land use planning program re-
                   ResourmAssessment                                          quirements for state agency coordination, citizen
                   The entire Oregon coastal zone, from the moun-             involvement, and natural resource protectiori. In
                   tains to the valleys to the ocean white with foam          particular, separate planning efforts were con-
                   (apologies to Irving Berlin), is covered by "spe-          ducted for each of Oregon's 21 major estuaries as
                                                                              sub-components of the comprehensive plans. All




                   48






                                                       Low Priority Assessments
                of these plans'have been approved by the federal         and the rest of the state can now by handled
                government as part of the Oregon Coastal                 through another type of "special area management
                Management Program.                                      plan!'. The 1989 Legislature authorized "wetland
                Within the marine portion of Oregon's coastal            conservation plans" to be created for site specific
                zone, another "special area management pl@p)" has        wetland areas by local governments and the
                been adopted. It is the Oregon Ocean Plan.               Oregon Division of     tate Lands which regulates
                                                                         wetland alterations.( ) The wetland protection re-
                NhnagementAssessimmt                                     quirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural
                                                      (4)                Resources) have been incorporated in the wetland
                The comprehensive planning statutes       remain ap-     conservation law.
                plicable to all land use actions in the coastal zone.
                This means that the comprehensive planning               Conclusion
                process will remain as the basic framework in            Special area management planning is not a
                which to resolve future land use conflicts.              priority for OCMP improvement.
                Territorial sea planning also N   a mandate to con-      Special area management planning is already
                tinue. Recent state legislation created the              being done in Oregon. The state has a long tradi-
                Oregon Ocean Policy Advisory Council, and re-            tion of resolving its land and water use disputes
                quires the council to produce a more specific ter-       through coordinated and collaborative decision
                ritorial sea management plan.                            making which involves all affected parties. This
                The management of wetlands in the coastal zone           process and, indeed, this attitude are continuing.

                Energy & Government
                Facility Siting & Activities

                Legislative Objective                                         10 miles in length, greater than 230,000 volts,
                Adopt procedures and enforceable policies                     and crossing a local government boundary;
                which will help the siting of energy and                      Solar collecting facility using more than 100
                government facilities and activities which                    acres of land, or generating more than 25,000
                may be ofgreater than local significance.                     kw of power;
                                                                              Liquid fossil fuel pipeline at least six inches
                ResouxmAssessmemt                                             in diameter and five or more miles in length;
                                                                              Natural or synthetic gas pipeline at least 16 in-
                  ï¿½ Mgjor Facilities                                          ches in diameter and five or more miles in
                The siting of major energy facilities in Oregon is            length;
                regulated by the Oregon Energy Facility Siting              e Geothermal pipeline at least 16 inches in
                Council (EFSQ. The following facilities are regu-             diameter and five or more miles in length; and
                lated (ORS469.300):
                     Electric power generating plant (non-nuclear           * Synthetic fuel plant which converts any
                     fuel), capacity greater than 25,000 kw;                  naTral resource to a fuel equivalent of 2.0 x
                                                                              10 Btu of heat per day (this would include
                  *  Nuclear power plant, capacity greater than               oil refineries).
                     25,000 kw;                                          The EFSC siting process is exempt from the
                  *  Any nuclear facility other than a nuclear           64 state agency coordinatioW' and the "comprehen-
                     power plant;                                        sive plan compatibility" requirements ?,,f the
                                                                         statewide land use planning program.( ) T'his
                  0  High voltage transmission lines greater than        means that a local government cannot "veto" an



                                                                                                                            49






                                             Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment


                   EFSC-regulated facility through its comprehen-                since "sunsetted", and is no longer in effect.
                   sive plan. It is the state's policy that the siting of
                   these major facilities be consolidated at the state           MwWemntAssesment
                   level and to be consistent with "state" policies
                   regarding energy and environmental protection                   ï¿½ Considering Facility Needs
                   (ORS469.310).                                                 The department is developing new administrative
                   Nevertheless, EFSC is required to "coordinate" its            rules for public facility siting. This will be for
                   decisions with local governments. To do this,                 public facilities other than those regulated ex,
                                                                                 clusively through EFSC. The new rules will build
                   EFSC must solicit comments from affected local                on the concepts and recommendations provide@,@n
                   governments (ORS469.350(3)) and appoint the af-               the department's 1991 study mentioned above.
                   fected local government as a "special advisory                One of the major concepts being developed is a
                   body" (ORS469.480(l)).                                        "certificate of need". Under this concept, a peti-
                   SinceEFSC was created in 1971, there has been                 tion would be filed with the Land Conservation &
                   only one application filed for an EFSC site certifi-          Development Commission to certify a                (2)
                   cate in the Oregon coastal zone. That was a pilot             regional/statewide need for a specific project.
                   project wind power electric generation power                  For EFSC-regulated facilities, the EFSC ad-
                   plant @@ Curry County, and it was approved in                 ministrative rules (OAR Chapter345) require find-
                   1983.                                                         ings of need for the facility to obtain a site
                      ï¿½ Other Facilities                                         certificate from EFSC.
                   All other types and sizes of energy and govern-                 ï¿½ Allow Siting and
                   ment facilities are subject to the statewide land                 Protect Natural Resources
                   use planning program. This means that the                     The siting , construction and operation of EFSC-
                   facilities must meet local comprehensive plan and             regulated energy facilities must be in "compliance
                   zoning ordinance requirements as well as state                with ... air, water, solid waste, land use and other
                   agency regulatory requirements. The local and                 environmental protection policies of this state"
                   state agency requirements, in turn, reflect require.-         (ORS469.310). EFSC administrative rules (OAR
                   ments in the statewide land use planning goals of             Chapter345) carry out this mandate. in addition,
                   the Land Conservation & Development Commis-                   EFSC has designated broad geographical areas of
                   sion. There are no requirements in the statewide              the state as to their suitability or unsuitability for
                   planning goals or in other statutes of state agen-            the siting of thermal (nuclear and fossil fueled)
                   cies that would allow a state agency to override a            and geothermal power plants (OAR34540).
                   local government veto of a proposed energy or                 Suitability is based on the degree of a "substantial
                   government facility.                                          deterrent' 'to siting, on the degree of conflicting
                   In 1991, the department contracted a study of                 uses, and on the ability to mitigate adverse effects
                   regional and statewide facility siting in Oregon.       (2)   (OAR345-40-012).
                   One finding of the study is that "the existing land           All energy and government facilities not regulated
                   use system, with a few exceptions, h     M   responded        by EFSC are covered by the statewide planning
                   to regional/statewide facility needs".      The study         program and the regulations of resource protec-
                   further indicated that "there are options available           tion agencies in the same manner as any other
                   to improve facility siting and a@23id pressures to            land use. As described above, the department has
                   override the land use process".                               begun the process of amending its administrative
                   There have been isolated incidents in the recent              rules for local government siting of public
                   past where the Oregon legislature was compelled               facilities. The revised rules will likely contain
                   to adopt short term "supersiting" legislation for             specific requirements to evaluate alternat e sites
                   specific uses or facilities. Examples have included           based in part on natural resource effectVli@
                   regional prisons and light rail mass transit in the           Conclusion
                   Portland area. In each case, the purpose of the
                   legislation was to preempt local governments'                 Energy and government facilities and activities
                   facility siting authorities. All such legislation has




                   50






                                                         Low Priority Assessments


                 siting are not priorities for OCUP improvement.            denied by local government. 'Me existing
                 The above assessment does not indicate that a              mechanism are adequate. Nevertheless, improve-
                 problem exists. There is no evidence of any                ments are being made to the program; the depart-
                 facilities of "greater than local interest" being          ment is amending its administrative rules for local
                                                                            siting of public facilities not regulated by EFSC.


                 References
                   . . . ........      ...


                 PublicAccess                                               Mazine Debris
                 1. Benkendorf Associates Corp. Inventory of                1. Center For Marine Conservation. Cleaning
                 Oregon Coastal Beach Access Sites. Prepared for            North America's Beaches: 1990 Beach Cleanup
                 the Department of Land Conservation & Develop-             Results. Center For Marine Conservation,
                 ment and the Department of Parks & Recreation.             Washington, DC, 1991.
                 Salem, Oregon. March 31, 1989.                             2. Oregon Department of State Police. SJR14
                 2. Bond, Peter. Oregon Department of Parks &               Compliance Report to State Legislature. State
                 Recreation. Personal communication, 10 October             Police General Headquarters, Salem, June 5, 1991.
                 1991.                                                      3. Oregon Ocean Resources Management Task
                 3. Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter660,                Force. The Oregon Ocean Plan. State of Oregon,
                 DivisionI5.                                                Salem, Oregon, 1991.
                 4. Oregon Department of Land Conservation &                4. Oregon Sea Grant. Oregon Sea Grant Program
                 Development. "Analysis Of Coastal Questionnaire            Plan For 1991-93, Volume 2. ORESU-P-91-004.
                 Responses". Salem, Oregon. July 1991.                      Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, May
                 5. _. Field Guide: Oregon's Coastal Resour-                15,1991.
                 ces Management Improvements Sites, 1990/91                 5. Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission.
                 Edition. Salem, Oregon. 1991.                              "Port Recycling Systems". PSMFC, Marine
                 6. Oregon Department of Parks & Recreation.                Habitat Project, Depoe Bay, Oregon, 1990.
                 Oregon's Beaches: A Birthright Preserved. Salem,           6. _. "Net Recycling Program". PSMFC,
                 Oregon. September 1977.                                    Marine Habitat Project, Depoe Bay, Oregon, un-
                 7. Oregon Ocean Resources Management Task                  dated.
                 Force. The Oregon Ocean Plan. Oregon Depart-               SpecidlAz-ea
                 ment of Land Conservation & Development.
                 Salem, Oregon. 1991.                                       Management Planning
                 8. Oregon Revised Statutes. Chapter 390.605 et             1. Oregon Ocean Resources Management Task
                 seq.                                                       Force. The Oregon Ocean Plan. Oregon Depart-
                                                                            merit of Land Conservation and Development.
                 9. Rawlins, Wayne. Memorandum, "Realty Section             Portland, Oregon. January 1991.
                 Biennial Report". Oregon Department of Fish &              2. Oregon Laws of 1989, Chapter 837.
                 Wildlife. Portland, Oregon. 10 September 1991.             3.'Oregon Laws of 1991, Chapter 501.
                 10. Rhodehamel, Ron. Oregon Marine Board. Per-
                 sonal communication, 8 October 1991.                       4. Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 197.
                 11. State ex rel Thornton v. Hay. 254 OR 584; 462          EnezW & Govenment
                 P2d 671 (1969).                                            Facility Siting & Activities
                                                                            1. Blanton, Dale. Department of Land Conserva-




                                                                                                                                 51



 A






                                        Oregon Coastal Program Section 309 Assessment
                                                                                                        13 6668 141  1044133

                 tion & Development. Personal communication. 1          3. Meehan, Tom. Oregon Department of Energy.
                 October 1991.                                          Personal communication, 27September 1991.
                 2. Dorman, White & Company, et al. "Siting             4. Oregon Land Conservation & Development
                 Process For Facilities And Projects Of Regional        Commission. "State Agency Coordination Cer-
                 Or Statewide Significance." Prepared for the           tification Order 91-CERT-750". 29April 199 1.
                 Department of Land Conservation & Develop-
                 ment, Salem, Oregon. July 1991.

















































                 52