[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
N0--rth Inlet=Wi*nyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Final Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Management Plan U.S. Department of Commerce State of South Carolina S.C. Coastal Council National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Belie W. Baruch Institute Ashley Corporate Center National Ocean Service University of Southern Carolina 4130 Faber Place, Suite 300 Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Columbia, S.C. 29208 Charleston. S.C. 29405 Sanctuaries and Reserves Division '4.20235 ow GC 512 @S6 F56 1992 410"41 OF CO 111+1 .1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE OFF CE OF OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT "Nres Of Washlington, D.C. 20235 APR 2 4 1992 MEMORANDUM FOR: DISTRIBUTION FROM: Annie Hillary Acting Chief Atlantic and Great Lakes Region Sanctuaries and Reserves Division SUBJECT: Final Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Management Plan (FEIS/DMP) for Proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Attached for your review is the FEIS/DMP for the proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve in Georgetown, South Carolina. Major concerns expressed at the public hearing and in correspon- dence involved continued public access to the North Inlet portion of the Reserve for fishing, maintenance dredging for commercial shipping purposes, and dredge disposal sites. Appendix M addresses written and oral comments received during the review process. Please provide any comments you may have to Dolores Washington, Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, (202) 606-4122, by May 2, 1992. Attachment Distribution: T. Coxe, OCRM J. Burgess, CPO V. Allin, PCD E. Ozturgut, OME C. Ehler, ORCA M. O'Connell, GCOS D. Cottingham, CSES N. Foster, F/PRl R. Kifer, NMFS, F/SEC8 111 Wd@; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN NORTH INLET/WINYAH BAY NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE APRIL 1992 Prepared by: U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20235 State of South Carolina Belle W. Baruch Institute University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 @J N') DESIGNATIQN:- 'Final Environmental Impact Statement TITLE: Proposed designation of the North Inlet and Mud Bay region of Winyah Bay estuaries as a National Estuarine Research Reserve and preparation of a draft management plan. ABSTRACT: The state of South Carolina proposes the designation of a site in the North Inlet/Winyah Bay estuaries as a component of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System. The core area of the site encompasses 9,000 acres of uplands, wetlands and open waters and a buffer zone of about 80 acres. Federal financial assistance for operations, management, and development are requested by the state of South Carolina. These funds accompanied by the required 30 percent state match will be used for basic program activities, including research and educational projects, and for the preparation of a final management plan for the NI/WB NERR in South Carolina. Appropriate Memorandums of Understanding are included for those portions of the site which are on state government or private property. The proposed reserve will be managed by the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research, the University of South Carolina. Approval of this proposal will allow for the establishment of an estuarine research reserve in South Carolina representing the Subregion of the Carolinian Biogeographic Region. The proposed reserve will be used primarily for research and education purposes, particularly as a tool for improving coastal decision making. No new regulations are proposed as a result of this action. Traditional uses within the proposed reserve boundaries will continue under existing local and state laws and private landowner policies. The educational programs will increase public awareness of estuarine resources and their importance. The research plan will establish a baseline monitoring program for the North Inlet and Winyah Bay region and encourage research projects consistent with the reserve's role as a natural field laboratory. Submit any written comments to the contact identified below. Applicant: South Carolina Coastal Council Ashley Corporate Center 4130 Faber Place Suite 300 Charleston, SC 29405 Contact: Mr. Steven Snyder Applicant: Belle W. Baruch Institute or Marine Biology and Coastal Research University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 Contact: Dr. F. John Vernberg, Project Manager Lead Agency! U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Contact: Ms. Annie Hillary Acting Chief, Atlantic and Great Lakes Region, Sanctuaries and Reserves Division Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE COVER SHEET TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES ACRONYMS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 1 A. National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) 1 1 . Federal Leg is lation/Autho rity 1 2. NERRS Program 1 3. Concept of Biogeographic Zones 2 4. Existing National Estuarine Research Reserves 2 5. NERRS Funding Types and Limits 5 6. Federal Role After Designation 6 B. Proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR 7 1 . Background 7 2. Site Selection Process 13 a. Biogeographical Representation 14 b. Ecosystem Representation 14 C. Ecological Characteristics 14 d. Naturalness 14 e. Research Potential 14 f. Educational Opportunities 14 9. Management Considerations 14 C. Reserve Goals and Management Objectives 17 1. Resource Protection 17 2. Research and Monitoring 18 3. Education, Interpretation, and Recreation 18 4. Facility Development 18 5. Public Access 18 ALTERNATIVES (INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION) 18 A. Preferred Alternative 19 1 General Description and Biogeographic Classification 19 of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR 2. Location and Access 20 3. Boundaries and Acquisition Plan 20 4. Draft Management Plan 22 a. Overall Management and Development Concept 22 b. General Policies 24 C. Administration 25 (1) Administrative Framework 25 (2) Resource Protection: Roles and 30 Responsibilities (3) Research and Monitoring 31 (4) Education 31 (5) Facilities Development 31 (6) Proposed Administration Staff 31 (7) Enabling Agreements 34 (8) Federal Government - NOAA Program 34 Review (9) Proposed Implementation Timetable 35 (10) Public Access 35 (11) General Permits and Licenses 39 d. Resource Protection 39 (1) Rationale and Goals 39 (2) General Policy Areas .40 (3) Management and Administration 41 (4) Habitat Restoration 47 (5) Relationship to Other Program Areas 47 e. Research and Monitoring 48 (1) Rationale and Goals 48 (2) Research and Monitoring Priorities 51 (3) Management and Administration 54 f. Education and Interpretation 58 (1) Goal 58 (2) General Context for Management 59 (3) General Policies 59 (4) Interpretive Themes and Messages 60 (5) Printed and Audiovisual Materials 60 (6) Exhibits, Signs, and Promotional 61 Materials (7) Program Activities and Services 62 (8) Public Access and, Recreation 63 9. Facilities Development and Staff Requirements 64 (1) Facilities 64 (2) Goal 65 (3) Staffing Requirements 65 B. Other Alternatives Considered 66 1. No Action/Status Quo 66 2. Alternative Sites 66 3. Alternative Boundaries 67 a. Inclusion of Debidue Island and the Northern 67 Marsh Region b. Inclusion of-the Upland Forest 67 C. Inclusion of all of Winyah Bay 67 d. Exclusion of Winyah Bay 68 4. Alternative Management Strategies 68 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 69 A. Resources 69 1. Environmental Conditions 69 a. Uniqueness 69 b. Hydrology 69 C. Geology 72 d. Climate 72 2. Living Resources 73 3. Cultural and Historical Resources 73 B. Uses 74 1. Prior 74 2. Existing 74 a. Recreation 74 b. Agricultural and Residential 74 C. Industrial and Port Related 75 d. Research and Education 75 e. Present Land Use 76 3. Future Land and Resource Use 76 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED ACTION 77 A. General 77 B. Specific Impacts 77 1 . Visitor Use 78 2. Construcion 78 3. Litter 78 4. Impacts on the Natural Environment 79 a. General 79 b. Adjacent Uplands 74 C. Adjacent Uplands and Open Water 79 d. Biota 80 e. Water Quality 80 5. Impacts on the Human Environment 81 a. Scientific and Educational 81 b. Traditional Uses 81 C. Employment 82 d. Public Participation 82 e. Fiscal 83 f. Infrastructure: Public Roads and Parking 83 Areas, Potabie Water Supplies, Sewer System, and Energy Supplies 9. Aesthetic 83 h. Cultural Resources 83 i. Public Access 84 C. Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 84 D. Possible Conflicts Between the Proposed Action and 84 the Objectives of Federal, State, Regional, and Local Use Plans, Controls for the Area Concerned V. LIST OF PREPARERS 85 VI. LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS 87 RECEIVING COPIES OF THE FEIS/DMP VII. SELECTED REFERENCES 92 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 . Designated and Proposed National Estuarine Research Reserves 3 2. NI-WB Site 10 3. Location Map for Proposed NERR Sites in South Carolina 16 4. NI/WB NERR Proposed Management Structure 23 5. Belle W. Baruch Foundation Management Areas Appendix A 6. System Model of North Inlet Appendix F-3 7. Dynamics of N and C Exchange Appendix F-3 8. Carbon Budget of NI Estuary Appendix F-4 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 . Implementation: Operation and Facilities 37 2. Implementation: Staff 38 3. Summary of "Networking" Activities 43 4. Activities Regulated Through Direct and/or 45 Consistency Certification by South Carolina Coastal Council 5. State Agency Permits Subject to Coastal Zone 46 Consistency Review by South Carolina Coastal Council ACRONYMS BI Belle W. Baruch institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research DMP Draft Management Plan EPA Environmental Protection Agency FEIS/DMP Final Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Management Plan LTER Long-Term Ecological Research MOU Memorandum of Understanding NERRS National Estuarine Research Reserve System NI/WB NERR North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration OCRM Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (NOAA) ORW Outstanding Resource Waters SCDHEC South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control SCDWMR South Carolina Department of Wildlife and Marine Resources SFH Shellfish Harvesting Waters SRD Sanctuaries and Reserves Division (NOAA) USC The University 'of South Carolina EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 315 of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 established the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (originally called the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program) as a Federal/state cooperative venture. Federal matching funds are available to coastal states to develop and manage a national system of estuarine research reserves which are representative of various regions and estuarine types in the United States. In addition, annual Federal matching funds for research and education projects are available. The goal of the program is to protect areas of representative estuaries, including valuable wetland habitat, for use as natural field laboratories. National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRS) are established to: 1) provide opportunities for long-term estuarine research and monitoring; 2) provide opportunities for estuarine education and interpretation; 3) provide a basis for more informed coastal management decisions; and 4) promote public awareness, understanding and appreciation of estuarine ecosystems and their relationships to the environment as a whole. The National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) has established a classification scheme that reflects differences in regional biogeography and estuarine typology to ensure that established sites are representative and that a variety of ecosystem types are included. The biogeographic classification scheme and estuarine typology system are shown in Appendix D. The North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERRS (NI/WB NERR) is in Northern Carolinas section of the Carolinian Biogeographic Classification Scheme. The North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR is being proposed by the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research, University of South Carolina, a State agency, in cooperation with the South Carolina Coastal Council (SCCC), the state's lead agency in coastal zone management. In 1990 the Governor of South Carolina nominated the site to NOAA and it was approved. The NI/WB NERR encompasses a core area of approximately 9,000 acres of tidally flushed wetland, raparian habitats, and a limited amount of upland habitats (the Marsh Islands and lands associated with the laboratory complex, the Kimbel Living Center and the Clambank Landing area). Portions of the proposed Reserve are owned by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation which was established in perpetuity to preserve and conserve the environmental qualities of their property as well as to preserve its historical and cultural value. The Baruch Institute, USC, through a long-term agreement with the Foundation and signed by the SC Attorney General manages that portion of their lands which are proposed to be part of the Reserve. The Foundation has given their approval for their lands described in this plan to be included in the Reserve. This area is in Georgetown County immediately east of Winyah Bay near Georgetown, SC and south of the Debordieu Colony property located on the i Waccamaw Neck :peninsula. This area was selected after an exhaustive selection process and a series of public meetings. It includes an undisturbed estuary (North Inlet) and an estuary which has been influenced by human activities (Winyah Bay). The Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research, The University of South Carolina, as stated in a MOU with the South Carolina Coastal Council and NOAA, is the lead agency. The purpose of the proposed NI/WB NERR is to establish and manage the areas within the boundaries as natural field laboratories and to develop a coordinated program of research and education for the reserve. Comparative ecosystem studies involving an undisturbed system and a man-influenced estuary will provide valuable scientific insights in the ecological processes controlling estuaries. Under the preferred alternative, the SC Coastal Council designated the Baruch Institute of the University of South Carolina (a state agency) to be the lead agency operating the Reserve in cooperation with the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, neighboring landowners, private citizens, state and Federal agencies, and advisory committees. Proposed reserve staff will initially include a Reserve Manager, Research/Resource Coordinator, Education Coordinator, and Secretary/Data Processor. The Reserve Manager will be the principal administrator of the Reserve and will be responsible for ensuring that the policies contained in the Reserve Management Plan are followed. This person will be employed and supervised by the Director of the Baruch Institute, USC. The Research/Resource Coordinator will develop and implement a resource assessment program, including long-term monitoring and research activities. The Education Coordinator will develop and coordinate education program activities that are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Reserve and the NERRS Network. The secretary/data processor will assist the program staff by providing secretarial service and also assisting with data processing. Research and education programs will gather and make available information necessary to improve understanding, appreciation, and management of the reserve site and national research and management issues. The NI/WB Reserve activities will augment, not replace, activities of other government agencies and the site owners. Traditional uses of the sites will continue and current site access policies will be enforced to protect the integrity of the reserve. Facilities will be developed as necessary to aid in research and education. In addition to the preferred alternative, four other alternatives are discussed including no action/status quo, alternative sites, alternative boundaries, and alternative management strategies. Under the no action/status quo alternative, the designation of this site would not be pursued, and there would be no change in the current management direction or level of management activity. Several other sites were considered early in the site selection process. However, they were rejected in favor of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay site because no alternative site in this section of the ii Carolinian Biogeographic Classification Scheme has the unique characteristics of the proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay site. Alternative boundaries were considered and discarded for scientific, ownership, or management reasons. Three alternative management strategies were considered but they proved to be less efficient from a management viewpoint and less scientifically productive. Valuable natural resources will be protected for lo ng-term research and education by designation of the reserve. Natural resources affected by the proposed action include diverse, highly productive estuarine system (North Inlet) made up of wetlands and open water. The comparison of responses of an undisturbed estuary (North Inlet) with those responses of an estuarine system influenced by human activities (Winyah Bay) will provide useful data on resource utilization, protection, and restoration. In addition to the natural resources, the proposed Reserve is endowed with nearby cultural reservoirs, including important historical and archaeological sites located on adjacent highlands. Traditional public uses of the proposed site will not be altered. These uses include boating, fishing, observation of wildlife, swimming and recreational harvesting of oysters and clams as permitted by state laws. Traditional uses of Winyah Bay permitted by state and Federal agencies will continue, including those associated with existing shipping channels. The environmental consequences of the proposed action are strongly positive, the primary impact will be long-term protection of the natural resources. No resources will be irreversibly or irretrievably lost. On the contrary, these precious resources will be provided with long-term protection and will serve both now and in the future as sites for important estuarine research and education. The proposed action is in accordance with all relevant state, local and Federal regulations and is consistent with the objectives of Federal, state, regional and local land use plans, policies and controls for the areas concerned. PURPOSE-0:17 AND NEED FOR ACTION A. National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) 1 . Federal Legislation/Authorit In response to intense pressures on the coastal resources of the United States, Congress enacted the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). The Act was signed into law in 1972, and amended in 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1980, 1986, and 1990. The CZMA authorized a Federal grant-in-aid and assistance program to be administered by the Secretary of Commerce, who in turn delegated this responsibility to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management. The Act and its amendments affirm a national interest in the effective protection and careful development of the coastal zone by providing financial and technical assistance to U.S. coastal states and territories to voluntarily develop and implement coastal zone management programs. The Act established a variety of grant-in-aid programs to coastal states for purposes of: 0 Developing coastal zone management programs. (Sec. 305) 0 Implementing, administering, and funding coastal management programs that receive Federal approval. (Sec. 306) 0 Establishing and funding coastal zone enhancement objectives. (Sec. 309) 0 Conducting research, study and training programs to provide scientific and technical support to state coastal zone management programs. (Sec. 310) 0 Establishing national estuarine research reserves. Funds are available to assist in the acquisition, development, -and operation of reserves, and to support educational or interpretive activities and research and monitoring programs. (Sec. 315) 2. NERRS Program Recognizing the need to address threats to the country's important and sensitive estuarine areas, Congress established the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program as Section 315 of the CZMA. (See Appendix C) The reauthorization of the CZMA in 1986 included an amendment changing the name of the program to the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, reflecting a stronger emphasis on research. What were formerly "sanctuaries" are now called "research reserves." The goal of the program is to create a system of reserves that represents distinct estuarine ecosystems found:nat ionally and to manage these areas for long-term research and education. Although the program is national in scope, individual states are responsible for implementing and administering their own programs. The CZMA was reauthorized in 1990. Regulations revised the process for designation of research reserves. Greater emphasis is placed on the use of reserves to address national estuarine research and management issues, and to make maximum use of the System for research purposes through coordination with NOAA and other Federal and state agencies which are sponsoring estuarine research. Other activities were emphasized: (a) providing financial assistance to states to enhance public awareness and understanding of estuarine areas; (b) providing new guidance for delineating reserve boundaries and new procedures for arriving at the most effective and least costly approach to acquisition of land; and (c) clarifying the amount of financial assistance authorized for each national estuarine reserve and criteria for withdrawing the designation of a reserve. Coordination of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) is provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), specifically the Sanctuaries and Reserves Division (SRD). In this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)/Draft Management Plan (DMP), the coordinating entity will be referred to simply as NOAA, with the understanding that SRD is actually the responsible division within NOAA. Regulations revising the existing rules for the NERRS were proposed in Vol. 55, No. 141, pp 29942-29962 of the Federal Register in July 23, 1990. This DMP is consistent with these proposed regulations. 3. Concept of Biogeogral2hic Zones To ensure that the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) includes sites that adequately represent regional and ecological differences, the NERRS regulations establish a biogeographical classification scheme that reflects regional differences in biogeography and an estuarine typology system which includes a variety of ecosystem types. (See Appendix C for a description of the biogeographic regions of the United States.). Upon completion, the NERRS will contain representation of the 27 biogeographic regions of the Nation's coastal zone. The North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (NI/WB NERR) lies in the Northern Carolinas sub-region of the Carolinian biogeographic region. 4. Existing National Estuarine Research Reserves At the present time, nineteen reserve sites have been designated across the country (Figure 1). Designated sites are: 2 The Naflonal Estuarine Research Reserve System C (D PadillaBay.WA St. Lawrence Rive Basin, NY (D CL Old Woman Creek, C1 South Slough. OR Wells, ME Great Bay NH 0 Waquoit MA 0 arraQapse y, RI (D San Francisco H I on River Y 0- Bay, CA flica River, NJ z a Chesapeake Bay, MD 0 :3 Elkhotn Slough, CA Ches,apeake Bay, VA 0 M North Carolina co C: Tijuana River, CA7 North Inlet, SC :3 ACE Basin, SC (D Sapelo Island, GA x (D (n (D East Coast, FL Weeks Say, AL 0 Apalachicola Bay, FL Waimanu Valley, HI Rookery Say, FL Cn CD *Jobos Say, PR :z M ""A" CA "6M tt N Research Reserve Bio-geograr)hic Classification Wells Acadian York County, Maine Great Bay Acadian Great Bay, New Hampshire Waquoit Bay Virginian Mashpee and Falmouth, Massachusetts Narragansett Bay Virginian Newport County, Rhode Island Hudson River (4 components) Virginian Stockport Flats, Tivoli Bays, Iona Island, Piermont Marsh Hudson River, New York Chesapeake Bay, Maryland Virginian (3 components) Anne Arundel, Harford, Prince Georges, and Somerset Counties Chesapeake Bay, Virginia, Virginian (4 components) York, Gloucester, James City, and King William Counties North Carolina (4 components) Virg inian/Carol inian Brunswick, Carteret, Currituck and New Hanover Counties Sapelo Island Carolinian McIntosh County, Georgia Rookery Bay West Indian Collier County, Florida Jobos Bay West Indian Guayama, Puerto Rico Apalachicola River/Bay Louisianan Franklin County, Florida 4 Weeks Bay Louisianan Baldwin County, Alabama Tijuana River Californian San Diego County, California Elkhorn Slough Californian Monterey County, California South Slough Columbi an Coos Bay, Oregon Padilla Bay Columbian Skagit County, Washington Old Woman Creek Great Lakes Erie County, Ohio Waimanu Valley Insular Island of Hawaii, Hawaii In addition, California-San Francisco Bay (San Francisco Bay), New York-St. Lawrence River Basin (Acadian), Delaware (Virginian), South Carolina (Carolinian), East Coast, Florida (Carolinian) have proposed sites to be included as National Estuarine Research Reserves and are in the process of producing environmental impact statements and management plans. 5. NERRS Funding Types and Limits (according to Interim Final regulations 15 CFR Cart 921) Federal funding for a NERR is described in detail below. Briefly, five categories of Federal awards are available from NOAA: predesignation awards; acquisition and development awards; operation and management awards; research and monitoring awards; and education and interpretation awards. The amount of Federal financial assistance provided may vary according to program areas; most of the Federal funds must be matched by the state or other entities. Although Federal funding has and will be used for initial operation and staffing of the NI/WB NERR, the reserve is a state program and must ultimately be funded by the state. At a minimum, long-term funds must be provided to help cover general operating expenses and the salaries of the reserve manager and support staff. The reserve staff will work cooperatively with other agencies to pool resources. Efforts will also be made to obtain outside grants and other sources of program revenue. 5 These include the- creation of support groups and- endowment funds for the program. Support groups have been successfully utilized at other Reserves and may be used as models (e.g. the Friends of the Reserve at the Apalachicola Reserve in Florida, the Elkhorn Slough Foundation at the Elkhorn Slough Reserve in California, and Friends of Jug Bay at JBWS in Maryland). Predesignation awards are available for site selection and post site selection. Acquisition and development awards are available prior to reserve designation for acquiring interest in land and water areas, performing minor construction, preparing plans and specifications, developing the final management plan, and hiring necessary staff. After a reserve receives Federal designation, a supplemental acquisition and development award is available for acquisition of additional property interests, construction of research and education facilities, and restoration projects. Operation and management awards are available to manage the reserve and operate programs detailed in the management plan. The Federal portion of operation and management awards may be used for the support of staff positions. Research and monitoring awards are available on a competitive basis to conduct estuarine research and monitoring within the NERR. Any coastal state or qualified public or private person may compete for these awards which are available annually. Financial assistance awards are available for conducting educational and interpretive activities within the NERR. These are available annually on a competitive basis to any coastal state entity. More detailed information on NOAA funding can be found in the Federal Register 15 CFR Part 921 (Appendix C), As CZMA regulations are amended, funding limits and types may change. 6. Federal Role in 1he Research Reserve After Designation According to current, Interim Final NERRS regulations, after designation, NOAA will conduct periodic performance evaluations of a reserve at least once every three years. Evaluations may be conducted more frequently as determined necessary by NOAA. These evaluations are required by Sections 312 and 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and will follow the evaluations procedures described in Section 312. Evaluations may assess all aspects of reserve operation and management, or they may focus on selected issues. Evaluations may also examine whether a reserve is in compliance with NERR designation regulations, and particularly whether the operations and management of the reserve are consistent with and further the mission and goals of the NERRS. 6 Federal officials will conduct the performance evaluations. When necessary, NOAA may request Federal and non-Federal experts to participate in the evaluations. Performance evaluations will be conducted in accordance with procedural and public participation provisions of CZMA regulations. The state must submit a report on operation and management of the reserve to NOAA.during the last year.of Federal operation and management funds and annually thereafter. If performance evaluations reveal that the operation and management of the reserve is deficient or the research is inconsistent with the Reserve Guidelines, the eligibility of the reserve for Federal financial assistance may be suspended until the situation is remedied. If major deficiencies are not remedied within a reasonable amount of time, NOAA may initiate a process to withdraw designation of the reserve. B. The Proposed NI/WB NERR The North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR is being proposed by the Baruch Institute of the University of South Carolina (a state agency) in cooperation with the SCCC, the state's lead agency in coastal zone management. The North Inlet/Winyah Bay ecosystems, located near Georgetown, SC, have been recognized at the state and national level as sites of particular interest for comparative ecological studies. The North Inlet estuary, an ecosystem which is relatively unperturbed by humans, has been the site of intensive study for 20 years. The Institute of Ecology and the National Science Foundation have given this area a rating of 98% for site quality and the SC Department of Health and Environmental Control designated North Inlet as an Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), an area possessing unique ecological qualities. For 11 years, this site has served as the only estuarine site in a network of 18 sites supported by the National Science Foundation for long-term ecological research. In contrast, the nearby Winyah Bay is an estuary which has been subjected to the influence of human activities. It is the connection to the sea of one of the largest watersheds on the eastcoast south of Chesapeake Bay. This proposed NERRS is viewed as an excellent site to provide a long-term database for valuable management of coastal resources. Early in the site selection process, other areas (Santee Bay and Port Royal 'Sound) were considered as possible NERR sites but were eliminated. The Site Selection Committee felt that the comparative study of an undisturbed and a disturbed estuary would provide a unique potential for research and education and would augment the variety of estuarine systems currently part of the'NERRS system. The South Carolina Attorney General's Office has affirmed that the State has adequate protective control over the Reserve's resources (see Appendix K). 7 Background This proposed management plan has been developed according to NOAA regulations (15 CFR Part 912) given in Appendix C, using information derived from research and public input. It is consistent with the Congressional in *tent of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS); the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce-State of South Carolina Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) concerningthe North Inlet-Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Site (NI/WB NERRS); and the provisions of the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. The purpose of this proposed management plan is to inform interested parties about the reserve and activities that will be conducted. The draft management plan establishes goals, program and facility needs, and frameworks, policies, and timetables to meet the goals. The plan is flexible and allows for review to make improvements in the program. Though it is long-term in scope, the plan will be reviewed by NOAA every two years and revised every five years. The NI/WB NERR encompasses a core area of approximately 9,000 acres of tidally flushed wetlands, riparian habitats, portions of open water of North Inlet Estuary and Winyah Bay, a limited amount of upland habitats (the Marsh Islands and lands associated with the laboratory complex, the Kimbel Living Center and the Clambank Landing area). This area is in Georgetown County immediately east of Winyah Bay near Georgetown, SC, and south of the Debordieu Colony property located on the Waccamaw Neck peninsula (Figure 2). Surrounding this core area is a buffer zone (about 80 acres) consisting of (a) the ecotone region of transitional vegetation between the dominant marsh grasses and the forest vegetation and (b) State controlled waters. The core area of the Reserve consists of lands owned by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, known as the Hobcaw Barony, and state-owned navigable waters. The Belle W. Baruch Foundation has been established in perpetuity to preserve and conserve the ecological and environmental qualities of Hobcaw Barony as well as to preserve its historical value. This site, whose goals and objectives are consistent with those of the NERR program, was nominated to be a NERR site for the following major reasons: I I 1. The program of the Baruch Institute since it began in 1969 is well known for its studies on long-term ecological research--for the past 12 years the National Science Foundation has funded the Baruch Institute program as part of the long-term ecological research network of national sites. In addition a well-established educational program exists. A continuing education program associated with both the Foundation's Nature Center and USC involved approximately 29,000 persons in 1990 8 Figure 2. NI-WB Site 79*15' 79*10' Georgetown A 2- 2"2 Debidue 3 13 Island Hobcaw Barony 33-20- E n North Inle t 4- G H Mud North Island Tinyah N Bay Kj J: Atlantic Ocean Scale I : 27095 33*15' Fig. 2. Map of proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERRS and surrounding area. Marshlands are shaded. Waterways, lands, and sites referenced in the text are designated as follows: 1 Debidue Creek A Hobcaw entrance, Bellefield Nature F Frazier Point 2 Bass Hole Bay Center, and Kimbel Living and G Ranger Island Learning Center 3 Cooks Creek E Field Laboratory complex H 1,000 Acre Rice Field 4 Jones Creek C Clarnbank Landing I Marsh Islands 5 Haulover Creek D Rabbit Island i Malady Bush Island - - shipping channel E Hare Island K Pumpkinseed Island 9 and the Marine Science Program (BS, MS, Ph.D.) is ranked fourth in the country. In addition, at the USC field laboratory exists research and teaching facilities and the Kimbel Living Center, consisting of dormitories and a meeting center. 2. The site, an excellent example of an undeveloped estuary (North Inlet) being located next to a highly developed estuary (Winyah Bay), allows comparative estuarine studies on how natural and disturbed estuarine ecosystems function. Results of these studies will be applicable when addressing national management questions, a new focus of the 1990 reauthorization. 3. The Belle W. Baruch Foundation was established in 1964 "for the purposes of teaching and/or research in forestry, marine biology, and the care and propagation of wildlife and flora and fauna in South Carolina, in connection with colleges and/or universities in the State of South Carolina". A Tripartite Agreement between the Foundation, the University of South Carolina, and Clemson University and approved by the South Carolina Attorney General in 1975 established a formal long-term agreement for management of the Hobcaw Barony and states that its purpose and programs are to preserve and conserve the ecological and environmental qualities of its property and to preserve its historical value (see Appendix A for a copy of this agreement). As part of this agreement, specific regions of Hobcaw Barony were delineated for each university to manage and use in conjunction with the Foundation (map of areas included in Appendix A). The Baruch Institute of the University of South Carolina (a state agency) is responsible for the marsh-marine portion on the Hobcaw Barony and it is these lands which form part of the Reserve. The Trustees discussed the NERR Program at various meetings beginning in 1988 and in detail at their December 7, 1990 meeting. They approved by mail vote the request that the Baruch Institute, USC enter into an agreement with the SC Coastal Council and NOAA to establish the North Inlet/Winyah Bay Reserve in accordance with NOAA regulations. The Tripartite Agreement is to be renewed in the year 2000 and no significant changes are anticipated. In keeping with the spirit of the Tripartite Agreement both universities and the Foundation have made long-term commitments to the existing programs. For example, with the approval of the Trustees, Clemson University has invested funds in staff to undertake long-term projects and to construct a laboratory facility. Also, the University of South Carolina has expended $3.2 million for dormitory-meeting center/laboratory complex and is funding an extensive teaching and long-term research program that is heavily dependent on the availability of Hobcaw Barony. Since the Foundation has allowed certain of their lands which the Baruch Institute manages for estuarine research and teaching to be included in the Reserve, no funds are requested from NOAA for land acquisition, an action consistent with the new 1990 regulations. 10 4. The environmental integrity is assured by existing Federal and State legislation (see section 11 A 4 d (3) for more details). The regions of Hobcaw Barony which are proposed for inclusion on the Reserve were nominated in 1989 as a National Estuarine Research Reserve in accordance with Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. The Research Reserve Site nomination serves to bring together a complex of state and privately owned areas in Georgetown County under a coordinated resource. management framework. National Estuarine Research Reserve Sites are areas designated for long-term research and education through a joint Federal-state effort and allows for continuation of traditional uses as provided by state and Federal law (see Section III B). A primary objective of these areas is to provide to the state, region and nation information that is useful for decision-making, with respect to the development and/or protection of the coast and associated resources. The NI/WB NERR is one of two proposed reserves in South Carolina, the other being the ACE River Basin south of Charleston. General procedures for selecting, nominating, and administering these sites are presented in the National Estuarine Research Regulations (15 CFR Part 921, July 23, 1990, see Appendix C). The preparation of a management plan is a key requirement of these regulations and a means of ensuring that planned activities and development within a reserve conform to the original intent of the program. As the southernmost estuarine systems in the Northern Carolinas section of the Carolinian Biogeographic Classification Scheme, the NI/WI3 NERRS includes one of the few remaining examples of a relatively undisturbed estuary (North Inlet) and a portion of a large, man-influenced estuary (Winyah Bay). Having portions of these two very distinct estuarine systems as part of the reserve allows for the development of research and educational programs comparing a wide spectrum of estuarine uses and ecological processes, from pristine to developed regions. In contrast to North Inlet, Winyah Bay has undergone substantial changes in the past, including episodes of increased or decreased freshwater flow, increased sedimentation, and measurable deterioration of water quality. These changes and the unique character of the freshwater, brackish, and high salinity wetlands provide a basis for research which will contribute to our understanding the ecology of a full range of diverse southeastern estuarine systems. The plan provides the basis for various government agencies, universities, industry representatives, and private groups of concerned citizens to make recommendations about the protection and careful use of the estuaries. The management plan complements existing SC Coastal Council policies and is consistent with state and Federal jurisdiction over tidal waters within the Reserve, and the objectives and regulations established by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation for the marshlands they own which are included in the Reserve. It includes general policies 11 concerning resources and resource-use that will guide the NI/WB NERRS management team over the next five to ten years. Specific actions are also described for resource protection, research, education, and facility development. The successful implementation of this plan depends heavily on cooperation and coordination among the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, The University of South Carolina, the South Carolina Coastal Council and other relevant state and Federal agencies. An Advisory Committee, consisting of representatives from government agencies, the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, The University of South Carolina, and the local community, will advise the Reserve staff. In addition, the Reserve staff will hold periodic public forums on the status of the Reserve. Variable funding for staff and program development may affect specific aspects of Reserve management as described in this plan and the scale of programs may have to be adjusted based on unforeseeable factors. Nonetheless, the overall goals and management objectives of this plan will not be affected by variable funding. 2. Site Selection Process On October 29, 1988, the S.C. NERRS Site Selection Advisory Committee was appointed by Senator John C. Hayes, 111, Chairman of the SCCC. The purpose of the committee was to consider potential NERR sites in South Carolina and to make a recommendation to the SCCC of one or more sites for inclusion in the national system. Staff of the SCCC served as staff to the Committee. At an organizational meeting on November 14, 1988, the committee appointed two subcommittees to study two potential sites - the ACE Basin, which had been recommended by Governor Carroll Campbell, and the North Inlet-Winyah Bay site, an area which had been considered in the past as a potential reserve site. At the next meeting on February 6, 1989, both sub-committees gave reports on their respective sites. The sub-committee reports indicated both sites appeared to meet criteria for the NERRS Program and public comments should be sought. The Site Selection Advisory Committee voted to approve the sub-committees' reports for both the ACE Basin and North Inlet-Winyah Bay sites and moved to proceed with obtaining public comment. A public hearing on the NI/WB site was held on May 17, 1989, in Georgetown, South Carolina. Concern was expressed about a possible impact on the shipping industry as well as public access. On July 17, 1989, the Site Selection Committee voted unanimously to recommend to the SCCC that both sites be nominated for inclusion in the NERRS. The committee also recommended that all public concerns must be thoroughly addressed during development of a management plan. At its 12 meeting of July 21, 1989, the SCCC, on recommendation of the site selection committee, approved the ACE Basin site and the North Inlet/Winyah Bay site for nomination to NERRS. Upon this decision, Council staff, in conjunction with staff from the South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department and Belle W. Baruch Institute, began preparation of the nomination package for submittal to NOAA under signature of Governor Campbell. On January 24, 1990, Governor Carroll Campbell nominated the ACE Basin and the North Inlet/Winyah Bay as separate Reserves because each site is located in a different biogeographic region (Appendix G and Figure 3). These two areas represent different zones of Biogeographic Classification Scheme: NI/WI3 site is in the Northern Carolinian Province and the ACE Basin site the South Atlantic portion of,this province. The sites differ in their ecology and habitat types. Nomination of these sites was made only after a thorough review of site evaluation criteria and the input of coastal scientists, state and local officials, affected landowners and the general public. Site selection criteria included: a. Biogeographical Regresentatio - whether the site represents the ecological conditions of the biogeographic zone of the Carolinian-South Atlantic Sub-Region in which it is found, fills a void in biogeographic representation in the state of S.C. and does not duplicate biogeographic representation in the Region; b. Ecosystem Representation - whether the site encompasses an entire ecological unit, represents a'significant component of the coastal ecosystem in light of the types of geomorphic features and biotic communities which are found in the state's coastal zone, fills a void in ecosystem representation in the state, and does not duplicate ecosystem representation in the Region; C. Ecological Characteristics - whether the area's ecological characteristics contribute substantially to the quality of the estuarine environment through its biological productivity, diversity of flora and fauna, and other demonstrated ecological values and functions; d. Naturalness - whether the site is relatively unaffected by past and present human activities and approximates a natural ecological unit where ecosystem processes can be studied in an undisturbed setting; e. Research Potential - whether the site provides a natural field laboratory, has a history of research use or is desirable for use as a research site, and is important for addressing fundamental ecological questions and local coastal resource problems; 13 Educational Opportunities - whether the site is accessible and provides opportunities for educational and interpretive programs which are compatible with the research reserve character as a natural field laboratory; and 9. Management Considerations - whether the site available for incorporation into the NERRS can be protected under some type of formal mechanism (long-term management agreement, MOU), is of adequate size to assure effective protection from activities outside its boundaries, and will provide a stable environment for research and educational activities. NOAA approved the site nomination on March 27, 1990 (Appendix H). This approval moved the Baruch Institute into the next phase of the designation process for the NI/WB NERR; preparation of this FEIS and final management plan (FMP). NOAA awarded SCCC $50,000 in Federal pre-designation funds to complete the DEIS/DMP and site characterization for the NI/WB site. The state is providing the required match through the Baruch Institute and SCCC. On November 20, 1991, a public hearing to review the DEIS/DMP was held. Comments at this meeting and subsequent written comments were addressed in the HIS distributed in April, 1992. 14 Figure 3. Location Map for Proposed NERR Sites in South Carolina C'%'OAS-,AL ZONE NCR 7H INLE CHARLESTON A SH.--P C 0 - C CMBA HZE- ED IS 70 (A d E) SI TE 40 so SCALE' J"=4C MILIS N Figure 3. Location 4ap for ?roposed NERRS Sites in South Carolina. 15 C. Reserve Goals and Management Objectives The purpose of the NI/WI3 NERR is to establish and operate a Reserve consisting of two estuaries which represent the diversity of coastal ecosystems found within the region: an undeveloped high salinity estuary and a human-influenced, large salt-wedge estuary. This National Estuarine Research Reserve will be managed by the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research of The University of South Carolina (a state agency) in agreement with the MOU between NOAA, the South Carolina Coastal Council and the Baruch Institute (see Appendix B). Although the Baruch Institute, USC will be the lead agency, it will work closely with the SC Coastal Council and NOAA. Within the areas owned by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, only those activities which are consistent with the objectives of the Foundation, the Reserve Program and state and Federal regulations and approved by the Foundation will be permitted (see Section 11 A for details). NI/WB NERR will be managed to meet specific goals and objectives. The goals are long-term and somewhat open-ended, focusing on desired conditions rather than specific actions; the objectives are short-term, measurable steps that can be taken to fulfill the goals. The various activities and programs recommended for implementation under this plan are aimed at achieving the objectives and thereby fulfilling the goals. Each of the following four programs and activities are discussed in greater detail in Section 11. 1. Resource Protection Program This program is to protect the natural status of the ecosystem of the Reserve from disruptive activities. The site will be managed to afford the maximum protection of this environmental integrity to achieve the goals described in this management plan. The SC Coastal Council is responsible under Act 123 (Coastal Zone Management Act) of the 1977 South Carolina General Assembly to protect and improve coastal tidelands and wetlands. The entire core area of the NI/WB NERR, with the exception of the high ground portion of the few scatter islands located in Winyah Bay proper, owned by the Baruch Foundation, is under the protection of the SC Coastal Council according to authority under the CZMA (see Section 11 A for details of management program). The lands of the Baruch Foundation to be included in the NERR have been set aside in perpetuity for conservation and the study of marine biology and forestry. The Baruch Institute has a long-term agreement with the Foundation to manage the lands to be included in the NERR (see Appendix A). The Foundation provides security for the protection of their resources. 17 2. Research and Monitoring Program The Research and Monitoring Program will conduct comparative research on an undisturbed estuary (North Inlet) and a man-influenced estuary (Winyah Bay) in order to achieve an understanding of the entire estuarine system and its watershed. Research results will provide a scientific basis for making decisions about coastal zone management. Various environmental parameters wilf be monitored on, a long-term basis to detect natural interannual variation. 3. Education, Interpretation and Recreation This program is to enhance public awareness, understanding, and wise use of estuarine resources in the North Inlet and Winyah Bay estuaries. In addition, this program will provide for traditional uses of Reserve as provided by state and Federal laws. 4. Eacility Development This program is to provide the necessary facilities for research and educational activities. 5. Public Access This program is to provide public access following existing practices and NERRS regulations. NERRS regulations require that reserves shall be open to the public to the extent permitted under State and Federal law. Public access may be restricted to certain areas within a research reserve. The Reserve policy will continue the current practice that the public has access to the North Inlet and Winyah Bay portions of the Reserve by boat, including power boats. According to Federal and State laws, no tidal waters can be restricted to public access. Currently, public access to the uplands portions of the property, including areas designated to be included in the Reserve boundaries is restricted. However, authorized individuals involved in approved projects utilizing the resources of the Reserve can gain access to the upland laboratory area by entering through an electrically controlled gate near U.S. 17. Other members of the public will be welcomed at the Nature Center and will be provided access to the uplands through scheduled tours of the Reserve. For further details of this program see IlAa 4c (10) and IV 5B i. 11. Alternatives (including the Proposed Action) The action under consideration by NOAA is a proposal from the State of South Carolina to establish a NERR in the North Inlet/Winyah Bay region of Georgetown County. 18 This section considers a number of reasonable alternatives which were analyzed during development of this document. The "preferred alternative" is the one the Baruch Institute believes would fulfill its mission and responsibilities in the North Inlet/Winyah Bay estuarine systems. It has been developed in detail as the proposed management plan, giving consideration to economic, environmental, traditional uses and other factors. The "no action" alternative proposes that the NI/WB site not be designated as a NERR and there is no change from current management direction or level of management intensity. Other alternatives discussed include boundary modifications and different management options. A. Preferred Alternative 1 . General Description and Blo-agoarnhic Classification of.the North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR The proposed NI/WB NERR is the southernmost estuarine system in the Northern Carolinas section of the Carolinian Biogeographic Classification Scheme. It is unique in a local, regional, and national context. It consists of parts of two estuarine systems, an undisturbed estuary (North Inlet) and portions of an estuary which has been influenced by human activities (Winyah Bay). The North Inlet Estuary represents a discrete, high salinity estuarine system that is surrounded almost entirely (90%) by highlands owned by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation. The wetland portion of the estuary is managed by the Baruch Institute, University of South Carolina, a state agency, and the State of South Carolina. The remaining highlands that are part of the Debordieu Colony, an exclusive re Aential development, and North Island, owned by the Yawkey Foundation and managed by the SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, do not border on the core region of the reserve. Winyah Bay is one of the major estuarine ecosystems in the southeastern United States. The entire Winyah Bay watershed is approximately 18,000 square miles. Only the Mud Bay region of Winyah Bay, which interconnects with North Inlet estuary, is included as part of the reserve. The North Inlet system offers outstanding examples of coastal wetland habitats that have been subjected to a minimum of human disturbances. In contrast, the neighboring Winyah Bay has been subjected to various industrial, residential, commercial, shipping, and dredging activities in addition to receiving drainage waters from vast regions of North and South Carolina. Together these two estuaries present an excellent opportunity to compare and contrast ecosystem responses of an undisturbed estuary with those of a disturbed system. Differences in the salinity regimes and associated flora and fauna between the North Inlet Estuary and sections of Winyah Bay also provide opportunities to conduct comparative research regarding ecosystem structure and fisheries habitat utilization. 19 2. location and Access The proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay site, consisting of a core area and a buffer zone, is located in Georgetown County, SC. The North Inlet Estuary portion of the Reserve is a semi-enclosed body of water surrounded by terrestrial areas (Waccamaw Neck, North Island, and Debidue Island), with a major aquatic connection to the Atlantic Ocean and minor connections to Winyah Bay. Other areas in the Reserve include portions of the wetlands bordering Winyah Bay on the southern side of Waccamaw Neck, including the 1000 acre Rice Field, and the Marsh Islands, Malady Bush Island, Pumpkinseed Island, and Ranger Islands. Access to the Reserve by land is from highway US 17 about 1 mile north of Georgetown. Immediately off the highway is the Nature Center of the Baruch Foundation and the USC Kimbel Living Center. An electric gate near the Nature Center limits entrance to the main part of the Hobcaw Barony without authorization. Research investigators and official visitors utilizing the Reserve facilities will be permitted entrance. The research facilities are located approximately 2 miles from the entrance gate. Hobcaw Barony is approximately 30 miles south of Myrtle Beach and 50 miles north of Charleston. Major airlines service both cities. 3. Boundaries and Acguisition Plan Boundaries for a NERR site must include "an adequate portion of the land and water areas of the natural system to approximate an ecological unit and to ensure effective conservation" (Federal Register, Vol. 53, No. 209, Section 921.11). These areas must be discrete enough to be effectively managed, but large enough to make long-term research possible. To help focus management efforts, site boundaries encompass two zones; key land and water areas (core areas) and buffer zones. NOAA's Guidelines for Establishing Proposed Boundaries for National Estuarine Reserves define core areas as areas which contain "critical estuarine ecological units for research purposes, encompassing a full range of significant physical, chemical and biological factors contributing to the diversity of fauna, flora and natural processes occurring within the estuary." The core area is "so vital to the functioning of the estuarine ecosystem that it must be under state control sufficient to ensure the long term viability of the reserve for research on natural estuarine processes. [These areas] should encompass resources that are representative of the total ecosystem which, if compromised, could endanger the research objectives of the reserve." A buffer zone is defined as an "area adjacent to or surrounding the core and on which the integrity of the core depends. This area protects the core and provides additional protection for estuarine dependent species." It may include an area for research and education facilities. 20 Site surveys have been conducted to establish proposed boundaries for the NI/WB site. The original boundary lines as described in the nomination document have been changed based on recommendations made by: advisory committee, NOAA, site property owners, and through, public comments. Management and acquisition strategies, including an MOU with the SC Coastal Council and Tripartite Agreement with the Baruch Foundation, establish adequate state control to provide long-term protection for reserve resources within these boundaries. No expenditure of Federal and state funds will be required for acquisition. No condemnation procedures will be used. The North Inlet - Winyah Bay Site boundaries are indicated on Figure 2. The northern boundary of the North Inlet Estuary portion of the Reserve begins in the northwest at the upper edge of the marsh abutting the uplands of the property of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation immediately west of the confluence of Bass Hole Bay and Debidue Creek. From this point the northern boundary is the Debidue Creek east to where Cooks Creek enters Debidue Creek, then the boundary line extends east to Debidue Island. The eastern border extends southward along Debidue Island to North Inlet, then continues down Jones Creek to Haulover Creek where the boundary line follows Haulover Creek to Mud Bay. The boundary line then extends southward and east of the marsh land into Mud Bay past Pumpkinseed Island to a point 150 yards north of the existing shipping channel. The southern boundary extends westward from this point, paralleling a line which crosses the southern end of the island complex of Malady Bush Island-Marsh Islands and Ranger Island at the mean low water mark, a line north of the existing shipping channel. West of Ranger Island the boundary line continues north to Frazier Point The landward boundary on the North Inlet segment of the reserve is the uppermost reaches of existing Spartina alterniflora and includes the highlands surrounding the Baruch Institute, USC, laboratory complex and the Clambank Landing portions of Goat Island - The landward boundary on the Mud Bay segment of Winyah Bay is the dominant wetlands vegetation. In addition the uplands associated with the Kimbel Living Center and managed by the Baruch Institute are part of the reserve. It is estimated that the core area occupies approximately 9,000 acres. The buffer zone between the core area of wetlands and the upland forested ecosystem is that ecotone region of transitional vegetation (approximately 50 m wide, approximately 80 acres) between the dominant marsh grasses and the forest vegetation. Portions of Debidue Island, marshlands immediately adjacent to the northern boundary line, the waters of the Atlantic Ocean adjacent to the mouth of North Inlet, North Island (a wildlife refuge owned by the Yawkey Foundation) which is south of North Inlet and east of south Jones Creek, and the waters of Winyah Bay 21 north of the ship channel form the outer boundary of the buffer zone. These waters are subject to state and Federal environmental protection laws and regulations. Aquatic areas within the Reserve can be reached by boat via tidal waters which are part of the public domain. No acquisition of land is being proposed at present. However, if additional parcels are identified that are essential for an expanded research program, it would be possible to adjust the Reserve's priorities to consider adding to the Reserve as required by NOAA regulations. Through a long-term agreement with the Baruch Foundation, the Baruch Institute (a state agency) manages the portion of the Foundation's lands to be included in the reserve and the State owns the remaining areas of the reserve. The Trustees of the Baruch Foundation have approved the Institute's participation in the NERRS program by letter vote after presentation of the Draft Management Plan at their December 7, 1990 meeting. This approval is in accordance with the Tripartite Agreement. In allowing us to participate in this program, they understand the long-term commitment to the NERRS program which is consistent with the Foundation goal of establishing their marshlands in perpetuity for marine studies. 4. Draft Manaaement Plan a. Overall Management and Develol2ment Concegt Management of the North Inlet-Winyah Bay Reserve involves the following functions: administration; resource protection; research, monitoring; education; and facilities development and land acquisition. The administrative framework ensures oversight and coordination of the various functions. The proposed management structure of the NI/WB NERR is graphically presented in Figure 4. The primary management goals of the reserve are to: - Establish and manage the North Inlet area within the boundaries of the Reserve as a natural field laboratory and the other area (Winyah Bay) as an area influenced by human activities. Having these two areas will permit comparative ecosystem research on two distinctly different types of estuaries which are in close proximity. - Protect research sites and make them available for continuous long-term and future studies of the natural processes and ecological relationships shaping and sustaining the estuarine system. - Conduct, coordinate and facilitate short- and long-term estuarine research and monitoring. 22 D SC Coastal Council NOAA U) State Policy and Direction 0 0 0 0 0 a Coordination, Grants, Performance +1 0 Evaluations, National Policy and Direction C 0) 0 E 0 A 0 0 C CO 0 V Baruch Institute Administration 0 OL pol. o Director of the Institute CL U) cc A Cf) cc Cq LU z M (U N1/WB NERR Advisory Committee I V .S Programmatic Issues Site Management Staff 4- She Manager C Education Coordinator - - - - - - - - - - Resource/Research Coordinator Secretary/Data Processor 0 z 4 6 Management responsibility i7L Policy direction 0 0 0 0 Feedback - - 01IIIIIIIIII - Gather and distribute information on estuarine ecosystems that is essential to sound decisions regarding the management of coastal resources. - Conduct and coordinate educational activities that increase the public's awareness and understanding of estuarine ecosystems, human effects on them, and their importance to the State and the nation. - Provide for traditional multiple uses that are consistent with Reserve research in order to ensure the continuation of existing traditional uses described elsewhere in this document. - Facilitate site access as appropriate for research, education and compatible uses, and control access for unallowed uses. - Develop facilities as necessary to aid in research and education. - Promote cooperative management among Federal, state and local agencies and reserve property owner. - Coordinate with existing programs in the areas of the reserve to maximize the research and educational potentials of the site. b. General Policies The following highlights the general policies of the Nl/WB NERR. More specific policies are detailed throughout this document in the appropriate sections, (e.g. specific research policies are detailed in the Research section). (1) Research reserve activities and facilities at the Reserve will augment, not replace, the conservation, research, education, and other functions of the basic programs currently in operation. Programs should also be complementary to the traditional public recreational uses of the area. (2) Unless otherwise stated in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or other management document, site property owner will continue to fund, operate, and administer its lands and facilities, including those portions designated in the reserve, and will continue to conduct activities and programs under its mandate. Goals of the site property owner and goals of the Reserve are compatible. Reserve status does not limit an owner's ability to conduct such activities as long as the activities do not adversely affect implementation of the Nl/WB NERR Management Plan, conflict with reserve goals, or have any adverse impact on the natural resources of the reserve. 24 (3) The NI/WB NERR uses a cooperative approach involving the Baruch Institute, SC Coastal Council, site owner, local government agencies and private organizations. An Advisory Committee will assist in providing a forum for input from various interest groups for management of the Reserve. Arrangements will be made to share use of existing facilities and to provide basic support services to carry out the NI/WB NERR Management Plan. (4) Although the SC Coastal Council is the designated State Agency to administer SC Coastal Zone Management Program and to receive fiscal awards, the Council, through an MOU, has named the Belle W. Baruch Institute, USC (a state agency) as the management agency for the NI/WB NERR (see Appendix B). (5) Present levels of traditional, public, compatible uses at and adjacent to the site will continue as provided for by local, state, and Federal law. The activities of adjacent property owners will not be restricted by reserve designation. C. Administration (1) Administrative Framework Since NERR programs are delegated by the CZMA to states, the overall program responsibility resides with the SC Coastal Council. However the SCCC has designated the Baruch Institute, USC (a state agency) to be the management agency, (see MOU, Appendix B). Implementation of the various facets of the program, from land planning to site management, program development, and enforcement, is accomplished through a coordinated and cooperative effort by the Baruch Institute and several state and county agencies, universities, private organizations and NI/WB NERR Advisory Committees. This type of effort is essential because much of the management structure involves existing agencies, laws, and programs. (a) Management Agency. The primary responsibility for management of this site will be undertaken by the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research, University of South Carolina (a state agency). The Institute interacts closely with the Belle W. Baruch Foundation in that the Institute has a long-term contract with the Foundation which was approved by the SC Attorney General to manage marine lands belonging to the Foundation. In addition the Foundation has approved the Institute to participate in the NERRS program. The Institute was established in 1969 through the joint action of the Baruch Foundation and the University of South Carolina-Columbia. Estuarine research was initiated in 1969 and a year-round program with a resident staff started in 1972 when the first field laboratory was built. Since 1969 the Institute has administered 25 over $13 million in grants, contracts, and awards involving multidisciplinary research and education. The Institute is a research branch of the University of South Carolina-Columbia and the Director reports to the Dean of the College of Science and Mathematics. The Institute is funded by state appropriated funds as well as funds from Federal and private sources. The Institute will administer funds provided to the South Carolina Coastal Council by NOAA and from other state sources. Every attempt will be made to obtain additional funds from private sources to enable the Reserve to be as self-sufficient as possible. The personnel associated with the Reserve will be employees of USC. Because the objectives of existing programs are very similar to those of the NERRS program, no major changes in the existing management strategy are planned except for the important addition of Reserve personnel as described below. Also, no new state or Federal regulations will be proposed because existing Federal, state, and foundation regulations already protect the area proposed to be within the site boundaries. (b) Other Involved Agencies/Organizations (i) Relationship between SC Coastal Council and Management Agency Although the South Carolina Coastal Council is the designated State agency to administer programs and receive fiscal awards under the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, the Council chooses not to be involved in direct land acquisition and management. Therefore, the Council has designated the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research, a state agency and an arm of the University of South Carolina, as the management agency for the NI/WB NERR site. Under contract with the Council and in cooperation with NOAA, the Institute will be responsible for development and implementation of the Management Plan and day-to-day operation of the reserve site. The Council will serve as the fiscal agent in acquiring funds from NOAA and will provide increased surveillance and enforcement to ensure compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act and the NI/WB NERR Management Plan. The Council will also serve on the Reserve's advisory committee and provide input into identifying coastal research needs. The purposes of Act 123 of the 1977 South Carolina General Assembly were to "establish the South Carolina Coastal Council and provide for its powers and duties for the protection and improvement of coastal tidelands and wetlands under a coastal zone management plan; provide for enforcement of policies of the Council and penalties for violations; and authorize legal proceedings for the determination of tideland properties." Act, 123, better known as the South Carolina Coastal Management Act, was implemented in accordance with the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act as amended (P.L. 92-583, 94-370) and a subsequent coastal zone 26 management program was developed and approved by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in 1979 which met the requirements of 15 CFR part 923 (Federal Register, March 1, 1978). (J) Other agencies/organizations Although the Institute will manage the site, interactions with state regulatory agencies (i.e., SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department and the SC Department of Health and Environmental Control) will be maintained to ensure protection of the site. In addition to interactions with state regulatory agencies, the Baruch Institute, USC, has an agreement with the Belle W. Baruch Foundation to manage the marsh-marine portions of Hobcaw Barony included in the Reserve under the terms of a Tripartite Agreement which exists between the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, The University of South Carolina, and Clemson University. This agreement describes the role of the two universities in managing the lands associated with the Hobcaw Barony. None of the lands managed by Clemson University are included in the Reserve. The trustees of the Foundation have established most of the terrestrial habitats adjoining the western border of North Inlet and much of the land bordering the Mud Bay section of the Reserve as an area for systems ecology research. SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Division of Marine Resources (SCWMR) The Division of Marine Resources is responsible for the conservation and orderly development of the state's marine resources through planning, research, management, and public education. The Division also has the primary responsibilities for management and development of commercial and recreational fisheries in the coastal area, including the regulation and control of commercial fishing seasons (areas and equipment), management of public shellfish grounds, and records of fisheries statistics. The Division is also active in environmental and ecological concerns, especially those which impact coastal fisheries habitats. SC Deoartment of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) The goal of the SCDHEC Shellfish Sanitation Program in South Carolina is to ensure that shellfish and the areas from which they are harvested meet the health and environmental quality standards provided by Federal and state regulations, laws, and guidelines. Additionally, the Department promotes and encourages coastal quality management programs consistent with protected uses established through the state water classifications and standards program. 27 Belle W. Baruch Institute Forest Science Institute of Clemson University The Belle W. Baruch Forest Science Institute was established to implement an agreement between the Belle W. Baruch Foundation and Clemson University to accomplish the objectives of The Belle W. Baruch ' Foundation and of. Clemson University relative to education and research in forestry and closely related sciences. Although Clemson has no management jurisdiction over the Reserve, it is responsible for maintenance of Hobcaw Barony except for the USC Field Laboratory. The Reserve will interact with Clemson in matters of mutual interest, as is the current practice. Others Over the course of time, the Reserve Management will interact with other local, state, Federal, and private organizations in respect to management activities. (iii) Advisory Committees An Advisory Committee will be established which will have one member selected (except as noted) from the following agencies and local interest groups: - the Belle W. Baruch Foundation - the marine scientific community (2) - the education community (2) -management of harbor-related industries -labor from harbor-related industries -representative of the Georgetown Sportfishing Association - Georgetown County Chamber of Commerce -South Carolina State Ports Authority -an environmental interest group - the League of Women Voters - a Debordieu Colony land owner - the Yawkey Wildlife Center, SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department - the Waccamaw Regional Planning Office - the Belle W. Baruch Forestry Institute, Clemson University - the Georgetown County Council - the Georgetown City Council -representative of SC Sea Grant Consortium -representative from SC Waterfowl Association -general public (2) -any others deemed appropriate by the Nominating Committee In addition, a representative of the SC Coastal Council, NOAA (SRD), and the Dean of the College of Science and Mathematic.s, USC, will serve as ex-officio, 28 non-voting members. The Director of the Baruch Institute, USC, will serve as chairperson and will vote in case of ties. The activities of the Advisory Committee will include: - Advising the Reserve Manager on matters of policy relating to planning and operation of the Reserve; -Assisting in seeking support for the research and educational programs and other financial matters; -Assisting in the preparation of any periodic summary or -annual reports on the operations of the Reserve; and -Representing the interests of the users of the Reserve, its neighbors, and the users of information and educational materials generated by the Reserve The Advisory Committee will have regular meetings at least twice a year. Special meetings may be called by the chairperson and/or upon the request of five committee members. The committee members will receive four weeks written notice of regular meetings and two weeks written notice of special meetings. A Nominating Committee, consisting of the Reserve Manager, Education Coordinator, Chairman of the Georgetown County Council, President of the Debidue Property Owners Association, Executive Director of the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce, Superintendent of The Georgetown County School System, President of the Georgetown Sportfishing Association, and Director of USC Field Laboratory, will submit a list of potential Advisory Committee members to the Chairperson of the SC Coastal Council for action. Appointments to the Advisory Committee will be for one year with a limit of three successive reappointments. Upon the advice of the Advisory Committee, the Chairperson will appoint subcommittees. Initially a Research and Monitoring Subcommittee and Education Subcommittee will be established. Research and Monitoring -Subcommittee The Research and Monitoring Subcommittee will consist of appr 'opriate Advisory Committee members and other technical representatives from the scientific and academic communities. The Subcommittee will advise the full Committee on research and monitoring activities with the reserve and will be responsible for the following: Review and approval of priorities for research and monitoring projects; Review research and monitoring proposals and interim and final research and monitoring reports; 29 Monitor and provide advice on local issues and new opportunities for cooperative research and monitoring; and Evaluate overall progress toward achieving research and monitoring priorities and adjust long-term direction accordingly. Education Subcommittee The Education Advisory Subcommittee will be composed of appropriate Advisory Committee members and representatives from area institutions of education, state agencies involved with education and others. This Subcommittee will be responsible for the following: Review and approval of the list of annual priorities for education and interpretation activities for the reserve; Review of education proposals and design proposals for all education and interpretive facilities, displays, media curriculum, training programs, etc., and monitor progress of specific activities to ensure that they are consistent with the goals of the reserve program and this management plan; and Evaluation progress toward achieving priorities for education and interpretation and adjust long-term priorities accordingly. (2) Resource Protection The resource protection goal of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay Reserve is to protect the natural ecosystem integrity of the Reserve. This goal is consistent with the present protection goal of the SC Coastal Council (as described previously), the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, and the Baruch Institute, USC. Existing state and Federal laws and regulations also provide for protection of the Reserve. Hence no departure from existing practices will occur from designation of the NI/WB NERR. At present the Belle W. Baruch Foundation provides funds for personnel to protect the resources of Foundation property to be included in the Reserve and the Reserve does not currently plan to request funds for this purpose. State and Federal agencies currently enforce their regulations in areas under their jurisdiction and will continue to do so after the Reserve is established. Reserve personnel will work closely with both the Foundation and state and Federal enforcement agencies to increase resource protection when necessary. 30 (3) Research and Monitoring The Reserve research and monitoring goal is to utilize this site for long-term studies to gain a better scientific understanding of how natural and human processes influence the ecological dynamics of estuaries and associated habitats. In addition, information will be developed which could be useful in the process of decision-making by various levels of government. The Reserve's research and monitoring activities would augment the Long-Term Ecological Research Program (LTER) currently funded by the National Science Foundation. The LTER Database will be continued to provide a basis for understanding long-term phenomena. The Reserve will encourage multidisciplinary research on the flora, fauna, water quality and nutrients, geology, and physical oceanography of estuaries to help explain ecosystem-level dynamics. Modelling at various levels of ecological complexity ranging from populations to sub-components of the estuarine system to estuaries to landscapes will be promoted. Studies utilizing past research results to address data gaps in our database will be encouraged. The Reserve will stimulate the effective use and communication of research results. (4) Education The Reserve will strive to enhance public awareness, understanding, and wise use of estuarine resources. It will promote knowledge of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, the NI/WB Research Reserve, its resources, and its programs as well as knowledge of broader coastal issues and concerns related to estuarine management and protection. In collaboration with the Baruch Nature Center and other organizations, it will provide educational and interpretive services to user groups, including teachers, civic groups, and student groups. The Reserve will encourage the development of volunteer programs and assist in providing facilities and expertise. (5) Facilities Development As the program develops, it may be necessary to expand the existing research and/or educational facilities. Any expansion will conform to the existing state practices, as well as approval by the Baruch Foundation and various university and state committees. If facility funds are provided by NOAA, the development must also conform with NOAA regulations (see Appendix C for more details). (6J Proposed Administrative Staff An adequate staff is essential to meeting the research, education, and other objectives of the NI/WB NERR. Staffing will be met through a combination of support from Federal, state, and private organizations. All staff members will be employees 31 of USC will be hired according to established university/state policies. The Reserve Manager will be the principal administrator of the Reserve and will be responsible for ensuring that the NERR policies and regulations contained in the Reserve Management Plan are followed. This individual, who will be employed and supervised by the Baruch Institute, USC, will report directly to the Institute Director, will be responsible for the following activities: (a) developing and implementing resource management, research and monitoring, and education programs. (b) managing of the Reserve's program on a day-to-day basis. (c) coordinating the NI/WB NERR programs with SC Coastal Council and NOAA staff (d) supervising Reserve funded staff (e) maintaining records and preparing reports and proposals associated with Reserve program (f) coordinating local programs with state and Federal programs, and attending appropriate meetings (g) preparing budget and being responsible for expenditures (h) conducting public relations programs and working with media and local groups 0) participating in advisory and management committees (j) coordinating Reserve research activities (visiting and collaborating scientists) with existing research programs and facilities In addition to the Reserve Manager, two key administrative staff members are the Research/Resource Coordinator and the Education Coordinator. Their duties are as follows: Research/Resource Coordinator (a) develop and implement resource assessment program (b) measure environmental variables as part of long-term monitoring effort 32 (c) prepare description and maps Of vegetation and faunal resources (d) maintain field instruments and accesses to research and education areas (e) assist research and education staff with Reserve's field programs (f) assist protection and regulatory personnel in safe-guarding the environmental integrity of the site Education Coordinator (a) develop and coordinate education program activities that are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Reserve and NERRS (b) evaluate the effectiveness of the education program and modify activities accordingly (c) monitor and adjust education program activities as necessary to assure that they do not negatively impact the research and management goals of the reserve (d) coordinate reserve education activities with education program activities of the Bellefield Nature Center, operated by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation (e) conduct periodic needs assessments to determine new areas for program development (f) assist in the establishment of and serve as a liaison to the Education Advisory Sub-committee (g) assist in the establishment and coordination of a volunteer program (h) assist in the development of grant proposals to support the continuation and expansion of the education program (i) coordinate activities with NOAA (SRD) national education program coordinator In addition to these three positions a secretary-data processor needs to be hired who will be responsible to the Reserve Manager, will handle the various secretarial tasks associated with the program, and assist the existing data management program 33 with those topics relating to the Reserve's activities. As the program develops, the need for additional personnel will be evident. It is anticipated that a research technician(s) will be needed to assist in field studies and monitoring of living resources and of physical/chemical/geological factors. (7) Enabling Agreements A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is established between NOAA, the State of South Carolina, and the Baruch Institute, USC for management purposes (see Appendix B). This document describes the interaction between NOAA (SRID), SC Coastal Council, and the Baruch Institute, USC, a state agency. The MOU establishes a commitment on the part of the State and the Baruch Institute, acting for the property owners, to protect the natural processes and resources of the site for research and education purposes. The MOU describes in detail the relationship between the SC Coastal Council and the Baruch Institute and includes information on the responsibilities of each party, conditions of financial assistance, and other arrangements. The proposed MOU is included in Appendix B. In addition, the Baruch Institute has a long-term tripartite agreement with the Baruch Foundation (Appendix A) to manage their marine program, including its lands associated with the marine program which are to be included within the boundary of the Reserve. The Belle W. Baruch Foundation has been established in perpetuity to preserve and conserve the ecological and environmental qualities of Hobcaw Barony as well as to preserve its historical value, The Foundation has approved the Institute's participation in the NERR system. The other portions of the Reserve are owned by the State of South Carolina. No property acquisition is required at present. (8) Federal Government - NOAA Program Review The research reserve program operates as a Federal/state partnership. Although the management of a reserve is a state's responsibility in the long term, NOAA cooperates with and assists the states on a day-to-day basis, and reviews state programs regularly. The purpose of the NOAA review is to ensure that a state is complying with Federal NERR goals, approved work plans, and reserve management plans. The primary mechanisms used by NOAA to review state programs, as well as NOAA responsibilities pertaining to reviews, include the following: NOAA staff, in particular the project manager for a state's reserve, communicates directly and regularly with state reserve staff. Communication builds a level of trust between Federal and state staff, and familiarizes both NOAA and the state personnel with reserve management procedures and policies. This cooperative approach is needed for a research reserve to be successful. Both oral and written communication are necessary, and site visits, as travel funding allows, is advisable. 34 Another mechanism available to NOAA is its research reserve funding program. NOAA provides different categories of funding to a reserve, and for each cooperative agreement, quarterly progress reports and a f inal report are required. NOAA personnel carefully review the reports and associated communications to ensure compliance with program policies and specific award conditions. The site designation process was also a primary avenue through which NOAA reviews actions. A state's site nominations must be assessed and endorsed by NOAA prior to formally beginning the designation process. As part of this preliminary stage, the site selection and public participation processes are evaluated by NOAA. When the DMP and DEIS have been completed they must also be approved by NOAA before the final versions of each document are written. NOAA staff have the responsibility of working with the state to select and designate national estuarine reserve sites. Finally, pursuant to CZMA enabling legislation (Sections 312 and 315), NOAA must conduct performance evaluations of the operation and management of each reserve, every three years while Federal financial assistance continues. Ifdeficiencies in the operation or types of research conducted at a reserve are found, NOAA may withdraw financial assistance to the reserve until remedies are in place. National Estuarine Research Reserve designation can be withdrawn by NOAA when a reserve is found to be deficient and fails to correct deficiencies within a reasonable time. The state must submit an annual report after Federal financial assistance for operations and management has been discontinued. NOAA will conduct performance evaluations at least once every four years after Federal financial assistance for operations has stopped. (9) Proposed Implementation Timetable The following tables outline the timetable for implementation of the final management plan. Table 1 outlines the development of reserve operations and facilities. Table 2 outlines annual staff needs for the reserve. The implementation of this plan does not represent duplication of previous research nor research currently funded by other agencies. Monitoring inventory programs require periodic sampling on a long-term basis to establish patterns of interannual variation. (10) Public Access Section 921.13 (a) (5) of the NERRS regulations requires a plan for public access as part of the overall management plan; however, the regulations do not specify what the public access plan must contain nor the extent to which the reserve must be available for public visitation. The regulations do state that use levels are set 35 by individual states and that acceptable uses must be consistent with the program mission and goals. In aggregate, the site will contribute to balanced access to the whole reserve system. Opportunities for public access are evaluated on the basis of the following criteria: (1) sensitivity of resources to human act 'ivities; (2) compatibility with research activities; (3) comparability with traditional uses; (4) compatibility with adjacent land uses; (5) existing degree of public access. Decisions on access also consider the policies of affected property owners. Public access to the Reserve will follow existing practices in that the Public has access to the North Inlet and Winyah Bay portions of the Reserve by boat, including power boats. Research plots, which will be studied for a finite period of time, will be marked with signs requesting that they not be disturbed by the public. According to Federal and State laws, no tidal waters can be restricted to public access. The South Carolina Coastal Council reaffirmed this policy on public access in a Resolution passed on December 13, 1991 (Appendix M). Currently, public access to the upland portions of the property, including areas designated to be included in the reserve boundaries, is restricted. The property consists of 90 miles of single lane dirt road. In order to protect the habitat and sensitive resources from human activities, to protect the integrity of ongoing and projected research activities, and maintain the integrity of the adjacent property owners, unrestricted use of the uplands portion of the Reserve is not permitted. This policy is consistent with current practices for the Foundation property and will remain in effect. However, authorized individuals involved in approved projects utilizing the resources of the Reserve can gain access to the upland laboratory area by entering through an electrically controlled gate near U.S. 17. 36 Table 1. IMPLEMENTATION: OPERATION AND FACILITIES Predesignation * DEIS/DMP completed * DMP Advisory Committee * Some coordination of research projects * Some coordination of education projects * Receive comments on DEIS/DMP; then work to complete FEIS/DMP and FMP First year after * Management plan approved FMP approval * Appoint Advisory Committee * Increase coordination of education program with Nature Center * Increase coordination of research/monitoring programs with ongoing research * Initiate monitoring and baseline inventory programs * Integrate data management system with LTER data management system * Develop brochures * Staff participation in research and education workshops * Initiate intersite cooperative programs * Planning for second year Second year * Continue coordination of site education programs as they develop * Increase coordination of research/monitoring/baseline inventory with ongoing non-NOAA programs * Develop year round monitoring/baseline inventory studies Expand research program Increase research and education workshops Conduct evaluation of facilities Planning for third year Third year * Continuation of research, education, monitoring, and baseline inventory activities * Planning for fourth year Fourth year * -Continuation of established programs * Planning for fifth year 37 Table 2 IMPLEMENTATION: STAFF Predesignation Development of DEIS/DMP, FEIS/DMP and FMP by J. Vernberg, D. Allen, W. Allen M. Crosby, and A. Miller First year after FMP approval Reserve Manager (full-time, NOAA funded) Education Coordinator (1/2-time, NOAA) Resource/Research Coordinator (full-time, NOAA funded) Secretary/Data Processor (8 months NOAA, 1 month State) Second year Reserve Manager (full-time, NOAA funded) Education Coordinator (3/4-time, 1/2 NOAA, 1/4 State) Education Specialist (part-time, NOAA funded) Resource/Research Coordinator (full-time, NOAA funded) Secretary/Data Processor (8 months NOAA, 1 month State) Third year Reserve Manager (full-time, NOAA funded) Education Coordinator (3/4-time, 1/2 NOAA, 1/4 State) Education Specialist (part-time, NOAA funded) Resource/Research Coordinator (full-time, NOAA funded) Secretary/Data Processor (8 months NOAA, 1 month State) Fourth year Reserve Manager (full-time, NOAA funded) Education Coordinator (3/4-time, 1/2 NOAA, 1/4 State) Education Specialist (part-time, NOAA funded) Resource/Research Coordinator (full-time, NOAA funded) Secretary/Data Processor (8 months NOAA, 1 month State) 38 Visits by student groups, participants in workshops and symposia, and other special groups can be arranged through formal programs associated with The University of South Carolina or the Belle W. Baruch Foundation. Tours of the site will be coordinated with the Nature Center of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation. The general public can visit the Bellefield Nature Center at the US Highway 17 entrance to Hobcaw Barony (approximately 1 mile north of Georgetown and 8 miles south of Pawleys Island). The Belle W. Baruch Foundation has been established in perpetuity to preserve and conserve the ecological and environmental qualities of Hobcaw Barony as well as to preserve its historical value. Access by water to the wetland areas of the Reserve via tidal waters under the jurisdiction of state and Federal agencies, however, is permissible by boat, including power boats. Members of the public are welcome to carry out traditional recreational activities in the tidal waters and marshes, but must adhere to state laws. Thus, traditional public uses such as hunting in the marshes, fishing and shellfishing will not be infringed upon by the NI/WB NERRS and people are free to access these areas by water (see section 11 A and III B for description of traditional uses). (111) General Permits and Licenses (a) Existing Permits and Licenses Existing requirements for local, state, and federal permits and licenses will be observed and normal application procedures will be followed. (b) Research Reserve Permits Permits will be issued by the Baruch Institute, USC for research activities conducted in the reserve. Scientific permit requests will be carefully reviewed through the system now in place in the Institute. The Institute has a permit from the SCWMRD to collect biological samples in the NI/WB region. New research projects not covered by this permit will have to obtain a special permit from the appropriate governmental agency. Appropriate enforcement personnel will be notified prior to conducting research. d. Resource Prgtection (11 Rationale and Goals The health, productivity, and integrity of the estuarine reserve resources must be protected in order to provide a stable environment for research and education programs which are used to address coastal management issues. The goals of 39 resource protection are to pr otect the natural status of the ecosystem(s) of the Reserve. Specific goals are- -identifying priority resources, gathering baseline information on them, and establishing them as indicators of change. -Developing facilities and equipment as necessary to aid in research. -Seeking agreements with research organizations to facilitate and augment research projects. -Assisting in the collections of important baseline data to use in monitoring differences over time and for making comparisons with other areas. -Preserving estuarine ecosystems for continuous future use as natural field laboratories where information essential to coastal management decisions can be gathered and disseminated. -Ensuring a stable environment for research through long-term protection of estuarine areas, including open water and transitional area wetlands. -Protecting natural, pristine estuarine sites for education and interpretation programs. -Protecting the habitats of estuarine wildlife as an integral part of the natural system. -Controlling access to Hobcaw Barony in accordance with the Tripartite Agreement between the USC Institute, Clemson University and the Foundation. -Preventing degradation of the Reserve by outside activities. -Coordinating activities with the Baruch Foundation, local, state and Federal authorities. (2) General Policy Areas Resource protection -will rely on the tripartite agreement between the Foundation, USC, and Clemson University as well as a number of existing Federal, state and local laws and regulations, enforced by regulatory agencies and Reserve and Baruch Foundation staff. It is also the responsibility of reserve staff to be knowledgeable of and involved with land use issues in the vicinity of the Reserve. 40 The NERRS regulations allow for multiple uses of reserves to the degree compatible with each reserve's management plan and consistent with the mission and goals of the NERRS. Traditional existing activities in the NI/WB NERRS will continue at levels currently permitted under local and state laws (see Section III B for details on uses). It is not the intent, objective nor desire of the NI/WB NERRS to restrict in any manner the legal traditional uses of public waterways that are currently under state and Federal jurisdiction and included in the Reserve. The Baruch Foundation will continue to regulate activities on its private property which is also included in the Reserve. Specific objectives are to: - Coordinate with existing surveillance and enforcement activities provided by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, state and Federal agencies, and establish a mechanism to increase resource protection, when necessary; -Provide for adequate public participation as a means to promote compatible uses of the Reserve and awareness of the need to protect sensitive resources; and -Rehabilitate Reserve habitats where necessary to restore natural bio-diversity and prevent further degradation of resources. Research is one of the primary goals of the Reserve, and it is given highest priority in the management plan. Sometimes the success of a research project depends on the study site remaining undisturbed. To prevent trampling or other unnatural physical disturbances, the researcher may request that signs requesting avoidance of the study area be posted. The request would be made to the Reserve Manager and reviewed by the Advisory Committee. Typically, study plots are small and located in infrequently visited or remote areas so that public travel or access patterns would not be disturbed. An information program will be initiated to inform the public about the importance of the research sites. (3) Management and Administration Management of the NERR Site Through the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management ProQra The purposes of ACT 123 of the 1977 South Carolina General Assembly were to "establish the South Carolina Coastal Council and provide for its powers and duties for the protection and improvement of coastal tidelands and wetlands under a coastal zone management plan; provide for enforcement of policies of the Council and penalties for violations; and authorize legal proceedings for the determination of tideland properties." Act 123, better known as the South Carolina Coastal Management Act, was implemented in accordance with the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act as amended (P.L. 92-583, 94-370) and a subsequent coastal zone .41 management program was developed and approved by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in 1979 which met the requirements of 15 CFR part 923 (Federal Register, March 1, 1978). The South Carolina Attorney General's office has affirmed that the State has adequate protective control over the NI/WB NERR (see Appendix K). Management of the Critical Areas The South Carolina Coastal Management Act defines the critical area as all coastal waters, tidelands, beaches, and primary ocean front sand dunes within the coastal zone of the State. A permit is required for any activity which impacts a critical area; in order to receive a permit the activity must be evaluated in accordance with a strict set of policies and regulations. In summary the policies for wetland areas prohibit the permanent alteration of productive salt, brackish, or freshwater wetlands unless there is an overriding public interest, no feasible alternatives, and all environmental impacts are minimized. Regulated activities include not only major activities, such as dredging or filling, but also activities such as pipelines, powerlines, docks, piers, intake structures and many others. Table 3 provides a listing of all activities which are governed by specific coastal zone management policies. With the exception of the high ground portion of the few scattered islands located in Winyah Bay proper, the entire core area of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR site is classified as critical area. Any activity which occurs in the critical area of the NERR site will be regulated by permit through the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. Management of Upland Areas (Non-critical area) Both the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and the South Carolina Coastal Management Act require consistency of all direct and regulated State and Federal activities which occur in the designated coastal zone of South Carolina. In South Carolina the coastal zone includes the entirety of all eight coastal counties which border the Atlantic Ocean. Therefore any activity which requires a state or federal permit must undergo a coastal zone management consistency determination by the South Carolina Coastal Council before the permit can be issued by the issuing State or Federal agency. The policies utilized to make a consistency determination are similar to those required for critical areas. Federal regulations (115 CFR 930) establish a review procedure with federal agencies. The Council has a memorandum of agreement with all regulatory state agencies that establishes a consistency determination review procedure. State permits which are reviewed for coastal zone management consistency are included in Table 3 along with the responsible agency. 42 mm 11 tj :e n n X -9 X X " > 0 -V > ;v -0 z;13 -0 #A CA r- c > .0 w i x > 0 > m0 a 0 AtA cr r tj F . I I Z Lr 0 a I p 9 <z n R A g P. E, - 9 9- 1A 2 10 EA Z a 0 0 > d n a R I >n Z > z R 0 > r 0 cr Is a 6 :9 go .4 o m p- 9A 0 12 -e > Is > r 0 0 to r m x x x x xlxlxl 1XIX x xlxlx x xlx Ix x x x x x xl>c x x x x x x x coasial C x Anonaud Atch. & i X x x x X X x xIX X X X1 x X X X x X Badges & X X X X X x I Xl X X X X DIIEC I I >1 x x X X X Dcvclopm xx X Forestly C x Ifighway x x Land Res x PUT palliol's Rallways x x PSA x PSC x Simic 110 >1 I i I x x x X SPA x Watts Re x x X1 I xI I I I 1>( wildllfc/b X1 xI I xj X x X x X LOCAL X x x X X I EDFRAJ rx xFxF,Tc-rxT>Tc- x x x X In addition to meeting normal rules and regulations, activities associated with the above permits which result in a land disturbance (i.e., subdivisions, malls, gas stations, etc.) must submit specific plans to address policies and approved guidelines of the Coastal Zone Management Program. These plans must conform to coastal zone policies before any permits can be issued. These plans include: Stormwater management plan Wetland management plan Dock master plan (if adjacent to coastal waters) In reference to the North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR, the entire site falls within the coastal zone of South Carolina; therefore, any activity which requires one of the referenced permits must be consistent with the coastal zone management program and the specific policies of the NERRS. Enforcement Under the South Carolina Coastal Management Act, the South Carolina Coastal Council has responsibility for the protection of coastal tide lands and wetlands. To fulfill its enforcement responsibilities, the Council may impose penalties and may take legal proceedings, as necessary. This responsibilities covers all coastal waters ' tidelands, beaches, and primary ocean front sand dunes within the state's coastal zone. Nevertheless, the Reserve Manager has first line of enforcement responsibility for ensuring that all activities conducted within the Reserve conform with NERRS guidelines, and the Foundation's rules for resource protection. The Reserve Manager will contact the SCCC, as necessary, and will be a full partner in the review of any permit affecting the Reserve resources. The South Carolina Coastal Council has an enforcement section of specially trained field biologists to ensure enforcement of the coastal zone management program. Weekly aerial flights and daily routine patrolling by motor vehicle represent the first level of enforcement. The Coastal Council is also in alliance with the S.C. Department of Wildlife and Marine Resources whose conservation officers patrol the waters and land of the coast on a daily basis. Noted violations are reported to Coastal Council enforcement staff who conduct a field inspection; State conservation officers are available for backup if needed. The Council also has a Memorandum of Agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to assist in enforcement in freshwater wetland projects requiring coastal zone management consistency certification. Fines for violations of the Coastal Zone Management Act are up to $1,000 per day. 44 Enforcement compliance of activities requiring coastal zone consistency certification can also take place through the agency issuing the permit. The majority of activities require a final Coastal Council sign-off prior to permit issuance; for example, a Coastal Council staff engineer conducts a site inspection to ensure the stormwater system is constructed according to the approved design before the applicant can operate his/her water or wastewater system. This provides a strong incentive to comply with coastal zone management program. Additionally, the Coastal Council has an active Beach and Creek Watch program to provide a forum for citizen awareness and violation reporting. Table 4 Activities Regulated Through Direct Permit and/or Consistency Certification by The S.C. Coastal Council (reference SCCZMP, pp. 111-1 - 111-74) Residential Development Ports Roads and highways Airports Railways Parking facilities Agriculture activities Forestry activities Mineral extraction Manufacturing Fish and seafood processing Aquaculture Commercial development Parks Commercial recreational Marinas Boat ramps Docks and piers Wildlife and fishery Artificial reefs management activities Impoundments Dredging Dredge material disposal Underwater salvage Sewage treatment Solid waste disposal Public/quasi-public bldgs. Dams and reservoirs Water supply facilities Erosion control activities Energy and related facilities Construction in critical areas or wetlands 45 Table 5 State Agency Permits Subject to Coastal Zone Consistency Review by The S.C. Coastal Council (reference SCCZMP, P. V-5) 1 S.C. Aeronautics Commission Certificates of approval for airports and other air traffic facilities. 2. S.C. Budget and Control Board Permits for activities below the ordinary high water mark which are within the coastal zone but out of the critical area. 3. S.C. Department of Health and Permits for construction of Environmental Control wastewater treatment facilities or septic tanks of 1500 gallons per day. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act certification. Permits for air emissions. Water supply permits. Landfill permits. Oil and gas facilities registration certificates. Underground storage tank permits. 46 4. S.C. Land Resources Conservation Mining operations permits. commission Sediment control permits (pending implementation). 5. S.C. Public Service Commission Certificates for major utility facilities. 6. S.C. Water Resources Commission Oil and gas facilities permits. Groundwater capacity use area permits. Interbasin transfer permits. (4) Habitat Restoration NERRS regulations recognize that many estuarine areas have undergone ecological change as a result of human activities. Although restoration of degraded areas is not a primary purpose of NERRS, some restorative activities may be permitted in research reserves as specified in their management plan. Generally, restoration for single-species resource management or enhancement is not permissible; restoration must be community or ecosystem oriented. The areas included within the boundaries of the Reserve are in a high state of ecological quality, therefore no plans have been developed to undertake habitat restoration. Results of research conducted within the Reserve on relatively pristine areas will be applied to other (disturbed) sites in order to develop a scientific basis for habitat restoration. (5) Relationships to Other Program Areas Although resource protection is an extremely important program component, it is not an independent program area. All other parts of the Reserve program contribute to the protection of this site. Researchers play a role in identifying especially sensitive areas of the estuary and their research results will be useful in site protection by monitoring for potential degradation. The educational program will develop printed information and conduct meetings which will inform the public of the need to protect and wisely use estuarine resources. The volunteer program will 47 educate and utilize persons to* assist in resource protection. The high degree of interaction between the various segments of the NI/WB Reserve necessitates a fairly broad and balanced perspective on resource protection by the Reserve. e. Research and Monitorina (1) Rationale and Goals The research and monitoring program will rely on the results of scientific research to achieve an understanding of the entire estuarine system and its watershed. The goal of the research/monitoring program is to utilize the Reserve for long-term studies to gain a better scientific understanding of natural and human processes occurring within the estuaries and to develop information for the use of coastal decision-making agencies. National and state agencies responsible for management and protection of coastal environments and resources are aware of the potential for increasing man-induced stress in our coastal ecosystems. Some programs have been initiated or proposed to address aspects of the enormous and complex problems associated with intense coastal development. For example, EPA has a program involving the Great Lakes and certain large estuarine systems, and recently initiated the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program. In addition, NOAA has started a Coastal Ocean Program. However, a recent study of marine coastal environmental protection by the National Research Council emphasized that a close link must exist between monitoring (constant measuring of environmental parameters) and research programs (determination of processes, mechanisms, predictive models, etc.) in order to produce information which is essential for interpreting monitoring results by environmental regulatory agencies. The proposed NI/WB NERRS will help fill this void. Despite past efforts, little attention has been specifically directed to long-term ecosystem-level studies dealing with southern coastal aquatic systems and the interaction between uplands and these aquatic systems. A significant data gap exists in understanding the interactive relationship of the stress created in these ecosystems by the growing human activity in the coastal regions of the southeastern U.S. In the southern region of the United States there are few large estuarine systems -- most of the estuaries and freshwater systems are relatively small and are surrounded by extensive wetlands. For example, there are over 320 small, high salinity creeks, inlets, and estuaries between Cape Fear, NC, and Cape Canaveral, FL. Nearly half occur in South Carolina. Approximately 500,000 acres of wetlands are found in the coastal region of South Carolina, and the southeastern sector of the United States has a large percentage of the nation's coastal wetlands. Much of the present and future development of coastal areas is occurring, and is predicted to continue to occur, on highlands adjacent to these estuarine and freshwater systems. There is a need for a holistic, ecological, landscape-level approach involving the integrative analysis of the 48 status and stress levels of southeastern coastal ecosystems. Coordination of research projects oriented toward this approach is of paramount importance in order both to understand the influences of human activities and inputs on diverse coastal systems of the southeast and to develop the ability to anticipate or predict potential problems associated with these activities and inputs. To adequately study complex coastal systems impacted by society requires a level of integration and organization not traditionally found in universities, which tend to be organized according to traditional disciplines. Because of the nature of research funding, most projects usually involve one or a few investigators working on one facet of a broader question. Traditionally, formal institutional mechanisms do not exist which allow integration of studies and a continuity of research themes. Frequently, valuable data from single- investigator oriented research is lost because of the lack of a long-term data management system. The Baruch Institute, USC has more than 20 years of experience with multidisciplinary, multi-investigator research projects. It has developed the facility and administrative structure to conduct research at this level. The research/monitoring program will not duplicate past or present research projects. There are several reasons why organization of research on southeastern ecosystems will be more cost-efficient and scientifically effective with the proposed NI/WB NERR, as opposed to individual research projects. The NI/WB NERR will: - provide a rapid and efficient means of disseminating new knowledge related to coastal ecosystems (by means of public presentations, publications, information transfer to Reserve education programs etc.), - respond in setting research priorities to accommodate either external individual grants or in-house research programs, - provide a collaborative environment which would foster multidisciplinary as well as multi-institutional projects, -provide an additional level of quality assurance at all stages of research performance, - channel scientific information (through technical reports, presentations, etc.) to NOAA, other Federal and state agencies, environmental groups, the public, and the press so that research findings can be utilized in a practical manner, and have a long-term, holistic perspective and focus on fundamental problems facing southeastern US coastal ecosystems. 49 Knowledge of how ecosystem processes function on a long-term basis in an unperturbed system is important in assessing the impact of human activities. Long-term comparative studies are essential to delineate between interannual variation in system responses due to natural variability (i.e., a prolonged cold spell or a drought) and variation resulting from human perturbation. These important scientific data are extremely limited and their scarcity has hampered regulatory/management agencies in assessing environmental impacts. North Inlet Estuary is an ideal site to use as a standard against which to compare other coastal systems: 1) it is relatively free of man-influenced disturbances, 2) it has been studied for 22 years, the last 12 years as part of the NSF program on Long-Term Ecological Research, 3) an extensive data base exists to study ecosystem processes, and 4) the Baruch Institute Field Laboratory and resident staff are located there. Specific objectives of the NI/WB NERR Research Program will be to: - establish and manage the areas of the reserve for long-term use as natural field laboratories by state, local and private organizations, while maintaining traditional uses of the reserve by individuals and various groups; - conduct both state-of-the-art and basic environmental research which will provide both significant information to the public, scientific, and regulatory communities and a data base for use in long-term and interdisciplinary studies; - enhance the scientific understanding of southeastern estuarine ecosystem processes and functions which can then be used for planning and standard-setting by reserve managers and coastal decision-makers; - provide education and experience to young scientists considering environmental careers by utilizing volunteers to achieve research goals. These objectives will be met by the Reserve staff promoting: - long-term baseline studies to characterize flora and fauna within the Reserve and gain an understanding of the ecological interrelationships between organisms and their environments; - a better understanding of tributary water quality conditions, particularly spatial and temporal dynamics, requirements for growth and -survival of living resources, and contribution and effects of point and non-point source pollution; 50 - a better understandin g-of physical processes operating within the estuary, such as tidal influence, circulation dynamics, freshwater inflow, stratification patterns, and sediment dynamics; -the Reserve as a site for estuarine research by providing essential services and facilities; -studies that make effective use of past research and address data gaps in the Reserve's information base; and -the effective use and communication of research results. (2) Research and Monitoring Priorities Establishment of the Nl/WB NERR will create a long-term opportunity for temporal and spatial sampling in wetlands, upland, and open water estuarine habitats, as well as a greater opportunity for the development and use of new observational and analytical techniques in protected estuarine subsystems. Nl/WB NERR sponsored research will be directed towards 1) water management, 2) soil management, 3) nutrients and other chemical inputs, 4) coupling of primary and secondary productivity and 5) estuarine fishery habitat requirements. General research priorities include: ascertaining which ecological resources are at risk and what level of human-induced stress exists in two southeastern coastal ecosystems, and developing accurate and sensitive bio-markers of pollutant exposure; - determining the condition of two southeast coastal ecosystems, and how they change (i.e., developing baseline characteristics that define a healthy, low stressed coastal ecosystem for comparisons with more polluted, highly stressed coastal ecosystems as regards organismal physiology, end point indicators, population and ecosystem structure, and determining the classes and specific types of anthropogenic activities and inputs which characterize and lead to unhealthy, stressed coastal ecosystems); and formulating specific computer models for predicting the effects of long-term, indirect and direct exposures to pollutants and other human activities in two southeastern coastal ecosystems (i.e., the coordination of exposure and effects studies under both laboratory and field conditions, using cornerstone species, to characterize real effects of 'Pollutants at the ecosystem level, and determining how accurately end point indicators, bio-markers, and physiological measurements in cornerstone species can be extrapolated to meaningful effects at the ecosystem level). 51 Initial short-term research-priorities include analysis of living resource data sets; stock assessments; evaluation and analysis of monitoring capabilities, oyster production and diseases; salinity and circulation patterns; nutrient levels in marsh areas versus nutrient levels in open water; land use patterns; and sublethal responses to toxin. Research priorities include providing support facilities to conduct research, including advanced analytical chemical equipment (particularly for identification of organic and metallo-organic compounds); remote sensing; and automated data analysis technologies. Sometimes the success of a research project depends on the study site remaining undisturbed. To prevent trampling or other unnatural physical disturbances, the researcher may request that signs requesting avoidance of the study area be posted. The request would be made to the Reserve Manager and reviewed by the Advisory Committee. Typically, study plots are small and located in infrequently visited or remote areas so that public travel or access patterns would not be disturbed. Longer term research needs include improved understanding of structure and function of coastal habitats (i.e., emergent saline marshes, tidal freshwater habitats, non-vegetated wetlands, benthic habitats, oyster reefs); impacts of modification of coastal and contiguous habitats; water column processes (i.e., plankton communities, inorganic nutrient cycling, replenishment, and storage, micro-circulation, and interactions among main stem and adjacent water bodies); toxins; genetic variability and structure of organisms within NI/WB NERR; watershed processes (i.e., transport, fate and processing of dissolved and particulate material; and effects of land-use activities); ground water contribution, including spatial and temporal input and outflows; chemical characteristics, extent and magnitude of pesticide, nutrient, and other pollutant contamination; impact on sediment-water column pollution interactions; and methods to reduce ground water pollution; impacts of population growth development; temporal and spatial variability in the use of marsh tidal creek ecosystems as nursery areas; wetland formation and production relative to sea level rise; archaeological studies; loss of wetlands habitat and mitigation approaches; buffering effect of wetlands on sediment and heavy metal/toxic chemical loads; basic marsh processes such as accretion and erosion; effects of human water activities on shorelines; buffering effects of wetlands on flooding and erosion; wetland production relative to sea level rise; and plant community succession. Although no manipulative research projects are planned, it is possible that small scale manipulative studies, limited in nature and to the minimum extent necessary to accomplish the stated research objectives, could be approved but only after a thorough review of the project by the Institute, the SCCC, NOAA, and after all necessary permits are obtained. Manipulative research activities with a significant or long-term impact on reserve resources require prior approval of the SCCC and NOAA. 52 Habitat manipulation for resource management purposes is not permitted within reserves, except as allowed* for restoration activities consistent with NOAA regulations. An exception may be allowed to this prohibition if NOAA determines that specific manipulative activity is necessary for the protection of public health or the preservation of other sensitive resources which have been listed or are eligible for protection under relevant Federal or state authority (e..g., threatened/endangered species or significant historical or cultural resources). In addition to research activities described above, program-wide research priorities have been developed for the NERR System for Fiscal Years 1993-2002. Research at the NI/WB NERR will be planned and proposals submitted which will part of these priorities. These research priorities are: FY 1993, 1994 Non-point source pollution (non-focused or non-identifiable sources of pollution inputs and alterations within watersheds). FY 1995, 1996 Habitat restoration (restoration of coastal habitats that have been altered by anthropogenic activities and/or inputs). FY 1997, 1998 Alterations in habitat utilization by coastal biota (exotic species, commercial species, non-commercial species). FY 1999, 2000 Alterations in water circulation, transportation and quality (tidal exchange, fresh water diversion, hydrological budgets, ground water intrusion, biotic species transportation). FY 2001, 2002 Anthropogenic inputs and activities (focused and identifiable - i.e., dredge spoils, HAZMAT, recreational uses, commercial uses). Specific means for incorporating program elements into existing and new monitoring programs will be developed, The reserve manager will work to incorporate the following elements into all monitoring programs: -hypothesis testing -relationship to management issues -quality assurance/quality control -means of determining program effectiveness 53 -periodic review -data management and analysis -publication of data The proposed NI/WB NERR monitoring program consist of a three-phase approach as follows: - Environmental Characterization, which involves literature review and/or field research to acquire all available information on hydrology, geology, water chemistry, water quality, biological resources, and the problems and issues confronting the reserve environment; - Site Profile, which involves a synthesis of information gathered to provide an overall picture of the reserve in terms of its resources, issues, management constraints, and research needs; and - Monitoring Program Initiation, which involves identifying parameters to be measured, procedures to be used (criteria for measurements, quality control, and standard procedures where they already exist), sampling strategy for selected parameters (spatial and temporal intervals), storage and retrieval of data (reporting, formatting, and analytical requirements), manpower requirements, logistics, and cost; followed by pilot projects and, upon successful evaluation, full-scale monitoring of selected parameters. The NI/WB NERR phased monitoring program will be integrated with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC) and South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources (SCWMR) monitoring program for water quality, living marine resources, toxic chemicals, and other parameters. It will also be integrated with other monitoring programs conducted by Federal agencies including NOAA and EPA. (3) Management and Administration Research opportunities at NI/WB NERR are available to qualified scientists and students affiliated with a college, university or school; non-profit, non-academic research institutions (e.g., research laboratory, independent museum, professional society); profit organizations; or state, local or Federal government agencies. Research opportunities will be available to all applicants without regard to manner of funding. Support may come through South Carolina state agencies, the NOAA Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM), NOAA Sea Grant, the Environmental Protection Agency, NSF, and other sources. Researchers may 54 apply to do research at any time, however, scientists seeking financial support from NOAA/OCRM must follow NOAA's research and monitoring guidelines. All research proposals will be evaluated by the Reserve Manager for consistency with NI/WB NERRS goals, and by the Baruch Foundation and the USC, to ensure that the proposed research will not interfere with other research at the Reserve. No proposed research at the Reserve will be approved unless it is consistent with the Tripartite Agreement discussed earlier. Projects would be selected based on their importance to coastal zone management issues, scientific/educational merit, and technical approach. Other project selection criteria include: the environmental consequences of the project; immediacy of need; and the proposed project's relationship to other available information and studies. Proposals requesting funds from NOAA will be evaluated using established NERRS guidelines. In order to qualify for NOAA funding, NI/WB NERRS research proposals must address one or more of the NERRS National Research Priorities and fulfill the requirement of the appropriate Request for Proposal. NOAA funds are awarded on a competitive basis and proposals will be competing with other research proposals in reserves throughout the National Estuarine Research Reserve System. Funding for national research priorities in the reserve is available through NOAA on a competitive basis to qualified researchers and must be matched equally by the recipient according to current NERRS regulations. An annual announcement of research opportunities, reflecting priority needs and levels of funding, will be distributed. This announcement will include: a) specific statements about the types of research that will be funded including the national research priorities set by NOAA; b) clear and specific guidelines for preparation; c) clear statements on procedures and criteria used in proposal review; d) level of funding; and e) a schedule of the proposed process. The distribution list will include local, state, and regional entities covering all eligible potential applicants. Also, a research prospectus will be provided to potential researchers, including basic information on reserve resources, unusual features, support facilities and a listing of research reports from the NI/WB NERR. Activities permitted in the core area are limited to research activities which do not manipulate habitats except in rare instances where small scale manipulative studies, with limited scope and clearly stated research objectives, may be approved, after thorough review by the Institute, the SCCC and NOAA. Manipulative research activities may be permitted in the buffer zone of the reserve as long as they address identified research or management needs. Any research activities which, in the estimation of the State and'NOAA, may result in impacts on reserve resources or habitats require prior approval of the State and private property owners. 55 To assist new researchers at the reserve, information packets will be available from the reserve manager. These packets will contain background information pertaining to the Reserve and an area map, designating reserve boundaries. New researchers will also be given a tour of the reserve area to gain familiarity with the research surroundings and general location. Research, monitoring and education projects will receive first priority within the reserve boundaries. Traditional uses of public areas will continue as currently regulated under Federal, state, or local authority. The Reserve Manager is responsible for carefully balancing uses of the reserve to ensure that the objectives of the reserve program are protected and sustained. The power of the Reserve Manager needed to meet other specified management responsibilities will not in any way be diminished by the NI/WB NERR research and monitoring plan. The NI/WB NERR Reserve Manager is responsible for coordinating all research and monitoring activities for the Reserve. To facilitate this, NOAA will maintain close contact with the NI/WB NERR Reserve Manager and will keep him/her informed of the progress of NOAA-funded researchers. The NI/WB NERR Reserve Manager will maintain regular communication with the researchers. He/she will aid in coordinating research activities in the Reserve and, when possible, will aid in fulfilling the needs of the researchers. To achieve the NERRS goals of 1) "making available information necessary for improved understanding and management of estuarine areas" and 2) "enhancing public awareness and understanding of the estuarine environment"; NOAA-funded research will be available to the general public and researchers will be requested to provide a presentation on their research findings at regularly scheduled meetings. The NI/WB NERR requests that researchers provide the Reserve Manager with quarterly progress reports, a final report, and an abstract and one copy of any publications resulting from any research at the Reserve. The final report will include an abstract, a literature review, methods, analyses, results, and conclusions. It will include a summary of the gathered data and a list of the analyses completed. In addition to a final report, the researcher will keep the Reserve Manager updated on the progress of the project by means of quarterly written progress reports. These presentations will help to achieve the Reserve's goal of providing information necessary for improved understanding and management of estuarine systems to coastal decision-makers and the public. Records, data, reports, publications, and other relevant materials will "be kept at the NI/WB NERR. Research information will also be forwarded to NOAA, which will act as a central clearinghouse and the center of the information network of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System. 56 Recruitment of research6rs is important to build the NI/WB NEAR data base and to establish the sites as long-term natural field laboratories. Recruitment of researchers with an established interest and capability will be one of the functions of the Reserve Manager. Recruitment strategies will include: - coordination through scientific/technical advisory committees; - participation of NI/WB NERRS staff in research symposia, conferences and workshops; -.intern programs for graduate students or upper division college students; and annual announcements of research opportunities in scientific association newsletters, meetings and through NOAA's Sanctuaries and Reserves Division. The NI/WI3 NERR will work closely with NOAA staff to develop and assess National Research Priorities. NOAA will also be involved with the Reserve through research funding and proposal evaluation. The Reserve Manager will communicate with other reserve managers and will work with NOAA and other reserve managers to establish a national information exchange network. Data from the NI/WB NERR will contribute to the national network long-term study to monitor the status and trends of estuarine ecosystems. Data from the National Estuarine Research Reserve System makes a substantial contribution to the understanding of long-term ecological effects on estuaries and is useful in predictive trend analysis of ecological stresses. The coordinated research network aids greatly in understanding the theoretical and practical aspects of conservation and coastal resources management. Information gathered in NI/WI3 NERR research and monitoring and the management implications of this information will be made available to decision-makers and the public in understandable forms (i.e. in laymen's language-not scientific jargon) through public forums, etc. Both NOAA and NI/WI3 NERR will encourage the dissemination of research results. Methods will include journal articles in the peer-reviewed literature; presentations at professional societies; and special symposia arranged by NOAA or reserves, often in association with other meetings such as the biennial meetings of the Estuarine Research Federation or Coastal Zone Managers. Additional avenues of information exchange will include a distribution of a summary of research at the Reserve, workshops, conferences and teach-ins at the reserve; a NI/WB NERR brochure, distributed with an annual call for proposals and at appropriate conferences and other events; press releases to local.media; articles in journals of 57 local organizations; direct mailihgs to state and local decision-makers; and regular contact with representatives of other state and Federal agencies, local government agencies, and planning boards. f. Education and Intervetation Education/interpretation will serve as the integrator for all functions of the NI/WB NERR. As the general public becomes more aware of how an estuarine system functions and why it is such an important natural resource, the more likely they are to support the reserve and other estuarine protection programs. A well-planned education/interpretation program will create a constituency for the Reserve and bring about positive attitudes and values in the user community. The program will focus on the values of the NI/WB estuaries and its wise use. The Reserve is an ideal setting for interpreting estuarine food webs, general biological principals and coastal processes. Opportunities exist for focusing on the national significance of the NI/WB site. It is also an appropriate place to learn about Federal and state endangered and threatened species. Overall, the program content will be broad-based, dealing with general concepts and specific issues related to reserve management. (1) Goal One of the primary goals of the NI/WB NERR is to enhance public awareness, understanding, and wise use of estuarine resources in the North Inlet and Winyah Bay estuaries. Specific objectives will be to: - promote knowledge of the research reserve, its resources, and its programs as well as knowledge of broader coastal issues and concerns related to estuarine management and protection; - collaborate with other organizations to provide educational and interpretive services at this site; - disseminate information gained from research on the Reserve to public audiences, including government officials, planners, and other d ecision- makers. - provide opportunitie's for teacher training, student projects, internships, and assistantships where enrolles work jointly with scientists, gain field experience, and learn about the importance of research results; 58 - enhance interest in and commitment to South Carolina estuaries and their tributaries through volunteer programs and personal contact with reserve, resources; -provide for traditional uses of Reserve sites as provided by state and Federal law. -broaden public support for the Reserve by continuing on-going programs suited to visitors of diverse interests, ages, and backgrounds. (2) General Context for Management The NI/WB NERR includes both the marsh/marine part of the 1 7,500-acre wildlife refuge (Hobcaw Barony), which was set aside in perpetuity by the late Belle W. Baruch for the purposes of research and education, and the public waterways of North Inlet Estuary and Mud Bay. Establishment of the Reserve on this site is consistent with Belle Baruch's Will and provides a unique opportunity for exchange of information between scientists and public audiences. A delicate balance must be struck to maintain the special research integrity of the site while providing opportunities for people to see and learn from the research program. Extreme care will be taken to develop an education program that is sensitive to and protects the significant research value of the Reserve. A number of policies and areas for education program development are outlined which should complement the research and management goals of the Reserve. (3) General Policies Several policies will guide the development of the education program: - Only educational activities which will have no negative impacts on the Reserve environment and its research projects will be implemented. Activities will be discontinued or changed if, after review by the site management team, the Advisory Committee and the Belle W. Baruch Foundation Trustees, they are found to conflict with this policy. -Much of the content for the programs will be based on the findings from research at the North Inlet-Winyah Bay Reserve and other estuarine reserves. Findings will be shared with general audiences and specific target groups such as teachers, K-1 2 students, policy-makers, and community leaders. -Reserve educational activities will be coordinated with and complement the Public Education Program of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation administered through the Bellefield Nature Center. The Nature Center currently sponsors a 59 diverse program that focuses on several ecosystems in the coastal plain of South Carolina. The Rdserve's educational program will expand offerings in subjects pertaining to estuaries and coastal zone management. - The Reserve's education program will also be coordinated with other local and state organizations that are involved with coastal education programs. (4) Interpretive Themes and Messages Our understanding of estuaries changes as new information is added to the relatively young field of estuarine research. Consequently, themes and messages for program content need to be flexible and sensitive to new discoveries about estuaries. Fortunately, North Inlet Estuary has been studied fairly intensively over the past decade, providing a foundation for supporting some initial themes and messages that will be incorporated into the education program: - Estuaries are complex ecosystems that are intricately linked to neighboring landward and seaward ecosystems. -Complex interactions, involving nutrient cycling, water movements, and energy flows through food webs contribute to the dynamic functioning of estuaries. -Estuaries serve important functions as nurseries for fish and shellfish, as feeding and nesting areas for birds, and as buffers from storms. - People are members of the estuarine ecosystem and also affect its functioning through interactions with the system. - The North Inlet-Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve serves an important role as a site for research, management, and education about estuaries. Specific examples that relate to these themes will be incorporated into program activities and materials. (5) Printed and Audiovisual Materials Brochures, special publications, and a regular newsletter are planned to promote knowledge of the Reserve,* its resources, and its program, and to disseminate information gained from research to public audiences. A general brochure about the Reserve, its goals, and opportunities available for researchers and the public, will be one of the first materials developed once the site is designated. It will be consistent with the "common look" site brochure developed by NOAA, SRD. The Baruch 60 Institute currently publishes the newsletter, "TIDINGS", which is distributed to members of Friends of the Baruch Institute. Research, education and management activities of the Reserve prograrn will be featured in this established newsletter. In addition to the mailings to members, copies of the newsletter will be disseminated to interested people upon request, including visitors to the Bellefield Nature Center. Special publications on selected topics will be developed as needs are identified. Printing these publications on recycled paper is encouraged. Instructional materials for teachers are also planned to complement teacher training activities and field study programs for school classes. The Bellefield Nature Center currently provides information to teachers participating in its field study and outreach programs. These materials provide background information on the subjects, pre- and post-visit activities, and lists of resource materials. Additional instructional materials will be developed to increase the learning experiences of teachers and students who participate in new programs developed for the Reserve. In addition to printed materials, audiovisual presentations will be created for use at the Nature Center and in outreach programs. A video program about the Reserve and its activities would be very beneficial in expanding public awareness and understanding of estuaries and the value of research at the reserve site. The program would be shown on a regular schedule to visitors of the Center and would also be available on a loan basis to interested schools, civic groups, or other organizations. Slide presentations are another medium that would be developed to further people's understanding of estuaries. The slide shows would be available to staff members who will make presentations at meetings of interested groups. (6) Exhibits, Signs and Promotional Materials The Bellefield Nature Center currently houses a variety of exhibits pertaining to the history and ecology of the wildlife refuge, Hobcaw Barony, and the research activities of the Baruch Institute of Clemson University and the University of South Carolina. Additional interpretive displays that relate specifically to estuaries and the goals and programs of the Reserve will be developed at the Nature Center. A portable exhibit about the reserve is also planned which can be taken to professional meetings and festivals to help promote the site to a wide spectrum of people. The Reserve will also be promoted through distribution of the general brochure described in the printed materials section. In addition, NI/WI3 NERR signs identifying the Reserve and the appropriate supporting agencies will help draw public attention to the special designation of the site. A sign will be constructed and placed near the highway entrance to the property and other smaller signs are planned to help identify the Reserve from the water. 61 (7) Program Activities and Services Many of the education program goals will be achieved through program activities and services provided to general audiences and specific target groups. The Reserve's education program will build on and expand upon successful activities and services already in place through the Belle W. Baruch Foundation's Bellefield Nature Center and the University of South Carolina's Continuing Education Program (see Appendix I for summary of 1990 activities). In addition, there will be 'a maximum effort made for interaction with education programs at other NERR sites. The Baruch Foundation currently provides a very popular field study program for school groups. Thousands of students each year participate in the program and learn about one or more of the coastal ecosystems on the property. Salt marshes are one of the systems covered in the field study program. As funds become available to increase staff for the field study program, more salt marsh studies can be scheduled. A wider selection of short courses dealing with estuaries will also be offered for members of the public and educators. Some of the topics for future short courses include, but are not limited to, coastal birds, fishes; life in the pluff mud, oysters and clams, shrimps, crabs and other crusty creatures; coastal photography; historical uses of estuaries; and coastal management. Teachers may elect to take the courses to receive credit towards re-certification. Special college-credit workshops and courses for teachers are also planned to provide teachers with information and field and classroom experiences pertaining to estuaries and coastal zone management. These programs will be designed to provide teachers with the information and skills needed to lead their students in studies of salt marshes anywhere in the state without the help of an outside resource person. Public lectures and forums that address topics and issues of current public interest and concern will also be continued and expanded at the reserve site. These programs will be designed to provide factual information on various aspects of the issues so that people can make informed decisions. Guided tou rs of the property are presently conducted on a weekly basis for interested members of the public. Information about the research and educational activities of the Reserve will be incorporated into this tour led by Nature Center employees. This information will be easy to insert since the tour includes stops along marsh areas to be designated in the Reserve. The education program, in addition to field studies, tours, short courses, teacher workshops and public forums conducted on-site, will encompass outreach efforts into surrounding communities. The successful school "Outreach Program" of 62 the Bellefield Nature Center brings hands-on nature experiences into local classrooms. This program will be expande'd to include more offerings pertaining to estuaries. Teacher information packets will be developed to enhance these programs. Reserve scientists and other staff members will also present programs at meetings of area organizations upon request. In addition, efforts will be made to assist outside tour guides in the area with up-to-date information about the Reserve and the area's rich coastal resources that they can incorporate into their guided programs. The Nature Center does not currently have a volunteer program. After the site has been designated, a volunteer program will be developed to provide opportunities for interested members of the public to interact more closely with both the education and research activities of the Reserve. The education volunteer program will be coordinated with the Nature Center administration and supervised by the NERR education coordinator. The research volunteer program will also be administered by the Reserve staff and will be consistent with policies of the Baruch Foundation. A limited number of volunteers (to be approved by the Baruch Foundation) will be involved in the program. Education program volunteers will be particularly useful in greeting visitors and answering questions at the Nature Center building, thus allowing NI/WB NERR staff members to conduct more programs in the field. A student internship program will also be implemented, as funds become available, in order to complement the education program. Student interns would become involved in and assist with on-going education programs as well as the development of printed educational materials and exhibits. (8) Public At;cess and Recreation Traditional public access policies and recreational activities that pertain to the Belle W. Baruch Foundation's property (Hobcaw Barony) included in the Reserve will be maintained. Currently, public access to the upland portions of the property is restricted. Authorized individuals, including researchers and students involved in approved projects utilizing the resources of the Reserve can enter through an -electrically controlled gate near U.S. 17. Visits by student groups, participants in workshops and symposia, and other special groups can be arranged through formal programs associated with The University of South Carolina or the Belle W. Baruch Foundation. Tours of the site will be coordinated with the Nature Center of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation. The general public can visit the Bellefield Nature Center at the US Highway 17 entrance to Hobcaw Barony (approximately 1 mile north of Georgetown and 8 miles south of Pawleys Island). Access by water to the wetland areas of the Reserve via tidal waters under the jurisdiction of state and Federal agencies, however, is permissible by boat including power boats. Members of the public are able to carry out traditional recreational activities in the tidal waters and marshes, but must adhere to state laws. Thus, traditional uses such as hunting on the marshes, fishing and shellfishing will not be infringed upon by the establishment 63 of NI/WB NERR and people are'free to access these areas by water (see section 11 A and III B for description of traditional uses). Traditional public use will be encouraged to the extent that is consistent with Reserve goals and objectives. 9. Facilities Develooment and Staff Reguirements (1) Facilities Funding is provided by NOAA and matched by the state for the construction or renovation of a visitor center, research facility, education center, or other improvements associated with research, education, and access to reserve sites. Facilities and improvements must be located within the boundaries of the designated research reserve. Major construction projects (i.e., buildings) require the preparation of architectural and engineering plans and state approval of capital outlay proposals. Funding for planning and developing architectural and engineering plans for buildings may come from initial acquisition and development grants which are awarded after approval of the DEIS/DMP (i.e., in the predesignation phase). Funds for constructing buildings come from acquisition and development grants which are awarded after approval of the final management plan. Minor construction activities that aid in implementing portions of the management plan (such as nature trails, boardwalks, boat ramps) do not require architectural or engineering plans. Funding for planning and constructing nature trails, boardwalks, boat ramps, and other minor improvements can be awarded under initial acquisition and development grants as well as under later acquisition and cooperative agreements. Research facilities in the Reserve are temporarily housed in trailers but the Institute will be constructing a new 16,000 sq ft research laboratory in 1992 to replace the two laboratories destroyed by Hurricane Hugo. These facilities will be constructed to confirm with FEMA regulations, since FEMA will provide partial funding for these buildings. This facility will have space for administrative offices, the computer center, teaching and continuing education rooms, chemical laboratories, 13 laboratories for visiting and resident scientists, seminar/library room, balance room, museum, and common equipment roorn. At the entrance to the Hobcaw Barony and adjacent to the proposed NI/WB NERR is the Nature Center, which is owned and operated by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation and functions as a visitor center. In addition to a reception and display area, a separate classroom building is used for instructional purposes. The adjacent USC Kimbel Living Center, that is part of the Reserve, consists of housing accommodations for 80 persons and a meeting center. It is also available for Reserve exhibits and displays, workshops, seminars, and visiting groups and researchers. Other facilities contribute to the overall experience of visitors to the site. Examples of these include interpretive exhibits, a collection of flora and fauna, and a boardwalk. 64 In the future as the program expands, the need for additional facilities will be assessed. Construction or expansion of facilities within the Reserve will be conducted only upon approval of NOAA, the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, the University of South Carolina and with any necessary Federal and State permits or agency approvals. (2) Goal The goal of the NI/WB NERR Facility Development program is to provide the necessary facilities for research and educational activities. Although research and educational facilities are presently available, the Reserve will seek funds to provide new facilities as they are needed to update and/or expand to meet new demands. These facilities should not interfere with the natural appearance of the site. The headquarters of the NI/WB N@ERR will be located in offices in the new laboratory located on the edge of North Inlet. This facility will serve to centralize reserve activities with those of the NI/WB project involving all participants, i.e., USC personnel, visiting scientists and students, visitors, representatives of varioAis agencies, and the Baruch Foundation. The continuing education office will be located in the new laboratory. Activities of this office will be closely coordinated with the personnel of the Baruch Foundation located in the Bellefield Nature Center, located at the entrance to the Hobcaw Barony as described in section 11 A 4 f. The Nature Center attracts thousands of visitors each year and provides information about the region and the available programs. (3) Staffing Requirements Initially four positions will be required to begin the basic programs at the Reserve: Reserve Manager, Research/Resource Coordinator, Education Coordinator, and SecretarV/Data Processor. The duties and responsibilities of the first three positions were described earlier in the management plan. The secretary/data processor, who will be responsible to the Reserve Manager, will handle the various secretarial tasks associated with the programand assist the existing data management program with those topics relating to the Reserve's activities. As the program develops, the need for additional personnel will be evident. It is anticipated that as the program develops and funding becomes a research technician(s) will be added to assist in field studies and monitoring of living resources and of physical/chemical/geological factors. Additionally, an education specialist will be needed to further coordinate and implement the reserve's education program. 65 B. Other Alternatives Considered Before reaching a decision on the preferred alternative, several options were carefully reviewed and evaluated. They are discussed below along with the reasons for not pursuing each of these alternatives. 1 . No Action/Status Quo Under this option, no portions of North Inlet and Winyah Bay Estuaries would be designated as part of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System. Implementation of this option would severely limit or entirely prevent the establishment and operation of Federallyfunded comparative researchand educational opportunities unique to the proposed NI/WB NERR. The unique character of the proposed site is due in great part to the inclusion of both a nationally and internationally recognized pristine salt marsh ecosystem (North Inlet), and a classic drowned river type estuarine system that is heavily influenced by human activity and inputs. Continuing development pressures on South Carolina coastal ecosystems necessitates a better understanding of coastal resources, interactions within coastal ecosystems and the ability of these systems to withstand human disturbances. The comparative research and education programs planned for the preferred alternative of creating the NI/WI3 NERR will make a valuable contribution to understanding and protecting sensitive coastal resources and improving coastal planning and decision making. The No Action/Status Quo alternative is an illogical choice and runs counter to Federal, South Carolina and Georgetown County goals for studying, protecting and managing coastal ecosystems. 2. Alternative Sites As the southernmost estuarine systems in the Northern Carolinas section of the arolinian Biogeographic Classification Scheme, the NI/WI3 NERR includes one of the few remaining examples of a relatively undisturbed estuary (North Inlet) and a portion of a large, man-influenced estuary (Winyah Bay). There are no other sites in the southeastern U.S. that provide this unique combination of ecosystem types in conjunction with an already established research program. In addition, the selection of the NI/WI3 site is very cost effective in that no Federal funds will be required for land acquisition and there exists excellent research and education facilities that can accommodate the NERR program requirements. An extensive data base on the environment of the NI/WI3 system exists which is not found in any other site in this region. The research program has been in effect since 1969. 66 3. Alternative Boundaries Alternative boundaries for the proposed NI/WB NERR were considered during the early planning stages of site selection. a. Inclusion of Debidue Island and the northern marsh region Inclusion of sections of Debidue Island and the northern marsh region of the North Inlet Estuary was considered during the early planning stages of site selection. Due to the development that has occurred adjacent to the northern boundary of these properties, it was felt that these areas would be better utilized as a buffer region outside of the NI/WB NERR proper. Both the southern portion of Debidue Island and the northern regions of the North Inlet Estuary are part of the B.W. Baruch Foundation properties and as such are protected from any future development. These areas will therefore make for an ideal buffer region adjacent to the NI/WI3 NERR. b. Inclusion of the upland forest Early in the site selection process the inclusion of the upland forest portions of Hobcaw Barony was considered. However, after discussions between Clemson University (which under the Tripartite Agreement manages the upland regions of Hobcaw Barony), the B.W. Baruch Foundation Board of Trustees, and the USC Baruch Institute, it was decided that inclusion of the uplands into the proposed NERR would present management and administration difficulties. This does not preclude the possibility of future inclusion of the uplands, including the Bellefield Nature Center, into the NI/WB NERR should all concerned parties agree to propose an increase in the Reserve area and subject to Baruch Foundation approval. Any expansion of the Reserve's boundaries must be approved by NOAA, SRD and follow its guidelines. If determined necessary, NOAA may require public notice in the Federal Register and in the local media to provide an opportunity for public comment. C. Inclusion of all of -Winyah Bay Inclusion of all of Winyah Bay into the proposed NI/WB NERR was also considered early in the site selection process. However, this would mean the inclusion of major shipping channels into the proposed NERR. This option was of great concern to the industries of Georgetown that depend upon shipping for their existence. These industries felt that (despite assurances to the contrary) inclusion of shipping channels into the NERR may somehow infringe on the future use and/or maintenance of these channels. Therefore, inclusion of all of Winyah Bay into the NERRS was not considered to be a viable option. 67 d. Exclusion of Winyah Bay Having portions of two very distinct estuarine systems as part of the Reserve allows for the development of research and educational programs comparing a wide spectrum of estuarine uses and ecological processes, from pristine to developed regions. In contrast to North Inlet, Winyah Bay has undergone substantial changes in the past, including episodes of increased or decreased freshwater flow, increased sedimentation, and measurable deterioration of water quality. These changes and the unique character of the freshwater, brackish, and high salinity wetlands provide a basis for research which will contribute to our understanding the ecology of a full range of diverse southeastern estuarine systems. The diversity of habitats of the Reserve into heavily impacted (Winyah Bay) and relatively pristine (North Inlet) sections also provides an excellent opportunity to study human effects on estuaries. Winyah Bay is subjected to agricultural, municipal, and industrial inputs and the continuing use of the Bay for shipping and dredged material disposal further impacts the environment. These uses are characteristic of many southeastern estuaries. Studying these areas will provide useful data for management. One of the primary goals of the proposed NI/WI3 NERR is to identify and integrate the needs of both natural systems and traditional human uses in order to promote the best possible long-term balance. The exclusion of Winyah Bay from the proposed NI/WB NERR would preclude these research and educational opportunities, and is not a viable option. 4. Alternative Management Stratagio Although other potential lead institutions were considered (SC Water Resources and SC Wildlife and Marine Resources), these alternatives were rejected in the preliminary planning stages. The USC Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research was chosen because the Institute is currently, and has for over two decades, conducted multi-disciplinary monitoring and research studies in the proposed NI/WB NERR and is charged by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation to manage the natural resources of Foundation marsh-marine lands. It is the most logical choice and no other institute is as qualified to act as the lead organization for the NI/WB NERR. Another possible alternative management strategy would be for the Reserve Manager to be located in Columbia, SC at the Baruch Institute main office. This is seen as a major disadvantage to the Reserve Manager's primary duties of managing the daily operation of the NI/WB NERR as well as the oversight and coordination of the various research projects that will be ongoing at the NI/WB NERR. A third alternative management strategy would be to give the NI/WB NERR complete autonomy from both the Belle W. Baruch Foundation and the USC Baruch Institute. This alternative is impractical because the Reserve could not benefit from the use of data, educational and laboratory facilities, and support from these two 68 organizations. In addition, this strategy is not acceptable, because it would not be in compliance with the goals and' regulations of the NERRS or the tripartite agreement of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation. 111. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT A. Resources 1. Environmental Conditions a. Uniqueness The Reserve has several unique aspects. Most of the undisturbed marsh and adjacent uplands are owned by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation and the State of South Carolina, which have established these lands in perpetuity for conservation and research. The North Inlet Estuary was designated a prime coastal ecosystem and included as an Experimental Ecological Reserve by the Institute of Ecology and the National Science Foundation with a site rating of 98%. In 1980, the North Inlet Estuary was selected as the marine-estuarine site in the National Science Foundation's nationwide Long-Term Ecological Research Program. The portion of North Inlet to be designated as a National Estuarine Research Reserve covers a 3,200 hectare area, with the majority classified as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). This special category is for tidal salt waters which constitute an outstanding recreational or ecological resource and will be maintained and protected in its natural condition. The remainder of the areas of North Inlet Estuary is classified Shellfish Harvesting Waters (SFH) by SCDHEC, while the waters directly adjacent to Mud Bay are classified as SB, (no harvesting of clams, oysters, or oysters for human consumption) the same classification as Winyah Bay. b. Hydrolo-qv (i) North Inlet Estuary The circulation pattern of North Inlet is tidally dominated. The circulation structure resembles a Pritchards (1955) type D vertically homogeneous estuary, although in several creeks a lateral net circulation exists similar to the type C estuary. The maximum spring tide range is 2.5 m and the neap range about 1.0 m, the maximum tidal current is 1'.7- m/sec with the net currents being as great as 26 cm/sec. There is limited exchange of water between Winyah Bay and North Inlet; the greatest exchange of water occurs between North Inlet Estuary and the Atlantic Ocean through North Inlet. In the mouth of the inlet, salinity varies from 30 to 35 ppt; however, after severe rainstorms the salinity may temporarily drop to 20 ppt. 69 Generally, salinities in all waterways are lowest in winter and spring. Water temperatures range from 30 to 300C. Detailed analyses of many aspects of the physical oceanography of North Inlet have been published by Dr. B. Kjerfve and his students (see Appendix J for a partial listing of selected papers). A long-term data base (approximately 11 years) exists which includes continuous recordings of precipitation, wind speed, barometric pressure, solar radiation, water and air temperatures, conductivity, and salinity. A daily water sample is taken from two or more locations and is analyzed for dissolved organic matter, N, P, C, chlorophyll, and particulate N, P, C, POP NH4, and N03/NO2. Dr. E. Blood and her associates have published various studies regarding nutrient dynamics in the area (see bibliography of Long-Term Ecological Research publications Appendix J) There are four distinct watersheds on the adjacent upland area; two drain west into Winyah Bay, one south into Mud Bay (Winyah Bay) and one east into the North Inlet Estuary. Extensive studies on hydrology have been undertaken by Dr. T. Williams and his associates from the Baruch Forest Science Institute of Clemson University ' The natural drainage patterns of about 60% of the upland area have been interrupted by man-made ditches and dikes that date back to the rice culture days. All watersheds drain into intertidal areas and therefore are influenced to a certain degree by tidal fluctuations. (ii) Winyah Bay Estuary Winyah Bay is one of the major estuarine ecosystems in the southeastern United States. It is a class B type estuary according to Pritchard's classification (1955). The axis of Winyah Bay is roughly oriented in a northwest-southeast direction. The estuary is narrowest near its confluence with the ocean 0.5 km) and widest in the center (7 km). At the upper end of the bay where the major rivers (Black, Pee Dee, and Waccamaw rivers) converge, the width is about 2 km. Prominent features of Winyah Bay include: long rock jetties which project more than a mile into the ocean from North and South islands, several large islands within the bay, and a large shallow mid-section known as Mud Bay. Winyah Bay has a mean depth of only 15 ft (4.2 m) and many hectares of open waterways are less than 6 ft (2 m) in depth. A ship channel which is maintained at 27 ft (8.2 m) runs along the axis of the bay from the end of the jetties to Georgetown Harbor. Details of the bathymetry of Winyah Bay are available from Coast and Geodetic Survey navigation map No. 787 and several U.S. Army Corps of Engineers documents (e.g., Trawle, 1978). The entire Winyah Bay watershed is approximately 18,000 square miles. Four major rivers drain into the system. More than 16,000 sq miles of this drainage area is associated with the Pee Dee-Yadkin river system which originates in the Blue Ridge Mountains area of North Carolina. Water from this area flows across the piedmont 70 region of both North and South Carolina, over the coastal plain of eastern South Carolina, and into Winyah Bay through the Pee Dee River. The Waccamaw River also receives water from the Pee Dee as the poorly defined, shallow, wide, swampy waterways merge upstream of the US Highway 17 bridges. The Black and Sampit rivers drain much smaller watersheds. Other characteristics of these watersheds are given by the Conservation Foundation (1980). According to Johnson (1972), the freshwater input to Winyah Bay Estuary ranges from 2,000 to about 1,000,000 cubic feet per second (cfs), and mean runoff is approximately 15,000 cfs. Superimposed on this unidirectional freshwater flow toward the ocean is the regular semi-diurnal tidal pattern. Mean tidal amplitude is on the order of 1.4 m at the ocean end of Winyah Bay and 1 m at the Sampit River 0.6 m and 1.2 m on spring tides, respectively; Trawle, 1969). A salt wedge effect occurs as heavier salt water moves up estuary along the bottom with a flooding tide, even though the overlying freshwater may be flowing toward the ocean. During periods of low freshwater inflow, flooding tides move salt water more than 15 miles upstream of the US Highway 17 bridges, but under average river flow, the penetration is usually within a mile of the bridges. Differences between surface and bottom salinities during these periods may be more than 20 ppt. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' measurements (Trawle, 1978) indicate that while surface water salinities are usually 29-32 ppt near the ocean entrance during most flow conditions, surface salinities in Georgetown Harbor range from about 0 to 10 ppt, Salinity patterns in the mixing zone between these ends of the system are highly variable as a result of changing freshwater inflow, tidal amplitude, wind conditions, and bottom topography. Further information on the hydrography of Winyah Bay is available in Trawle (1969), Johnson (1970), and Bloomer (1973). Almost the entire shore of Winyah Bay is vegetated by marshes. Approximately 31,867 acres (12,747 hectares) of marsh are associated with this estuary. More than 77% of these marshes are regularly flushed through tidal action; the remaining 13% are impounded (Tiner, 1977). Some 80% of the marshes are vegetated by freshwater plants while most of the other 20% are inhabited by the brackish water grass Spartina cynosuroides and black rush, Juncus roemerianus. Of the 17 estuarine systems in South Carolina, Winyah Say is most important in terms of freshwater marshes. In fact, about 35% of the state's freshwater marsh lands occur there (Tiner, 1977). Relatively small stands of salt marsh cordgrass (Sl2artina alterniflora) occur near the entrance of Winyah Bay, and a narrow band occurs adjacent to major waterways upstream to the middle bay. Water quality in Winyah Bay is directly influenced by inputs from the Georgetown area. Georgetown is one of themost extensively developed areas of the Sea Island Coastal Region (Mathews et al., 1980). Winyah Bay has been classified as SB, meaning that its waters are not suitable for harvesting of clams, oysters, or mussels for market purposes or human consumption (South Carolina Department of 71 Health and Environmental Control 1977; South Carolina Pollution Control Authority 1972). Shellfishing in Winyah Bay has been restricted since 1964 (U.S. Departmen@ of Commerce, 1979). It is not the intent, objective nor desire of the NI/WB NERR to restrict the shipping activities of the port of Georgetown. Rather, the traditional and future port activities (i.e. commercial shipping and dredging of channels) in Winyah Bay are expected to be the major focus of comparative research projects with North Inlet. C. Geolog North Inlet waters drain a very large marsh located between Debidue and North islands and the mainland. The mainland consists of Pleistocene Storm Beach Terrain with ridges oriented in a north easte rly-so uth westerly direction. These ridges intersect the Atlantic Ocean at the north end of Debidue Beach. These surficial mainland features are underlain by a complex sequence of older coastal plain sediments, a sequence which is poorly understood in the immediate area at the present time. Debidue Beach and North Island represent part of a Holocene Barrier Beach System. This system has migrated southward in recent times, with principal evidence here being the major spit along the northern entrance to Winyah Bay, and smaller spit migration land forms along the northern border of North Inlet. North Inlet drains numerous tidal creeks, and two of these extend back through the marsh to lie in close proximity to the Pleistocene mainland. The creeks are very shallow in depth, never exceeding 30 ft below mean sea level, and commonly showing floors which are occupied by sand bars. The marsh areas are underlain by silts and clays which extend an unknown depth below the surface. Relief is generally flat; the western third of the peninsula has the most relief with bluffs adjacent to Winyah Bay as high as 15 m. Geologically, Winyah Bay represents a drowned river basin and receives water from an extensive drainage basin (see previous description). d. Climate The climate is temperate or subtropical with air and water temperatures ranging from - 1 3*C to + 41 'C and 30C to 300C , respectively. Winter temperatures are highly variable but generally mild. Ice occasionally forms on high marsh pools, but snow is a rare event. Rainfall is about 45 inches (1114 cm.) per year. Daytime temperatures are usually above 200C from May through November. 72 Hobcaw Barony. During Mr. Baruch's ownership, many famous world leaders visited the Barony, including President Roosevelt and Sir Winston Churchill. Ownership of the Barony was transferred to Belle Baruch, Mr. Baruch's daughter, and when she died in 1964, the property was included as part of the newly established Belle W. Baruch Foundation. B. Uses 1 . Prior Until the Foundation was established and universities started research and educational programs on Hobcaw, the Barony was exclusively for the private use of the Baruch family. Traditional public uses of the proposed site will not be altered. These uses include boating, fishing, wildlife observation, swimming and recreational harvesting of oysters and clams as permitted by state laws. Seasonal hunting for waterfowl and rails in the tidal waters of the Reserve is a legal activity. Traditional uses of Winyah Bay permitted by state and Federal agencies will continue, including existing shipping channels. 2. Existing a. Recreation. Public recreational activities are not allowed on the upland areas of the Hobcaw Barony. Since Hobcaw Barony is a designated wildlife refuge, no hunting or trapping is allowed on the upland portions of the property. However, the tidal waters are open under state and Federal jurisdiction and used by the public for boating, fishing, swimming and recreational harvesting of oysters and clams. However, seasonal hunting on the marshlands for waterfowl and rails in the tidal waterways of the Reserve is a legal activity, regulated by State laws, and will not be altered. This activity does not take place in areas of the Reserve that will conflict with other traditional activities such as fishing and swimming. b. Agricultural and Residential. No agriculture takes place on the Barony. At present, Hobcaw House is operated as a historical house - museum; however, Bellefield House is the residence of Miss Ella Severin, a trustee of the Foundation. There are five other residences on the property used by resident research, security, and forestry personnel. Dormitory facilities for approximately 80 persons are available for visiting scientists and students. 74 2. Living Resources The North Inlet-Winyah Bay complex contains a diverse but representative assemblage of southeastern coastal habitats and associated biological communities. The proposed site includes a range of habitats ranging from salinity-dominated freshwater wetlands to ocean-dominated salt marshes. In addition, a series of habitats extending from the open ocean across a barrier island and an extensive salt marsh to the uplands are included. Island habitats which are used as bird nesting sites as well as a portion of a barrier island are to be part of the reserve. Since 1969, numerous studies have been conducted on the ecology of the North Inlet system; however, fewer studies exist for the Winyah Bay portion of the proposed estuarine reserve. To date, there are 846 publications representing marine and coastal studies completed by Baruch associates (see Appendix J); many deal exclusively with the North Inlet-Winyah Bay system. Extensive faunal species lists and distribution information has been developed (see Zingmark, 1978; Fox and Ruppert, 1985; Ogburn et al., 1988) and much of the phytoplankton, macroalgae, marsh plants, zooplankton, and meiofauna has been identified (see papers in Appendix E and Zingmark, 1978). The area includes many commercial and recreational species of fish and shellfish. A variety of'resident and migratory birds inhabit this estuarine system (see Bildstein publications in Appendix J). A detailed characterization of the existing literature on the physical, chemical, and biological conditions of Winyah Bay and North Inlet Estuary is available (Blood and Vernberg, 1992). Although Winyah Bay habitats have not been extensively studied, Allen et al. (1982, 1984) have described the temporal and spatial patterns of water column biota from the ocean to the mouth of the rivers. 3. Cultural and Historical Resources Hobcaw Barony has a rich history. There is strong evidence indicating that an early Spanish settlement was located on the Barony in 1526. For various reasons, the Spanish left in 1527. By the 17th century English influence had spread from Virginia, and in 1718 King George 11 granted the Hobcaw Barony to Lord Carteret. This area became well-known for rice culture and the general region of Georgetown County was one of the richest areas in the colonies. On the Barony is located remnants of a colonial fort and cemetery, remains of three slave villages, and old cemeteries. Artifacts of early Indian settlements are found throughout the area. The King's Highway, which was the coastal road from Wilmington, NC, to Charleston, SC, crosses the property; George Washington used this road in 1791. In more recent time, Mr. Bernard Baruch, famous financier and advisor to presidents, purchased land in 1905 and 1907 which comprises the present 17,500 acres tract known as the 73 C. Industrial and Port-Related. No industrial activities occur or are allowed on Hobcaw Barony, although designated dredge spoil sites have existed elsewhere on B.W. Baruch Foundation uplands bordering Winyah Bay since 1968; these sites are not part of the Reserve. It is not the intent, objective nor desire of the NI/WB NERRS to interfere with the use of these spoil sites by the South Carolina State Ports Authority. The shipping lanes adjacent to the south-western border of the Winyah Bay portion of the Reserve are used extensively for activities related to industries located in Georgetown, as well as import/export activities centered at the Port of Georgetown. Industries located in Georgetown which are dependent upon the continued use of the Port include Georgetown Steel, International Paper ., Santee Cement and AKZO Salt, all of which are important to the local and regional economy. In addition, future potential long- term Port users and transit type cargoes' under long-term contracts may consist of lumber, ore, scrap metals and general cargo which have been handled in the past. In order to maintain the shipping channel at the authorized depth, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must dredge the channel on a regularly scheduled basis. The creation of the Reserve will not alter the current or future use of any of these areas designated for dredged spoils. The Reserve Draft Management Plan does not call for a change from existing or traditional uses of the areas of the Reserve. It is not the intent, goal nor desire of the Reserve to restrict shipping and dredging activities of the Port of Georgetown which provide a major portion of Georgetown's industrial-based economy. The proposed NI/WB NERR is unique in the U.S. in that no other NERR is located in such close proximity to Federally maintained shipping channels. One of the objectives of the Reserve is to study the relationship between natural ecosystems and these shipping/industrial activities in order to establish an information base for the wise management and coexistence of both in the future. Hence the establishment of the Reserve would not limit the maintenance of existing shipping channels. d. Research and Education. The North Inlet Estuary-Winyah Bay site serves as a research and instructional facility for the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research of The University of South Carolina. It functions as a national and international site for estuarine and coastal research and education. Since 1969, a comprehensive research program ranging from studies of molecules to ecological landscapes has evolved. The research approach has developed from quantifying various physical, chemical, and biological components and interactions between these components, to incorporating exchange of substances across ecosystem boundaries and exchanges between different subsystems. Initial research efforts emphasized wetland and estuarine processes, but studies have 75 expanded to encompass an entire coastal landscape, from ocean to diverse upland and freshwater habitats. There is algo a continuing emphasis on molecular and organismic studies. Undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate instruction has been given at Hobcaw Barony. In 1980, the Baruch Institute, USC, established a Continuing Education Program at its field site in Georgetown to serve area residents and visitors. This program has included short courses for children and adults, public lectures and forums, and marine science workshops and courses for teachers. Additional public education activities are conducted at the site through the Bellefield Nature Center, a part of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation. The Nature Center is open to visitors 6 days a week and contains aquaria; exhibits featuring coastal life, ecology and research conducted on-site; and audiovisual programs that are shown daily. In addition, the Nature Center also conducts field studies of salt marsh, forest, and freshwater habitats on the property and brings nature programs to local schools. Although significant progress has been made in developing broad-based monitoring, research, and education programs, a distinct need exists to improve and expand the program to educate more people about the cultural, economic, and ecological values of our coastal area and to develop a more comprehensive scientific basis to deal with the ever-increasing environmental pressure resulting from continuing growth in the coastal zone. e. Present Land Use. The present land uses have been described in the previous section on existing uses. The area to be included in the Reserve is primarily used for research and education, but the tidal waters are used by the public for recreational purposes as provided by state and Federal law. 3. Future Land and Rgsource Use No change in land and resource use is proposed as a result of the creation of the NI/WB NERR, except to strengthen and expand research and teaching facilities and programs to meet future demands. Existing uses of the land and resources by the public will be continued in the Hobcaw Barony, as provided by Baruch Foundation regulations and State law, and in the tidal waters, as provided by State and Federal laws. Traditional uses include sail and power boating, recreational fishing and gathering of shellfish, hunting in marshes, etc., that currently exist as provided for by the above regulations and laws. 76 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES A. General Establishment of NI/WB NERR will have a net positive benefit to both the natural environment and the human environment. The primary positive impact on the natural environment will be long-term protection of the natural resources. This will have an obvious positive impact on biota, habitats, and water quality. Research and education programs will have a positive impact because they will improve understanding, management, and use of coastal resources. The impacts of visitor use and facilities development which may occur at the Reserve will be negligible. The impact of littering will also be negligible, if not reduced, through education campaigns. Impacts on the human environment will be positive. Research and education will result in positive benefits to society. Traditional uses of reserve land and water areas will not be hampered. Public contact with the estuarine environment will be enhanced. Effects on employment and tax revenues will be positive. Aesthetic impacts will not be negative. Cultural resources will be protected and not adversely impacted. B. Specific Impacts 1. Visitor -Use No change from the existing research and traditional use of the Reserve lands and waters will occur. Visitors will be received at the Nature Center, which is located at the gate on US Highway 17. All tours of the property will be conducted by personnel associated with the Nature Center and the Reserve. Because of the large expanse of Hobcaw Barony (it has approximately 90 miles of single lane roads), ongoing wildlife and other research projects which require minimal human disturbances, and the liability concerns of the primary landowners (Belle W. Baruch Foundation), it is not feasible to allow unrestricted access to the property. Water access to the Reserve tidal waters is possible under existing state and Federal regulations. No additional regulations or restrictions are being proposed. No significant increase in the use of the Hobcaw Barony and the proposed Reserve is expected over the usage during 1990 when the education programs of the Foundation and the Baruch Institute served about 35,000 people, including more than 2,900 school children from around the state who participated in field studies of salt 77 marsh, pond and forest ecosystems. Approximately 200 teachers from various school systems participated in workshops presented by staff members. The carrying capacity for visitor use will be determined and any environmental effects of additional visitors will be carefully monitored. Only increases in visitor use which have none or only minimal effects on the environment will be permitted. 2. Construction Research facilities are available and the Institute will be constructing a new research laboratory in 1992 to replace the two laboratories destroyed by Hurricane Hugo. At the entrance to the Hobcaw Barony is the Nature Center which is owned and operated by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation and functions as a visitor center. In addition to a reception and display area, a separate classroom building is used for instructional purposes. The adjacent USC Kimbel Living Center, consisting of housing accommodations for 80 persons and a meeting center, is available for workshops, seminars, and visiting groups and researchers. Other facilities contribute to the overall experience of visitors to the site. Examples of these include interpretive exhibits, printed educational materials, a collection of flora and fauna, and a boardwalk. If NI/WB NERR builds or renovates a structure, development activities will take place on a very small area of land in the least sensitive zone of the reserve. A feasibility study will be conducted to take into account soil suitability, geology, vegetative community development, wildlife use, presence of rare, threatened and endangered species, and historical land use patterns. Land cover and land use categories will be mapped and defined according to suitable uses. The environmental impact of any construction and improvements will be fully assessed as part of a site design plan. Building will be constructed to conform with federal (i.e. FEMA) and state regulations. Any necessary permits or agency and Foundation approval will be obtained and applicable state and local guidelines will be followed to avoid environmental damage. Overall, impacts from construction and improvements will be negligible. 3. Litter barrels will be provided at the Nature Center that is also the primary point of land access to the site. Periodic litter patrol and dumping of receptacle contents will be accomplished by reserve staff and volunteers. Since visitors will arrive in small controlled group situations, a major problem with litter should not occur. In addition, land access to the site is strictly regulated by gates and fencing installed by the Baruch Foundation. 78 4. Iml2acts on the Natural Environmen a. General Establishment of Reserve will ensure long-term protection of wetland, upland, and open-water habitats associated with the research core areas of the Reserve. Habitats in the buffer areas will be protected also, but with fewer restrictions on land use. Because the reserves' habitats support diverse and productive flora and fauna populations and help protect water quality, this protection will have a significant positive impact on the natural environment. Research and education programs will have net positive effects on the habitats, populations, and water quality of Winyah Bay in that these programs will increase the knowledge and understanding of estuarine systems which, in turn, will lead to improved care and management of estuaries. Only non-manipulative research will be permitted except in special research projects involving a small area of the Reserve and often extensive review of proposed research by the management team, the Baruch Institute, and SCCC. In addition appropriate permits will need to be obtained. Research and education projects will be approved through the permit process and managed to minimize disturbance to the environment. b. Adjacent Uplands Research and educational activities associated with the Reserve will not have negative impact on lands adjacent to the Reserve's boundary lines. These adjacent lands are: (i) The uplands of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, that have been established in perpetuity for the purposes of the study of marine biology, forestry, and conservation of wildlife; 00 The uplands and marsh lands of North Island that are owned by the State of South Carolina and have been set aside as an area of no development; and (iii) The marsh lands and uplands of the DeBordieu Colony. These uplands have been developed for residences. C. Adjacent Uplands and Open Water. The creation of the Reserve will not have a negative impact on shipping channels in Winyah Bay. The management plan clearly indicates that the boundary 79 lines do not impinge on existing shipping channels. At the point of closest proximity (the region immediately south of the Marsh Islands) the boundary line is the mean low water level adjacent to the marsh vegetation. Under state and Federal guidelines, no dredging or other disturbances of marsh vegetation would be allowed here even if the Reserve did not exist. If these guidelines are changed, the goals of the Reserve would not be altered in that one of the research objectives is to compare ecological responses of a man-influenced estuary (Winyah Bay) with an undisturbed estuary (North Inlet). Hence the establishment of the Reserve would hot limit the maintenance of existing shipping channels. (For a more detailed description of state regulations, see Section 11. A. 4. c.0)(b)(i) Relationship between- the South Carolina Coastal Council and the Management Agency.) The management plan does not call for a change from existing and traditional uses of the water areas of the Reserve nor will the creation of the Reserve have any effect on existing dredge disposal areas which are located well outside the boundaries of the Reserve. These dredge sites do not have an apparent effect on North Inlet. Existing dredge spoil areas are being used under a long-term contract involving the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It is not the intent, goal nor desire of the Reserve to restrict shipping and dredging activities of the Port of Georgetown. Rather, it is the objective of the Reserve to study the relationship between natural ecosystems and these activities in order to establish an information base for the wise management and co-existence of both in the future. d. Biota Governmental regulations and owner policies dealing with the harvesting of natural resources within the NI/WB NERR will not be altered by the creation of this Reserve. The comparative research and educational projects that will result from the creation of the NI/WI3 NERR will serve to increase public awareness and proper use of the natural resources within the site. Overall impact on the biota will be positive. e. Water Qualily Winyah Bay has undergone substantial -changes in the past, including episodes of increased or decreased freshwater flow, increased sedimentation, and measurable deterioration of water quality. North Inlet, by contrast, has been classified by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control as having the highest possible water quality status. Immediate impacts on the overall water quality in the NI/WB NERR will be negligible. Water quality monitoring will be part of the research and monitoring programs of the Reserve. This monitoring may lead to better management practices in the future which could improve overall water quality of the site. 80 5. ImI2aQtS On the Human Environmen a. Scientific and Educational Designation of the NI/WB NERR will make a valuable resource available on a long-term basis to local public and private research organizations and institutions. Reserve education programs will be useful to local school systems and higher education institutions. Education programs will benefit the local communities by providing opportunities for groups and individual citizens to increase their understanding and awareness of estuarine systems. Sound, informed coastal management decisions resulting from dissemination of research results to coastal managers will benefit the local community, the state, the region, and the Nation. b. Traditional Uses Establishment of the Reserve will not restrict traditional uses of the . environment. Traditional uses include observation of wildlife, swimming, hunting in marshes, fishing, and shellfishing. Protection of natural habitats and water quality may actually enhance traditional uses by enhancing natural diversity and productivity of reserve resources. Designation will ensure that the area will be available and protected for future use and enjoyment. (i) Hunting. Hunting in marshes is allowed in the Reserve subject to state and Federal jurisdiction and no change in existing practices will occur. (ii) Fishing. Recreational fishing is currently permitted understate regulation in tidal waters. It is not the intent, objective, nor the desire of the NI/WB NERR to change existing policies. Both recreational and commercial fishing activities are subject to the laws of South Carolina and regulations enforced by the SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department. (iii) Shellfishing. Shellfishing in the Reserve is governed by state rules and regulations which exclude commercial harvesting in North Inlet's tidal waters. State recreational harvesting regulations apply throughout this area. It is not the intent, objective nor the desire of the Reserve to change existing policies. 81 C. Emr)lovment No jobs will be eliminated by the designation of the reserve site. In contrast, four new positions will initially be created to begin the basic programs at the Reserve: Reserve Manager, Research/Resource Coordinator, Education Coordinator, and Secretary/Data Processor. The duties and responsibilities of these positions were described earlier. The secretary/data processor, who will be responsible to the Reserve Manager, will handle the various secretarial tasks associated with the program and assist the existing data management program with those topics relating to the Reserve's activities. As the program develops, the need for additional personnel will be evident. It is anticipated that a research technician(s) will be needed to assist in field studies and monitoring of living resources and of physical/chemical/geological factors. Overall impact on area employment will be positive. d. Public Particir)ation The designation of the NI/WB NERR will create excellent opportunities to enhance public awareness, understanding, and wise use of estuarine resources in the North Inlet and Winyah Bay Estuaries. These opportunities will be attained by the NI/WB NERR staff through: (i) promoting knowledge of the research reserve, its resources, and its programs as well as knowledge of broader coastal issues and concerns related to estuarine management and protection; (ii) collaborating with other organizations to provide educational and interpretive services at this site; (iii) disseminating information gained from research on the Reserve to public audiences, including government officials, planners, and other decision-makers; (iv) providing opportunities for teacher training, student projects, internships, and assistantships where enrolles work jointly with scientists, gain field experience, and learn about the importance of research results; (v)'' enhancing interest in and commitment to South Carolina estuaries and their tributaries through volunteer programs and personal contact with Reserve resources; and 82 NO broadening public support for the Reserve by continuing on-going programs suited to visitors of diverse interests, ages, and backgrounds. e. Fiscal Designation of the NI/WB NERR will not cause any loss of tax revenues to the counties or state because no change in existing land ownership and tax status will occur. The existence of a National Estuarine Research Reserve site in Georgetown County could have positive impacts on the tax base of lands in the immediate area by making the nearby properties more desirable and valuable. In addition, new employment opportunities and an increase in the number of visitors to the Nature Center will mean an increase in taxable salaries and dollars spent within the county. f. Infrastructure: Public Roads and Parkin Areas, Potable Water Supplies, Sewer Systems, and Energy Sugglies No impacts on the infrastructure of the NI/WI3 NERR area will occur. No new public roads, parking areas potable water supplies, sewer systems nor energy supplies are necessary since these facilities currently exist at the Hobcaw Nature Center and the Baruch Marine Laboratory. 9. Aesthetic Designation of the Reserve will protect the existing natural beauty of the site, and will make this beauty more available to the surrounding communities through public access. Reserve interpretation and education programs will enhance the Scenic Rivers Act of 1968. Reserve interpretation and education programs will enhance the public's awareness and appreciation of the aesthetic as well as the practical values of estuaries. Many education activities will use a multisensorV approach, helping people to gain familiarity with and enjoy the resources of the estuary through seeing, hearing, smelling and feeling. Passive enjoyment activities, such as watching and listening to birds or sketching estuarine scenes, will be encouraged. Designation will have a significant positive impact on aesthetics. h. Cultural Resources Cultural resources suc'h as historical and archaeological sites and artifacts will be protected and enhanced. These resources will also be made more available to the public through education programs. Designation of the site will have a significant positive impact on cultural resources. 83 Public Access Access to the Reserve by land will be monitored and controlled and current access policies and regulations will be enforced. As noted previously (see Section III B) access to the Reserve's tidal waters by boat is a traditional use and this practice will not be altered. The South Carolina Coastal Council reaffirmed this policy on public access in a Resolution adopted on December 13, 1991 (Appendix M). C. Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources No resources will be irreversibly or irretrievable lost since no change in land ownership will occur. The Reserve management plan does not attempt to change existing local, state or Federal laws/regulations relating to current and traditional uses. To allow for future growth or change, the NI/WB NERRS program is flexible. The plan can only be rewritten or the boundaries changed, subject to a complete public review process and NOAA guidelines. The entire program can be terminated in accordance with NOAA regulations, should it be desired. I D. Possible Conflicts Between the Proposed Action and the Objectives of the Belle W. Baruch Foundation, Federal, State, Regional, and Local Use Plans, Policies and Controls for the Area Concerned The establishment of the proposed NI/WB NERR will not be in conflict with the objectives of Belle W. Baruch Foundation, Federal, State, regional and local land use plans, policies, and controls. Many of these agencies and the Belle W. Baruch Foundation have existing goals which are in common with the National Estuarine Research Reserve Program. The proposed action is consistent with all relevant regulations. The NI/WB NERR will cooperate with these agencies and the Belle W. Baruch Foundation and comply with their regulations. All necessary permits and agency or Foundation approval will be obtained for reserve activities. The NI/WB NERRS management plan clearly emphasizes coordination and cooperation with existing local, state, regional, Federal and Belle W. Baruch Foundation programs; with local and state education systems; and with Federal marine and estuarine programs. 84 V. LIST OF PREPARERS State of South Carolina Baruch Institute, USC Dr. Dennis M. Allen, Assistant Director Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research Baruch Marine Field Laboratory, University of South Carolina P.O. Box 1630 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mrs. Wendy Allen, Continuing Education Director Bellefield Nature Center Rt. 5, Box 1003 Georgetown, SC 29440 Dr. Michael P. Crosby, Research Assistant Professor Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine. Biology and Coastal Research Baruch Marine Field Laboratory, University of South Carolina P.O. Box 1630 Georgetown, SC 29442 Dr. F. John Vernberg, Director Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 SC Coastal Counci Mr. Steve Snyder SC Coastal Council 4130 Faber Place, Suite 300 Charleston, SC 29405 NOAA Mrs. Dolores Washington Program Specialist Sanctuaries and Reserves Division National Ocean Service Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management NOAA Washington, D.C. 20235 85 Acknowledgements: We would thank J. Blakely, K. Caulfield, P. Kenny, A. Miller, and M. Sawyer for their assistance@ with the preparation of this management plan and environmental impact statement. Members of the NI/WB NERR Advisory Committee were actively involved in the planning and development of this document. 86 VI. LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS RECEIVING COPIES OF THE FEIS/DMP Federal Agencies Advisory Council of Historic Preservation Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division Department of Agriculture Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service Department of Defense Department of Energy Department of Health and Human Services Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of Justice Department of Labor Department of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard and Federal Highway Administration Environmental Protection Agency, Permits Branch, Region IV Federal Energy Regulatory Commission General Services Administration Nuclear Regulatory Commission Congressional Senator Ernest F. Hollings Senator Strom Thurmond Representative Arthur Ravenel State Distributign Governor Attorney General Archaeology Institute South Carolina Coastal Council South Carolina Department of Archives and History South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control South Carolina Department of Highways and Public Transportation South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism South Carolina Forestry Commission South Carolina Land Resources Conservation Commission South Carolina Public Railways Commission South Carolina Public Service Authority 87 South Carolina Public Service Commission South Carolina State Budget and Control Board South Carolina State Development Board South Carolina State Ports Authority South Carolina Water Resources Commission Local Distribution Georgetown County Georgetown County Development Commission Beaufort County Joint Planning Commission Georgetown County Administrator Waccamaw Regional Planning Commission Mayor, Georgetown Senator Doug Hinds Representative Linwood Altman Environmental Interest Groups Center for Environmental Education Environmental Defense Fund The Nature Conservancy National Wildlife Federation Sierra Club South Carolina Chamber of Commerce South Carolina Coastal Conservation League South Carolina Environmental Coalition South Carolina Wildlife Federation League of Women Voters, Georgetown Chapter Libraries Georgetown County Library South Carolina State Library NI/W9 NERR Advisory Committee Members Mr. John McMillan, Director Division of Energy, Governor's Office State House P.O. Box 11369 Columbia, SC 29211 88 Dr. James Halpin Belle W. Baruch Foundation at Georgetown 104 Barre Hall Clemson University Clemson, SC 29634-0351 Ms. Betsy Haskin League of Women Voters 218 Cannon Street Georgetown, SC 29440 Mr. Jimmy Chandler SC Environmental Law Project P.O. Box 279 Pawleys Island, SC 29585 Mr. D. Claude Baker SC State Ports Authority P.O. Box 601 Georgetown, SC 29440 Mr. Bob Joyner Yawkey Wildlife Center SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department Route 2, P.O. Box 181 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mr. Bill Doar P.O. Box 418 Georgetown, SC 29442 The Honorable Linwood Altman P.O. Box 164 Pawleys Island, SC 29585 Mr. Tommy Strange Santee Coastal Reserve, SCWMR P.O. Box 37 McClellanville, SC 29458 Mr. Alfred Schooler, Chairman Georgetown County Council P.O. Drawer 1270 Georgetown, SC 29442 89 Mr. Charles Lucquire international Paper Corp6ration P.O. Box 538 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mr. Dan Avant Edens & Avant 930 Richland Street Columbia, SC 29201 The Honorable H.E. Bonnoitt, Jr. Mayor, City of Georgetown P. 0. Box 164 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mr. Jack Kendree Georgetown County Development Commission P.O. Box 689 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mr. Ingell H. Doyle Georgetown Bar and Harbor Pilots Association P.O. Box 404 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mr. James B. Moore, Jr. P.O. Drawer 418 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mr. Dean C. Cain SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department P.O. Box 839 Georgetown, SC 29442 Mr. Charles, Stockly Georgetown Sportfishing Association 603 Whitehall Drive North Belle Isle Georgetown, SC 29440 M r. Stuart Hope 12 Lafayette Blvd West Debordieu Colony Georgetown, SC 29440 90 I I Mr. Reed M. Bohne, Manager Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary, NOAA I P.O. Box 13687 Savannah, GA 31416 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 91 1 VII. SELECTED REFERENCES Allen, D.M., S.E. Stancyk,, and W.K. Michener, eds. 1982. Ecology of Winyah Bay, SC and Potential Impacts of Energy Development. Baruch Institute Special Publication No. 82-1. 275 pp. Allen, D.M., W.K. Michener, and S.E. Stancyk, eds. 1984. Pollution Ecology of Winyah Bay, SC: Characterization of the Estuary and Potential Impacts of Petroleum. Baruch Institute Special Publication No. 84-1. 271 pp. Blood, L. and F.J. Vernberg. (11992). Characterization of the physical, chemical, and biological conditions and trends in Winyah Bay and North Inlet Estuaries: 1970-1985. In: Characterization of the physical, chemical, and biological conditions and trends of three South Carolina estuaries. SC Sea Grant Consortium. Bloomer, D.R. 1973. A hydrographic investigation of Winyah Bay, South Carolina and the adjacent waters. Masters Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology. 57 1313. Conservation Foundation, The. 1980. A reconnaissance of the structure and dynamics of the Winyah Bay ecosystem. pp. 1-36, In: The Conservation Foundation. Winyah Bay Reconnaissance Study (Technical Supplement). Washington, D.C. Fox, R.S. and E.E. Ruppert. 1985. Shallow-water Marine Benthic Macroinvertebrates of South Carolina. Belle W. Baruch Library in Marine Science, Number 14. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC. 329 pp. Johnson, F.A. 1970. A reconnaissance of the Winyah Bay estuarine zone, South Carolina. S.C. Water Resources Commission. Report No. 4. 36 pp. Johnson, F.A. 1972. A reconnaissance of the Winyah By estuarine zone, South Carolina. S.C. Water Resources Commission. Report No. 4. 36 pp. Mathews, T.D., F.W. Stapor, Jr., C.R. Richter, J.V. Miglarese, M.D. McKenzie, L.A. Barclay, E.B. Joseph, and M.D. McKenzie (eds). 1980. Ecological characterization of the'Sea Island coastal region of South Carolina and Georgia. Vol. 1: Physical features of the characterization area. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biol. Serv., Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-79/40. 212 pp. 92 Ogburn, M.V., D.M. Allen, and W.K. Michener. 1988. Fishes, shrimps, and crabs of the North Inlet Estuary, SC: A four-year seine and trawl survey. Baruch Institute Technical Report. No. 88-1. 299 pp. University of South Carolina, Columbia. Pritchard, D.W. 1955. Estuarine circulation patterns. Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 81 (717):1-11. South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. 1977. Water classification standards system for the state of South Carolina. South Carolina Pollution Control Authority. 1972. Stream classifications for the state of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. 24 pp. Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1977. An inventory of South Carolina's coastal marshes. S.C. Mar. Res. Cent. Tech. Rep. No. 23. 33 pp. Trawle, J.J. 1978. Georgetown Harbor, South Carolina; Report 1, hydraulic, salinity, and shoaling verification; hydraulic model investigation. U.S. Army Engineer District, Charleston, S.C. Miscellaneous paper H-78-6, Report I of a series. U.S. Department Commerce. 1979. Final environmental impact statement proposed coastal management program for the State of South Carolina. Zingmark, R.G. ed. 1978. An Annotated Checklist of the Biota of the Coastal Zone of South Carolina. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC. 364 pp. For more information see Publications of the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research 1969 - 1989 which contains citations of 750 papers published by Baruch Institute personnel. 93 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX A I Tripartite Agreement I I I I I I I I I I STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA AGREEMENT COUNTY OF THIS AGREEMENT made this' ZZ day of February 1975, among THE BELLE W. BARUCH FOUNDATION (the "Foundation"), CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the FOUNDAT@O N1 owns over 16, 000 acres of maritime properties in Georgetown County, South Carolina, and is a charitable organiza- tion declared exempt from Federal income taxation by an Internal Revenue Service ruling dated December 24, 1964, and an operating foundation by an Internal Revenue Service ruling dated January 17, 1973; WHEREAS, the FOUNDATION was created pursuant to the last will and testament of Belle W. Baruch, (which will was duly admitted to probate by &-*e Surrogate's Court of the County of New York, State of New York), the pertinent provisions of said will, (a copy of which is annexed hereto) stating as follows: 'To invest and reinvest the trust property, and, in perpetuity. to collect the income therefrom, and, after paying to the Trustees such commissions for the administration of the Trust -is are allowable under the laws of the State of South Carolina, and such other expenses of the administration of the Trust, and other proper legitimate expenses, to use said net income for the purposes of teaching and/or research in forestry, marine biology, and the care and propagation of wildlife and flora and fauna in South Carolina, in connection with colleges and/or universities in the State of South Carolina. The college or 'colleges or universities in South Carolina, and-the teaching and research for the charitable Uses and purposes. above set forth in this Article shall be selected from time to time by the Trustees, or a majority of those serving at any time'.-'# The Trustees. in addition to all other powers given under Lhis Will. are authorized to pay all or part of the expenses of teachLng and/or research in connection with any college or colleges and/or universities in South Carolina selected by the Trustees, which will, as a part of its research or educational program, assist in the carrying out of the educatlional and charitable uses and purposes of this Trust*0* definitely wish the house at flobca%v to be used as a laboratory for the teaching and/or rcsearch in forestry and/or marine life in connection with a colle."e jr university in the State of South Carolina. specif ically ernpowe r my said T ftistee s to keep, maintain and improve noy lanrl% or building that may be a pitrt of the corptis of th,-- !: UST, and to maitc. tiuch addition-t and per-manent improve- rncntr, to the prop@-rty as will incrca!-.e its productivity and its useful- ness for the charit; 1)Ia purposes of this Foundation Trust7lg@@'r; and A- I WHEREAS, an agreement was entered into between the FOUNDATION and CLEMSON UNIVERSITY on November 14, 1963, desi.-ned to implement a program developed by the FOUNDATION in conjunction with the UNIVERSITY and pursuant to which CLEMSON UNIVERSITY has furnished professional advice to the FOUNDA- TION with respect to the scientific management of forested lands, beach areas, and aquatic environments, and the operation and management thereof in their use as a research and teaching facility; assembled data with.respect to trees and vegetation, and the succession and interaction of plant and wildlife populations; made studies of soil types, insects and diseases; developed and implemented programs of research on forestry; and*conducted biological investigations of the FOUNDATION'S property-, and WHEREAS, an agreement was entered into on March 22, 197Z, between the FOUNDATION and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, designed to implement a i rogram. developed by the FOUNDATION in conjunction with the UNIVERSITY and pursuant to which the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA has furnished professional advice to the FOUNDATION with respect to the preservation of marsh and estuarine areas -And the operation and management thereof in their use as a research facility; made studies on the functioning of high salinity marshes; developed programs of research in marine biology; and erected a laboratory for the co@duct of such research on the FOUNDATION'S property; and WHEREAS, the FOUNDATION has reviewed with CLEMSON UNIVERSITY and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA the desirability of a long-range joint program directed towards the coordination of activities and procedures of the UNIVERSITIES and FOUNDATION in inter-related spheres of interest and pursuit with a view to assuring the preservation and conservation of the ecological and environmental qualities of the FOUNDATION'S property and the preservation of. its historical value as a whole; and WHEREAS. in recognition of the identity of the Interests of the FOUNDA- TION and the UNIVERSITIES as state universities in the preservation and conserva- tion in perpehilty for the benefit of the State of South Carolina and the public of the valuable resources of the FOUNDATION'S property. the FOUNDATION has concen- trated and is desirons of continuing to concentrate its avail,@blo funds tow.%rds -3- this objective and special research and teaching projects in forestry, marine biology and the care and propagation of wildlife and nora and fauna in the State of South Carolina it conducts on its property; and WHEREAS, in recognition of the value to the public of the coordination of the activities of the FOUNDATION, and the UNIVERSITIES, and their continuance, the FOUNDATION has determined that its purposes would be furthered by the opera- tion, management, and use of its property as provided for in this agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements con- tained herein, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 1. Use of Property Subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, the FOUNDATION shall from time to time with the aid and consultation of CLEMSON UNIVERSITY and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, delineate by zones depicted on appropriate maps the specific areas within the FOUNDATION'S property which the UNIVERSITIES can manage and use in conjunction with the FOUNDATION. Delineation of these areas may be changed or modified in accordance with Article 19 of this agreement and in such manner as shall seem to the F0UNDATION most appropriate for the achievement of its goals, but such delineation shall be made only after the UNI- VERSITIES have each had opportunity to relate to the FOUNDATION both the status of their research activities and the nature of and extent of any increases or decreases they may wish to seek in the scope of their activities* or responsibilities, or which may be necessitated by change of circumstances. Subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, and for the purpose of conducting-a joint project with- the FOUNDATION,-the FOUNDATION shall permit CLEMSON UNIVERSITY' to use and occupy in conjunction with the FOUNDATION, the areas within the portion of the FOUNDATION'S property herein described as the FOREST-MARINE AREA at the locations marked in green on the map of the FOUNDA- TION'S property attached hereto as Exhibit "A. " The FOUNDATION, subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, shall further permit CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, to use and occupy the building on the FOREST-MARINE AREA provided for its resident director, and the building provided on such area for its resident forester, A-3 -4- and other buildings on such area as the FOUNDATION may designate, and to use the equipment, furniture, furnishings and other personal property of the F0UNDA- TION located therein or used in connection therewith provided, however, that the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA in accordance with use plans developed by CLEMSON UNIVERSITY in coordination with the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA and the FOUNDATION, shall have the right to conduct, meetings, discussions, sern- inars, exhibitions, and other such activities at Hobcaw House, and for such purposes also to use the equipment, furniture, furnishing and other personal property of the FOUNDATION located therein or used in connection therewith in such manner as shall not interfere with the effective use and maintenance thereof by CLEMSON, UNI- VERSITY. CLEMSON UNIVERSITY shall have the responsibility for initiating the consultations necessary for development of a coordinated plan for the use of Hobcaw House, and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA and the FOUNDATION shall be responsible for making timely responses to the initiatives'of CLEMSON UNIVERSITY in this regard; and CLEMSON UNIVERSITY shall have the discretion to resolve schedule conflicts in such manner as in its judgment shall seem. most reasonable in. effecting the purposes* of this agreement but in each instance shall coordinate its decision with the FOUNDATION. CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement shall with the FOUNDATION use the FOREST-MARINE AREA, and shall use and occupy the said buildings -provided for its resident director and its resident forester, shall use and occupy Hobcaw House and other buildings designated by the FOUNDATION in accordance with the terms stated above and shall use the said equipment, furniture, furnishings and other personal property of the FOUNDATION located therein or Used in connection therewith, and shall u se and occupy the portion of the boat building in MARSH-MARINE AREA now in use and occupied by it. in accordance with. the terms stated below, exclusively for the purposes enumerated in this agreement, such use and/or occupancy to be conducted in a manner serving and in furtherance of the FOUNDATION'S purposes and programs to preserve and conserve the ecological and environmental qualities of its property (of which the FOREST-MARINE AREA forms a part) and the preservation of its historical value. A-4 Subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, the FOUNDATION shall permit the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA to use and' occupy, in Conjunc- tion with the FOUNDATION, the area3 within the portion of the FOLTNI)ATIOANIS property herein described as the MARSH-MARINE AREA at the locations marked in blue on the map of the FOUNDATION'S property attached hereto as Exhibit "A. The UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLMA, in.conjunction with the FOUNDATION, sha.11 also have the use of and shaU occupy the marine biology laboratory building and other buildings as the FOUNDATION may designate on the MARSK-MARZIE AREA and shall also use and occupy the boat building on the MARSH-MARINE AREA; provided, however, that CLEMSON UNIVER SITY shall continue to have the use and oc cupancy of "as portion of z aid boat building an the MARSH -MARINE AREA which is, now in use and occupied by it. and provided further that such use and occupaacy of the boat house by CLEMSON UNIVERSITY shall not interfere with the effective Use 'hereof by the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA. The UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, shall. with the FOUNDATIOND use the MARSH-MARINE AREA, and shall use and occupy the marine biolog y laboratory building situated on such area and other buildings as the FOUNDA- TION may designate and shall use and occupy the boat building thereon (other than the portion of such boat bui.1ding now in use and occupied by CLEMSON UNIVERSITY), exclusively for purposes enumerated in this agreement, such use and/or occupancy -to be conducted in a manner serving and in furtherance of the FOUNDATION'S purpose and programs to preserve and conserve the ecological and environmental qualities of its property (of which the MARSH-MARINE AREA forms a part) and the preserva- tion of its historical imporance. CLEMSON UNIVERSITY shall have, in conjunction with the FOUNDATION, the custody and use of maintenance and safety equipment of tAe FOUNDATION located on or within the FOREST-MARINE AREA or used in connection with maintenance of roads, buildings and equipment. CLEMSON UNIVERSITY shall also have, in conjunc- tion with the FOUNDATION, the use of boat landings. docks, piers, boats and other transportation equipment and maintonance and safety equipment of the FOUNDATION located on or within the MARSH-MARINE AREA in connection with the performance A-5 -6- by it of its obligations under this agreement in respect to roads and land areas within the MARSH-MARINE AREA. The UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA shall, in conjunction with the FOUNDATION, have the use of boat landings, docks, piers, boats and other transpor- tation and safety equipment of the FOUNDATION located an or within the MARSH- MARINE AREA in connection with the performance by it of its obligations under this agreement in respect to areas within the MARSH-MARINE AREA; provided, however, that CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, in accordance with use plan's developed by the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA in coordination with CLEMSON UNIVERSITY and the FOUNDATION. shall have the right to use the boat landings, docks, piers, boats and other transportation equipment of the FOUNDATION located on the MARSHS- MARINE ARE A; in such manner and at such times as shall not interfere with the effective use thereof by the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA. The UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA shall have the responsibility for initiating the consultations necessary for development of a coordinated plan for the use of these facilities and CLEMSON UNIVERSITY and the FOUNDATION shal.1 be responsible for making timely responses to the initiatives of the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA in-this regard, and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA shall have the discretion to resolve schedule conflicts in such manner as in its judgment shall seem most reasonable in effecting the purposes -of this agreement but in each instance shall coordinate its decision with the FOUNDATION. Access roads and water routes to and within the FOREST-MARINE AREA and the MARSH -MARINE AREA and par-king sites within such areas (except parking sites for buildings in use or occupied by the 'resident director and resident forester of CLEMSON UNIVERSITY and for the marine biology laboratory building in Use and occupied by the UNIVERSITY OF' SOUTH CAROLINA), shall be used in common by the UNIVERSITIES and the FOUNDATION; provided, however, that CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, in consultation with the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA and the FOUNDATION. shall have the authority to regulate traffic so as to ensure the offi- cient maintenance of facilities and a minimum of traffic conflicts for efficient and safe use of the properties, and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA shall have comparable authority and responsibility with respect to water routes. A-6 -7- The FOUNDATION may from time tn time grant casements and other rights to others over the FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA and may make such additional uses of the FOREST-MARINE AREA and MARSH- MARINE AREA as in each case shall not interfere with the effective use of the same by the UNIVERSITIES for the purposes enumerated in this agreement. Any such use of FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA by the FOUNDA- TION shall be subject to safety regulations prepared by the UNIVERSITIES and approved by the FOUNDATION as provided in Article 2 of this agreement. The boundaries of the FOREST-MARINE AREA and the MARSH-MARINE AREA, determined by the FOUNDATION in consultation with the UNIVERSITIES, shall at al1 times encompass not less than the entire acreage of the FOUNDATION'S property. Any contiguous property hereafter acquired by che FOUNDATION shal.1, if the FOUNDATION in its sole discretion so determines, be added to either area and shall be subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement. (It is recognized that a portion of the FOUNDATION'S property is subject to the legal Ufa tenancy granted to Miss Ella A. Severin by the %rill of Belle W. Baruch, and that no pro- visions of this agreement shall in any wise affect such legal Ufa tenancy.) 2. Safety Regulations Each UNIVERSITY shall prepare and submit for approval by the FOUNDA- TION comprehensive safety regulations appertaining to its area(s) of responsibility. These shall include. without being limited to, fire ru1es and precautions, emergency warning systems, communication procedures, admiS3ion restrictions, permits and identification badges. Regulations on road use, speed limits, traffic control and their enforcement, shall be the responsibility solely of CLEMSON UNIVERSITY. Enforcement of safety regulations with respect to the use of water routes shall be the responsibility solely of the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 3. Protection of Property It is recognized by the parties to this agreement that the primary value of the FOUNDATION'S property is the availability of the diverse environmental and ecological characteristics of the FOREST-MARINE and MARSH-MARINE AREAS, with their wildlife populations, for the purposes of teaching and research. A-7 Therefore, it is essential that these physical qualities be'conserved and preserved in such a manner as to offer the widest range of benefits from use of the property for teaching and/or research in forestry and marine biology, and the care and propagation of wildlife and flora and fauna in perpetuity. In the event any activity shall be engaged in on the FOREST-MAR114E AREA and/or MARSH-MARUX AREA that adversely affects the teaching and research values of the FOUNDATION'S property, the UNIVERSITIES shall take such steps as are necessary to cause the. cessation of such activity or to compel its discontinuance and to prevent its recurrence. UNIVERSITIES shall attempt to secure assistance and services available from law enforcement officials of the state, local and federal governments for the protection of the FOUNDATION'S property. UNI'%MRSITIES shall cooperate with the FOUNDATION, upon its request, in attempting to have its properties declared a sanctuary both state and federal., and i otherwise affording to FOUNDATION'S property the protection provided by conservation and similar laws. 4. Overations and Activities CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, in accordance with Its past practice, shall continue to provide professional advice to the FOUNDATION with respect to the scientific management of the FOREST-MARINE AREA, and the operation thert:of in its use as a research facility, and, in accordance with programs and policies heretofore and hereafter initiated and/or approved by the FOUNDATION, shall continue, in conjunction with the FOUPWATION, to conduct research and provide teaching in forestry and the care and propagation of wildlife. flora and fauna within the FOREST -MARINE AREA, as depicted an the map attached hereto as Emhiblt "A." and to develop and implement management concepts and procedures withizz% the FOREST-MARTNE AREA. The UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, in accordance with its past practice, shall continue to provide professional advice to the FOUNDATION with respect to the preservation of the MARSH-MARINE AREA and the operation thereof in its use as a research facility. and in accordance with programs and A-8 -9- policies heretofore and hereafter initiated and/or approved by FOUNDATION, shall continue, in conjunction with the FOUNDATION, to conduct research and provide teaching in marine biology and the care and propagation of wildLife, flora. and fauna within the MARSH-MARINE AREA, as depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A, " and to develop and implement management concepts and procedures within the MARSH-MARINE AREA. All activities conducted by the UNIVERSITIES on the FOUNDATION'S property. and all decisions of the UNIVERSITIES which involve the conservation, preservation or use of the FOUNDATION'S properly must be approved by the FOUNDATION in advance. After consultation with and the approval of the FOUNDATION, each of CLEMSON UNIVERSITY and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA shall: (i) Conduct special seminars, lectures and symposia within its field of interest for scientists and advanced students. (ii) Enagage in teaching and research programs determined to be of value in carrying out the purposes of this agreement. (iii) Each of CLEMSON UNIVERSITY and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA shall provide, the FOUNDATION with progress and completion reports on approved proposals; prepare timely technical, administrative, and financial reports on its activities for the FOUNDA- TION and. application of funds received from the FOUNDATION not less frequently than annually; furnish the FOUNDATION copies of project outlines, -completed reports, and articles and other material appearing in scientific jourcals and other publications with respect to the progress and results of research and other activities -supported through this agreement. All activities of the UNIVERSITIES listed above, including all research. teaching, etc., shall be for the purpose of preserving and conserving the ecological and educational qualities of the FOREST-MARINE and MARSH-MARINE AREAS for teaching and research in forestry and the care and propagation of wildlife, flora and fauna within the FOREST-MARINE AREA and in marine biology and the care and propagation of wildlife, flora and fauna within the MARSH-MARINE AREA. A-9 _10- 5. Disbursement of Income - Contribtition of Funds After reviewing the proposals for research projects. teaching and other activities made by the UNIVERSITIES to the FOUNDATION. and after allocatLng to the UNIVERSITIES funds required for maintenance and upkeep of the FOUNDATION'S property, the FOUNDATION shall determine which portion of its income for the year Will be used to support such research, teaching and other activities of the two U`1NI- VERSITIES and will notify ihe UNIVERSITIES as to the funds available to them. The FOUNDATION shall make no distribution of income for teaching or .research purposes during thd'term of this agreement whi-ch are independent of the. teaching and research programs of the UNIVERSITIES conducted in conjunction with the FOUNDATION. 6. Maintenance, Repairs and Taxes Except as otherwise provided herein, CLEMSON UNIVERSITY shaU keep and maintain in good order and repair and in safe condition all b%LUdings, roads. vehicle ey-tries, drives and parking areas. boat landings, docks, piers, boats and other trans- portation equipment and maintenance equipment of the FOUNDATION. The costs of maintaining aforementioned buildings, roads, capital improvements; costs of mainte- nance, repair, and replacement of service vehicles used jointly by all parties or for general maintenance of the property; and costs of taxes, sball be paid by the FOUNDA- TION. CLEMSON UNIVERSITY. in consultatior, with the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA-Pund the FOUNDATION, -shall prepare and submit to the FOUNDATION prior to the beginning Of each fiscal year a budget estimate of the costs for the forthcoming year for the e=enditures defined in this Article. The UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA shall, except as otherwise re- quired by this Article of CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, keep *and maintain the interior areas of the marine biology laboratory building in use and occupied by it in the M.ARSH- MARINE AREA. and the fixtures and appurtenances thereto. and any equipment or other personal property of the FOUNDATION located therein or used in connection therewith in good order and repair and in safe and clean condition and shaU further keep and maintain in good order and safe condition, free from obstruction, the entry, drive. and parking areas of the building. 7. Alterations and Improvements Recognizing that future building and expansion may be neccsxary to carry out effectively the purposes of the UNIVERSITIES and the FOUNDATION. neither UNIVERSITY shall make any alterations. installations, additions or improvements on, in or to FOREST -MARINE AREA and MARSH-MARINE AREA, including any buildings, structures or improvements now or hereafter erected thereon, -and the fixtures and appurtenances thereto, without the FOUNDATION'S prior written consent, nor shall either UNIVERSITY demolish any part thereof or remove any equipment, furniture, furnishings or other personal property of the FOUNDATION, without the FOUNDATION'S prior written consent. All buildings, structures and improvements now or hereafter erected on FOREST-MARINE AREA and MARSH-MARINE AREA, and the fixtures and appurtenances thereto, shall be part of the realty. and freehold, and shall not be removed by either UNIVERSITY, without the prior written consent of the FOUNDATION (The removalbe scientific, research, office and other equipment and the movable furniture and furnishings of each UNIVERSITY, however, shall remain its property at all times and may be removed prior to or at the expiration of the term hereof. Any darnage to the FOUNDATION'S property in the course ot such by either UNIVERSITY of its movable property shall be repaired by the UNIVERSITY con- cerned at its sole expense and cost. Maintenance, repair transportation and safety equipment purchased by or through either UNIVERSITY with funds provided by the FONDATION and at the FOUNDATION'S specific request or with its approval, shall be deemed property of the FOUNDATION.) Neither UNIVERSITY shall have any power to do any act , or make any contract which may create or bind the FOUNDATION for any lien, mortgage or other encumbrance upon FOREST -MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA, or upon any part thereof or upon the estate of FOUNDATION therein. 3. Utilities and Serv-ices Each UNIVERSITY shall pay or cause to be paid all charges for utilities and services (including bull without being limited to heat, electric current or power, pump and well. septic tank, telephone and refuse removal). furnished to the occupants of any building, structure or improvement exclusively occupied by it, and the FOUNDATION shall not supply or be responsible or liable for any such utilities or services. A- 1 9. Laws and Orders The UNIVERSITIES, and each of them, shall promptly observe and comply with all present or future laws, ordinances, orders, rules, requirements. and regulations of each and every governmental and lawful authority having jurisdiction over all or any part of FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE, AREA, and of the Fire Department, Board of Fire Underwriters and/or similar body exercising functions over the sarne, and of all insurance companies writing policies covering the same or any part thereof. 10. Fire In case of fire and damage caused thereby to any building, structure, a or improvement, the FOUNDATION (except as herein otherwise provided) shall repair the same,or the part thereof damaged, with reasonable diligence. Due allowance shall be made, however, for any delay which m ay be caused in connection with the adjustment of fire insurance or by reason of governmental regulations, accidents or other causes beyond the FOUNDATION'S control. If the damage or destruction shall affect the whole of FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA or shall in the sole judgment of the UNIVERSITY concerned be deemed so extensive that the UNIVERSITY concerned cannot reasonably continue the conduct of its activities thereon, then this agreement and the term hereof shall cease and terminate as to such UNIVERSITY upon- the date of such damage or destruction; if, however, only a part of FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE -AREA shall be so damaged or destroyed as to be rendered unusable, and the part not so affected shall be sufficient to permit the UNIVERSITY concerned reasonably to continue the conduct of its activities, or if any building or improvement shall be so damaged or destroyed that the FOUNDATION shall decide not to repair or shall decide to demolish the same, then in either such event, such UNIVERSITY may elect to terminate this agreement by giving FOUNDATION notice of such intention, in which case this agreement shall terminate as to such UNIVERSITY upon the expiration of the time fixed in such notice, or it the UNIVERSITY concerned shall not elect A- 12 -13- to so terminate this agreement, this agreement shall continue in full force and effect as to the part of the area concerned remaining usable by such UNIVERSITY. 11. Condemnation or Taking If during the term of this agreement, the whole of FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH -MARINE AREA shall be taken for- any public or quasi-pub1ic use under any statute, by right of eminent domain or if a part thereof shall be so taken and the part not so taken is insufficient, in the sole judgment of the UNIVERSITY concerned, for the reasonable continuance of its activities thereon, then in such event, this agreement and the term hereof shall cease and terminate as to such UNIVERSITY on the date when possession by eminent domain shall be taken. only part of FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA shall be so taken and the part not so taken shall be sufficient for the reasonable continuance of activities 'thereon by the UNIVERSITY concerned, then such UNIVERSITY may nevertheless elect to terminate this agreement by giving the FOUNDATI0N, notice of such intention in which case this agreement shall terminate as to such UNIVERSITY upon the expiration of the time fixed in such notice; or if the UNIVERSITY concerned shall not elect to so terminate this agreement, this agreement shall continue in full force and effect as to such. UNIVERSITY and as to the part of FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA without affecting such UNIVERSITY'S obligations and privileges under this agreement. In no event shall the UNIVERSITIES or either of them have any claim against the FOUNDATION by reason of any taking by eminent domain as aforesaid of FOREST -MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA or any part thereof, nor shall the UNIVERSITIES or either of them have any claim to the amount of any portion thereof that may be awarded as darnages or paid as a result of such taking; provided, however, that each UNIVERSITY shall be entitled to receive any part of such damages which is reasonably attributable to the interruption of research or teaching projects in existence, or for which start-up costs have been incurred. Subject to this proviso, each UINIVERSITY hereby assigns to the FOUNDATION any and all other rights or interests of such UNIVERSITY in and to any and all amounts awarded or paid by reason or as a result of such taking. A-13 -14- 12. Termination (a) This agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement among the parties hereto, or as to either UNIVERSITY by agreement between such UNIVERSITY and the FOUNDATION. (b) In the event of any failure by the FOUNDATION to perform any of its obligations under this agreement, which failure shall continue Uncorrected for a period of twenty (20) days after notice thereof and which shall not be caused,directly or indirectly. by governmental regulations, accidents or causes beyond the FOUNDA- TION'S control. either UNIVERSITY may elect to terminate this agreement by giving the FOUNDATION. notice of such intention, and upon the expiration of the time fixed in such notice, this agreement shall cease and terminate as to such UNIVERSITY. (c) The FOUNDATI0N may upon live (5) days notice to the UNIVERSITY concerned terminate this agreement and the term hereof as to such UNIVERSITY upon or all any time after the happening of one or more of the following events: Failure by such UNIVERSITY to perform any of its obligations under Article I hereof, under Article 3 'hereof, under Article 4 hereof, unnder Article 5 hereof, under Article 6 hereof, under Article 8 hereof, under Article 9 hereof, and under classes (a)and (b) of Article 16 hereof, which failure and its effects shall continue uncorrected for a period of twenty (ZO) days after, the FOUNDATION shall have given such UNI- VERSITY notice thereof: provided that if such failure and its effects cannot with due diligence be corrected within twenty (ZO) days after such. notice and if such UNIVERSITY shall promptly commence and shall therea.fter diligently proceed to take all action reasonably I required to correct the same, then such period shall be extended to forty (40) days.- (d) In. case of the termination of this agreement as to only one UNI- VERSITY, the rights and obligations of such UNIVERSITY under this agreement (in respect to the use or occupancy of property, the payment of funds and otherwise) shall become those of the other UNIVERSITY it accepted by the other UNIVERSITY. (e) Upon the effective date of the termination of this agreement. whether by the FOUNDATION and/or the UNIVERSITIES or either of them, or by reason of extensive damage or destruction by fire. or upon the expiration of the term of this agreement, the UNIVERSITY concerned shall have the right to terminate long-term research projects in a reasonable period of time but shall immediately cease all short-term research and terminate its occupancy of oF F0REST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA and of every building, structure, and improvement A- 14 -15- thereon. and its use of equipment, furniture, furnishings, and other personal property of the FOUNDATION, and shall at its sole expense and cost, ppromptly remove from, 'the FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA all movable equipment and furniture and furnishings put in by it at its sole expense and cost and repair any and all damage done to the FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or. MARSH-MARINE AREA by reason of such removal; however, the UNiVERSITY concerned shall retain the right to re-enter the property solely for the purposes of completing the orderly termination of long-term research projects, providing it notifies the FOUNDATION prior to entry and specifies the length of time and area in which it will be conducting necessary tasks. Also, the UNIVERSITY concerned shall have the riqht, to publish all data collected at the time of termination and any additional data collected in the process of orderly terminating long-term research. 13. Consultation The UNIVERSITIES shall consul', with the FOUNDATION with respect to the use of FOREST-MARINE AREA and MARSH -MARINE AREA. and shall keep the FOUNDATION advised of their respective activities thereon and such matters as may reasonably be expected to affect the interests of the FOUNDATION. EitHer of the UNIVERSITIES shall have the right to release general information to the public concerning their research and educational programs on FOUNDATION property to scientific and -lay publications and to advertise for legitimate purposes so long as such information does not contain opinions or statements concerning the policy or the operatins of the FOUNDATION or contain information which would in any way impair or threaten to impair the value of the FOUNDATION'S properties, or which would in any way jeopardize or threaten to jeopardize the FOUNDATION'S status as an operating foundation described in Section 4942 or as an organization exempt from Federal Income Taxation under Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or any successur to said section. Any release of material A- 15 either printed, written, or oral by the UNIVERSITIES which contains information that relates to the policies of the FOUNDATION or might be detrimental to the FOUNDATION as described within this Article must have written approval by t-e FOUNDATION before such information can be released. If either UNIVERSITY fails to adhere to the policy of advertising and publicity described in this Article, the FOUNDATION, at its discretion, may terminate the agreement with the UNIVERSITY concerned according to Article 1Z hereof. 14. General Restrictions The UNIVERSITIES and each of them shall not use FOREST-MARINE AREA and/or MARSH-MARINE AREA for any purpose, or permit any condition or activity thereof: (a) which has not bee n authorized by this agreement in accordance with its terms and approved by the FOUNDATION, (b) which is prohibited under any applicable law, ordinance, order, rule, requirement or regulation of a-my governmental or lawful authority having jurisdiction over, or similar body exercising functions over the FOUNDATION or UNIVERSITIES, (c) which is detrimental to the interests of the FOUNDATION, (d) which interferes or conilicts with any purpose of the FOUNDATION, or (e) which interferes with the value of the FOUNDATION'S property as a whole. The existence of detriment referred to in (c) of this Article and the existence of interference or conflict referred to in (d) and (e) of this Article shall be determined solely by the FOUNDATION. Moreover, (i) No part of the property or any use thereof or 0f any funds received or payable under this agreement shall inere or be payable to any private shareholder or individual or otherwise to or for any purpose which is not an exempt purpose within the meaning of Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as now in force or hereafter amended, and which is further not exclusively Within the scope of the exempt purposes of the FOUNDATION as an organization described in said section. (ii) No part of the property or the use thereof or any funds. materials or services contributed by the FOUNDATION,under this agreement shall be used directly or indirectly for the carrying on of propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation or to influence the outcome of any specific public election or for any partisan political activity or to further the election or defeat of any candidate for public or political party office. A-16 -17- or otherwise for the participation in or intervention (including publishing or distributing of statements) in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office. (iii) No person in the United States shall. on the ground of race, creed, sex, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied any benefits of, or be subject to discrimination in the performance of this agreement. (iv) There shall be no religious worship, instruction or proselytization as part of or in connection with the performance of this agreement. 15. No Assignment Neither UNIVERSITY shall assign, mortgage or encumber any interest herein granted without the prior written consent of the FOUNDATION in each instance. 16. Governing Law This agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of South Carolina which are applicabLe to the FOUNDATION'S re- property situated in such state. It is understood. however, that the Trustees of the FOUNDATION are subject to the jurisdiction of the Surrogate's Court of the County of New York, and that this agreement is subject to approval by such Court should the Trustees of the FOUNDATION determine at any time that such approval should be obtained. 17. Term of Agreement The term hereof shall commence on February 22 1975 and shall continue for a period of twenty-five (25) years and end on February 22 2000 Unless sooner terminated as provided in this agreement. 18. Rulings and Determinations If any party hereto shall determine at any time to seek a ruling or other determination by the Internal Revenue Service or by any court, governmental or lawful authority with respect to the effect of this agreement or of the perform- of any obligation imposed by this agreement upon the tax liability or tax exempt status of such party, notice of such intention shall be given to each other party herein and each such other party, at its soe expense and cost, Shall cooperate with and shall assist the party seeking such ruling or determination, Such cooperation and assistance to include , without limitation, assistance in the preperation of any statement, description or portion thereof which shall be deemed necessary by the A- 17 -13- party seeking such' ruling or determination and which shall deal with the activities of each other party hereto or any other matter of which such party shall have special knowledge. 19. Changes in Agreement This agreement contains the entire agreenent between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. Accordingly, the prior agreements between the FOUNDATION and CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, and the FOUNDATION and the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA of November 14, 1963 and March 22, 1972, respectively, will terminate and cease to be in effect and be replaced by this agreement as of the effective date hereof. Neither this agreement nor any provision hereof may be changed, amended, modified, waived, discharged or terminated except by an instrument in writing signed by the parties hereto. If as a result of any tax ruling, determination, or advice is used to or obtained by the FOUNDATION, from the Internal Revenue Service or any judicial determination obtained by the FOUNDATION, this agreement or any provision hereof shall in the opinion of counsel for the FOUNDATION require modification in order to conform to such ruling or determination, the parties hereto agree to enter -,-.to and execute such modifications for such purpose. In the event that counsel for both UNIVERSITIES shall disagree with counsel for the FOUNDATION as to the need for, or the terms of, or the extent of any modification of the agreement, the parties shall submit the rnatter to the Attorney General of South Carolina for his opinion, 'which opinion shall be binding upon the parties. 20. (a) No delay or omission by any party hereto to exercise any right or power accruing upon any noncompliance or default by any other party with respect to any of the terms hereof shall impair any. such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. No waiver by any party hereto of any of the covenants and agreements hereof to be performed by any other party shall be construed to be a waiver of a succeeding default or breach thereof or-of any other covenants or agreements herein contained. (b) No termination of this agreement shall discharge, release or in any way affect any liability or obligation of any party hereto which shall have A- 18 -19- accrued or which may accrue, in whole or in part, by reason of any such termina- tion or of any matter which shall have occurred prior to such termination. (c) This agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and, except as otherwise provided herein, their assigns. (d) Headings or captions are for purposes of convenience in reference only and shall not limit, describe or otherwise affect any of the terms hereof. (e) Addresses: THE BELLE W. BARUCH FOUNDATION Bellefield Plantation Georgetown, South Carolina Z9440 CLEMSON UNIVERSITY Clemson, South Carolina 29631 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA Columbia, South Carolina 292O8 IN WITNESS WHERE0F, this agreement has been duly executed as of the day and year first above mentioned in the State of South Carolina. THE BELLE W. BARUCH FOUNDATION /a/ -Ella A. Severin Trustee Trustee /s/ H. M. Arthur Trustee /s/ Leonard T. Scully Trustee /s/ E. Craig Wall. Sr. Trustee Trustee CLEMSON UNIVERSITY By: Is/ Robert C. Edwards President UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA By: /s /William H. Patterson President ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA By: /a/ Daniel R. McLeod A- 19 Memorandum of Understanding between The Belle W. Baruch Foundation Clemson University The University of South Carolina The Trustees of The Belle W. Baruch Foundation, the President of Clemson University, and the President of the University of South Carolina have on February ZZ, 1975 signed an Agreement establishing a tripartite working relationship among the two Universities and the Foundation toward joint efforts in teaching and research in Forestry, Marine Biology, and the care and propagation of wildlife, flora and fauna of South Carolina. When the agreement was signed, certain operational procedures were left to be arranged under a separate Memorandum of Understanding. Therefore, it is understood and agreed that: Receipts from FOREST -MARINE AREA The proceeds from harvesting operations within the FOREST -MARINE AREA shall be allocated by the FOUNDATION to CLEMSON UNIVERSITY to be used for scientific management of the FOREST-MARINE AREA. I Receipts from the MARSH-MARINE AREA The proceeds of harvesting operations in the MARSH-MARINE AREA shaU be allocated by the -FOUNDATION to the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CARO- LINA to be used for scientific management of the MARSH- MARINE AREA. Notification and Request for State Funding On July -first of each year, the FOUNDATION will notify each UNI- VERSITY of the amount of funds it estimates will be distributed from its net income to each UNIVERSITY for the fiscal year beginning on the following July first. This will enable each UNIVERSITY to include in its normal budget- ary submission to the General Assembly a request for such additional funds as are considered necessary for carrying out its programs. The FOUNDATION will be notified by the UNIVERSITIES of the amount of state support granted by- the legislature as soon as the General Appropriation Bill passes each year. Thousand-Acre Marsh In the area known as Thousand-Acre Marsh, neither 'UNIVERSITY shall, initiate projects within the nnarsh directly affecting the marsh or adjacent forest areas without prior written concurrence of the other UNIVERSITY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Understanding has been duly executed as of the 18th day of July 1975 CLEMSON UNIVERSITY THE BELLE W. BARUCH FOUNDATION By: By: President UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA By: President A-20 The Belle W. Baruch Foundation MIT 0 Y 84, ;91 "N' 4,41 . z ) Ibw IN AM his"' .bw ?TIP ln@I__ AN* Acte TNV@$ Wet Flats N am.." NOR IAT L OFOrest-MOrine FiMoysh-Morine C, wood N 6 <). FT 600 W" 20" Wn Figure 5. Property of Belle W. Baruch Foundation. The Marsh-Marine Area is managed by the Baruch In@titute, USC and is part of the NI/WB NERR.,- The-Forest-Marine Area is managed by A.- @L_ Clemson Univer'sity. A-21 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX B I Memoranda of Understanding I I I I I I I I I I Draft of Proposed Memorandum of Understanding Between The State of South Carolina and The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Concerning the Establishment and Administration of the North Inlet-Winyah Bay National Estuarine Reserve Research WHEREAS, the State of South Carolina has determined that the waters and related coastal habitats of North Inlet and a portion of Winyah Bay provide unique opportunities to study natural and human processes occurring within estuarine ecosystems; and WHEREAS, it is the finding of the State of South Carolina that the resources of North Inlet and portions of Winyah Bay and the values they represent to the citizens of South Carolina and the United States will benefit from the management of these sites as part of the National Estuarine Reserve Research System (NERRS); and WHEREAS, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce has concurred with that finding and pursuant to its authority under Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, (CZMA, P.L. 92-583, 16 U.S.C. 1461) and in accordance with implementing regulations at 15 CFR 921.30, may designate North Irdet/Winyah Bay as a National Estuarine Researr-1k Reserve in South Carolina; and WHEREAS, the South Carolina Coastal Council (Council) is the Governor's designee under Section 315 of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and the recipient state entity in matters concerning all programs and financial awards authorized under the CZMA and the implementing regulations, and is responsible for ensuring compliance with the rules and regulations of such law in South Carolina as authorized in the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program (Section 48-39-50(B), Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1976, as amended); and WHEREAS, the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research, University of South Carolina (Institute) is the agency designated by the South Carolina Coastal Council in the North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Reserve Research System Management Plan (Management Plan) as being responsible for.managing the North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Reserve Research System in South Carolina and acknowledges the need and requirement for continuing State-Federal cooperation in the long- term management of the site in a manner consistent with the purposes sought through their designation. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein it is agreed by and between the State of South Carolina and NOAA, effective on the date of the designation of North Inlet and portion of Winyah Bay as components of the Reserve as follows: B-1 ARTICLE I: STATE-FEDERAL ROLES IN RESERVE MANAGEMENT A. The Council, serving as the grants award office for the State of South Carolina under Section 315 of the CZMA, and responsible for compliance with the rules and regulations of the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program, shall: 1. In cooperation with the Institute, apply for such funds authorized under Section 315 of the czmA for acquisition and development, operation and management, and research monitoring and education in accordance with the Management Plan and annual work plan. The funds received by the Council for these purposes, with the exception of acquisition, shall be contracted to the Institute for Plan implementation with the exception of an amount not to exceed ten (10) percent to be retained by the Council for administrative and enforcement costs as documented in the annual work plan. Land acquisition will be handled by the Council with no administrative costs and all lands and properties will be deeded directly to the Institute or appropriate State agency. 2. Ensure the Management Plan and annual work plan is consistent with the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. 3. Provide increased surveillance and monitoring to ensure protection of the NERR site and enforcement of the rules and regulations of the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. B. The Institute, serving as the managing agency for the Council to implement the Management Plan, shall be the principal contact with NOAA for the State of South Carolina in all matters concerning the Reserve, with the exception of fiscal awards, and will serve to ensure that the Reserve is managed in a manner consistent with the goals of the National Estuarine Reserve Research System and the management objectives of the Management Plan. The Institute's responsibilities for Plan implementation will include the following: 1. Effect and maintain a process for coordinating and facilitating the roles and responsibilities of all local, state, and federal agencies involved in the management of the Reserve, including but not limited to: a. Enforcement programs regulating water quality, fish and wildlife habitat protection, sport and commercial fisheries, and non- consumptive recreational activities; b. The on-site administration of facilities, programs, and tasks related to Reserve management; C. Activities and programs conducted pursuant to the State's Federally- approved coastal management program, and d. Research and educational agenda developed and implemented in accordance with corresponding elements of the Management Plan; B-2 2. In cooperation with the Council, prepare and submit to NOAA for approval an operational strategy which in coordination with the Plan describes how the State of South Carolina intends to meet its long-term commitment to the management of the Reserve. The strategy, at a minimum, will describe the following: a. Specffic mediation procedures and resolution mechanisms, developed jointly with the Sanctuaries and Reserves Division (SRD) of NOAA, for reaching mutually acceptable solutions for correcting or avoiding conflicts requiring action under the CZMA and regulations; b. The procedures developed in accordance with SRD guidelines and proposed by the State as a means for prescribing contingency responses to emergency conditions that exceed routine Plan implementation; and C. The Plan's continuing functioning, after Federal financial assistance for operations and management ends, as a vehicle for carrying out the mission of the national program, i.e., (i) how the State intends to coordinate Reserve management with its coastal resource management decision-making process; (ii) the anticipated work program, priorities, and sources of funding for ensuring the continued maintenance of the Reserve, and (iii) the means relied upon by the State to assure NOAA that real property acquired with Federal Funds for the purposes of the Reserve will continue to be used in a manner consistent with 15 CFR 921; 3. Serve as principal negotiator on issues involving proposed boundary changes and/or amendments to the Plan; 4. Submit periodic reports as reclAred to the Councfl and NOAA on the Reserve describing the program and fiscal performance in Plan i -lementation and a detailed work program for the following MP year of operations, including budget projections and research efforts; 5. Respond to NOAA!s requests for information and to evaluate findings made pursuant to Section 312 of the CZMA; and 6. In the event that it should become necessary, based on findings of deficiency, serve as the point-of-contact in conjunction with.the Council for the State of South Carolina in actions involving the possible withdrawal of Reserve designation, as provided at 15 CFR 921-35. C. With NOAA, the sanctua'ries and Reserves DivisionMD),-Office of ho Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM), will serve to administer the provisions of Section 315 of the CZMA to ensure that the Reserve is managed in accordance with the goals of the National Estuarine Reserve Research System and the Plan. In carrying out its responsibilities, the SRD will: B-3 1. Subject to appropriation, provide financial assistance to the SCCC, consistent with 15 CFR 921 for acquisition, development, management and operation of the Reserve; %. 2. Subject to appropriation, provide financial assistance to the state on a competitive basis for research, monitoring and education programs at the Reserve; 3. Serve as the point-of-contact for NOAA in discussions regarding applications for any financial assistance received by the State under Section 315 of the C2MA, including any and all performance standards, compliance schedules, or Special Award Conditions deemed appropriate by NOAA to ensure the timely and proper execution of the proposed work program; 4. Participate in periodic evaluations scheduled by OCRM in accordance with Section 312 of the CZMA to measure the State's performance in Plan implementation and its compliance with the terms and conditions prescribed in financial assistance awards granted by NOAA for the purposes of the Reserve and advise appropriate OCRM staff of existing or emerging issues which might affect the State's coastal management program; and 5. Establish an information exchange network cataloging all available research data and educational material developed on each site included within the nationai system of estuarine research reserves. ARTICLE 11: REAL PROPERTY ACOUIRED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RESERVE The State of South Carolina agrees to the conditions set forth. at 15 CFR 921.21(e) which specify the legal documentation requirements concerning the use and disposition of real property acquired for Reserve purposes with Federal ftmdsunder Section 315 of the CZMA. ARTICLE III: PROGRAM EVALUATION A. During the period that Federal financial assistance is available for Reserve operations and management, OCRM will schedule, periodic evaluations of the State' s evaluations of the State's performance in meeting the conditions of such awards and performan-ce in meeting the conditions of this MOU. Where findings of cieficiency occur, NOAA may initiate action in accordance with the designation withdra'. procedures established at 15 CFR 921. B. After Federal financial assistance under Section 315 of the CZMA is no longer available for the operation and management of the Reserve, OCRM will continue to evaluate, pursuant to Section 312 of the CZMA and the corresponding provisions of 15 CFR 921, the Institute's and the Council's performance in implementing the Plan and developing strategy to assist the State in the long-term management of the Reserve. Where findings of deficiency occur, NOAA may initiate action in accordance with designation withdrawal procedures established at 15 CFR 921. B-4 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Memorandum to be executed. Director H. Wayne Beam, PhD Office of Ocean and Coastal Executive Director Resource Management South Carolina Coastal Council National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce Date Date William F-arrigan John C. Hayes, III Acting Chief Chairman SAnctuaries and Reserves South Carolina Coastal Council Division Offic- of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce Date Date Ardis M. Savory Office of Sponsored Programs and Research University of South Carolina Date F. John Vernberg, PhD Baruch Institute University of South Carolina Date Witness Date B-5 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX C I National Estuarine Research Reserve Program Regulations I I I I I I I I I I J@ A Monday July 2j, 1990 AMA, S SEW lffl Q UM Department of erce,. Oceanic -and Atmospheric' Admbid@on 15 -CFR.PzTt 921 WatlonWEstuarine iqese_r@e Pesearch ,-System Program Reg.uktions; hftdm ~0 ~1p~ Federal Register / Vol. 55. No. 141 / Monday. July ~2~3~ 1990 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ADDRESSES: ~8qM~r. Joseph A. Ura~vritch~. support the research mission. not as National Oceanic and Atmospheric Chief. Marine and Estuarine ends in themselves. Consultation by the Administration management Division: Office of Ocean Secretary with other Federal and state and Coastal Resource Management. agencies to promote ~use c~qf one ~cr more 15 CFR Part 921 NOS/NOAA~. 1825 Connecticut Avenue reserves within the System by suc ~.~n NW.: Suite 714~; Washington. DC 20235, agencies when conducting estuarine ~j~0c~~k~e~t No. 70874~-0133~q1 (202) 673~-5126. research is also a clearly defined goal of N~~f~lo~nai Estuarine Reserve Research FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. the Syster~n. The regulat~l~c~n~s also Mr. Joseph A. Uravit~ch. (202) 673~-5126. emphasize the use of a reserve's r~,~.at~L~:ral System Program Regulations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: resource's and ecology to enhance public ~~~ENCY~: Office of Ocean and Coastal- awareness arid ~u~rd~er~st~anding of Resource Management ~(~'~8qOCRM)~, 1. Authority estuarine areas, a~nd to provide s~u~"~a~qb~le cation a~nd ~rvic~a (NOS), N opportunities for public ed~L ~;~~qf~qt~n~a~ql Ocean ~qSe- atio~n~al This notice of interim final rulemakin~qg Oceanic and Atmosphe~n~c is issued under the authority of section interpretation. This education goal has A~~~i~n~@str~at~4~cn ~q(N~2qO~2qAA), Department of 315~q(a~q) of the Coastal Zone Management been elevated to become one of the essential criteria ~for des~qi-nat~4on of a C~~m~merce. Act of 1972 as amended. 16 U.S.C. 1461 ACTION: Interim final rule. (the Act). The National Estuarine reserve. Reserve Research System has been IV. Revision of the Procedures for SUMMARY: The regulations revise operating under regulations published Selecting, Designating and Operating existing rules for national estuarine June 27, 1984 (49 ~qFR 26~q510). National Estuarine Re~sear ch Reserves reserves in accordance with the Coastal 11. General Background (A) Revision ~qq~qf Des~i~r~q@nc~ti~on C~ri~l~e~n~'~c~. Zone Management Reauthorization Act On October 28,1988 (53 ~qFR 43816) The Coastal Zone Management of ~~985 (title IV. subtitle ~6qD, Pub. L 9~q9- NOAA published proposed regulations Reauthorization Act of 1~q985 established, 272) and recommendations contained in for continued implementation of the for the first time. statutory criteria for the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Estuarine Reserve Research designating an area as a national Office of Inspector General Report No. System (NERRS) Program pursuant to estuarine research reserve. An area ~qmay F-72~q6~-5-~q010, ~"C~ipport~7~un~qit~qies to section 315 of the Act, 16 U.S.C. 14~q61. be designated by the Secretary of Strengthen the Administration of the Written comments were accepted until Commerce as a national estuarine Estuarine Sanctuary Program." Effective December 30,1988. These comments research reserve if. with the signing of Public Law 99~--272 on have been considered in preparing these I I April 7, 19~q8~q6, the name of the Estuarine final regulations. A - ~- ~q(1) the Governor of the coastal state in Sanctuary Program changed to the ummary of the 'which the area is located nominates the area National Estuarine Reserve Research significant changes to the proposed 'for that designation: and System Program~: estuarine sanctuary regulations is presented below. (2) the Secretary finds that: sites are now referred to as national These interim final regulations (A) the area is a representative estuarine es~ua~r~qine research reserves. These establish the Program's mission and ecosystem that is suitable for long-term regulations revise die p~qi~q6cesi~ql~o~r~'-~. goals and revise procedures for -research and contributes to the `b reserves. io~geo~qgr~ephical and typological balance of designation of research ~selecti~ng~,~"desi~qg~natin~qg and operating ~.~I~qk ~.~1 1 ~qf national estuarine research reserves. the System~: Greater emphasis is.placed on the use o ~q(~B) the law of the coastal State provides ~ve ~5 on rese ~' stoaddre snati alesi~q;~4qAr~ql~qn~qi~l~_~@~q:~qA t~qh d E~in~qi ~0qrb~6q"~4qG~qw~o~q@~'~$~q:~@~6qton~qg-term protection for reserve resources to ~q1~q1~qL Cha~n~2q&~qg ~eName an I research and management issues, and to the Program ~q_~_ ensure a stable environment for research. make maximum use of the System for research purpo~qe~qe~' through ~q6~0~0~qi~qd~qi~8qa~qt~qi~qo~n~, "The 1~q9~6qM Coastal Zone Management (C) designation of the area as a reserve will ~a Act and its ~a~i~qf~qiend~qments established the serve to enhance public awareness and with NOAA and other Federal and state National Estuarine Reserve Researcl~i~' 1~q0~q@~.~.~l~u~nderstandi~n~qg of estuarine areas, and agencies which are sponsoring estuarine System (System). The System consists of provide suitable opportunities for public research. Additional emphasis is -also'....' -~i~oducation and ~qinterp ta~tio a d given to providing financial assistance (1) each estuarine sanctuary designated , r~e ~n~; ~n ~rea is prior to April 7, 1~q98~q6 which is the date ~qof (D) the coastal State in which the a. to states to enhance public awareness ena ~ctment of the Coastal Zone locate~'d has complied with the requirements and unders~tandi~rg of estuarine areas by Management Reauthorization Act of Of any regulations issued by the Secretary to providing opportunities for public:.- I ~e~;~-~w~@ implement this section. education and interpretation. ~qT~qhe ~.~q1~q9~8qM. and ~q(2) each estuarine area ~.~7 designated after the Act. The term 'Some of t~qhese criteria for designation regulations provide new guidance for delineating reserve boundaries,and new estuarine sanctuary no longer appears in are either new or substantially more regulations; the term research reserve or' specifi~q6 than those contained in the procedures for arriving at the most reserve appears in its place. I -~_~. ~7 for~qin~qir regulations. For example, under effective and least costly approach to The Mission Statement for the .System ~hese regulations the Governor of a acquisition of land. Clarifications In the is much the same as for the National coastal state must nominate an total amount of financial assistance authorized for each national estuarine Estuarine Sanctuary Program which estuarine area for designation, and reserve, and criteria for withdrawing the existed prior to the 198~0q5 amend~16qmen~q_~40q4` findings are required that the law of the However. the goals for the National coastal state provides long-term designation of a reserve. have also been ~2q!~q-~qy~q-~q-~q-~q_~qn~qQ I Estuarine Reserve Research System ~qT~q'~6q!~q?~q;~q1~0qprotection for reserve resources to ~edded. stress the use of reserve sites for ..ensure a stable er~qn iro~qn~4qment for DATE$: Effective Date: These in~qter~08qI prom~qct-~q.on and coordination of estuarine research and that designation of the final regulations are effective July Z3, research on a national level as the -'area will serve to enhance public 1990. highest priority and reason for -- -~q-~q"~q-~q@~0qawarenes~qs and ~qI~8qi~qnderstandin~8qg of C~qom~qr~qn~qen~qts: Comments are invited and establishing the System. The protection ~- estuar~qi~52qn~0qi areas. The criteria in the will be considered if submitted on or and management of estuarine areas and existing regulations have been revised before September 21, 1990. resources are clearly intended to accordingly. ~0 Federal Register I Vol. 5~5, No. 141 ~/ Monday, July 23, 1990 / R~~des and Regulations 29941 (B) Revision of Site C~rite~n~i~c and be required to justify the use of ~qfe~e phase, funds are available for ac~qq~uir~qi~n ~qg P~roc~ed~ar~e~3. The criteria for selecting an ~sir~rrple acquisition methods and make interest in lard, which is the primary estuarine area for designation as a greater use of n~o~n-~qle~e~e simple me~th-~o~qds to pur-~p~ose of this award. and for minor national estuarine research reserve have conserve ~cxp~end~it~ure of funds. For each construction ~qi~e~.~qg.~, nature trails and boat been expanded to provide guidance for parcel. both in the core area and the ramps). preparation of architectural and d~ate~rmin~in~qg boundaries for the proposed buffer zone, states must determine, with engineering plans a~nd specifications, site. The Office of Inspector General appropriate justification (1) the development of the final management Report No. F~-~@-~,~qM-~q5-010 cri~qt~qd~zed ~Lhe ~rni~n~qimu~qm level o~qf controi~l~l~s~q) required. (2) p~,~a~n~. and hiring a reserve m~q-~a~-~la~qg~e~r and lack Of S~qp~eCi~qf~*C ~qg~l~l~qi~qdEline~a for setting the level of ~existi~r~g state control. and (3) other staff as necessary to in~ip~qL~-m~c~nt ~t~qhe level of ~addi~l limits o~rbound~0q&~i~es ~a~rou~n~:~q1 estuarine ~qi~onal state contro~ql~q[s~q) the NOAA apprcved draft management ~s~3~r~c`-~U~*~a~nes to ensure that only land required~; states must also exar~a~qh~ne -all plan. es~szntial to the mi~a~si~o~n of ~t~qhe program rea~s~ora~qb~qle alternatives for attaining ~t~qhe The length of time for this ~qi~r~@i~ti~al ~qbe included inside the sanctuary. additional level of ~c~antrol required, phase o~qf acquisi~t~qJon and dev~e~q!opm~,~2~r~t References in th~he existing regulations to p~e~n~o~r~qm a cost analysis of each, and may be up to three years. After ~t~qhe 6~i~t~c ensure that th~e ~qL~-ound~e~ne~s er~ico~r~r~4qma~s~s rank, in order ~o~qf cost, t~qh~e alternative receives Federal designation. as a an adequate port~qicn of the key land and methods o~f acquisition which were national estuarine research reserve. t~qh~:~! water areas Of ~t~qhe natural system to considered. The cost-effectiveness state may request additional financial ~approx~il~f~.dt~8~an ecological unit are too assessment ~T~n~ust also ccmp~a.~-e short- ass~'ista~rce to acquire addi'~qdo~r~al vague, particularly since terms a~:e not term and long-term casts. The state shall property interests (e.g., for the buffer d~e~qf~qi~r~ked. The propo~t~;ed regulations give pri~crity consideration to the "east zone). for construction of r~e~s~3a~rch and define key land and water areas as a* cost, ~qmethod(~s) of attaining the interpretive facilities, and ~"~a~,- restorative core area" within the reserve which is minimum level of long~q4erm control activities in accordance with the so vital to the functioning of the required. which is sufficient to meet the approved final management plan. estuarine ecosy~atem that it ~au~L~st be statutory requirement that "the law of The Coastal Zone Management under a level of control sufficient to the coastal state provides long-term Reau~qtho~qe~ization Act of INS specifies ensure the long-term ~v~ria~qb~qil.~2q4 of the protection for reserve rescurces to th~at the amount of financial assistance reserve for-research on natural ensure a stable environment for provided with respect tD the ~q=~qqu~ql~s~s~qitia~n processes. ~q7~q1e determination of key research. See ~ql~qe U.S.C. I 14~q61(~qb~q)~q(2)~q(B). of land and waters. or interests therein. land and water areas must be based on (D) Financial Assistance Awards for for any me national es~qt~u~qm~qin~e research scientific knowledge of (he area.~"The Site Selection and Post Site Selection. res~e~qn~r~e may ~n~ot ex~qm~ed an amount concept of a -buffer zone to protect ~qt~qhe The ~qT~ir~st ~of five types ~o~qf awards under equal to 50 per cen~tum ~x~qf (he of core area and provide addid onal the National Estuarine Reserve the lands. waters. and interests therein protection for estuarine-dependent Research System is for site selection or $4~,000~2q= whichever ~s~qm~o~on~t is less. species has also been defined in the and post-site select~qior, which includes The amount of Federal financial regulations. The bu~0qf~0qfe~qi zone may include preparation of a draft management plan assistance provided under the an area necessary for facilities ~re~qqt~qdred ~q1~qinclud~qin~qg MOLT) and ~qthe collection of regul~a~qd~ons for d~evelopmen~t~c~o~s~ts f~o~r research and interpretation. and information necessary for preparation of directly associated with ~v~qajor facility additionally, to accommodate a shift ~qof the environmental impact statement. construction ~q(~qL~e_ other than land the core area ~qis~*~qi ~-r~qesu~qh ~p~qt biological, The ma~x~qi~n~qmm ~qt~Gtal FedeT~al share df acquisition~q) f~or~a~ny~one national ecological ~crr~qje~q@~a~0qmo~qu~i~qli~q6~qlo~qgicai change these awards has been raised to - estuarine research reserve must ~not which~.r~e~i~qn~o~n~ab~qbr~-~c~oul~qd be expe~0qaed to $100,000 as~0q4e~q~@~c~6q@e~qd~ql~n ~1~q1.~q9~q2~q1~.~q4~q9.~'~6qO~qf ~q1h~qi~s exceed ~q00 p~e~voe~i~0qA~qm~0qO~qt~qhe~c~os~qt~s of occur. States -will ~qbe ~qie guired ~'to use am~o~%~u~2qA ~up~qto ~q1~q25,0~q00 may be used ~qt~q6 such construction or $1~.500~,00~q%~ scientr~2qT~qm~.arit~erial~a ~qfus~qt~qlyt~qhe~"~.~- ~. ~@ ~.~*~.. conduct ~t~h ~w~qi~te selection pro~c~e~qi~qi~@~as - whi~4q6eve~qr amount is less. ~~-~_ ~* ~- ~q"~q" bounda~r~i~q@~s~-~qi~qd~qi~q@~cte~qA -for a.pr~o~8qp~osed site. des~qm~q@~4qW in I ~0qWI~0qM. A~qfte~rN~6qOAA~'s ~8q-Aw~q&~rds far (~qF) Financial A s~s~qi~s~4qf~4qt~4~c~e The information requirements for appr~qi~v~id~af ~s~qpr~ap~o~s~e~qd~q4~qite and decision Operation and Ma~n~agewe~nt. 'Me NOAA approval ~qo~qf a I p~r~qd~q6~qn~qd ~qw~qf~qth the ~6qA~e~s~qi~qgnati~on proo~ess, amott~i~qf~qt ~v~q? Federal fin ~qi~s~atst~a~x ce _proposed site to ~8~q= under existing regulations were ~qt~qhe state may expend (1) up to $40~2qA~8qW of available t~qd -a state to man-age the --- c a~'~n~qf~asi~r~qg and n~aw-have been ~4qda~qkfi~qe~qd~qL~" this amount to develop the draft reser~ve~qi~ntl~qbperatep~r~D~qg~r~m~ms~&~.~U~L~L st~ent. NOAA ~qba~s recognized the need to' management plan and collect with the ~m~qds~s~qion and goals of the conduct studies to develop a basic information for preparation ~o~qf ~qthe National ~2qE~-~9t~tra~r~qin~e~'Re~s~erv~a ~2qResearc~ql~i description of ~6q&e ph~qy~a~qr~ica~qL chemical, envir~o~qa~qme~0qw~a~ql impact statement~; and (~q2) System has been raised f~qr~o~2q@ ~qS~6qM~qO~qO~qO to and b~qiological characteristics of ~qT~qhe site. up~@t~a ~0q&~e remainder of~available ~qhm~0q& to $70,~q0~q00 ~qf~qar~'~e~qm~qA~i~qtwe~qlve ~v~qi~yr~t~qfh pe~l~qlo~qi~qL As a resu~ql~l~,~"sta~qies may ~m~q@~,~v~q; be eligible conduct studies to develops basic Up to ten ~qI~qm cent ~qo~qf the total award for Federal ~qfu~nd~qI~0q4 d~qt these studies after description of the physical, chemical~, (Federal and state) each~2qyear may be NOAA ~6qq~2qTr~av~al ~af a~2qpropo~sed site. and b ~qLal~qo~qg~qical characteristics of the site. used f~qor canst~ructia~n-type activities. ~qjC~q1 Management Plan Deve~qlo~8qpme~n~qL i~na~n~c ~rd~s f~ar (G) F~qinan~2qd~al Ass~qL~s~qta~nce for (E) ~2qF i~o~ql Assistance A~qw~qa Once ~12qW~16qOAA app~2qi~2q@~qv~q'~8qi~4qi ~4q1h~0qipropo~qsed site'- A~qc~2qq~qa~16q&~16qX~qo~qi~q4 De~qve~0q1o~8qp~qR~0qwn~0qt;~q,~qo:~qvd~12qb~2q9~0q1ia~4ql R~qe~qsear~qr~0qh. ~6q7~0qlie Coastal Zone and decides ~0qto~2ql~q)~qroceed w1t~0qh ~2qA~8qfan~2qq~2qg~qe~qn~0qw~qi~0qd~q. Ike re~2qSdatio~qns divide Management Reauthorization Act of designation, the ~qsi~8qn~q-te ~36qmu~qs~.t~q.dev~8qilo~8qp ~4qa- eli~12qp ~0qt~2q@~qr for ~6q1~2q1r~qu~4qm~qci~qa~0ql~08qA~qss~8qistance ~q1~8q08~4q5 specifically ~qaffect~qsth~qe~qron~0qd~qu~qct of draft mana~8qgementplan~q.~q'~6qI~20qbe contents ~qO~4qf awa~qzd~qa ~6qi~qar ~qa~08q%u~2ql~qar~2qit~8qion and ~0qdev~qel~qo~qp~52qme~56qW the System' ~qs research program ~0q1y the plan. inclu~6qd~8qin~2qj the memorandum ~4qof into t~0qw~qo~2qp~0qh~qa~qse~qs. In the init~6qia~8qt~2qpha~qs~qe, , -; establishing th~qe~qxe~8qg~qi~qL~6qdrem~qen~0qt for understanding f~8qN~8qT~40qM between NOAA states are working to meet the criteria developing Estuarine Res~qa~0qi~qcc~0qh and the state, are specified in ~0qthe ~q' required ~6qL~qor f~qarmal.~qres~qe~qarch reserve C~qu~2ql~qd~qp~4ql~qi~qn a f~qo~qr~0ql~4qhe conduct ~qjaf~qi~qesearch regulations. The acqui~qs~08qM~qQ~qn portion of designation. ~8qLe.. establishing adequate within the system ~qa~qn~0qd sp~qeci~2qJ~44qV~qa~qi~8qg what the plan has been greatly expanded to state control over key land and water these guidelines ~qab~qa~0qp in~qn~qInde. ~2qT~6qhe implement recommendations ~2qi~qn the ~q' - ~q* areas in accordance with the draft legislation also requires ~0qthe Secretary of Office of fr~qi~qspector General Report No. management plan and preparing a ~6qr~qa~qu~6qd Commerce to require that NOAA. in F-7~4q2~4q0~q-~q-~0qZ~q-~0q0~q10. It is proposed that -states management plan. In this predesignation ~q. conducting or supporting estuarine 29942 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Morday, July 23. 1990 Rules and Regulations research. give priority consideration to interpretive purpose, and techniques for Specific: research that uses reserves in the making available or locating information Sec!j.on 921.1-,klission. Goc!s, and Systeii. and that NOAA consult with concernina reserve resources, activities, General Provisions other Federal and state agencies to or issues)7 promote use of ore or more reserves by (2) Development and presentation of A-pposed � 921.1tc,?-One reviewer such agencies when conducting curricula. workshops, lectures. seminars, suggested the deletion of the first estuarine research. and other structured programs or sentence of this provision which states, The research guidelines. which are , I re!erred to in the regulations, but are not presentations for on-site facility or field "National estuarine research reserves part of them. state that NOAA Will use; shall be open to the public." This proVide research grants only for (3) Extension/ outreach programs: or reviewer noted that in multiple proposals which address research (4) Creative and innovative methods component reserves some components questions and coastal management and technologies for implementing may not be appropriate for general issues that have highest national priority interpretive or educational projects. public access; either because of the as determined by NOAA_ in Interpretive and educational projects purpose or emphasis of management at consultation with prominent members of that site (e.g., research) or due to the may be oriented to one or more research limited interest which the managing the estuarine research community. reserves or the entire System. Those entity has in the component (e.g.. a One significant addition to the projects which would benefit more than conservation easement which does not regulations is that research awards are one research reserve, and, if practical. available on a competitive basis to any the entire National Estuarine Reserve provide for unlimited public access). coastal state or qualified public or Research System. shall receive priority This reviewer expressed concern that private person. thus making it possible consideration for funding. state denial of general public access at for public or private persons, such components of a reserve could be organizations or institutions to compete V. Summary of Si cant Comments on challenged on the basis of this provision. with coastal states and coastal state the Proposed Regulations and NOAA's Response.- Consistent with the goal of universities for NOAA research funding Responses .. the National Estuarine Reserve to work In research reserves. NOAA received comments from 16 Research System to "enhance public (M Financial Assistance for sources. Reviewers included Federal awareness and understanding of the Afonitoring. The Coastal Zone If and state agencies, academic estuarine environment and provide Management Reauthorization Act c tutions, and the National Es suitable opportunities for public 19M authorizes the award of grants for inst! tuarine education and interpretation." public the purposes of conducting research and Research Reserve Association. The monitoring. While objectives in c.omments of the National Estuarine access should be allowed to the greates estuarine research and estuarine Research Reserve Association (NERRA) extent possible permitted under State monitoring are mutually supportive, are a summary of comments submitted and Federal law within national monitoring is generally designed to to NERRA by most of the managers of estuarine research reserves. However, provide information over longer time. the existing arid proposed national the statement "National estuarine research reserves shall be open to the frames and in a different spatial context. estuarine reseirlih reserves. All : - public does not require that all .Consequently a separate subpart comments received are on file at the components of a multi-com'06nent addressing specifically the development Marine and Estuarine Management reserve or the entire area within the and implementationof monitoring Division. Qffice of Ocean and Coastal.,,-' boundalids-of a single comp .onent. projects has been Included in the Resource Management and are-,: -, @ resi@ve be open to the j'eneral public regulations. available at that office for review upon unconditioially. The last sehtenc@ of (1) Financial Assistance-Ai@@sfor request Each pf the major issues raised by the revieveer's has been summarize resoune reie@ih Interpretation and Education.The d i 9214(c) reads, "'Consistent with 7 Coastal Zone Management 0iotection and :, - iknd NOAA's responses are prbvided *i- objectives.'public access 'm"A'y'beV@ Reauthorization Act of 1985 authorizes under the relevant subheading in this - c'rt' areas within a the award of grants for the purposes of section. restricted to. 'e ain e e unco na conducting educational and interpretive research iiiseiv Whet nditio I activities. To stimulate the development General: public access is not consistent with of innovative or creative interpretive Three reviewers recommended that resource protection and research and educational projects and materials objectives as stated in the approved more emphasis be placed on developing management plan (eg.,'Public access which will enhance public awareness an Information network among research would interfere with reserve re search or and understanding of estu"i areas. reserves and between research reserves is likely to dim."sh the value of reserve the regulations provide for funds to be available on a competitive'4bails 6 and research and educational groups,'." resourceli for future research) it must be 0 any and institutions. Two of these reviewers coastal State entity. These'fiunds4re limited accordingly. just as certain areas provided in addition to dny'other.funds noted the absence in the proposed are idefiftfied in reserve management available to a coastal state Under these regulations of a paragraph which had plan - is being more or less'sensitive to regulations. addressed this subject in the existing Dublhsc access impacts in single regulations (49 FR, 28502, June 27. 19M). Categories of potential educational The deleted paragraph concerned the* omponent res 'erves. the same is true of and interpretive projects include: components mi.m.ulti-component (1) Design, development and development and Federal administration reserves. Frequently in management d is trib ution/ placement of interpretive or Of a research and education information plans for multi-component reserves one educational media (ie., the development exchange network for the System. - "' or more components will be identified of tangible items such as exhibits/ . Response: NOAA agrees. The section as those for which the relative displays, publications, posters, signs, referring to information exchange management emphasis will be public audio-visuals. computer software, and between NOAA and the Reserves has education and interpretation. Similarly. maps, which have an educational or been reinstated in I 921.1(h).' other components are identified as those ~0 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday. ~J~~ly 2~3. ~qL~9~q0 Rules and Regula~ti~~m 29~q= which emphasize research and resource representative est~u~u~n~@~ne ecosystem th~ot Generally, it is NOAA's belief that. protection. is suitable for long-term r~e~s~&~q=~c~qh and given the less-t~qhan-pcrfect state of Proposed � 9~q21.1~q(~qd) ~and� 9~q21.1~q(e)- con t~ribut~e~q@ to the biogeo~qg~r~ap~qb~qic~al and knowledge regarding b~eth the Seven reviewers commented an these ~qq~-poi~o~qg~qic~al balance of the System fi~i~nct~qionin~qg of estuarine ecosystems and provisions, These comments ranged (emphasis added). the effects of natural and anthropo~qg~eni~c from ~one sentence requesting The primary intent of I ~q92~1.1~q(d) a~nd change that manipulation should be clarification to approximately six pages ~9~'~71.1~q(e) is to restrict and allow carefully limited within estuarine a., Comments dedicated to th~-~e~se activities involving habitat maaipulatir~in research reserves~. Outside the context provisions ~a~qJo~n~e~. These c~amments also to the de-r~ee necessary to ensure that of a carefully planned, and peer ranged from expressing concern or ~0 ~0 reserves a~qm and continue to be, re~N~qiewed~, research or restoration ob~'ect~;on re-arding the pr~opc~ised representative estuarine ecosy~ste~q=~. It ac~t~qivitv, NOAA believes th~a~*t habitat ~ql~i~z~4q@~ita~'ons ~0 ~. ~- ti on habitat manipulation to is this mission, and requirement of the manipu~'~qlati~on for management p~qw~rpcs~,-s suggesting a more restri~ct~qi~,~.e approach. statute, that the System goals of involves a sip, ifica~nt ~qn~qisk to the One reviewer expressed~str~o~ng � 92~1~.1~q(b) are meant to support. This representative in~teg~rrt~qy a~nd character of support for a~r outright pr~o~qH~qibition on mission, ~u-~nd requirement of the statute, a national estuarine research res~qme. habitat r~nani~qp~0qWa~t~qion, whether ~qf~or is the foundation upon which ~t~qhe System As a result, the Phrase In th~e proposed management or research. exrept far is built, the primary basis on which regulations "habitat manipulation for restoration activities where such estu~.~-Tin~e areas are selected and resource management ~qp~urpo.~3es~" ~qis rest~ora '!on can avoid long-term adverse designated as reserves, and the i~n~lended to mean h~Fb~'tat management impacts. Another reviewer c~om~r~nented u~n~q@~qer~qlyi~ng principle with which all other for the promotion of a~'partic~6qJ~3~r sp~ec~l~es ~e~xt~e~.~r.s~qively on th~;s prov~qisi~q= express~I~r~Ig aspects of reserve development and or habitat, or for som~e purpose other strong objections to a prohibition on operation must be consistent. As one than research involving or restoration of habitat manipulation activ~qi~2qtes for rcviewer stated. in no case should the a representative "natural" estuarine management purposes. This Teviewer ecological or representative integrity Of ecosystem. stated that the ~'~q@~qpres~erv~atic~n" of a a reserve be comprised. NOAA acknowledges that much habitat T~eq~m~qires acth~re management Habitat manipulation activities involving habitat m~aT~ri~qpulat~qt~on~. research involves some degree of One reviewer requested ~c~qLar~6qf~6qf~6qi~c~at~qion conducted for a purpose ~iother than (~1) manipulation of ~qther~e~s~ource(~s~q) and of the difference between ~i~-e~s~qt~arati~on restoring ~t~qhe representative integrity of habitat~q(~s~q) which~are -the subject of activities and~6qbabitat m~an~qi~qp~u~6qkt~qion for a reserve or (2) e~stu~qm~qi~n Tese~erch, ~are study. In this r~e~qgar~8q4 ~r~v~aer~ves -are not research or management purposes. One not consistent with &is requirement ~nf int~a~nded to be "control" habitats only. the ~st~a~0qf~0qtte orthe mission ~o~qf the ~-Syst~e~n A reasonable 1~q1m~qit~at~qi~qm~en t~q1~re -nature manipulation is reco~qgn~qbred as an reviewer suggested ant~er~qia for assessing and some degree of habi~qU~f~t . ~qt~qhe degree of -~qmani~8qW~la~8qf~8qt~2qe.a proposed and extent of habitat manipulation essential aspect of much important rEsearch project may involve. One activities conducted as a ~qPa~Tt of estuarine research~. However, research reviewer requested clarification of the estu~qm~qine research is m~eces~sar~qy to intent of this pr~ovi~sic~in ~and~'~qhow it may activities c~ond~n~ated within a ~qmserv~e apply to: ~q(~1) ~a~c~ti meces~aary to protect ensure that the representative ~qi~8qM~qpgrit~qy Should not involve ~n~1~w~2~qi~qp~u~qla~dv~e ~. ~- ~, public health, ~qt2~ql pr~ote~c~2qd~on of existing ~of a T~e~g~erv~e is protected. likewise. ~a~c~qt~qiv~qi~qf~i~es ~qT~qh~a~qt ~4qte of their ~' ~or species; mid t~q3) ~a~qf~ql~owa~n~qb~e ~qi~qm reasonable exceptions ~qlo these exten~qt~q@~qw~o~nl~qd~s~qi~qgn~i~4qT~q=~rnt~qly impair the restorative activities ~qfor~0qb~qi~s~qt~ar~qical limitations on habItat manipulation ~"~nat~nr~0qd~'~.~'~:~r~e~qP~qw~q=~st~s~2q9~v~e~qv~a1u~e ~qt~qi~e~,~ activities are a s of preservation. One rev~sewer~sta~qted that ppropr~qiate ~qfor ~r~q-e~s~s~o~n rep~qms~qm~4qta~2q#~qm ~qkhar~a~c~qter~q) of t~qhe reserve. - .. -~qv~qi ~qii pub~ql~qic~'he~a~qlth and ~q1he protection ~qo~qf other whatever type o~qt~qbab~qI~qt~qa~qt ~m~8qT~qi~x~qf~ql~q@ a on. determined a~ql~qlowable by N~4qOAA~. day sensitive resources (e~qg_endan~qger~qed~q/ NC~q1AA ~q@~6qW~q"~q6~q1~c~qh~qd~v~0q"es~!~0qf~0qf~0qi~8qk to-day site management decisions are threater~qfed wildlife and significant restoration efforts may involve best made by the p~qw~qh~m~qmi~on~a~ql staff of historical and cultural resources~q). It ext~qo~i~s~q1~qw~.~l~qb~ab~it~at~qi~na~r~qf~qf~ql~qi~qi~q0~ation.- ~a~t- ~f~l ar ~qbav~e each reserve habitat manipulation is determined to ~q%e ~e~a~s necessary In ~~a~n ~8q=~o~ne~s~o~qm~q6~qi~qm ~8qW~'~c~qi~qd~r~q1r~ang~qb~a~s~e -One reviewer ~qm~qqu~i~t~a~8qQ ~c~ql~a~6qh~qf~qi~c~s~qf~qi~n~a c~qh a ~ca~se~,~-the~in ~sucl~i ~-~qf the ~i~nt~e~n of this t~qb~g~-~ activities should be limited 96 as ~n~qo~qt to ~r~e~s~a~6qf~6qt of ~qb~u~in~a~n activities (~q0~.~q0 ~8qp~qm~v~is~qm~s and sign~qi~qr~lca~n~qi~qly~~qi~qmpactthe Tepresentat~qi~ve hy~qd~r~qd~ql~o~qg~qic~al ~4q6~ange~qi~qt~at~qwiti~on~al~ql differences between ~qba~qb~qi~qt~a~qt un~qi~nte~ir~qt~qi~on~a~ql~s~i~qpe~c~re~s~"~c~t~@~r~a~y~u Mon manipulation for res~p~qA~qm~qb~. -habitat and ecological integrity of ~qT~qhe reserve. manipulation for ~n~qia~n~e~qge~n~m~qm~qL and ~2qC~o~ntr~6qk~qy to the assertion ~of Me ~c~qh~a~6qn ge~g~.~q-~qintro~thr~ced and exotic ~q ~qies, pe~L etc.). In~qIh~o~se area~qi des* ~ted as habitat m~a~ni~qp~a~qlati~qm~qj~o~r ~r~e~etm~qv~2qw~n~.~@_ ~~7 revi~ew~r~qz ~q1~qhe intent o~qfdesi~qg~nat~qing and ~T~2qM This same reviewer ~str~e~s~a~qid the ~qp~qd~u~qm~qy ma ~n~ag~i ~a research reserve is not ~qlo national estuarine ~zesearc~qh reserves, i~nip~ar~tan~oe of ~t~qh~qi~:~p~c~o~ql~og~qic~al and ..preserve" that p~art~i~r-~1~1~1~ar habitat in a such changes may have diminished the representative ~qi~a~ql~0q't representative 'Character and ~qIn~legr~i~tty of y ~qp~q(~4qA reserve. stasis condition. Estuarine ecosystems Respo~n~s~a~@ The mi~qm~o~qk~qi~n of the ~q1~q4atio~nal are naturally dynamic habitats which the site. Where ~qre~gtoration~of such d~qi~qi~T~aded areas is ~qdeterm~q@~qmed n~*ec~essar~qy Estuarine Reserve ~qRe~s~e~qs~q;d~h System, as webave~qyett~o~ql~ully~un~qd~e~rsta~nd. stated in I ~q921~q.1~6q(a)~q, "is the *~q.~.~q. ~q7. NOAA~'~qs intent in desi~8qg~0q=ting estuarine within ~q93~q1~9 ~t~ontext. su~rl activities must es ~qtabli~qshm~qent and ~6qma~qc~8qa~8qgeme~qn~2qt through areas as national estuarine research be carefully p~0ql~4qi~qi~8qimed. M~qu~qr~20qlresearch i~qs ~qn~0qi~q&~2qd~qve~q' Ee~qce~2qs~qsar~8qy to determine ~2q1~0qhe ~q'~qm~qa tural" Federal-state ~qa~4q6~0q6pe~qr~0qi~2qf~2qi~qx~q)~28q4 c~6qif-~8qa~q'~2qnat~2qi~qo~qnal res~qe~4qmes is to protect the r e~-p~qrese s~4qystem~qof~qestuari~qne ~qz~4qe~qse~qa~8qi~qch reserves* character of each individual reserve and representative state ~8qb~6qf in ~qe~qe~qst~qu~qarinee area r~qapr~qese~6q=~qf~2qi~qve of Me ~qr~qa~qn~q'~qO~qL~0qM ~q.~qr~qe~8qs~qi ~q.~qo~qn~qs thereby establish a national system of ~40qV e-~q, an estuarine ~0qi~qcosy~4qsit~qe~qr~qn ~08q6~q1 1 silly ~0qm~q1~qn~q1m and e~qs~q:ua~qr~2qL~6qw ~0qij~8qp~qes ~8qi~qzz ~qlh~8qi~q"~16qU~qh~0qh~0q@~6qd estuarine areas representative of the affec~4qt~qed~4q@~60q@Imma~2qb ~qa~q_~q,~q-~8qA~8qi~qV~56q4~q,~6qo~qr ~8qi~qr~6qd~6ql~4qw~08q4~0qw~6q). S~qt~qa~q,~qas (emp~12qhas i~qs~qadd~qe~2qd~2q@ The first biogeographic r~qe~8qgions~qand estuarine Fre~4qquen~2qf~6ql~4qy~q. su~qc~0qlire~2q4~4qi~0qL~qr~6qitio~qn-activ~qii~qie's Secretarial finding requ~2qi~qzed far types of the United States. These provide ~qe~qa~0q@~qoene~qnt ~qo~8qp~8qp~0qW~0qt~0qM~0qi~8qi~8q1~qe~q'~qS~q* for. designation of an estuarine area as a representative estuarine research management oriented research national estuarine re~qser~qv~qel~0qmder ~qse~qc~qf~qto~qn reserves then provide opportunities for In respG~qase -to -.reviewers ~4qf~4qt~4qquest~qs for 315(b)(2)(A) of the Act, ~4q1~4q6 ~16qU~12qS~q.C. long-term research. education. and clarification and consistent with the 146~28qUb~4q)~8q(2~4q1~8q(A). is that "~qIhe area i~qs~q.a~q. interpretation. response provided above, ~8qJ 921~q.~0q1~6q{d) and ~0 29944 Federal Register / Vol. ~35, No. 141 / Monday, j~ly 23. 1~9~qW Rules and Regulations ~21.1~q[e~q) have been revised and education grant funds. See subparts sentence to include a reference to the appropriately. F~, G~. H. Site acquisition limits are revised I ~q921.~1~q(d) and ~qJ 921.1~q(e). ~qA-op~osed�9~q2~1~.1~q(~qJ~q9~-~q-~q(~qI~q) One reviewer statutory. (16 U.S.C. 1461~q(e)~q(3)~q(A~q)) Section 921~.2-D~e~qf~qini~tions recommended that a formula be Funding I~qL~-~nits ensure that some e~tabl~'shed that would "pre-determine funding is available for those types of P~roposed�~921.2~q(~qb~q)~q-~qit was noted that the minimum level (percentage) of funds awards which support most directly the the Secretary of Commerce recently that would be set aside within the total mission and goals of the System (i.e., delegated authority for matters relat~qL~i~qg [System] budget for specific categories generally, after designation of a reserve, to National Estuarine Research Reserves (Research. Education, Monitoring, the competitive awards). As to the Under Secretary for Oceans and Operation /Management, Acquisition. importantly, funding limits are Atmosphere. and Development).~" In addition, this necessary to ensure that available funds Response: NOAA agrees with the same re~,~.~qI~ewer recom~r~nended that the are awarded in a relatively fair and recommended modification and has allocation of acqu~is~qition/developmen~t proportional manner among national changed references from the Assistant ~"Un~ds should be made on the basis of estuarine research reserves. In the Administrator to the Under Secretary greatest need measured against absence of such limits. one or a few throughout. predetermined criteria. research reserves could receive the bulk Proposed � 921.2~q(d~q)~-~-One reviewer Response: N~6qOAA acknowledges that of available funds at the expense of a~ql~ql recommended a modification to the under certain conditions establishment other reserves. These limits prevent second sentence of the definition of of predetermined percentages for such a substantially disproportionate estuary to include the term measurably allocating funds among programmatic 'distribution of limited funding.. diluted with freshwater rather than categories could provide greater At present. some of the existing minimally diluted. predictability in the distribution of research reserves in the System are Response. NOAA agrees with the Federal funds among reserves. However. approaching the eligibility limits for recommended modification the the advantages of such an approach acquisition and facility development recommended term "minimal" should be depend on a predictability in both the awards, while most have received less the term "measurable". The definition level of annual appropriations as well as than ~q50 per cent and a number less than has been changed accordingly. major acquisition and development 25 per cent. of the eligibility limits of needs for the Reserve system. ~6qT~qhe these type of awards--a difference ~6qA~r~o~qposed � 9~q21.2~q(e)-~qFive reviewers uncertainties in appropriation levels and between these categories of stated that some confusion has resulted acquisition needs are sufficient enough approximately one to three million in the reversed order of the terms to make an allocation formula among dollars. These differences are justifiable research and reserve in the name of the the six major funding categories on the basis of relative need. reserve System National Estuarine Reserve (research. education. monitoring. size, property values, construction costs, Research System. and the name of each predesignation. acquisition/ etc. A greater* difference in relative , - individual reserve, national estuarine development. operations) unfeasible. allocation of funds between reserves research reserve~. NOAA attaches primary importance would favor- d~qisproportionally some Response.- NOAA ac~qlmowled~qge3 that to long-term support for the-operational reserves and. is a result. be detrimental ~1~10~q1 ~q"~qh~q'ion has arisen as a result of needs at each reserve as described in to the System as a~2qWhole~.`~~,~.~*~;~;~w~2p~p~ this difference. However. this is to., ~1921.32 of these~qregulat~qion~s~, and Eligibility limits an established for statutory language which only can be changed by amending the Act. fulfilling the research. education and the purposes noted above and not to ~qur~i~qma~qson~qAb~ql~qy~'~qr~-~i-~qtri t ~?~0qP~4qd~o~qi~l~s~qh~I~qp to ~e~r a monitori~n~q# objectives of the program~. es c a rese~qi~qi~q6h reserve ~qS~qi~qe~ql~qt~q6n ~q21~.~q4~-~q=~6qRe a unlimited eligibility for these for the from access to available~'~qFede~qra~ql~fund~s. Provisions of the Coa~qi~1p~ Zone awards. as ~q;~qf NOA~0qX~qi ~6qO~n the b ~- is exp~q0~r~qi~8qg~2qNe~'Jin ~-M a~qn~0q@~,~q!~q@~qme~nt Act (2) Four reviewers expressed conce~'m ~ae~l~qmin~i ~ te~qr~u~8q4 Federal financial or objection to l~qim~qiti~ng~.t~.he~.fundi~ng assistance for the S~qy~ste~qi~i~q@~qa~r~qid be~ca~@use it Was noted that the existing program eligibility of a~n~q@ one reserve under any I of comm~qi~r~qit~qi from many ~8qUsearch regulations describe this section as type of award. pa~qi~qtIcularly ~q6pe~qr~z~qoon/ reserves, the e~6q4bil~qit Relationship to other provisions of the management awards. These Binh ~'for Coastal Zone Management Act and to reviewees operation/management a~iw'ard~s.~qw~a~qs comments ranged from general concern raised to a maximum of $7~q0,000 per site the National Marine Sanctuary to recommending that a~ql~ql ~qfundin~qg~-~q6aps per year. In response to~~omme~qnts on Program". Text describing the be removed from all types of awards. the proposed regulations, the eligibility ...relationship between the Reserve and These reviewers also stat~q;~4~qf their limit for ma~qjo~qrfacility co~qhst~r~q@~iction has ~' Sanctuary Program was omitted. New general concern re~qgardi~qz~qi~qg~'a~-p~-~e~r~q6~aived been raised 50 per cent in these final J ..marine sanctuaries~*~a~nd estuarine lack of long term Federal ~qf~qin~qi~qm~qc~ql~qa~ql regulations (see response under research reserves are being designated commitment to the System~q!~q@~6q@~6qI~--~'~1p~p~ proposed ~q1921.31 below). in close geographic proximity to one Response: Annual appro ation~sare ~'A~-~oposed~q�~q9~q2~q1.~q1~q(g)~q-~-On~qd reviewer another and therefore improved limited. not unlimited. ~2qF ~q'~q:~q'~q-~qe~2qI~0q4~2qpbi~0qhty disagreed with the requirement that land ~qc~2qb~8qb~qr~6qdinat~2qio~qn between the two programs ~q, ~q, ~q.~q.~qL is warrant- limits f~qcr each reserve h~qa~40qW~qe already in a protected status can be' ed~q. established in regu~8q@lat~2qi~8q6~48q6~q-~52qC~qn~4qI~6qj ~24qw~36q@~qre included within a reserve only if the ~40q4~q'~q,~0qRe~qs~4qp~6qb~36qa~qe~2q@ NOAA agrees. ~6qT~0qhe revision determined appropriate and neces~2q4a~qry managing entity commits to long-term of the Section h~8qoa~16q&~48q4 and text should for the establishment and on-going non-manipulative management. -be adopted and ~qstr~8qingthened. ~8qT~16qhe support of the mission a~0qhdg~q'oa~0qls~q'~qof the Response. NOAA believes this ~32qAo lesion of this information from the System. These regulations establish requirement is necessary consistent proposed regulations wa~6qi an oversight. annual eligibility limits for operations with the mission and goals of the - ~- ~q, ~6qT~0qhe Section heading ~4qa~qnd text have been (~q$70~q.000 per year, per reserve) ~20q6~4qid System. Essentially this same subject is revised appropriately. program-life limits for site acquisition discussed in the response to comments Sec~0qf~8qioz~8q@~0q9~0q2~0q1~q.~0q1~04qa~8q-Gene~qr~qal~q. (S4 million per reserve). Funding on proposed I 921.1~0q(d) and ~0qi ~8q9~4q2~4q1.1~0q(e). In eligibility limits have not been order to clarify the intent of this ~20qP~qr~qoposed�9~4q2~0q1.10~6q(a)-~6qFive reviewers established for research, monitoring. provision. NOAA has revised this objected to two or more states which ~0 Federal ~qRag~is~t~~ I ~qV~~d. 55. No. 141 / Monday, July ~23~ ~1~9~q0 Rules and R~g~~qk~t~i~~n~ share a biogeographic region being The remaining reviewer ~re~c~o~r~qmn~a~n~qded Post site selection. In add~qi~qt~on-h~orw~eve~r~, limited to the development ~-~o~qf~a -single extensive revisions to the-subsection to under the new ~su~ql~ipart G~, N~2qOAA may reserve, even it it was a mul~tic~omp~on~ent provide guidance on where habitat provide financial ~assi~stance~,on a reserve with components in each ma~n~qip~i~qf~ql~at~qion would be allowed. competitive basis ~qf~o~r eec~qh phase ~of a respective state ~qfe~.g.. Maryland and ~2qRes~qpan~se: After careful review of this monitoring program. These grant awards Virginia in the Ch~e~sape~ake~2q2a~qy subsection, N~2qOAA do" not believe that will be separate from ~T~qhose provided for subregion of ~qthe Virginia biogeographic the buffer zone concept should be estuarine research under subpart F. region). These rev~qi rs specifically deleted or that substantive revisions are Section ~221.1~q3~q-~i~8qWo~n~a~qgemen~t Plan and objected to t~qhe eligibility limit on land appropriate. The basic approach Environmental Impact Statement acquisition ~qh~qm~qdin~qg (see I 9~21.~1~q0(~qb) and presented is sound. A critical concept Development ~q� ~q921~4qM) as it applies to any individual and distinction between the two areas reserve. single or multiple component. which may have been overlooked is that Proposed �.9~q2~7.~T~q3~q(o)~q(7~q)-Th~r~ee Response.- NOAA agrees- Some of the key land and water areas ("c~ore-~q)~'an~qd -a reviewers provided comment ~q= the System's biogeographic ~su~qbregio~n~s.are buffer zone -will hke~qiy acquisition plan guidance of this represented ~qby m~ore~th~an one reserve in significantly different levels of control subsection. Two reviewers requested more than one ~st~ate.~Asa result. in the (see ~q� 921.13 fa)(7~q1). In addition to the additional guidance on what constitutes case of a biogeographic moon (see basic principles established in the ..adequate state control" and Appendix 1) shared by two ~o~r more regulations, NOAA has developed more commented that the requirement to states. each such state ~oh~ou~qld be eligible detailed boundary guidance which is assess the cost effectiveness of control for Federal financial assistance to available to states attempting to conduct a~ql~qlerna~qtive~s is exces~s~L~qively burdensome. establish a national estuarine research the difficult process-of boundary The remaining reviewer stated that reserve within their ~resp~e~e~cti~ve~qpor~tion delineation ~of~,a proposed ~-~a~qi~t~e. having four million dollars in funds of the shared biogeographic region~. P~ro~2qpo~sed�~-~q92~1,~q11~q1c~q)~q(~q5~q1~-~-~6qO~ne reviewer ava~qd~qlable~qf~or land acquisition is not Section ~q921~,10~q(a~q) ~qi~qw~a been -amended to recommended amending this site consistent with the-requirement to reflect this revision. Because ~of this selection principle to include "the conduct an assessment o~ql't~qhe cost revision, the pb~ra~ae which begins "In supped ~o~qfon~qg~aing~-~qw ~qpla~qm~ied effectiveness ~o~qf acquisition alternatives. the case of a multic~a~qmp~on~ent national management Activities in nearby Response. What constitutes estuarine ~* ~* ~q" in ~qJ ~q9~q21~0q1~q0~q(~qa), ~q1921.3~q1. estuaries, ~qi~n~qd~i~s~qi~qfi~n~g these ~qI~n~qth~e adequate State ~-c~o~ntror Is de and I ~q921~-~q32(c) is~no~4qbn~qger-~nece~s~sar~qy National Estuary Program." pendent and ha~sbeen deleted. Response: NOAA considers on ~site~-~vpe~c~qf~qf~qic ~c~qh~t~, t~a~qm~m~s -and Proposed ~qf ~q9~2qn. ~qn~2qy~qb)-Two reviewers I ~q921.11(c)~q(5) to encompass this concern requiteme~n~8qh.~'~4qMe~qu~a~)~et~qvffi~6qd~t~qmtuse-~of commented that NO~2qAA ~qi~qho~quld consider in that ~-~6qf~6qf~6qie State ~qI~s~-~r~eq~qdir~ed to av~e~0qlab~qle~e~cq~u~qi~n~qi~qf~qi~en funds can only be a higher eligibility limit or relative demonstrate ~qbaw Ilia proposed ~i~qf~qte Is ensured~qth~r~ou~qg~0ql ~qIh~e ~ql~qd~en~qt~6qM~c~w~qf~qien of greater~qlunding ~qlor awards to mul~qd- consis~qie~nt with existing and potential reas~o~n~able~,~contro~qL or ~acq~u~qi~j~qdt~qi~o~n com alter~n~a~2qf~2qtes and an ass~qi~ss~i~ne~nt of -their ~qponent reserves than -to single land and water uses. Both the r~e~qlg~qliv~e~qm~a~qt4~a~i~qd~a~qlfe~c~qt~qi~v~e~n~esL This ~c~o~qm~qp~ane~r~it~re~se~r~u~e~s. designation by ~2qN~2qO~2qAA~-ef ~a~y~e~serv~e does ~8qWm~ec~e ~:~Z~n~o~j~qm~ql~qb~z~qt ~q1~qhe keel Response~- ~8qN~6qVAA disagrees. ~qFundin~qj un~qd~er~1p~e ~2qAc~qt~,and~-~-~qma~d~a~qg~eme~nt plans c~o~o~qd~qy if, for ~qt~qhe System to lin~i~qf~qted. A State ele~a~4qu dev~el~ope~qd~8q0~qmu~qgh ~-~0qf~0qf~0qie 1~q9~qd~qf~qi~o~j~8qW Estuary ~qd~ua ~q=~wt be ~s~s~qi~qwt~P~qa~.~qI~q1~0qAoe~sz~n~a~n~. to ~e~st~ab~ql~qi~qd~ql~i a multi~-~c~o~n~@~,~V~u ~qm~qi~xe~s~e~t-~ve Program d~qT~,th~qi~0qU~.~qS.~1~8qM~6q4~qi~q6~q4~qw~qb~qm~2qM~e~qd b~o~qw~e~v~q= ~qT~qhat ~*11 ~r~ea~s~o~qm~0qWe~c~qo~r~qk~ral ~o~r~l~e~a~p~t~u~l a ~w~qin~qg~ql~e c~omp~o~ne~nt~-reser~ve to the~6qSt~a~qle~qi for a ~0q4~2q0~q6~qm~qg~n~a~ql~qi~qin -of with fall lam~v~qF~6qk~qd ~. t icy under ~ve~ct~qi~o~n ~8qW~q(~0qO~qt~ql~qj~4~4qA alternatives ~ab~oul~qd-b~et~qh~er~o~u~qg~ql~il~qy ~0qp~pf~qthe ~qI~qde~n~6qf~6qta~ql~-~- con~s~i~s e~i examined and &heir ~re~ql~a~qd~qw ~q=~s~2qW. e~2qf~2qt~qf~0q0~qft~qi~ql~qi~nn~q@s~u~i~n ~a-~qh'y-~qt~qn~qc~qf~ql~qOt~qdt~a~qf~ql~-~-~qV~4qV~'~.~, the Coastal Zone ~6qV Act ~qi~0~qf reserve, whether single ~or~-~qmu~qlti~qp~qle ~qI~4qW~qZ~,~;~a~s~zm~xnt~qIerL~2qV~6qOAA ~v~qd~aw~s~qi~qlli~s~, ~qIdenti~qf~qi~e~qd.The~4qZe~m~el~o~qp~qm~e~nt~-~af~qm comp~onent.~'E~at~e~'~. ~qb~ql~qi~qsh~qin~qg acquisition ~qpl~ar~i~ql~s ~s~2qm~6qA~qU~qa~8qwabl~e -cost ~qm~e~c~qh~8qa~qf~qi~8q6~qm~m an ~q@~0qa~qe~:c~2qf~2qt~e~qx~qi~e~s~qn~s~4qu (Federal ~iDr~qmatch~qi~ng~'~s~qh~a~qr~e~q)~. Four fu~nd~qi~n~qg~e~qti~qg~qf~qb~6qU~qi~qt~qy limits ~-~qI~qo~rr~, or ~qensu~0qf~0qi~6qn ~6qf~6qi~st~qi~qke~s~er~qms Million d~o~qUa~r~s~qj~S~q&~4qW ~"~4~qi~v~qi~qdab~ql~e~,"~-~qbu~qt~qis adv~qin~qb~e~-th~e~qm~qd~evan~qt~z~o~v~qi~6qi~qd and d~qispr~o~rp~o~r~qti~o~n~d the ~qi~qf~qig~ibil~qity~4q1~r~qi~i~qf~qt~-~qf~i~erla~nd acquisition ~1~0~, ~qb~qje~c~qt~qi~v mul~ql~qic~om~qponen~qt ~P~e~se~qmes would~I~4qbe estuarine '~a~n~a~qgemer~tt~-~o ~a~s funds ~qTo~qi any on~e~res~e~r~y~p~-~6ql~i~8qg~ardleas of likely ~qto~h~a~ve -a sign~qi~qf~qi~c~qm~qi adverse including those ~of~'t~qhe Na~qtiona~ql~2qE~4qf~4qt~ery the ~am~ou~Dt of ~qb~qwd~0qW~qg~8qIv~qi~qIl~8q&~e~_~qf~o~r impact ion single-component ~ze~s~e~qw~qe~g Program.~0qTh~e~?e~qf~ore, ~@~qJ ~6qMA~qI~q(ca~q[5) has land ac~qquI~a~ql~qt~qi~o~n. a ~qth~ar~ou~2q& assessment and, ~qw a result~. ~qthe Sy~qitem ~qi~sa whets. been amended~:to -make -more specific f aG~qQ~6qWs~qi~qtio~n.alter~naf~ql~i~ves a~n~qd ~q(h~2q6r~cos~qt Further, acquisition and ~4q&~qw~elopment our intent that the site -support' es~tua~min~e ~'D effectiveness l~a necessary Ito ensure funds are l~qi~n~qf~ited -by flip Act: management objectives. responsible and ~v~0qN~i~2qde~n~qi use ~qo~qt~qFeder~qal section Sec~t~qi~qO~qn ~-~q9~q21.~q1~q2~--~qP~qb~st Site Selection grant ft~a~i~qd~s. At a minimum lie a~egr~ee ~of ~qS~qtr~up~osed~q�~q9~q2~q2~.~q1~q1~q(~a~q)~0qM-~0qO~n~e~reu~qi~ewer Proposed � ~q921.12(o~q)~L~.~q-~2qTwo reviewers state c~o~ntrdI~qmu~st provide ~ade~qqu~f~f~4qf~4qt recommended t~qh~at~qt~qhe last sentence ~0q*~e recommended a ~qw~tp~a~rate -type ~mf award long ~-~qterm-pr~ot~e~ct~qiu~n ~qIo ensure for revised to ~qalim~qim~04qa~qi~qi~qe~qf~qerenc~qeto~"~8qa fo~qnm~qonit~qo~qr~qing that w~0qnuld p~qr~qo~qv~qid~qe~ql~qo~qn~2qg~q- ~q. reserve resources a -stable ~e~nv~qtr~or~tmen~qt~, nat~qur~qal.~qs~6qy~qste~8qm" ~ ~:~q:~qI~qI~q_~q.~q, ~. ~q@ ~qi .~q. ~q.. ~q- term support for these ~qact~12qW~12qWes. ~4qf~qo~qrTe~qse~qarch~2q: ~08qA~qa~qsp~qa~4qm~0qw: NOA~12qA-~qa~8qg~qr~qe~qe~qs~4qthat~qa ~qm~q3~8qin~qor R~qe~qs~4qp~0qw~0qme~q.~q-~q'NOAA ~qa~2qNre~qe~qs. A mew Proposed � ~08q=.~q,~36qM~qc~qr~0q)~q@~6q(~08qV~0q)-~16qOrie revision ~8qi~qsr~qum~qe~qs~qs~qer~6qy Io ~qc~6ql~0qn~48q*~q-th~qe ~1~4q1 ~qs~qubpart-G-~16qM~qo~qn I ~8q]~8qI~q'~q-~20qb~4qn been added rev~8qiew~qer~q-~qst~qate~0qd~2qth~qe~0qt~12qW~12qDA~12qK~qs of this seat~qe~qn~qre.~16qM~qi~qe~q-~qi~qse~qnt~qe~q7~qic~qe~0ql~4qm~qs~20qb~qe~qe~qn to t~0qhe~qr~q.~q6-~4qO.~q" ~q1~8q1~0q[~qsub~6qpa~04qn~qs-~20qC ~qa~qnd ~16qH of ~qre~qs~8qp~qo~qn~qe~24qM~0ql~~2ql~qt~2qy~4qt~qo~qn~2qi~qi~6qa~0qm~6qi~qa~ql~qc~qon~12qf~12qt~4qiency revised in a mm~qum~qer c~qon~qs~8qi~qstent~q-~qA~qw~08qah ~qe ~2qW~qa~qy~qa~0qnd ~qT~qr~qg~0qw~qu ~qH~qo~qn~qs~20qt det~qer~qn ~8qf~8qi~qc~4qm~qe~q'h~4qou~0qI~16q&be~0qm~6qmae~qv~6qJ~qear corresponding ~qc~6ql~qar~2qi~44q4~8qin~8qg ~qa~qr~4qdi~qs~8qi~qon~qs is ~qrele~qtt~6qe~0q"~0qd ~qe~qs -sub ~q.~q,~q- ~16qH and- early in the ~qveg~qu~20qW~qon~qs~q.~q' I ~4q92~4q2~q-1~0q1d) -and I ~8q9~04q=~4q2~0q(~q6~6q1. respectively: and ~4q1~16qhe~qI~4qm~08qf~08qf~08qi~6qm~q-~qnu~6qm~20qberi ~12qR~qe~qg~8qP~qo~qi~qr~qs~8qe~qr ~16qW~16qO~12qAA agrees. A reference P~qTo~4qp~qo~qs~qe~2qd~0ql~00q=~q_~00qU~0q(~qc~36q%~0q2~6q@~q-~20q@ being renumbered ~q-accordingly)~q. ~12qb~8qf~8qi~8qf~8qf~2qal to I ~4q9~04q=~00q3~4q6~0q(~6qb) b~qim b~qe~6qin added to ~12qf~12qf~12qi~qg reviewers ~qcrrmm~4qw~qi~ql~qed ~qm~qu ~4q1h~qe ~qzon~qa~qsp~4ql~20qd funding f~qor~q'~0qbas~4qic~q-c~16qha~qr~qac~qte~qriz~qa~0qti~qon d~6qf ~0qT~0qhe subsection to ~qc~6qdarif~4qy ~12qN~16qO~12qA~08qK~qS core" and ~q'~20q%uffe~qr~q"~6qm~0qm~qas ~q-~qor~0qzon~qe~qs. T~qu~4qm p~6qh~12q"~8qi~qca~6ql~q, geological, ~qche~0qm~8qi~qc~2qd~8qL~q4~0qmd - cons~8qisten~qc~8qydet~qe~qr~0qm~8qh~6qm~q'~8qd~qo~qn of these ~qr~qe~qv~4qi~qew~qar~qs~qzecamm~qe~qnded biolog~8qic~qa~0qL~qc~6qh~qa~qracteri~qs~8qf~8qics ~qof~q.~q1~6qh~qe site ~2qwIll responsibilities ~qe~qa~2qt~6qly~8qi~qn.prepa~qr~qs~qtion~q:~qo~2qt deleting the concept of a b~qu~0qf~0qf~qerz~qo~qne~q. continue to be provided under ~6q192~0q1.12~2q- the management plan. ~0 29946 Federal Register / Vol. 55~ No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 19~q0 Rules and Regulations Section 921.2~q0~q-General Section 921~.30~q-Des~qignct~qion of National Section ~q921~-32~q-Oper~at~qion ~and Proposed � 921.20~q-Two reviewers Estuarine Research Reserves Management Implementation of the requested a clarifying revision to the Proposed � 921.30~q(~c)-Two reviewers Man ~a~qg em en t Plan last sentence of this subsection, the provided comn~ients on the designation Proposed � 921.3~q2~q(~o~-~qd)-Seven addition of the phrase "to a coastal criteria listed in this subsection. One reviewers objected to the eligibility limit s~ate." reviewer recommended a change in on operations and management awards. ~R~@~@~s~'~:~:~!or~se: NOAA ag~:ee~s and t~1h~e (a)(4) at variance with the Act. The They noted that the statute contains no sec~'~qi~o~n has been revised accordin~qg~qlY~. other reviewer recommended an provision for withdrawal of Federal addition to the designation findings to support for continued operation of the S~c~"'~On 921.21~q(e~q)~q-~qI~n~qi~L~'~a~ql Acquisition include a requirement that. in the case. reserves. The termination of Federal c~-~~2 Development A~qw~c~:-~qds of a State which con~t~ai~r~s, in whole or support for the individual sites is viewed Two re~,~6~qiewers provided comment on part. a national estuary program as a lack of Federal commitment to the t~@.~is section. The first reviewer convened pursuant to section 320 of the long-term maintenance of a -e~~uested clarification that ~0q&~,~a provision Clean Water Act. suitable consideration representative system of estuarine re~~'~ardin~qg de-designa~tion of a site has been given to integration of research research a~nd education sites. applies only to properties acquired with and public education programs of the Response: The Reserve Program was Federal funds. The second reviewer estuarine research reserve and the designed and continues to be a State- stated that the provision to compensate national estuary,prog~ra~qm. It has also Federal partnership. The key to this the Federal government for its share of been noted that the final management partnership is the requirement that the acquisition cost in the event of de- plan as the governing document for NOAA share with the State reserve designation. may be contrary to overall subsequent operations and management program the financial needs associated coastal protection objectives because of the reserve should contain the signed with site designation. land acquisition. the state may have to sell the property designation findings. Subpart (a) of this research. education and operations. to development interests in order to fully section should also be revised to show As discussed previously, appropriate compensate the Federal interest. that the Under Secretary is responsible eligibility limits ensure that funding is Response. Regarding the first for designation of reserves in ~i available for competitive research comment NOAA does not believe accordance with the delegation of that education and monitoring awards. It as authority from the Secretary of some reviewers suggested. NOAA additional clarification is necessary. Commerce. removed the annual monetary ceiling for ~qT~his subsection states specif~qica~qDy that Response. The terms for designation operations and other awards, an these provisions apply to "any real ~ of a National Estuarine Research inequitable and disproportionate property acquired in whole or part with Reserve are set forth in the statute. distribution of the limited f~a~nds for the Federal funds* %*'The second NOAA agrees that research and program could result. Annual commenter ac~qknowledge~o~'corTectly that education programs should be operational eligibility limits in addition these requirements are designed integrated between the Environmental to ensuring the availability of funds for accomplish the goals of the National Protection Agency's National Estuary competitive projects provide a stability Estuarine Research Reserve System and Program and NOAA's National and even distribution among designated that this provision helps insure that - ~-~. ~; Estuarine Reserve Research Syste~n~L -and develop~6qlg reserves, Consequently reserves maintain the standards ~t~l~-~A~o~8qW~1~3 :ThisI~'~: A ha *already ~qt~qi~6q&~2qY~qt~q@~qdlt~qlated NOAA is retaining th~qe ~qi~ql~0qWb~qility limit of ef~qfo a established for the ~system~.and. if they $70,00~q6 for~'op~qera~qtion~s ~qa~nd ~qi~qi~i~qan~qig~q!~0qqent ~~qi~r~" through ~a memorandum~of~.~7~,~X~*~,~-~r do not that a ~qperc -per site ~qPer year." entag~qi of the fa underst~qi~L~ndingbe~'t~v~q@~c~ie~r~qfth~qi~@~p~'rogramsat~- ~'~qV~qi~qllabl~qi~qt- th~qi~qi~'~-~!~e the Nationa~qlJ~qivel and is being pursued market value'i~s a 00 NOAA concurs with the reviewers' reserves. It should a~8q%~q6~'b~qe ~qi~qio~qt~qed that. -at the local leve~qL where appropriate. assertion that the s~4qUtute does not direct. these ~qOrovis~qi~c~2q6~s a~*~r~'e ~ti~qot ~qne~'w-a~i~n~id b~qiv~qi ~q7~qberefore~.~@NOAA believe's it does not 'the Federal G~q6v~ier'~n~q-~~-e~-~in~i~qfto ab~l~qi~tn~id~qbn ~qit~s been in place since th~qe ~qi~qnceptio~8qdof the~' require restatement in the pr~q6~*~qgra~6qm~.~,-~@~-~_-: support and financial commitment to Reserve program through ~qgr~0q6~qi regulations. However. NOAA agrees reserve operations at the conclusion of a directives contained in ~6qO~6qU~6qB Circul ~.a~r A- that the mana~qgem~qinif plan should prescribed period of time or when a~qn 102. The provisions in the Reserve contain the findings of des~qig~nation~'and arbitrary cumulativefundin~qg ceiling for regulations are taken ~qdirect~ql~qy-~qE~r~q4~qm~~qthe~~*~ the regulations should show that the Federal support of operations has been A~102 Circular and apply to ~4qQ real Under Secretary is respo ~sible for met By imposing a fixed d tio ~@for ~. ~qV- ~@~,~' Federal support of Reserveuoraperantio~ns property acquired in whole or ~qi~@~qi~i~2qf~2qt~4qwith designation. The regulations have been NOAA may undermine its ability to Federal funds. It should a~qli~q6 be noted revised accordingly. a ~ ~. I ~. ~. ~~.~~ ~. ~participate effectively with the Reserve that there are other~alte~* -aside ~~. ~;~.. ~, Section ~q921.~q31~q-Su~qp~qplemental -~L~q_~* system to address coastal and estuarine erty_ si~0qt~2qion and Development Awards management issues of national from sale of the prop ~8qt Of A~qc~2qqu~2qi tide ~q.~6q7~q. ~q7 de-designation the state significance. The previously proposed' or transfer title to the Fe ~qa ~6qP~2q@~qv~6qposed� 921.~4q3~4q1~8q-~2qFour reviewers three year support per position a~6ql~6qlocated government. In these ins ce~0qs it is expressed concerns that the eligibility through A $~4q4~04qW,~4q0~4q0~4q0 operations ceiling likely that the resources of the ~0qm~4qierv~qe limit of ~8q$L000~q,00~0q0 in Federal financial also established a complex and - : ~@ I could continue ~6qto be protected. V~20q&~4qf~4qle~q* assistance for facility co~qnstru~24qaon may burdensome a~qc~0qhni~qn~qi t~qr~qative process none of these alternatives are ~. ~q. ~q. ~. not be adequate to meet anticipated which is further complicated when inexpensive they do, as noted by t~0qhe longterm needs and should be allocated among Reserves which have commenter~q. help ensure that the site increased or eliminated. already received operations support. continues to be managed and Response: NOAA agrees. The and the newly designated sites which maintained in conformance with eligibility limit for facility construction have yet to receive such support~q. To ~r~n ~Z~8qV~L~'es ma ~qj~28qn~56q@ d ral ~4q#~q.~0q@ research reserve goals and objectives. has been increased 50 percent to simplify. streamline and improve $~4q1.~4q5~08qw~q.000. NOAA~q's effectiveness in support of ~0 Fed~~nd Re~q&~qU~ / Vol. 5~5. No. ~141 / ~qNond~~y, July 2~3, ~1990 Rules ~~~d Re~gula~t~i~rrs ~Z~qM~7 Reserve~~oper~ati~on~a. the three year with the program goals as specified in on these issues. Therefore, ~8qN~2qO.A~.A d~z~;~es restriction and ot~qh~er~-r~efe~r~e~z~zc~a~s lo ~q192~1.1 of these regulations. The five not agree that additional ~trec~qha~r-~qi~sm~s cessation ~of Federal support for goals described in ~C~qhis section ~a~7e for d~a~l~s~qpu~te resolution are warranted. operations and management ~at the nearly identical to the criteria prop~c~sed Proposed ~q� 92~q1.40~q(~e~qj~-~-~@ Two r~ev`ewers reserves have been removed throughout by one commenter. The c~om~n~ient~er recommended a nin~e~t~qy-d~ir~qi r~e~qq~u~i~i --men~t the regulations. added cost-effectiveness in using f~:~)r State submittal of an ~enr~ual r~ep~.~-~rt Federal funds as an additional criteria instead of sixty days. Section ~q9~2~q1~-33~q-~qB~ou~qm~qh~qv~-~, ~2qC~q@~q=~,~qg~e~s, which, while not directly stated as a ~qR~espc!~7~s~e: NOAA agrees. Section A~.~r~ne~n~qe~.~7~:~e~n~ts to the M~,~q=~t~c- ~g~e~qm~e~nt P!~c~n, prc~aram goal ~qi~n the re~6~qp~lati~on~s is 9~q21.4~q0~q(e~q) has been ~r~ev~qi~s~.-~qd a=.-,- ~n~qs~'~qy~- ~C~r~IdA~qd~qd~qit~qion ~of~2qM~a~ql~t~qi~qp~qle~-~s~qite . ~0 ~u~nplicit ~qL~r~i any evaluation ~of efficient NOAA ~e~,~'~:o notes that this section Components management ~of the total reserve indicates that inadequate a~n~z~i~ral reports F~ropas~ed ~q� 9~q2~.~Z.33~q(~c)~q-~-O~ne reviewer program. will trigger a Full scale performance re~c~ernmen~qeed de~qle~t~qicn ~cr substantial It is n~ot feasible to establish a evaluation. This provision is no longer modification of ~qt~h~qis subsection to checklist for any evaluation to needed since ~q� ~q9~21~-~q32 has been changed recogrize the State's right and ability to predetermine what constitutes a~qdequa~qle t~o provide ~ql~ar~:~q3 term e~l~i~8q&iI~6q4 for appropriately plan and legislate its legal versus inadequate performance. Each ~0 operations support~. Eva~ql~'~uat~;~o~n~l~s c~q@a~r~qg~e-the research reserve. In reserve has very Unique rd~qmin~I~st~rative ~C~_~-nse~qquently will be conducted su~i~n~qm ary, this reviewer objected to struct~7~ires. environmental re~s~o~Lrces. a~nd generally ~at least every 3 years. The N~2qOAA'~s approval authority/ corresponding management needs. statement has therefore been deleted. requirement for activities discussed in NOAA views the evaluation process to &is subsection. The reviewer suggested be a highly c~all~abora~qdve effort with the Section 921.50~q-~2qCen~er~al that it should be sufficient if the State State such that the evaluation can be Proposed � 92~q1.50~q(~6~q@~q-~qFo~ur re~%~qie~Y~qnr~s provides NOAA an opportunity for used to focus an pa~r~8qf~8qt~0qWar and specific commented on this subsection. Three review and comment on proposed problem areas. It is not appropriate to reviewers rec~oE~r~tmend~ed that research changes. attempt to c~on~s~h~r~u~0qd a li~lmus test for funded under this subpart be allowed in ~6qR~e~q=ns~e: NOAA disagrees. NOAA is inadequate or ad~r~qqu~a~qte perf~amance an area larger than the boundaries of responsible for Federal oversight of the which could reasonably ~antiaipate the the research reserve. One ~o~qf ~qf~qir~es~e S ~ystern and -each designated research substantial variety ~of~ql~qnu~e~s that are reviewers also recommended t~hat the r~q@~s~erve. As long as a State wishes for a addressed in the evaluation process. m~an~eg~qi~6qN entity of ~qT~qhe reserve approve reserve ~qlo remain a part ~of the System NOAA would be justifiably ~ic~ti ~qf~qic~qized for all research prior to NOAA funding. One and to retain Federal de~s~qi~qg~n~e~6qf~6qt~n. applying an artificial measure against reviewer expressed concern that ft~u~i~qd~qin~qg NOAA will continue to require Federal unique and s~qi~qte~q4~qpe~cif~qic ~ I ~i stances. eligibility is tied to ~6qNOAA approval of a approval ~of changes in that research NOAA agrees with ~t~qhe ~c~amme~irt~s I management plan. ~- reserve's ~q7~3~ound~er~qies and management. made re~qg~ar~0q&~ng participation of ~a~qd~qwr ~J~%espo~n~s~e~: ~1~4~q0~t~u~qk agrees that ~qg~re~s~qter General officials in the evaluation process. Such flexibility should be provided for the officials provide recommendations to P~r~ap~ov~ed � ~0qW~2~,~2qM ~6q1 ~4qM-4~q1~, and NOA~qA6 an ~speci~qr~qw ~ql~m~qi~qi~qw~s ~qJ~n the area in w1r~qich fe~qd~er~al~qt~qy Funded research � ~q921.42~--~qS~e~y~p~n~qo ~M~a~x~qie~q"~qW~e ~, evaluation To ensure th~at-R~e~serv~e under this subpart may be c~o~nd~irc~qted. recommended ~-~b~-~A~r~i~ca~qf~qi~a~n~qz~0qMe personnel are directly ~qi~n~v~a~qb~n~e~qd in The regulations have been revised to C~l~qi te~qd~A ~q1~0 be m~1~2d ~qd~u~qd~n~qg ~0q*~W~qh~q=M~M~q= selection of the eva~ql~n~e~6qd~on team allow research activity in the immediate e~v~a~qh~i~m~t~k~-~qM~A am== ~q0 1 1 should ~q1 ~q92~q1.40~q(~c~q) has beenr~evi~sed t~o~ql~adi~c~at~e watershed of the re~servewbile ~s~qt~qU cl~ea~r~ql~4qr~e~t~a~qt~e~, ~qW~qi~t~a~lt a ~q-~i ~qi~q1~i I ~P I that NOAA will ~'~qc~o~qn~0qu~qlt ~VA~qt~qh and -~r -~qP requ~qi~gi~r~4qg~qi~qb~e~qm~aj~o~6qf~6qt~a~qf~qf~u~nd~ed ~-~~. or inadequate ~qper~qfa~r~qma~u~qm~- One request recommendations ~qI~qmm the activities to be con~4q6~qL~qIed within ~q9~qw c~om~s~ue~qn~t~er ~qp~r~o~qAded~;a list ~oft~qlems ~O-N~2qOAA bou~s es~. N~0qO~2qM~i~a~qlso agrees that the Reserve an the appropriate no ~qma~qm~4q&~qg entity of the reserve ~shou~qLd suggested f~qW~qi~z~qi~qll~qm~qh~n~qiin ~R~U e~V~8~q1~B~R~qf~qi~M~L part~qj~qp~qip~a~nt~s Prior to the ev~a~qi~n~a~qt~o~n~qa Th~r~qie rev~qiew~er~s~i~n~a~qd~e~-~sugg~e~s~qti~on~s an The recomme~nd~ati~o~n~,~qt~qh~a~qt the direc~2q4~qi~nd~qi~c~a~8qf~8qt approval or the composition ~a~qf~qthe ~*~v~a~qh~qw~qd~qm ~f~a~qm evaluation ~e~x~am~i~n coordination disapproval of proposed ~r~qm~i~qir~c~qh recommending non-Federal andp~2qdv~at~e between the Reserve ~2qpr~o~qg~q@am ~a~nd other Project ~6qC~u~r~re~r~2q* each ~qn~a~er~v~e is individual participation w~qi~t~qi~ql~e another coastal research e~6qf~6qf~or~4qU is ~qf~al~ql~qy -- ~- ~- requested to review and assign ~qpri~ari~t~qy comme~n~qt~er suggested the re~qg~ulat~qi~o~q= cons~qi~ote~nt with N~4qDAA objectives for ~qt~qhe t~o ~se~s~ea~rc~qh projects proposed for the indicate criteria f~orch~o~os~qi~n~qg t~qhe -~-.~- evaluation process and is currently reserve. if a reserve does not approve of members of the ~e~v~a~qk~ta~qii~on team Finally considered under Reserve program a particular project that ~qi~n~qf~qm~q=at~qhm a r~ec~ommendat~qi~qa~qiw~a~s'~a~0qf~0qf~ered that the criteria to "promote Federal~, State. should be expressed directly to NOAA~. evaluation ~O~qtr~a~q"~qJ~a~qt~e~qgra~qt~qi~o~qn~-~of the public and private use of one or more NOA~2qA agrees that its review a~nd Reserve ~qp~n~0qw~om with-other state reserves within the System when such ~s~q?~qP~r~z~qw~z~q1 of state submitted final ~coastal/~re a~rc~qh~.~qp and that the entities conduct estuarine research." management plans should be as regulations provide for other dispute NOAA however, does not agree ~v~1~qi~q1h &a expeditious as p~o~s~i~6qNe. However~, resolution ~4qMe~qc~4qb~8qm~0qis~00qm ~qs~4qk~qe~08qd Of co~qn~qu~qse~qn~0qt that other disput~qe~q.ra~qs~qolu~0qt~8qion consistent with N~6qQAA~'s ~qre~qsp~qan~qs~qib~qi~ql~l~q-t~qy litigation. mechanisms should be devised shad of to ensure ~8q1h~qat reserve ~4qm~qa~qn~qag~qamer~qf~qt ~8qix Response., ~04qR~qe~8q@~6qp~36q=~qe~q*~q- evaluation at litigation in the event of an ~qur~20qA~qr~qvar~qab~0qle conducted In -~qo~qzd~qa~qnce ~0q%~8qi~qth the a national -estuarine research reserve is evaluation that.m~qay ~48qW to wt~20q&~4qd~4qmw~qal mission and goals of the 9~8qy~qz~4qt~qp~q-~2q= the c~qe~qnt~qr~qa~0ql~q:~0q1~44q0~2q40~08qAA~q'~qs~qabi~6q4~0qty 1~2q6 ensure -that of designation. Th~qep~qr~qa~12qd~qz~8qi~qo~qns contained need for an approved final m~qa~qn~qa~4qg ment reserve operation ~0qa~qnd management is in ~24qbo~4qf~0qh i ~04qw~0qi.4~0qi and ~6q# am p~qr~4qm~8qdd~qe a plan to qualify for~16qW~16qO~16qA~16qA ~- funded being conducted In -a manner fully le~qn~8qgt~6qb~8qy and elaborate proem for - research remains. consistent with program B~qo~qa~4qd~qe~qa~qnd ad~0qd~qre~qs~qa~4qk~qa~4qg. major differences between Section~~8q9~8q2~8q7.~8q3~4q1~8q-~16qEs~4qtuar~6qine Research objec~0ql~8qive~qs as defined in ~qse~qc~2qd~qon ~8q315 of the NOAA and the ~q-Re~qs~qe~4qme ~qre~0qb~12q&~qve~q'tD Guidelines the Act, 16 ~16qU~16q3~q.~04qr~4q_ Mi. and He of~6qf~8qinan~qc~2qial~0q"si~qzianc~qe~qur Proposed ~0qi ~0qa~00qn~q.~q51~8q-~2qF~8qive reviewers ~qk~@~l ~@ ~qL~0qmp~6qle~0qme~qnti~qn~8qg ~qTe~2qg~qulation~4q& ~12qThe criteria ~qof desig~qn~qa~8qf~8qlon~q. ~16qn~2qd~qs Process for an evaluation corresponds directly is expressly designed to ~qdva~2qid litigation re~qc-~qend~qed t~20qW~16qNOAA ~6qp~qr~qo~qa~qr~8qide, at 29948 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday, I-aly 23. 1990 / Rules and Regulations minimum. a more detailed and specific that properties included within NERR United States based enterprises to description of the Estuarine Research boundaries. particularly the core area. compete with foreign based enterprises Guidelines in the regulations. One will be subject to resl.-icted uses, and in domestic or export markets. re%aewer objected to NOAA's role in these uses will be subject to NOAA These rules amend existing establishing the research priorities for approval (e.g., research. construction. procedures for identifying. designating, funding under this subpart. education). Since these properties add and managing national estuarine Response: NOAA disagrees. Section real value to the LNERR System. but have research reserves in accordance with 3115 of the Act requires NOAA to diminished use for other purposes, they the Coastal Zone Management develop guidelines, not regulations. for should be allowable as state match. Reauthorization Act of 1985. They will the conduct of research within the These reviewers therefore not result in any direct economic or System. A basic description of these recommended elimination of a one-year environmental effects nor will they le-,-d g,iidelines is provided in both the Act time limit. to any major indirect economic or and the regulations. Includhig the Response: This provision has been environmental impacts. guidelines themselves, or a more adopted in the past to ensure that lands (B) Regulatory Flexibility Act detailed and specific description of included within the Reserve system are Analysis. A Regulatory Flexibility these guidelines. in the regulations acquired consistent with the purposes Analysis is not required for this would severely limit flexibility in their and objectives cf the Reserve system rulemaking. The regulations set forth implementation. NOAA publishes the and. as required by section 315(e)(3)(A) procedures for identifying and guidelines arinually in the Federal of the Act. to assure that the state has designating national estuarine research Register and intends to continue to matched the amount of financial reserves. and managing sites once improve these guidelines within the assistance provided by the Federal designated. These rules do not directly relatively comprehensive standards of Government for the acquisition of land affect "small government jurisdictions" the Act NOAA develops general for a reserve. However, NOAA agrees as defined by Public Law 98454, the research priorities on an annual basis in that the imposition of a one-year time Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the rules consultation with the estuarine research limit may not be the most effective or will have no effect on small businesses. and resource management community. appropriate method to achieve this (C) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. The agency foresees no advantage to purpose. We have therefore eliminated This rule contains collection of including more specificity or detail than this provision from the regulations and information requirements subject to necessary in the Program regulations. instead allow inclusion of land and submerged lands already in the states' Public Law 16-511. the Paperwork The financial support provided under possession as state match irrespective Reduction Act (PRA), which have this subpart for Research is of the date obtained by the state. already been approved by the Office of administered by NOAA As a result. Management and Budget (approval NOA.k in consultation with prominent However. calculation of the amount number 0648-0121). Public reporting members of the estuarine research eligible as match for existing atAte burden for the collections of information community, will continue to determire owned lands will be made by an contained in this rule is estimated to research priorities for this funding. independent appraiser who will average ZM2 hours per response for consider the value for match purposes of Subpart G-Interpretation and these lands by calculating the value of managernint plans and related Education benefits foregone by the state, in the use documentation. 1.25 hours for Section 921-60--C"eneral of the land. as a result of new performance reports, and 15 hours for restrictions :that may be imposed by. ;--t. annual reports and work plans. These Proposed`4 921-Wo)-Two review 'ers Reserve designation. - - estimates include the time for reviewing objected to the requirement that Proposed � 90,71(e)(4,L-One instructions. searching existing data * '-interpretive and educadoii projects be reviewer regommended elimination or sources. gathering and maint -the conducted within the research reserve. simplification of the matching share data needed. and completing= Response: NOAA did not intend to criteria for research'a'w'irds._ reviewing the collection of information. limit funding under this Subpart to Response. Thi matching share Send comments regarding this burden activities donducted entirely within the requirement cannot be eliminated estimate or any other aspect of these !'I boundaries of a research reserve*, and because it is required by statute. collections of information, including has revised the statement to clarify the However, the matching share criteria suggestions for reducing this burden. to intent. has been simplified to be consistent Richard Roberts, Room 1235, Proposed � 9-71.w(b)-One reviewer with the provisions to I 921.50(a) of Departriient of Commerce, Washington. suggested NOAA require that all subpart F. DC 20230. and to the Office,of - applications for interpretation and Information and Regulatory Affairs, education awards be app!7ed by, the VL Other Actions Associated With the Office of Management and Budget. state. Rulemaking Washington. DC 20503. ATTN: Desk Response. NOAA agrees .that .'(A) Classification Under Executive OfficerforNOAA ;: - , *_:@, @ - - I applications under this subpart should Order i2m. NOAA has concluded that (D) Executive Order 12612. These have the support of the state managing these regulations are not major because interim final rules do not contain entity. The regulations have been they wW not result in: policies which have sufficient revised accordingly. (1) An annual effect on the economy Federalism implications to warrant of $100 million or more; preparation of a Federalism Assessment Section 921.71-Allowable C@sts' (2) A major increase in costs or prices pursuant to Executive Order 12612. Proposed � 921.71[e)[2)-Two for consumers; individual industries; However, the provisions of the rules reviewers objected to a one year time Federal, state, or local government setting forth what a state must do or limit prior to pre-acquisitioft being agencies; or geographic regions; or agree to do in order to qualify for the imposed on the allowability for state (3) Significant adverse effects on various types of Federal financial match of state lands already in a fully- competition. employment. investment. assistance available under the rules protected status. The cornmenters noted productivity, innovation or the ability of have been reviewed to ensure that the ~0 Federal Register / Vol. 55. No. 141 / Monday, July 23. i~qM / Rules ~n~d Reg~~l~~t~h~m~ ~Z~qN~4~ rules grant the states the maximum submitted prog~r~3~r~n applications that Sec- ~a~qd~qmirr~qistr~qzt~qi~ve dis~qmetion possible in the anticipate in~i~t~ned~i~ste implementation ~of ~qS~,~q;~qb~pa~r~i ~qF-R~e~sea~r~c~qh admiaistra~f~qi~an of the National Estuarine these regulat~qior~s. Public comments on ~9~2~1.~50 Ceneral. Reserve ~qResea~qmh System policies these interim final regulations are ~92~1.~51 Estuarine research ~gu~i~de~qUne~s. embodied in the qualification invited and will be considered if ~9~Z~I.~32 promotion a~nd coordination of re~qju~qi~reme~nt~a. In ~qf~o~r~rm~i~qlat~qin~qg those submitted on or before September 2-~1~, e~i~tua-~qme rese~a~z~c~qh. policies. the NOAA worked with 1~9~q30. Subpart G-Mo~n~it~c~u~ri~n~g affected states to develop their o~%~-~n list of Subjects in 1~q5 C~qFR Pa~zt 9~Z~I ~92~1~.~6~0 General. policies with respect to the use of Na~'i~c~z~a~ql Estuarine Research Reserves. A~qdmiru~i~0qe~t~rativ~e practice and Subpart ~1~1-~Inf-er~p~r~et~a~t~ic~qm and Education To ~t~qhe maximum extent possible procedure, Coastal 2one~, ~qF~qmv~qL~r~onm~ent~al ~9Z~1.70 General. c~or~sistent with the NOAA~'s ~qL~npact statements, Grant programs-- 9~2~1~1.~qn~, Categories of pote~nti~a~ql~i~n~te~r~p~rc~t~qwe responsibility to ensure that the Natural resources, R~ep~o~r~qf~qing and and educational projects; e~@~q@~q;~q:u~a~l~4on objectives of the National. E~s~t~u~2qe~ne rec~ardk~e~epin~qg requirements, Research. c~r~;t~c~r~i~a~. Reserve Research System provisions of ~qf~Fe~qd~e~-al Do~r~me~stic Assistance Catalog Subpart ~q1~-~-~qGe~qmal Financial Assistance the Coastal Zone Management Act are Number 11.420, National Estuarine Reserve Prov~i~s~g~o~c3 ~ebtained~. the rules refrain fr~am Research System) ~921.~80 Application information. es~t~a~qb~"~ahi~r~qg uniform national standards. Dated: July ~1~f~_~1 ~1~9~qM~. 921.~8~1 Allowable costs. Extensive consultations with state V~L~-~4i~D~qia X ~0qr~Lp~pie, ~9~:~1.8~.~' Am~i~snd~qm~ents to ~qf~qinan~d~e~? ~a~b~s~;~_~-~1~,~;~nce o~qficial~s and organizations have been As~sis~t~a~n~tAd~qm~in~@s~i~x~ato~r~qf~a~r 0~%~;e~q= Services awards. held regarding the f~qincu~i ~al assistance and Coast~o~qlZ~on~e ~J~%f~a~n~a~qge~qmen~t~. Appendix I to Part ~9~q=~q-~qBi~o~qg~eo~0qg~3p~qhic qualifications imposed. Details ~qC~qlass~qf~qf~qi~catio~n Scheme regarding awards of financial assistance For the reasons set forth in the have been discussed above under the preamble~- ~15 ~qCF~qR part ~q9~qZ~qI is revised to Appendix ~1~q3 to Part ~2~2~1--Typ~o~qlo~qgy of hea~qd~u~i~l~qi "REVISION OF T~qh~6qE read as follows: National E~stuari~n~a Research Reserves PROCEDURES FOR S~2qE~6qECTING, Authority: Sec. 3~q1~5~, Public Low ~9~2-~683. ~as DESIGNATING AND OPERATING PART ~q9~q2~q1-NA~qT~qIO~2qNAL ESTUARINE amended. Be ~qSt~at. ~12~qW (IS C ~14~1~61~qJ. NATIO~4qNA~2qLESTUAR~qL~8qNE RESEARCH RESERVE RESEARCH ~qS~qV~I~6qSTE~2qM RESERVES" and an not repeated here. REGULATIONS Subpart A~-~-~6qG~qww~qw~6qW ~2qUkew~i~se comments from the states ~ Sec. ~qJ ~q921~qA ~4qMt~s~s~qk~qn gags and ~qge~qf~qt~r~a~l regarding ~qqua~0qU~cati~on~s and responses ~qp~qm~v~qf~s~ql~qw~& and changes to the regulations regarding S~ubp~o~d A-Ge~n~eral (a) The mission of t~qh~e ~2qKa~qU~a~r~tal same were set forth under the heading ~921.1 Mission, goals and general. provisions. Estuarine Reserve R~e~se~a~q=~q1 System. is SUMMARY OF S~qIGN~0qWICANT ~9~2~1.~2 ~qD~e~qf~qi~n~0qm~ons. the establishment and ~qm~e~n~a~qge~qm r~it, COMME,NTS~6qON ~6qU~6qE PROPOSED 921.3 N~at~i~o~n~a~ql~4qS~e~b~u~t~r~qi~ne Reserve Research through Federal-State cooperation. of a REC~6qU~qLATI~6qONSAN~2qD~N~6qGA~2qXS -System, bio~qg~e~ogr~i~qq~)hic ~cla~s~sific~at~i~qm ~nati~or~qA~ql ~sy~ste~i~qi of estuarine ~qmearch RESPONSES. It should be mated that scheme and estuarine ~t~yp~o~ql~o~l~qpi~e~s~. reserves representative of the va~z~qio~us. some of the states ~camment~ed ~qhi ~9~2~1.4 Relationship to other p~qm~v~qi~s~ions ~o~qf~qt~qh~e opposition to -condil~qi~c~i~r~e~e -or ~ql~ang~t~i~qa~qge Coastal~.~qZone Management Act. regions and estuarine types in t~qhe United States. Est~i~v~i~qdne res~ea~qwl required by law or by ~0qO~qf~qf~qi~ne~of Subpart ~q2~-~-~qS~qk~e S~e~ql~e~c~qf~qi~qm Pod Us reserves are ~e~qj~qu~4qb~ql~qi~a~qh~ed to ~q;-~iv~qide: Management and Budget ~qC~qArcular A-~q10~4q1 and ~q?~qA~qla~na~qg~e~s~se~n~t Plan Development opportunities ~ql~ar 1~q6z~i~qg-~qterm research. NOAA does not have the ~qd~qi~qi~a~qm~2qA~qm to ~q~z~qm~e -~-Ge~ue~r~a~qL education, ~s~qi~nd~qi~n~qt~e~rpreta~qt~qio~n. change such language or conditions. ~92~qmi Sit~e~va~qle~c~qd~o~n.~1p~p~p~p~p~ f for ~8qn~qj~q@~2qoal~qi~qZ '.the ~qp~r~og~q= (E) National En v~qLr~or~6qd~n~e~qi~qd'~6qd~6q*~ql~i~qc`~q]~r~@~'~@ 92~1.1~2 P~ost~si~ql~e~sel~ec Act. N~2qOAA-ha~s concluded ~qt~qhat ~9~q=~1~q9 I ~qI~qd~qw~a~qgem~e~n~t plan ~A~"~J ~s~av~ir~on~qm~e~a~qml carryu~i~qg out (his' m~" pub~ql~qic~s~it~qi~s~qm of th~es~a~ql~i~0qf~0qt~qt~qi~qm~qf~qi~n~a~ql~z~t~s~qles- ~; impact, statement dim ant e~n~v~qir~onm~e~n~qt for does ~nat ~c~ong~0qw~n~t~e a ~m~qm~qi~ar Fede~r~id "~q!~qs~ql~qo~qp~qm~, research ~qlh~qm~qu~qi~q@~'~qI~q@i~8qw~qt~e~q;~sn protection of ~- S~u~qbpa~qf~qf C--~qA~i~c~qu~qf~s~qf~qt~qk~F~qi~L~. ~0qm~v~V~e~ql~o~qp~qm~e~n~qt ~4~0~1~qd estua~2qd~qw ~.reserve ~q;~e~qs~o~u~t~ce~qq; action sig~nif~qica~nt~qI~qV ~aff~e~c~q6~m~qg five q~u~all~qi~qty P~r~o~g~qm~ati~qm~i ~2qd~1h~e ~r~h~m~qL M~u~n~a~qge~n~qo~qw Plan ~- ~- ~- of the human envir (2) Address ~c~D~a~*t~&~q1 management ~qTh~e~qi~"~qf~qi~qm~, issues i~qde~n~d as a~qi~qg~n~qi~6qf~6qt~a~nt through an environmental impact statement-is 921.22 &Mal acquisition a~nd development ~not re~qq~ui~ied. coordinated estuarine re~sear~c~qb w~qi~th~qi~m ~a~qw~z~m~ql~s~. (~qF)~.Ad~i~r~qi~qm~8qWr~at~qi~v~e~8qP~qm~c~e~6qda~r~q@ Act Subpart D~q-Re~s~qm~e D~esi~qZ 7nation and the System:,. ~q(3) Enhance pub~0qk awareness and ~qThese ir~d~er~qin~t f~i~r~qml egu~ql~a~rd~o~qm an Subsequent Operation effective July ~qZ3, ~qI~4qM~0qM To the extent that under~stand~qi~ng~of the estuarine 921.30 Designation of National ~qB~e~tu~ari~ne e~nvir~qw~iment~an~qd provide suitable ~qdie~se r~e~qg~t~i~ql~ati~on~s ~r~e~ql~i~t~qt~a~qto grants mid R~q,~q,e~m~r~qd~qh Reserves. ~o~qppo~4qmm~qi~qf~qi~es for public ~4qW~ircati~on ~and co~oper~ative~a~2qve~e~w~e~e~r~qi~qf~sth~e 921.31 Supplemental acquisition and, interpretation; requireme~n~t~s4~3f th~eAd~qminist~r~a~q1~qh~r~qe~: - development awards. ~4q@~qme~qn~6qj~q:~q- (4) Promote Federal, state. public and P~qr~qoced~qu~6qm Act 5~q-U~20q&C. ~8q5~08qW~0qd~qs~8qn~qn~4qt~0qA~2qPP~0ql~2qJ~qr 9~qZ~q1.32 Operation ~qa~qnd m~qen~qa~qg To the ~6qw~qdent that ~0qm~08qW ~0qw~qi~6ql~qi~04qda~qnt~2qi~qv~qe- ~q-~qT-- ~0q3~2qmp~0qle~qtnent~qat~qi~qon of the management plan.* pnvate ~qt~qs~qwe~qof~q,~qo~qn~qe or =are reserves provision does not involve g~qr~qan~qi~qs or ~q92~q1~2qM ~q- ~00qScu~6qm~4qiary~q.~qc~4qb~qanges, amendments to within the System ~0qw~2ql~qier~qt such entities ~q. t~8qh~qe~6qmana~0qgem~qe~qn~qi plan, c~qoope~qr~qedi~qve agreements ~qmo useful~q. [email protected]~q. and ~qad~qA~0qM- of conduct ~qu~04qf~04qt~qa~qt~qi~12qbe ~qse~qs~qear~qc~0ql~qs~q; and ~.~_~8q7~q,~qM~8qd~qf~qi ~36qp~36qp~0qC~qe~qn~6qd~qti~00qd ~qv~qnd ~qc~qoo~qr~2qd~8qb~qi~8qa~0qte es~0qt~8ql~qa~qr~8qi~qn~4qe purpose would be ~qse~qrvedby~q-~6qd~qe~0qla~2qy~8qj~qm~8qg ~.~q-~qZ research w~0qh~32qW~qx ~4qthe~q'Sys~0qte~6qm.~4qga~2qlh~qe~8qf~8qin~2qg the effective date for So days. No riots Subpart E-~0qP~qer~4qf~qo~qrm~qan~qo~qs~q'~4qEv~qa~4qluati~qon and. of the participants in this Federal Withdrawal of Designation an ~4qd ~8qma~4qi~6qd~qng ~0qiv~qa~4qgable ~2qh~4qd~qa, ~qa~0qtion program w~16qW be adversely ~qe~2ql~2ql~qa~qc~qt~qed by 021.40 Evaluation ~qof system performance. necessary for improved understanding immediate implementation. To the 9n.41 Suspension of el~0qi~qg~0qibility'f~qo~qrf~qi~qn~qa~6qn~qc~qia~8ql and management of e~qs~0qtua~2qf~4qme areas. contrary state recipients of f~8qi~qn~qan~qc~0qi~qa~6qJ assistance. (~qc~6q)~q'~16qK~qa~6qd~qe~8qnal estuarine research assistance -through this progr~qa~qi~qn have 921.42 'Withdraws'. of designation. reserves shall be open to the public to 2MO Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 19W Rules and Regulations the extent permitted under Slate and re.pr esentative and ecological integrity protection of estuarine resources. The Federal law. Multiple uses are allowed of the reserve. research and monitoring awards provide to the degree compatible with the (e) Under the Act an area may be funds to conduct estuarine research and research reserve's overall purpose as designated as an estuarine reserve only monitoring within the System. The pro,.ided in the management plan (see Fi the area is a representative estuarine educational and inferpretive award � 921.13) and consistent witb paragraphs ecosystem that is suitable for long-term provides funds to conduct estuarine (a) and (b) of this section. Use levels are research. Many es@uarine areas have educational and interpretive activities set by the individual state and analyzed undergone some ecological change as a within the System. in the management plan. The research result of hum, an activities (e.g., (g) Lands already in protected status reserve management plan shall describe hydrological changes, intentional/ managed by other Federal agencies. the uses and establsh priorities amon.- uniintentional species composition state or local governments, or private these uses. The plan shall identify uses change s-ir trod uced and exotic organizations can be included within requiring a state permit, as well as areas spe6es). In those areas proposed or national estuarine research reserves w@ere uses are encouraged or desig'nated as national estuarine only if the managing entity commits to prohibited. Consistent with resource research reserves, such changes may long-term non-manipulative protection and research objectives. have diminished the representative management consistent with paragraphs public access may be restricted to character and integrity of the site. (d) and (e) of this section in the reserve certain areas within a research reserve. Although restoration of degraded areas management plan. Federal lands already (d) Habitat manipulation for research is not a primary purpose of the System. in protected status cannot comprise the purposes is allowed consistent with the such activities may be permitted to key land and water areas of a research following limitations. Manipulative improve the representative character reserve (see f 921.11(c)(3)). research activities must be specified in and integrity of a reserve. Restoration (h) To assist the states in carrying out the management plan. be consistent activities must be carefully planned and the Program's goals in an effective with the mission and goals of the approved by NOAA through the Reserve manner, the National Oceanic and program (see paragraphs (a) and (b) of Management Plan. Historical research Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) this section) and the goals and may be necessary to determine the will coordinate a research and objectives of the affected research natural" representative state of an education information exchange reserve, and be limited in nature and estuarine area (ie., an estuarine throughout the national estuarine extent to the minimum manipulative ecosystem minimally affected by human research reserve systeM.'As part of this activity necessary to accomplish the activity or influence). Frequently. role, NOAA will ensure that information stated research objective. Manipulative restoration of a degraded estuarine area and ideas from one reserve are made research activities with a significant or will pro-. ide an excellent opporturdty for available to others in the system. The long-term impact on reserve resources management oriented research. network will enable reserves to - require the prior approval of the state (f) NOAA may provide financial exchange information and research data and the National Oceanic and - assistance to coastal states, not to, with each other. with universities Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). exceed 50 percent of all actual costs or engaged in estuar 'ide research. and with Federal and sta Manipulative research activities which $4 million whfcheief amount In leis. to te ajencies. NOAA'i can reasonably be expected to have a assist in the acquisffi6i'6f land and objective to a system-wide program of significant adverse impact on the waters. or'interests'thiAlii@NOAA may research and i6onitoiinglckpable of stal addre i the in"a estuarine resources and habitat of a provide finsincial pssimanbe,to coa Sams - , - gement issues that Y -_ eir-ce"nit -bf all -affect lo*tirni 0 - btivity reserve, such that the'aiiilvities states not to i ceed'50 p' 'of our- themselves or their resulting'short- and actual costs for the management and Nation's estuaries. long-term consequences compromise the operation ofand the conduct of ago& w-, J 921.1 2 representative character' and integrity of educationZ or interpretive activities owi concerning. national "tuar'mie research" (e) Z o*ne, a reserve. are not all (r Habitat* manipulation-for resource managOmeaf reserves (see 5_ubiidl of this pirt@ Management Ad of 1972. as it-ended. purposes is not permitted within NOAA may provide- financial assistance -16 U,S,C- 1451 et ieq-SectioA 315 of the national estuarine re"arch' to any coastal state or public or private Act 16 U.S.C. 145L establishes the reserves. except as allowed for restoration person. not to exceed So percent of all National Estuarine Reserve Research activities consistent with paragraph (a) actual costs, to support research and ISystem.. -i@ of this section. NOAA may allow an monitoring within a national estuarine (b) Under SecTetary mebuu the Under exception to this prohibition if , research reserve. Five types of awards Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere, manipulative activity is -necessary for are available urnder the National - . ' ' U.S. Department of Commerce, or the protection of public health or the Estuarine Reserve Reseaa+1 System designee..: preservation of other saikitive resources Program. The predesignatioh awards are - W C@qastal statemeans a state of the which, have been listed or are-eligible - for site selection. draft management United States. in or bordering on. the for protection under Mev'ant Federal or plan prepariation and c6pduct of basic Atlantic, Pacific.' or Arctic Oc6an; the : tate authority (e.g., threatened/ characterization studies. Acquisition- Gulf of Mexico.-Long Island Sound. or ndangered species or significant ind development awards are intended one or more of the Great Lakes. For the historical or cultural resources). It primarily for acquisition of interests in purposes of these regulations the-term habitat manipulation is determined to be land and construction. The operation' also includes Puert -0 Rico, the Virgin ---, necessary for the protection of public and management award provides funds islands, Guam. & Cdmiii6xiWeailth of health or the preservation of sensitive to assist in implementing the research. the Northern Mariginas Islands. the '- resources. then these activities shall be educational, and administrative Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands, specified in the Reserve Management programs detailed in the research and American Sainca (see 16 U.S.C. Plan and limited to the reasonable reserve management plan and is 1453(4)). alternative which has the least adverse reflective of the joint State-Federal . (d) Estuary means that part of a river and shortest term impact on the partnership in the preservation and or stream or other body of water having ~0 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday. July 23, 1990 Rules and Regulations 29951 unimpaired connection with the open approved coastal zone management million for which each reserve is eligible sea. where the sea water is measurably programs under section 306 of the Act is for land acquisition. In the case of a diluted with fresh water derived from eligible for an award under the National biogeographic region (see Appendix I to land drainage. The term also includes Estuarine Reserve Research System (see this part) shared by two or more states, est~uary-type areas with measurable 921.2~q(c))~. each state is eligible for Federal freshwater influence and having (b) For purposes of consistency financial assistance to establish a unimpaired connections with the open review by states with a federally national estuarine research reserve sea. a~nd estuary-type areas of the Great approved coastal zone management within their respective portion cf the Lakes and the~;r connecting waters. See program, the designation of a national shared b~i~c~qgeograp~q@ic re-io~n. F~;~.~i2ncial 16 U.S.C. 1453~q(7))~. estuarine research reserve is deemed to assistance application proced~~,~:~res are (e) A~'~a~t~.'on~al Est~ua~r~qi~n ~e Research be a Federal activity, which, if directly specified in subpar~qi I of th~;s part. R~es~e~qn~-e means an area that is a affecting the state's coastal zone, must (~qb) In developing a research rese~-~,-~.-e program, a state may choose to develop ~,e~,re~sentat~qive estuarine ecosystem be undertaken in a manner consistent to suitable for long-term research, which the maximum extent practicable with a multiple-site research reserve I av include a~ql~ql or the key land and reflecting a diversity of habita~Ls ~i~n a ~qM the approved state coastal zone program waier portion of an estuary, and as provided by section 1456(c)(1) of the single biogeographic region. A m~'~Ul~Lip~qle- adjacent transitional areas and uplands Act, and implementing regulations at 15 site research reserve also allows the constituting to the extent feasible a CFR part 930, subpart C. In accordance state to develop complementary natural unit. and which is set aside as a with section 1456(c)(1) of the Act and the research and educational programs natural field laboratory to provide long- applicable regulations NOAA will be within the individual components of its term opportunities for research. responsible for certifying that multi-site research reserve. Mu~qltiple-si~te education. and interpretation on the designation of the reserve is consistent research reserves are treated as one ecological relationships within the area with the State approved coastal zone reserve in terms of financial assistance (see 1~q6 U.S.C. 14~q53(8)) and meets the management program. The State must and development of an overall requirements of 16 U~.S.C. 1461(b). This concur with or object to the certification. management framework and plan. Each includes those areas designated as It is recommended that the lead State individual site of a proposed multiple- national estuarine sanctuaries under agency for reserve designation consult ~ site research reserve shall be evaluated section 315 of the Act prior to the date of at the earliest practicable time, with the both separately under I ~q921.11(c) and the enactment of the Coastal Zone appropriate State officials concerning collectively as part of the site selection Management Reauthorization Act of the consistency of the proposed national process. A state may propose to 1985 and each area subsequently estuarine research reserve. establish a multiple-site research designated as a national estuarine (c) The National Estuarine Research rese~xve at the time of the initial site research reserve. Reserve Program will be administered in selection, or at any point in the ~ close coordination with the National development or operation of the ~q921.3 National Estu~qa~dn~e Reserve Marine Sanctuary Program, (Title III of estuarine research reserve, even after Research System b~l~oge~4q"r~aph~ql~e the Marine Protection Research and classification scheme and estuarine Federal funding for the ~'single site ~t~qy~qp~o~l~o~qo~k~qm Sanctuaries Act. as amended. ~q1~q6-~2qU~2qS.C. research reserve has expired. If the state 1431~-1445)~. also administere~qdby NOAA. ~@dec~qldes to develop a multiple-site, (a) National estuarine research 'Title M authorizes~'the Secretary of reserves are chosen to reflect re ~"o~nal ~-~@~~; - ~"' ~'nat16nal estuarine research reserve after Ill Com~i~nerce to designate discrete areas of the initial acquisition and development. differences and to include a variety of the marine environment as marine - award is made for a single ~qi~qf~qte. the ecosystem types A biogeographic -~q4~!~,~s~6~qi :As-- ~8q*- *sanctuaries to ~.protect or restore such - ~Z~-. ~4q*~4qV~qB~qposal is ~s~qiibjec~ql:~q4~q6 ~the're~qq~8q*ement~s classification scheme based on regional areas for their conservation. ~ set forth in I 921.33~q(~qb). However, a state variations in the nation~'s~1p~stal zone recreational. ecological, historica~qL -- - - t ~qf~qbpose to ~qidd one or more - - ~. I may no p has been de~.veloped~.The~'b~qiog~qeograp~qh~qi~q@~" ~r~qb~e~qgarch. educational or esthetic values. sit~qds J~qdan already-designated research classification scheme is ~qd~oed to ensure ~@d ~qT~qional marin~qi sa~nc~- anes an rese~rve~'if the operation a~nd ~qe~4qV~@~" ~- that the National Estuarine Reserv e~qstu~2qaine-~rese'arch reserves. may not en uch ~qi~qi~q@ se~2q7~i~q@ Research System includes at least one' overlap, though t~qheyjmaybe adjacent. m~a~0qi~qi~qge~0qr tof ~a ~" searc~qh~qie- site from each re~qgion.The~qi estuarine ..has bee~n~'foi~qmd deficient a~nd ~uncorrect~qid or the rese~qii~qih conducted is typology system is utilized to ensure Subpart ~qB~q-S~qit~e Se~ql~e~ct~qlo~6qN Post Site not consistent with the Estuarine that sites in the System reflect the wide S~e~ql~qf~qt~qf~ql~on and Management Plan Research Guidelines in accordance with range of estuarine types within the Development ~4qAhe provisions of subparts E and F of United States.* -this par~qL In addition. Federal funds (~qb) The biogeographic classification ~q1~,~q9~q21.~q10' General~. scheme, present~e~qd~qin~'Append~qix I to this' (a) A state may apply for Federal ~% ~ac~qquisition'of a multi~qple~-s~qi ~'te research part. contains 27~qq~qi~q;~qj~'~ql~qj~n~1~q& ~6qF~l~-gure 2. ~r~.,~1p~ financial assistance for the purpose ~'of reserve -remains limited to ~q$4.000,~q0~q0~q0 selection, preparation of documents (see 1921.20). The funding fo~qr operation graphically depicts th~qi biogeographic ~51 regions of the U~n~qit~ied States.~q@~T~Z~q-~~2q4~2qA~qu~qj~q.~qI~q.-~qi ~qipecified in ~q1921.13 (draft ma~i~n~qi~qgement of ~qa multiple-site research reserve is (c) The typology ~qs~12qy~qstem~q-~6qisp~q'~qi'ese~8qf~8qited plan and environmental i~0qm~8qp~6qict~q' limited to ~0q$~0q70, 000 per year (see statement ~6q(EIS~0q)) and ct of 921.32(c)) and preacquisition funds are in Appendix ~2q1~2q1 to this p the ~6qbo~0qndu re~2qs~6qiar~24q& necessary to complete basic' ~4ql~8qi~qn~2qi~8qite~q*dto~4q$~0qloo~q,ooope~2qirese~q.~qrve.~q,~-~q, ~0q1~q92~q1.4 R l~qat~ql~qonsh~44qwtoo~4qi~qh~4q4~0qi~0qP~8qi~qvv~ql~qs~0ql~6q6~qn~q*of ~6qcha~2qi~8qict~qer~8qi~0qut~8qion studies. The total the Coastal Zone M~qan~qa~0qg~qa~0qi~qn~qe~qntA~qct. 921.11 ~4qS~0qK~qO ~qs~qe~0ql~qe~qc~qt~qlo~0qm Federal share~6qbf this group of us ~8qp ~0q0~0q0~4q0 ~2qi~qr~0qf (a) The National Estuarine Reserve predesignation awards ma~8qY not e~4q;~2qi~4q@~4q@~0qied ~6q(~4qi) A ~q9 ate may. ~6qe~q'u -to ~6q$2~0q3, Research System is intended to provide $1~2q0~0q6,000, of which up to $2~4q5.000 ~qn~6qiay be Federal funds to establish and information to state agencies and other used for site selection as de~qs~0qcri~4qbe~qid in implement a~q@site selection process entities involved in addressing coastal ~4q921.11. Federal financial assistance for which is approved by NOAA der 1921.11 (~6qb) In addition to the requirements set. management issues. Any'coastal state, ~q-preacquisition activities un including those that do not have and ~8q1921.12 is subject t~qp th~6qi total $4 f~2q6rth in subpart I of ~0qt~16qW~qo part. a reques~qi ~0 ~99~5~2 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday, j~~@y 23. 1990 / Rules and Regulations for Federal funds for site selection must those ecological units of a natural being considered for selection as a contain the following programmatic estuarine system which preserve, for potential national e~st~iar~qfne research information: research purposes, a full range of reserve. After the local ~qgover~a~r~rent~q(s) t~i) A description of the proposed site significant physical, chemical and and affected l~and~owner(~s) have been selection process and how ~qi~qt will be bicl~o~qg~qic~al !actors contributing to the contacted. at least one public meeting implemented in conformance with t~ql~@e diversity of fauna, flora and natural shall be held in the area of the proposed biogeographic classification scheme and processes occurring within the estuary. site. Notice of such a meeting, including typology ~q(~q� 921.3), The determination of which land and ~t~q@e time, place, and relevant subject (2) An identification of ~6q&~.e site water areas are "key" ~qto a particular matter. shall be announced by the state se~.ect~ion agency a~nd the potential reserve mast be based or specific through ~t~qhe area's principal news media management agency; and scientific knowledge of the area. A at least 15 days prior to the date of the a , basic (3) A description of how pub~qhc principle to follow when deciding upon meeting and by NOAA in the Federal participation will be incorporated into k~cy land and water areas is that ~6qf~6qf~6qi~ey Register. the process (see ~q� ~q921.11~q[~qd)). should encompass resources (~e) A state request for NOAA (~n) A~s part of t~qhe site s~elect~qicn ~vpr~e~sen~tative of the total ec~o~qr~qystem, approval of a proposed s~,~-~'te (or sites in process. t~q@e state and NO~qA.~.A. shall and which if compromised could the case of a multi-site reserve) T~nu~3t evaluate and ~s~e~e~qiect ~i~l~l~ie final s~qit~ef~'~s~q). e~nd~a-~.~r~qge~r the research objectives of t~ql~@e contain a description of ~q2he proposed ~qNOAA has final au~qd~qwr~qity in ~sppro~vi~:~i~qg rc~s~erve. ~6qr~he term ~"~qb~cf~qfer zar~se~" refers to s~qf~qte in relationship to each of ~t~qhe site such sites. Site se~0q4ction shall be guided an area adjacent to or ~s~rrro~undin~qg key selection principles (I 921.1~1(c)) and t~qhe by the fol~qlo~qw~qir~qg principles: land and water areas and e~a~sent~qial to following information: (1) The site's contribution to ~6qf~6qf~6qie their integrity. Buffer zones p~-~.~v~te~0qe, the (1~q) An analysis of the proposed site biogeographical and ~t~typclogi~cal balance core area and provide additional based on the biogeographical scheme/ ~~i the Na~t~uonal E~stuari~re Reserve protection for e~stu~a~r~qi~n~e-depe~ndent typology c~qris~qms~sed in ~q1921.3 and set Research System. NOAA will give species, including those that are rare or forth in appendices I and ~q1~q1 to this part; priority cons~qid~erati~qm to proposals to endangered. When ~0q&~-ter~n~h~qined ~' ~q(2) A description, of the proposed site establish reserves in biogeographic appropriate by the state a~n~qd approved and its major resources, including regions or subregions that are not by NOA~4q& the buffer zone ~ar~ay also location, proposed boundaries, and rep e~ne~nted in the system (see the include an area necessary ~4qk~r ~qfacil~qit~qi~q!~9 adjacent land uses. Maps, Including bio~qgeo~qt~2qpaph~qic ~c~4qk~e~sif~qi~c~a~ti~on~. scheme and required for research and ~qh~ite~rpret~ati~cn~. aerial photographs. are required; typology set forth in ~q1 ~q9~0q=3 a~nd Add~qit~qi~o~n~a~qf~qfy, bu~4qf~4ql~qer zones ~s~qho~4qW~qd be (3) A description of the public appendices I and ~q1~q1 to this part); e~st~ab~4q%~qhe~qd sufficient to accommodate a participation process used by the state (2) The site's ecological shift of the care area as a r~e~s~u~qf~qt of to solicit the views of Interested parties. characteristics. including ~qi~qts biolo~qgica~ql bio~ql~og~6qk~&E eco~4qWc~a~ql or ~- productivity, diversity of flora and ~qgeom~orph~o~q;~o~qg~qic~a~ql change which a summary of comments, a~n~c~qE ff to attract a bras reasonably could be expected to ~o~c~q=~. fauna, and capad d interstate issues are involved, range of research and educational Nat~qi~o~qm~ql ~e~s~qh~r~ari~t~te r~e~qn~a~qm~qb reserves docume~n~t~a~t~qh~o~o that the Gov~er~our~qf ~9) of interests. The proposed site must be a may ex~qh~F~4qf~4qt Federal or state the other a ~6qf~6qf~a~c~l~e~qd ~s~t~a~6qW~a~qj has been representative estuarine ecosystem and contacted. Copies of all cor~resp~o~0q6de~nce, Ian& ~a~qErea~qd~qy in a protected status t letters to a~ql~ql affected ~hou~ql~c~qL to the ~qn~hax~qimum extent pos~s~i~qtb~qle, ~qW~qJ~qW~r~e ~qm~q*~4qW benefit c~a~qi~r be _~J including conta~c e~u~qb~qm~ic be Ain estuarine ecosystem ~qm~i~n~i~qm~-~e~qf~qfy Ho~'we~qi~er~.~q1~q40AA ~2q*~0qf~0qf ~a~l~qo~qf ~-~i~t~qy~qp~r~o~v~~qe a site landowners m~i~x~0qg be ~a~qpp~end~r~4qA a affected by human activity -or influence"' for potential ~Hat~0qk~n~a~ql e~st~e~qi~qr~6qke research (4~q) A list of a~4ql sites c~o~qd~sidered and. (see I MIMI brief ~sea~t~e~qmen~t at the basis ~qf~er~qn~q6~qg reserve ~qm~a~v~e~s ~qV~2qWi~s ~6qd~e~qp~qi~qmden~qt ~q(~q3) A~s~s~ura~r~.i~ce that the sites pr~qima~8qf~8qt ~U~qp~q6~q~qi ~0q6~6 ~qk~qw~4qh~w~qf~orr of Currently selecting ~qT~qhe ~n~qo~qd~L~qpre~qf~qi~rr~qid ~qi~2qf~2qt~qm~- and' boundaries encompass a~qn adequate ~-i~qa~ql lands ~qi~m ~o~r~0q*~r ~4q* meet (a) A ~no~qm~qina~qd~o~w of the proposed portion of the k~e~qy~@ land and water areas~'~@~;- protected Fed1~qe~. ite~q(~r~q) ~qfb~qed~qi~e~s~q@~qp~0q* I~qf~qf~e~qa its ~W National eq~qu~qi~s~e~4qm~qo~4qf~4qt IN ~Pei~serv~e .the r~" ~i r~qo~qm~qw~e~ql~qi of the ~n~u~qf~ura~ql system. to approximate in status ~q(s~v~c~4qWa~s, key ~qJ~qW~qd~qW~0qA water ~2qR~e~pe~a~p~c~qh R~qw~q@ by the ecological unit and to ensure ~af~4q@~@~, C~o~v~ern~o~r ~O~2qf~2qi~qbe ~C~0q&~a~qi~0qw state in ~qW~qh~2qk~qh ~qwill~.~qi~l~qi~r~qi~,~:~.~, ~~v~; a~qfeas). s~qh~0qa ~qh~a~qi~qds. ~qg~e~qi~v~e~qi~a~8qW w~0qM be conservation. ~6q&u~qiid~qm~4q* size i~r~qic~qlu~qd~ed ~q@~0qA~qh~v~0q*~qm~se~qwc~qh ~qm~s~erv~e t~o the area ~qt~o~6qU~ca~ql~qe~qd~. great~q!~qy dep-~.~n~qd~qh~6qV ~qo~n the ~natu~qm ~a~r~qo~qbu~6qf~6qfer far other ancillary ~ ~t~q" _` ~:- ~1. Of t~qh~e serve ~ 1 9~'2~'1.~1~'~q1~' Post ~a~qjt~J~qj~8~G~qW~C~tk~W~L ecosystem. Research reserve bo ~arfe~s purposes~; ~e~nd must ~e~nc~ormpa~s~s the area ~i~q@r~qtt~qhin w~q?~qd~ch Of ~q7~4qU~-~s~qf~qte's ~r~2qd~rt~a~qb~8qf~8qt ~qf~q@~r ~qT~q@~n~qg~'term (a) At the ~qd~mi~e of the ~st~a~6qW~s request adequate c~a~ntr~o h~qw~4q&~8q*~0qMb~e est~L~ar~qir~t~qi research. ~qk~qw~qf~ud~qi~n~qg ~q=~0 for NOAA approval of a proposed We, established ~qb~q7 the m~a~n~O~qTM~qF ~qO~n~qf~r~qf~qt~qy over, factors and proximity to ex~qI~st~qi~n~qg~ql~q!~0q@~ql~- the state ~n~u~i~2qr ~o~o~qb~qm~qi~-t it ~qm~qqu~e~4qA ~qi~or u~qp to human ~act~qf~vi~t~qf~e~qi~r ~o~q=~q_~4~_~1~W ~v~1 the research facilities and educational $4o~.0~q00 of the total ~qsi~6qmoo~qo allowed for reserve. Gener~s~q'~U~Y~,~*~q-~q=~s-~1`~-~W-- ~6qb~o~6q6~qu~ql~ar~qie pred~e~s~4q*~w~d~qi~an ~qh~u~ad~qk to develop the ~V institutions; will encompass ~qh~qW~*~qa~r~_~q"~'~_~qr~.~_~q9~e~'~qY~'~4qh~q=~qd and ~-~q(~q5~q1~. The site's c~ompat~qi~qb~l~ql~-~r~qi~qj with draft m~a~n~z~qy~qm~en~t plan ~qw~3~qd for the water areas for "cute ~qi~qi~e~l~f~8ql ~qg~qF~c~8qj~~a~q@ existing mid potential land and water collection of ~4q*~0 ~qt~qi~on ~ne~r~qA~s~sa~r~qy buffer zone. Key uses in co~n~qt~qig~uou~s~area~s as well as, for ~qpr~ep~a~qm~qd~o~t~a ~a~qE the environmental ~q@~12q7~. and a buffer zone win 'I ~qa~6qp~16qw~qov~32q@ c~qaas~0q@~qa~0ql and estuarine impact ~qstate-~0qA At this t~2qb~qna. ~24q6~q8 state ~qay a~0qlz~qe ~qv~qa~0qb~0qm~08qA a ~12qW farthe significantly di~6qf~6qf~0qer~qs~0qi~16qf~16qt manageme~qm~4ql p~0ql~qamr~q. ~0qa~qnd In (see I ~0q9Z~0qI.~0q1~0q3~6q(~40q07~0q)~6q@ ~2q7~4q1~4qi i~qe~2q@~16q&~q'~28qIk~qt~4qe ~qr~8qq~0qm~qrt~4q=~qc~qe ~q-t~qv~q'e~0qd~qa~q:~0qd~qat~8qf~qorr remainder of t~2q4~qep~qo~qe~0qd~qesi~8qg~qnatic~qn funds 1., (~0q6) The ~2qq~64q@ ~2q@ ~q. _ ~q._ _ ~qnt w~q, and water ar~4qn~qs~q" refers to ~0qd~qv~0qit a~0qa a~qnd ~6qf~6qt~2qit~64q@~36q@ ~4qi~qiff~6qdrts, co~qn~qs~8qf~qa~0qt~qe th for research necessary to complete a I ~2qbf the ~2qp~6qh~qy~qv~4qi~8qlc~8qi~qk~0ql. ~6qof the basic ~6qi ~20qhr~qa~04qde~12qd~q- =I%' within the reserve tha~qL is so vital to ~0qt~6qk~8qw r the need f~2qe~qr c~qon~4qd~0qm~qr~8qi~6qd ~qp~qr~qot~qec~qt~8qf chemical an~0qd ~24qWologic~2qi~20qf~20qf~q'c~4qharacter~2qf~8qs~4qt~4qi~qf~qi~qcs functioning of the es~4qf~4qi~6q1~8qsr~4q6~4qi~2qi~2q@e`~4qc'~4q3~0qsy~0qi~4qi~6qgi~qr~8qi' natural system. "I ` - ~q: ~q' that it must be ~qand~qer~qal~qev~qe~6ql of c~qo~qn~0qt~qr~qo (d) Early in the site ~qse~6qiect~4qi~0qm p~qr~qo~qc~qe~qr~qs~qs~q' of the site approved by NOAA~q. The ~s~,~2qdf~qi~qcient to ensure the long-term -- ~q, the state m~qu~qst~q'seek ~qt~6qhe v~4qi~qe~qv~2qi~qs of affected state's ~0qm~04qq~qu~2qi~0qnt f~2qbr~qt~6qhese post site '_ ~q- viability of the r~qer~qser~qve for research an landowners, local governments. other. selection ~0qh~4qi~qn~4qd~qs'~24qmu~qst be accompanied by natural processes. Key land ~qa~qvd water state afid' Federal a~8qg~0qi~0qmcie~qs'~qand other the information spe~qc~28qMed fn subpart I of areas, which comprise the core area. are parties ~qv~q6~q-~4qh~0qd are in te~qr ested in the ~qare~2qa~4q(~qs) this pall and, for draft management plan Federal Register / Vol. 55. No. 141 / Monday. July 23, 1990 1 Rules and Regulations 29953 development and environmental impact establishing adequate long-term state state shall give priority consideration to statement information collection, the control over these areas sufficient to the least costly method(s) of attaining following programmatic information: provide protection for reserve resources the minimum level of long-term control (1) A draft management plan @utline to ensure a stable environment for required. Generally, with the possible (see I 921.13(a) below); and research. This plan must include an exception of buffer areas required for (2) An outline of a draft memorandum identification of ownership within the support facilities. the level of controlfs) of understanding (MOU) between the proposed research reserve boundaries. required for buffer areas will be stale and NOAA detailing the Federal- including land already in the public considerably less than that required for state role in research reserve domain; the method(s) of acquisition key land and water areas. This management during the initial period of which the state proposes to use- acquisition plan. after receiving the Federal funding and expressing the acquisition (includirg less-than-fee approval of NOAA. shall serve as a state's long-term commitment to operate simple options) to establish adequate guide for negotiations with landowners. and manage the national estuarLne long-term state controL an estimate of A final boundary for the reserve shall be research reserve. the fair market value of any property delineated as a part of the final (b) The state is eligible to use the interest-which is proposed for management plan; funds referenced in I 921.12(a) after &e acquisition; a schedule estimating the (8) A resource protection plan proposed site is approved by NOAA time required to complete the process of detailing applicable authorities, under the terms of 1921.11. establishing adequate state control of including allowable uses, uses requiring the proposed research reserve; and a a permit and permit requirements, any 1921.13 Management plan and discussion of any anticipated problems. restrictions on use of the research environmental Impact statement development. In selecting a preferred method(s) for reserve, and a strategy for research (a) After NOAA approves the state's establishing adequate state control over reserve surveillance and enforcement of proposed site, the state may request to areas within the proposed boundaries of such use restrictions, including use additional predesignation funds for the reserve, the state shall perform the appropriate government enforcement draft management plan development following steps for each parcel agencies; and the collection of information determined to be part of the key land (9) If applicable, a restoration plan necessary for the preparation by NOAA and water areas (control over which is describing those portions of the site that of the environmental impact statement. necessary to protect the integrity of the may require habitat modification to The state shall develop a draft reserve for research purposes), and for restore natural conditions; management plan. including an MOU. those parcels required for research and (10) A proposed memorandum of The plan will set out in detaih interpretive support facilities or buffer understanding (IvIOU) between the state (1) Research reserve goals and purposes: and NOAA regarding the Federal-state objectives, management issues, and (i) Determine, with appropriate relationship during the establishment strategies or actions for meeting the Justification. the minimum level of and development of the national goals and objectives; control(s) required (eg., management estuarine research reserve, and (2) An admin strative section' agreement regulation. less-than-fee expressing a long-term commitment by including itaff roles In administration. simple property interest (eg., - the state to maintain and manage the research. education/intei-pretation. and conservation easement), fee simple research reserve in accordance with surveillance and enforcement - , property acquisition. or a combination section 315 of the Act 18 U.S.C. 1461. (3) A research plan. including a of these approaches-, 1@ and applicable regulations. In monitoring design; (ii) Identify the level of existing state conjunction with the MOU and where (4) An edu6ation/interpretive plan; control(s): pos ible under state law, the'slate will (5) A plan for public access to the (iii) Identify the level of additional con:ider taking appfopriate. research reserv' state control(s), if any. necessary to e*. admin strative or legislative actioh to (6) A construction plan. includi4a [email protected] minimum requirements ensure the long-term protection and proposed construction schedule, general identified in (a)(7)(i); of this section; operation of the national estuarine descriptions of proposed developments (iv) Examine all reasonable -'veftarch reserve. The MOU shall be and preliminary drawings. if . alternatives 'for attaining the level of - signed prior to research reserve appropriate. Information should be control identified in (a)(7)(iii) of this designation. If other MOUs are provided for proposed minor section, and perform a. cost analysis of necessary (such as with a Federal construction projects in sufficient detail each-,and agency or another state agency), drafts to allow these projects to begin in the [v) Rank, in order of cost. the methods of such MoUs also must be included in initial phase of acquisition and. (including acquisition) identified in 'the plan; and development. If a viiitor center, paragraph (a](7)(iv) of this 3ectiorL (11) If the state has a federally research [email protected];any other facilities An assessment of the relative cost- approved coastal zone mana.gement are proposed fk@@nitruction or effectiveness of control alternatives program documentation that the renovation at"the*site, o-'r restorative shall include a reasonable estimate of proposed national estuarine research activities which reqWnsigaificant ;_ - both short-term costs (e.g., acquisition of reserve is consistent to the maximum, are 'id. a detailed property interests. regulatory program extent practicable with that program. construction plann construction plan including preliminary. development including associated See I 921.4(b) and I 921.30(b). cost estimates and architectural enforcement costs, negotiation, (b) Regarding the preparation of an drawings must be prepared as a part of adjudication. etc.) and long-term costs environmental impact statement (EIS) the final management plan; and (e.g., monitoring. enforcement under the National Environmental Policy (7) An acquisition plan identifying the adjudication. management and Act on a national estuarine research ecologically key land and water areas of coordination). In selecting a preferred reserve proposal. the state shall provide the research reserve, ranking these method(s) for establishing adequate all necessary information to NOAA areas according to their relative . state control over each parcel examined concerning the socioeconomic and importance, and including a strategy for under the process described above, the environmental impacts associated with ~0 ~~~qM Federal Register / Vol. 55. No. 141 / Monday, July ~23. 1~9~90 1 Rules arid Re~g~qWat~ions ~1p~~~~~~ imp~i r~i~ti~n~qg the draft management funds may be used in accordance with that the construction activity will not be plan and feasible alternatives to the- the final -~a~nag~e~rn~ent plan to constru~c~A detrimental to the environment. plan. Based on this i~r~@~qfor~sn~aticm~. NOAA research a~nd educational fa~4qdl~qi~t~qies, ~r I Ld) Except as specifically provided in will prepare the draft E~2qM complete a~n~ny remaining land paragraphs (a) through Cc) of this (c) E~ar~q!y in the development of the acqui~si~ti~qm and for restorative activities section. construction projects, to be draft management plan and t~qhe draft identified ~qi~2 the ~qf~qf~nal management plan. funded in whole or in part tinder an E~S. t~ql~@e state shall hold a meeting in the In any case. the amount of Federal ~a~z~qq~Lisit~f~on and development award(~s)~, area or areas most ~2qO~rected to solicit financial assistance provided to a may not be initiated until the res~e~-a~r~-~ch pu~qbiic and ~qg~o~v~e~r~-~qm~qm~ent comments on the coastal state with re~spe~cl to the reserve receives formal de3~qig~nat~ion ~q(s~c~2 significant issue~s r~el~a~ied to die ~. Won of ~qk~i~r~ic~qi~s and waters. or � ~9~11.30). ~qT~"hi~s requirement has been ~ ~a~c~o~u~l~l~s~i proposed acti~c~i~i~. N~8qO~8qAA will publish a interests therein~. for a~=~qy ~o~ne national adopted to ensure that substantial ~~oti~c~e of the meeti~rg i~n the Federal ~estu~qm~q@~ne ~r~ese~qxth reserve may not . progress in establishing adequate state R~~qgi~b~ql~e~r 1~q3 days prior ~t~j ~t~qhe me~eti~r~:~q;~. exceed an amount equal to ~q50 percent of control over key land and waters areas The state shall be res~qpon~i~t~i~qbi~e for ~qt~qhe costs ~of the Lands, w~a~qte~qm and has been made and that a ~qf~q1ral pu~qbl~qish~qL~r~ig a ~sir~r~i~-~qlar not~4re~'ia the local interests therein or ~6qU~8q=~6q= management plan ~is completed before media. whichever am u~r~qd is less. The amount ma~i~or st~e~ns are spent on c~o~nstruct~icn~. (d~q) ~I~4qN~0qOAA will publish a Federal of Fe~i~qi~e~m~qml assistance for dev~e~!~opment On~8q6 substantial progress in Register notice c~qf intent to prepare a and ~con~3tr~rc~qtoa act~0qh~q!~*~;es is establishing ade~qq~u~E~;~t~qe ~s~l~,~3te contra!/ ~d-~~a~'~t E~qI~qS~.~,~0qV~qter ~0q6e draft EIS is prepared acq~ui~s~it~on has been made. as de~qf~ql~i~ned and filed with the Environmental ~q1921~q-21 ~L~n~0qWa~l ~a~4q"~.u~1s~qWo~n and .. Protection A~qg~e~n~zy (EPA), a Notice of development aware&. by the state in the management plan. other a~ct~8qM~i~ties guid~Ld by the final Av~a~qUab~ility of the DEIS will appear in (a) Assistance is p~zo~v~0qWed to aid die management plan may begin with the F~aderal Register. Not less than 30 recipient ia~: NOAA's ~a~'~qp~qp~:oval. days after publication ~af the notice~, (1) Acquiring a fee simple ~o~r less- (e) For ~a~ny real property acquired in NOAA will hold at least one public than-fee simple real property interest in whole 3~r p~axt with Federal funds for the hearing in ~qt~qhe area or areas most land and water areas to be i~n~c~qh~1ded In research reserve the state shall execute affected by the proposed national the research reserve boundaries (~s~q" suitable fide do~c~a~qm~ent~s t~a, include estuarine research reserve. ~qT~qhe hearing ~q1~,9~q2~q1~4qM~q(a)~q(7~q1~- I 921.30(d~q)~q?~, ~- ~. substantially the following provisions. will be held ~no sooner than is days after (~q2) ~q&fi~n~or construction. as provided in or otherwise append the following appropriate notice of the meeting has pa~n~a~qgrap~qhs ~q(~qb) and Cc) of ~qt~hi~s section~; provisions in a manner acceptable under been given in the principal news media (3) Preparing the ~qB~r~ia~ti: ma~qna~qg~z~a~tent applicable state law to the official ~ql~amd and in the Federal Reg~6qW~er by NOAA plan: and rec~ord(~3): and the state, respectively. After a 45~- (4) Up to the point of research reserve (1) Title to the property conveyed by day comment period. a final EIS will be designation, initial management costs, this deed shall vest in the [recipient of prepared by N~2qOAA. e.g., for ~qk~upl~eme~n~qf~6qM the N~qX)AA the award granted pursu~ar~qA to se~c~qA~2qWn Subpart C__~qA~c~qq~u~0qk~qi~qg~o~n~, ~qD~q*~V~a~qi~0qq~qf~qf~ql~qV~" appr~o~v ad draft ~qm~ax~ta~qge~qme~nt plan. ~q31~q6 of the A~c~qL 18 U~.S~-r- 14~q61 or o~qt~qh~qn and preparation of the ~6qFn~af preparing the final management pl~a~a. ~2qN~4qOAA approved state a~qge~a~cy~q) ~sub~qf~-~e~ct A Man Ma~na~qg~em~er hiring a reserve manager and ~o~qd~qw~r staff to the condition that the designation of as necessary and for other ~qm~a~r~i~a~qg~e~m~qm~8qd~- the [name of National Estuarine ~92~q1~.20 G~o~n~era~qL related activities. App~qr~q=~q#~q= Reserve] is rat withdrawn and the The ~ac~qq~p~q1s~qiti~o~n~qi~t~u~8qdd~eve~q!~upr~u~e~nt pro~ce~qd~m~r~us we specified In. subpart I of property remains pert of th~a federally period is ~s~e~qp~qwated into two major this part designated (name of National ~qEs~ti~qi~qdne phases. After ~2qNOAA approval at the (~qb) The expendi~qt~qu~qm of Federal and Research Rem v site. d~qg~aft m~a~x~2qWe~qmen~qt p~qh~qmand draft s~qtat~qi ~qf~m~r~qi~c~0qb ~o~qp Meier c~o~qr~2q@~8q@ (2) In the event that ~qth~qe property is ~r~r~qj M~2qO~2qV~,~'and c~o~a~tp~qie~qt~qi~q= of the final ~4qV~4q& a activities ~qf~a~qi~t~o~qt a~ql~qlowed d~u~r~qm~'~qs th longer ~qh~qw~ql~a~qded as ~o~qft~qhe ~z~w~qwarc~qh ~L~ne state is eligib~qie for. an Initial ~a~qd~qq~t~qds~6qf~6qt~q= initial ~s~o~q4~w~6qh~6qM~a~n and d~e~v~e~ql~o~qp~'~l~ue~nt re~qier~v~e~. or if the ~0q=~q;~8q@ti~o~n of am ~~d development award~qj~s~q@ In t~qhis initial phase. ~qT~qhe preparation o~qfa~r~ch~i~4qk~0q"~qi~qir~al researr~0ql ~qh it J:B part to phase, the state should work to meet the~'~@ a~qnd ~o~qi~qgineeri~2qn plans, in~0qdu~0q&~n~qg withdrawn. then NOAA or its successor am' d for ~qf~or~au~qd research ~speci~qf~qica~qdon~s~. ~qf~or~'~sny proposed ency r on ~a criteria req I ~a~qg , aft~e ~0qM and rea~s ab~qi reserve designation~; ~ag~. establishing co~ns~qU~qm~c~qt~qio~8qm or for proposed restorative consultation wi~qd~i the State. m~3y adequate state co~ntr~a~ql over t~qh~a ~qk~ey land ac~qdvides, is permitted. In addition. exercise ~6qf~6qf~6qi~e following rights re~qgar~qd~i~rg ~~~qd water areas as specified in the draft m~qk~qw c~on~s~qtru~c ~qf~ql~on activities, c~onsf~8q~ the d~qL~qqx~x~qd~qd~qm of the pr~opert~q)~r ~'- ~%~t ~' I management plan and preparing the ~. with paragraph ~q(c) of ~0q&~.~s section also (i) The recipient may retain title after ~f~mal management plan. T~qh~qm are a~ql~qlowed. The NOAA-approved draft paying the Federal C~over~mment an the requirements are sp~e~e~6qf~6qf~6ql~e~4qdh~qi 1 ~q9~q2~q1~.~4qn management plan ~qn-~qL~qbowever~. amount computed by apply. M ~@ nor construction in a~qc~q6~a~qid~a~nce with include a cm~i~st~z ~rt~i~r~qm ~qp~q1~qm and a public Federal pe~qn~e~uta~qge of participation In th~e~' draft managemer~q, pl~qa~qn~q:~qi~2q* aim be access plan before any award can the cost of the original project to the conducted daring this ~q0 phase~q. ~6qT~0qhe be spent on cons t~qr tic ~qa~qc~0qt~8qi~qvi~8qf~8qi~4qm ~q1_~q@ ~q- ` ~. current fair ~-~4q-4~q, t value of the initial acquisition and de~qv~qe~24qk~8qq~qu~qn~qamt ~qr - . ~q- ~4qCc) Only minor c~qo~qu~qf~qf~00qf~00qtu~qc~4qt~8qi~qo~qn ~qac~0qti~qv~2qi~8qdes property, phase is expected to last nor longer than that aid ~2qh~qx ~6qh~qop~0ql~qar~qn~6qh~qa~2qt~0qmg portions of the ~6q(~8qi~2qi~6q) ~2qIf the r~qe~16qd~2qp~2qie~qn~0qt does ~0qnot elect to three years. If necessary, a I time management plan ~6q(s~qw~q:h as boat ramps retain title. the Federal Government may period may be negotiated between the and nature tra~8qll~qs~6q) are ~8qp~qe~12qf~12qt~08qWe~20qd during ~qz either direct the recipient to sell the state and NOAA. After research reserve the initial acquisition~, and development property and pay the Federal designation. a state is eligible ~4qf~qo~qr a phase. No more than, five ~6q(~0qZ) per~qrea~0qt of Government an amount computed b~2qY suppl~qe~q,mental acquisition and the initial acquisition and c~0qle~qve~6ql~8q9p~0qm~qe~qnt applying the Federal percentage of development award(~qs) in accordance award may- be expended on such participation to the cost of the ~qo~qr~8qi~2qg~6qt~24qW with 1921.31. In this post-des~2qi~2qg~qz~4qm~0qt~2qk~4qm facilities- NOAA must make a specific project to the proceeds from the sale acquisition and development phase. det-~4qmin~qat~6qio~qn. based on ~4qt~qhe final (after deducting actual and reasonable ~0 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday. July 23, ~1~9~90 / Rules and Regulations 2~99~5~5 selling and repair or renovation in the management plan, are under state may request a supplemental expenses, if any, from the sale adequate state control sufficient to acquisition and/or development proceeds), or direct the recipient to provide long-term protection for reserve award~q(s) for acquiring additional transfer tide to the Federal Governmen~qL resources and to ensure a stable property interests identified in the If directed to transfer title to the Federal environment for research: management plan as necessary to Government. the recipient shall be ~q(~q@~qj Designation of the area as a enhance long-term protection of the area entitled to compensation computed by reserve will serve to enhance public for research and education. for facility applying the recipient's percentage of awareness and understanding of construction. for restorative activities participation in the cost of the original estuarine areas. and provide suitable identified in the approved rnara~qgement project to the current fair market value opportunities for public education a-rid plan. and for administrative purposes. of the property; interpretation: The amount of Federal fina~nc~-~'al (iii) Fair market value ~o~qf the Property (5) A final management plan has been assistance provided for supple'mental must be determined by an independent approved by NOAA and contains the development costs directly associated appraiser and certified by a responsible s~@gned copy of the designation findings; with facility~'corstruc~qt~on other than ~c~qHicial of the state, as provided by (~6~5) An ~qS~qIOU has been signed between land acquisition (ie., ma~qj~cr construction Department of Commerce Regulations in t~q1~,~e state and NOAA ensuring a long- ac~t~:~,~@-~ities) for any one n~a~"~c~r~ial estuarine 15 C~qFR part 24, and Uniform Relocation term commitment by the state to the research reserve may riot exceed Assistance and Real Property effective operation and implementation ~q$1~.~q5~q00.~100 and must be matched by the Acquisition for Federal and Federally of the national estuarine research state c~a a 50/50 basis. Supplemental assisted programs in 15 CFR part 11. reserve; and acquisition awards for the acquisition c~qf (~q6 Upon instruction by NOAA. (7) The coastal state in which the area lands or waters, or interests there~qL~qn. for provisions analogous to those of is located has complied with the any one National Estuarine Reserve may I 921.21~q(e) shall be included in the requirements ~of these regulations. not exceed an amount equal to ~q50 per documentation underlying less~-than-fee- (b) NOAA will determine whether the centum of the cost of the lands. waters, simple interests acquired in whole or designation of a national estuarine and interests therein or ~q$4~,000.000 part with Federal funds. research reserve in a state with a whichever amount is less. In the case of (~qg) Federal funds or non-Federal federally approved coastal zone a biogeographic region (see Appendix I matching share funds shall not be spent management program directly affects to this part) shared by two or more to acquire a real property interest in the coastal zone. If the designation is states, each state is eligible for Federal which the State will own the land found to directly affect the coastal zone, financial assistance to establish a concurrently with another entity unless NOAA will make a consistency national estuarine research reserve the property interest has been identified determination pursuant to section within their respective portion ~qof the as a part of an acquisition strategy 307(c)(~1) of the Act. 1~q6 U.S.C. 145e~, and shared biogeographic region. pursuant to ~q1921.13(7) which has been 1~q5 CFR part 930, subpart C See Application procedures are specified in approved by NOAA prior to the I 9~q21.4~q(~qb~q). The results of this subpart I of this p~q@~qu~4qt Land acquisition effective date of these regulations. consistency determination will be must follow the procedures specified in (h) Prior to submitting the final published in the Federal Register when a I ~q921.13(a)(7)~. I ~q92~q1~4qM (e) and (f) and management plan to NOAA for review notice of designation is published. See I 92~q1.8~8qL and approval~. the state shall hold a I 921.30(c). public meeti~6q4 t 'receive ~q@~qo~qmment on (c) NOAA will cause a notice of ~0 1921.32 Operation and m~an~ag~er~n~er~it. the plan in the area affected by the- designation of a national estuarine:~'~.-- - ~qh~r~q4~qa~e~rn~e~ntat~qi~on of ~qO~qw ma~na~qg~a~i~n~ent p~0qW~L estuarine research reserve. NOAA will research reserve to be placed in th~qi (a) Aft~6qF the national estuarine publish a notice of the ~2qme~'eti~ng in the F~ede~nd Register. ~2qTh~qe state shall be ... research re~qi~qir ~v~*e~'is f ~qbr~0qm~,ally designated~. Fe~q4e~q;~0qW Register. -The state shall ~qOe~'~~@ ~@~@~4~e~!~l responsible for having a similar notice the state Is eligible to receive Fed~4q&~q@~qI~. responsible for ha~'vin~qg a~s~qi~0qm~qilar notice publ~qished~~qin the local media. fonds t~4qWa~'s~sist the state -in the opera~n~qg~n published in the local media. (d~q) The ~qierm "state control" in and management of the research 921~.30~q(a)(3) does not ~n~qe~q6~qi ~qi~qi~rily reserve.. The purpose of this Federally Subpart ~2qD~q-Res~erv~e D~e~s~qi~qg~n~at~qion~qind require that key land ~qin~qd~v~qi~qi~qieT areas be funded operation and management Subs~equ~on~, t Operation. owned by the state in fee ~s~ql~2qm~q@le~. ~! ~@~, Acquisition of l~qes~s-th~an-fe~i~qi~-~'s~qi~in ~.pie phase ~q1s.to implement the approved fi ~-nal 1921.30 D~*~qW~q�~n~at~qlon of National E~s~qh~ou~ql~qm management plan and to take the ~, ~,~8qL Research Reserved. Interests (eg., conservation easements) necessary steps to ensure the continued and utilization of existing~'State (a) The Under Se~a~r~.~*etar~q- effective operation of the research y ~8qmay regulatory measures are encouraged reserve., designate an area as a na. where the state~'can de~rno trate that estuarine research ~qi~qii~qi ~0qU~'~nt to ~r~q!~s ~- -~, (~qb) State operation and management these Interests and measures assure of national estuarine research reserves section 315 of the Act. if Wised on adequate long-term State control ~. written findin~qg~qi~2q&~~qit~qit~qi~ql~ia~qt~4qmet the -- ~' -shall be consistent with the mission. and ~ ~L consistent with the purposes of the ~, ~' following re~qq~u~qi~r~e~l~2qw~an ~q*~1 ~ shall further the goals, of the National (1) The Go~qv~qe~qrli~6qB~qi~qr~q'~4qbf~4qf ~-~i~q. ~36qW state research reserve (see also I ~q921.13~q(a~q)~q(7); Estuarine Research Reserve System (see in which the area is located ~4qh~0qa~qs I ~4q9~0q21.2~0q1~0q(~8qg)~6q). Should the state later elect to purchase an interest in such lands nominated the ar~4qi~8qi for~q"~6qd~8q6s~qi~4ql~8qg~2qi at~8qio~q-n~q-~qi~qi~qis~q'a using NOAA funds, adequate ~40qjc~0q)Fede~0qt~4qal funds of up-~44q6~48q4~0q7~q.0~q.~4q0~q'~04qW~2qie~q'r national estuarine r~2qesea~8q@~8qm~28ql re~4qierve~q-~q, justification as to the need for such- year. to be -matched by the state Ion a (2) The area is a representative acquisition must be p~qr~76q"ded to NOAA~q.~q'~q-~q- ~4q50/50 basis, are ~qa~qv~0qi~0qf~0qlable for the estuarine ecosystem that is suitable for operation and ~24qm~4q1~6qf~6qi~4qi~4qi~60qi~qi~0qi~2qient of the long-term research and contributes to 1~q921.31 Supplemental ~qa~04qNu~qt~qa~0qtt~qlon and national estuarine' ~6qie~4qsearch rese~6qive, the biogeographical and ~8qq~08qwlo~8qg~8qical development awards. including ~q.the establ~4qi~32qA~00qm~4qint and balance of the System~q: After national estuarine research operation of* basic environmental (3) Key land and water areas of the reserve designation. and as specified in monitoring program In the case of a proposed research reserve. as identified the approved management plan. the biogeographic region (see appendix I t~8qd ~0 2~qN~q% F~f~t~qW~qW Re~gis~i~m / Vol. 5~5. No. 141 / Monday, ~I~~~l~y 2~q1 ~1~qM / Rut" and ~l~te~g~~la~j~qW~~ this part) ~sha~t~ed by two or more states. accordance with section ~qJ ~q92~qI~qL13 and performance evaluations. If other each state is eligible for Federal shall include an administrative experts am to be included in the financial assistance to establish a framework for the mul~t~qipl~e-~a~qf~qte research ~E~q"~qJ~qw~r~qd~q= N~0qQAA will first ask the national es~qh~m~u~-ine research reserve reserve and a description of the state to recommend appropriate within their respective portion of the complementary research and individuals to serve in that capacity. hared biogeographic region (see educational programs within the (~qd) Performance evaluations will be 921.~q10). research reserve. If NOAA determines, conducted in accordance with the ~q(d) Opera~qton and management funds based on the scope ~of the project and procedural and public participation are subject to the following limitations: the issues associated with the additional provisions of the CZMA regulations on (1) No more than $70.000 in Federal site, that an environmental assessment review of performance at 1~q5 ~2qC~qFR part funds may be expended in a twelve is sufficient to establish a ~qm~ult~qip~ql~e~-~s~qite 9~qZ~q8 (ie., I 928.3~q(b) and 1~q9~q28~-4). month award period (ie., Federal funds research re~ser~qm then the state shall (e) To ensure effective Federal for operation and management may not develop a revised management plan be expended at a rate greater than which, concerning the additional oversight of each research reserve $70.000 per year), %!thin the Na~qd~on~a~ql Estuarine Reserve component. incorporates each of the Research System the state is required to (2~q) No more than ten percent of the elements des~c~z~qi~qbed in I g~qz~qt.~4qn~q(a~q@ The revised management plan ~s~qbal~qt address and management of the research reserve total amount (state and Federal shares) submit an annual report on operat~qi~l~cn of each operation and management goals and objectives f~or all components during the immediately preceding state award may be used for construction- of the multi-site research reserve and fiscal year~.~-~qI~l~hi~s annual report must be type activities (ie., ~q$14.000 maximum the addit~qiona~ql~'~comp~onen~qt's relationship submitted within a ninety day period per year). to the original ~a~8qf~8qte~q(~s~q)~. following the end of the state final year. ~l 921~4qM Boundary ~ch~a~r~qn~qi~el~, ~qW~n~qW~X~qh~qM~Rt~5 SUb~2qW ~qE~q-~qP~. f~o~. ~m~qunc~e Evaluation The report shall detail program to the management p~qh~qn ~qm~4qW addition of and ~6qW~qi~qt~qh~c~qh ~C~qd ~0qD~6q"~0qW~q=~6q*~qM suc~ce~qn~q" and ~a~cc~o~qmp~ql~qis~qi~n~n~en~qt mu~lt~q1p~ql~e~-~a~tt~e ~c~o~0qm~on~ent~s~. referencing the research reserve (a) Changes in ~re~.~, ~sarch reserve 1~q921~-40 Evaluation of ~s~qyst~a~i~n management plan and. as appropriate. boundaries and major changes to the ~qP~e~qdar~qm~a~nc~e. the work plan for the previous year. A final ma~na~qgem~qa~qd plan, including gate (a) Following d~es~qi~qgn~ation of a national work plan. ~qdet~ai~ql~4q@ the projects and laws or regula~qf~qio~ns promulgated estuarine r~p~a~pa~r~ch~r~e~e~a~r~ve p~i~qm~qm~an~qt to acti~v~8qMes to be undertaken over ~ql~qb~e~- specifically for the research reserve, 1~q921.30. periodic performance coming year to meet the goals and may be made only after written evaluations shall be candu~c~4qW objectives of (he research reserve as app~r~vv~al by NOAA. If determined to be ca~ncer~n~qi~n~qg the op~eratk~ir~i and described in the management plan and necessary. N~0qOAA may require public management of each national estuarine the state's role in ongoing research no~qti~qm including notice ~qin the ~qF~ed~o~4qW research reserve~. ~qh~qw~-~qh~ul~qi~n~qg the research reserve pr~o~qgr~a~q= shall also be Included. Register and an opportunity for pub~qbc and zn~G~ni~qt~a~rin~qg ~r~nn~qd~j~9~r~f~P~qA within Coll -ant Ch~m~m~qs~es in the bour~idar~ql~es of the reserve and education and 1~q92~q1A~qI ~qS~u~qM~qm~a~ql~o~n~o~qt~4q0~qg~qr~a~6qf~6qt~qt~or ~qf~qin~an~0qd~a~ql~s~e~4qd~s~qt~an~o~q& the research reserve ~qi~nv~o~ql~v~qdng the ~qInt~er~2qpr~e~6qa~ve a~c~qt~qh~qd~qf~qi~es. Evaluations may ~q(~a) ~4qK~a performance evaluation under acquisition of properties not listed in assess performance ~qI~r~qi'~qal~ql aspects of 921.~q40 ~qM~w~e~e~0qk that ~0q&~a operation and management plan or final EIS require research ~_~_~q_~_ ~_~_ Ion and ~; -~-~@~' of the research r~e~qm~qm~e Is If- 1 ~.~0~, -~3~4 public notice and ~qth~qe opportunity far, m~a~na t ~a~qi may I m~i~te~d in scope, management def~qicia~i~6qK or ~6qQ~at the re~se~4q@ be~0qf~0qt co~rn-ent~;~.~qI~n certain cases, an focus an selected ~ql~qi~m~4q@~o~2qr~. ~co~nduc~qied~q;~0qMt~qh~qi~n the reserve Is not environmental ~a~s~s~'e~0q"~qwe~nt and ~qP~q@~qi~q~qi~qb~qly~, ~qim, ~2q&~8qA~C~qi~qM~qiL~qi~qx~qi ~l~qav~a~ql~m~, ~a~,~qd~qW~,~&~qh~L Ite~s~e~arc~qh c~onsl~a~qte~v~qit with ~qdw~2qr~qAtuar~qkie an e~nv~qi~o~q6~n~qne~o~8qW~ql~qi~qm~qpac~qt ~s~qhr~qlem~qe~n~qt~. as sop ~o~qa~@ ~ma~qy ~qt~4qk ~qie~q4ulre~4~qL ~2qW~qbe~qr~0qi ~qi~qf~qi~0qf~0qt~qe no- ~qo~c~qi~s ~: ~- ~1~ ~. ~ ~f~. I A.... Gu~qlde~ql~2qk~e~s referenced ~q(~n~q4~a~qb~qpa~qit ~0qY~er and mana ~~,~%~- ~qt~ql r~~qq~%~qd~red. ~6qW~6qOAA w~qi~qf~qf place a notice Fin~- ~1~1 ~- ~qJ~I~L 2~q1~s~-p~ar~qL ~q1~qh~qi ~8qA~qg~qA~0qd~qi~qt~qy of die re~qw~d~qi~t~qi~k whether a- ~D~O~qW~qT~O ~qi~s reserve for ~qF~*d~e~n~qd financial a~s~si~e~0q@ ~2qR~qe~qg~qi~st~ai of compliance the Federal ~a~n~qy ~-e~nt~a~S ~as described in ~0qf~0qf~0qiese reg~pla~qf~qlo~qw may be ~ha~n~~qges in re~se~w~r~6q6 reserve boundaries thesis ~q=~q4u~qlat~qi~o~qn~i~q@~qp~qwti~2qi~u~qlar~ql~qy ~qi~4q4a~ql~ql~i~e~r~. or prop' d major changes to the fin ~qg~em~ent of ~gu~qs~qo~qj~qj~qn~6q@ ~qj~[~q@~4qW the deficiency or On al~, (I) ~qT~qh~e ~-~'at~qi~on A ~- in management plan. Thestate -shall be -~-~, -the re ~. ~. ~6qU consistent with- consistency Is remedied. responsible for publishing in equivalent and fi~'~8qA~p~r~a the ~qm~0qWi~o~u and goals ~Of the (~qb~q) NOAA Will provide the state with notice In the local me~qd~2qk~. See-aim E~st~q@~&~qd~n~qi Reserve R~*~zea~qT~q0~qL~.~qW~,~,~._ ~@a written notice of the defi~6qd~e~nc~qy ~qW ~'~qS~qys~qf~e~2qm~q[s~qi~qm~qi~qg~4qm~qi~qla~nd inconsistency. This notice Will ~6qW~qla~qi~R requir~e~v~qoent~s of I ~q9~q21.4~q(b~qf~a~qi~t~qid ~@~ ~' I (~q7~q4 A ~qb~a~a~0qb c~o~nt~in~t es to e~3dst to the &ding. a~a~s~e~ss ~qt~qbe Federal ~r~8q9~a In (~qb) As discussed In a state support any ~an~qi~orm~c~ce of the ~q@~nd~!~q7 co~n~qi~zi~qbuting to the problem. propose a may choose to develop a~0qt~m~a~ql~q!~q4~q9~9~-~f~f~qf~qt~e ~'~c made un~i~qd~e 1~q2~q2~q1~q30~q(~4q4 lution or solutions. provide a ~4qW~hedul~e ~~ by which the gate should remed~qY ~qt~qh~qe fin~n~a~l estuarine ~qn~qu~r~v~e ~aft~e~t (~qb) Ce~a~era~qlly~. p~qir~qf~D~rma~nce ~qv~q@~qf~qfl be three~ ~56qi~0q6ars~q. the initial a~qc~8qq~quf ~qs~6qiti~qc~4qa ~qa~qs~8qi~4qd development ~qev~qa~6qb~qu~0qd~qe~6qd ~qa~4qt least ~qe~6qi~qr~qary deficiency or ~8qInco~qns~12qWe~qncy, and Oats award for a s~2qb~2qq~2qoe si~q'~4qt~qa~8qb~qas~28ql~32qe~8qAr~qi~0qma~4qd~qe~q. -~q7 More: frequent evaluations may b~qi~qa~q. whether the state's eligibility for Federal Public notice of the proposed ad~2qd~8qf~8qt~4qL~4qm~q':~q;~q: scheduled as de~04qU~4q=~2q1~36q6~20qd t~8qo be financial assistance~q, has been suspended will be placed by NOAA In &a ~8qF~qe~6qd~6qw~qal ne so b ~12qNQAA. in whole or par~qL In ~6qdi~8qJ~q$ notice the state ~q. ~q:~. ~44qW ~2qP ~qr~qi~qn~qa~qn~qc~qe ev~qa~8qh~0qm~qi~qi~q-~qn w~24qab~4q&- shall al~qoo be advised that it M~qaY bl~qeI~q_. Register. The stale shall b~qe~q, ~q.~q.~q, ~8qP~qO ~qn~48q4~qk -comment on this ~qf~qi~qn~qr~qun a~qn~0qd~qn~0qw~qetw~2qfth -for publishing an ~qe~8qq~quJi~4qva~6qle~qnt not~8qic~qer in conducted by Federar o~0qf~6qf~6qi~56qda~4qls~q. ~12qV~20qA~4qw~0qd the local media. An opportunity for.. ~- determined to be necessary, Federal and NOAA officials to discuss t~2qh~qs results Of comment. in addition to t~0qh~qe~2qprepar~qati~qO~qn non-~6qFed~qec~qa~4ql ~qe~2qip~qect~qs ~2qJ~qn ~qn~qat~4qm~qa~4ql resource the pe~qr~0qi~0qb~8qma~qnc~qe evaluation ~q&~qa~24qd ~qa~qs~24q& to of either an environmental assessment management. estuarine ~qr~q6~qf~qle~qa~qV~qch~q, remedy d~4qw deficiency or ~2qh~4qW~qO~qn~qs~2qh~0qd~q_~4q=~qcY- or environmental i~4qmpaGt statement on interpretation or other aspects Of ~0q(~qc) E~6ql~64qob~2qility of a research ~4qw~0qw~qr~qv~qe for the proposal. will also be ~qn~qe~8qquired. An national estuarine research ~qr~4qmerv~qs financial as~qs~12qb~qf~qt~4qm under these environmental impact statement if operation and ~qn~qu~0qm~qa~8qg~qe~4qme~qn~0qi~4qm~08q"~36qbe regulations shall be restored upon requested by NOAA to participate in written notice by NOAA to the state required. shall be prepared in Federal Register / Vol. 53, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, IM Rules and Regulations 299i-, that the deficiency or inconsistency has J 921.21(e) regarding the disposition of to any other funds available to a coastal been remedied. real property acquired in whole or part state under the Act. Federal research (d) If. after a reasonable time, a state with Federal funds shall be followed. funds provided under this subpart mus: does not remedy a deficiency in the (0 NOAA may not withdraw be matched equally by the recipient. operation and management of a national designation of a national estuarine consistent with I 921.81(e)(4) estuarine research reserve which has research reserve if the performance ("allowable costs"). been identified pursuant to a evaluation reveals that the deficiencies performance evaluation under in management of the site are a result of J 921.51 Estuarine research guidelines. J 9.11.40(a), such outstanding deficiency inadequate Federal financial support. (a) Research within the National shall be considered a basis for Estuarine Reserve Research System withdrawal of designation (see 1921.42). Subpart F-Research shall be conducted in a manner 921.42 Withdrawal of designation. 1921.50 General. consistent with Estuarine Research (a) Designation of an estuarine area (a) To stimulate high quality research Guidelines developed by NOAA. as a national estuarine research reserve within designated national estuarine (b) A summary of the Estuarine may be withdrawn if a performance research reserves, NOAA may provide Research Guidelines is published in the evaluation conducted pursuant to financial support for research which is Federal Register as a part of the notice 921.40 reveals that: consistent with the Estuarine Research of available funds discussed in (1) The basis for any one or more of Guidelines referenced in 1921.51. 1 921.50(c). the findings made under I 921.30(a) in Research awards may be awarded (c) The Estuarine Research Cuideiines designating the research reserve no under this subpart to only those are reviewed annually by NOAA. This review will include an opportunity for longer exists; designated research reserves with comment by the estuarine research (2) A substantial portion of the approved final management plans with community. research conducted within the research the following exception: NOAA may reserve. over a period of years, has not award research awards under this 1921-52 Promotion and coordination of been consistent with the Estuarine subpart to reserves without final estuarin* research. Research Guidelines refereaced in management plans that have been (a) NOAA will promote and subpart F of this part; or designated prior to the effective date of coordinate the use of the National (3) A state. after a reasonable time. these regulations; in the absence of an Estuarine Reserve Research System for has not remedied a deficiency in the approved final management plan. research purposes. operation and management of a however these reserves will be eligible (b) NOAA will. in conducting or research reserve identified pursuant to for research awards during only the first supporting estuarine research other than an earlier performance evaluation two years after the effective date of that authorized under section 315 of the conducted under 1921.40. these regulations. Although this research Act give priority consideration to (b) If a basis is found under may be conductid within the immediate research that uses the National I 921-42(a) for withdrawal of watershed "of the research reserve, the Estuarine Reserve Research System. designation. NOAA will provide the majority of research activities of any (c) NOAA will consult with other state with a written notice of this single research project furided under this Federal and state agencies to promote finding. This notice will explain the subpart must be conducted within use of one or more research reserves basis for the finding, propose a solution reserve boundaries. Research funds are within the National Estuarine Reserve or solutions and provide a schedule by prim:arily used to support management- Research System when such agencies which the state should correct the related research that will enhance' d ' stdirindi *se&& con uct e deficiency. In this notice, the state shall a'cientific understanding of the research also be advised-tbat it way comment on *resirve ecosyqte ='-provide information SubpartG the finding and meet with NOAA @-'niee4ed by"reserve managers g ind 6oaital officials to discuss the finding and seek, a' emeh't de78si&n_'makers, and 192160 Gerieral. :*,.,,J4CA -man S to coirect thedeficiency. improve public iwareh (a) To prbi;ge a systematic basis for ess an (c) If. within a reasonable period of -understanding of-estuarini ec'osistems developing a high quality estuarine time, he deficiency is 'not corrected In a and estuarine ind-na,eme-M issues. resource and -ecosystem information manner acceptable to NOAA, -a notice Research projects may be oriented to base for national estuaim"e research of intent to withdraw -designation. with specific research reserves; however. reserves and. as a result. for the System, an opportunity for comment. will be research projects that would benefit NOAA may pro@yicl@ financial support placed in the Federal Regliater. -more Omn one research reserve in the for monitoring programs. Monitoring (d) The state shall be provided the National Estuarine Reserve Research funds are used to support three major opportunity for ii"Wormal hearing System are encouraged. phases of a monitoring program; studies before the Under Se6retax necessary for comprehensive site y to consider (b) Federal research funds under this NOAA's fmding R difi&ncy and intent subpart ar@ not intended as a source of description/characterization. to withdraw desiliffiVo-ONits well as- the' continuous funding for i " rticular development of a site profile. and pa state's comments on'M Aes'p"o"n-sie"to' project over time'. Research funds may implementation.of a monitoring NOAA's wriZefi 'notice-ksui:nt to be used to support start-up costs for program,.,. I 921.42(b) an Federal ke;i#stg notice long-term Oibjed3 if ah applicant can (b) Moniioirin7g@ funds are available on pursuant to I 921.42(c). identify an alternitive'source'of loW a competitive basis to the state agency respons (e) Within 30 days after tlie-h@ioim@ term research support.'.r, iSle. foi reserve management or hearing. the Under Secretary shall issue (c) Research funds are available on a quililltid public or private person or a written decision regarding the competitive basia1c, any coastal state or entity'desigifat6d by the Reserve. designation status of the national qualified public or private person'. A However,if the applicant is other than estuarine research reserve. If a decision notice of available funds will be the entity of a reserve is made to withdraw research reserve published in the Federal Register. research (coastal state), that applicant designation, the procedures specified in Research funds are provided in addition must submit as a part of the application ~0 2995~8 Federal Register / Val. ~5~5, No. 1~41 1 Monday, July Z3. 19~90 / Rules and Regulations a letter from the reserve manager recipient, consistent with I ~q92~.1.81(e)~q(4) public or private person may apply for indicating formal support of the ("allowable costs-). Federal financial assistance awards for application by the managing entity of estuarine research or monit~cring~. The the reserve. Monitoring awards will be ~q1~921.71 Categories of p~ot~ent~f~al announcemert of opportunities to I~rt~er~pr~et~iv~e and educational projects; made on the basis of a five-year evaluation ~c~r~qi~te~r~l~s. conduct research in the reserve sys~t~-~I~T~I performance period; and with initial (a) Proposals for interpretive ~0~q! appears on an annual basis in the fu~rdin~qg for a twelve ~q(1~q2~q) month period; Federal Register. If a state is a~~qd with annual supplemental funding educational projects will be considered participating in t~qhe national Coastal under the following categories: contingent on ~qpe~t~qiormance and Zone Management Program. the ~iations under the Act. (~q1) Design, development -and app~rop~ri d~qis~tribution/~p~q! ~acem~ent of interpretive applicant for an award under section Monitoring funds are provided in or 315 of the Act shall notifv the state addition to any other funds available to educational media (ie.. the development coastal management agency regarding a coastal state under the Act. Federal of tangible items, such as exhibits/ the application. ~m~0~nit~o~ring funds must be matched displays, publications, posters, signs, (b) An original and two c~op~ql~es of !he equally by th~-~3 recipient. consistent with a~udio/vi~suals, computer software and formal application must be submitted at ~q92~q1.81~fe)(~1) ("allowable ~cc~-~sts")~. maps which have an educational cr least 120 working days prior to the interpretive purpose; and techniques for ~q(~c) Monitoring pro~6q*~'~,s funded under proposed beginning of ~2q&~,~a project to the this Subpart must focus on the resources making available or locating ~qinfor~i~n~ation following ad~0q1~ress: Office of Ocean and within the bcu~ndaries of the research ccr~icernin~qg research reserve resources, Coastal Resource Management, reserve and must be consistent with the activities, or issues); National Ocean Service~, National aprp~qf~qicable sections of the ~qE~stuar~qL~-~te (2)~'~q6evelopment and presentation of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Guidelines referenced in curricula, workshops, lectures, seminars, Administration, Universal Building � 921.51. Portions of ~Lie pro~;c~ct ~qm~ay and other stru~qa~lured programs or occur with~qm the ~qi~rnmedi~ate ~J watershed presentations for facility or field use; South. ~qI~qL8~q2~0qZ Connecticut Avenue. NW, of the Reserve beyond the site (3) Extension/outreach programs-, or Suite 714. Washington, DC 202~q35. The boundaries. However. the monitoring (4) Creative and innovative methods Application for Federal Assistance proposal must d~em~o~nstra~te~w~6q+y this is and tech~no~ql~o~4q&s for implementing Standard Form 4Z4 ~q(N~on-~c~o~n~s~qtru~cti~on necessary for the ~a~n~c~q6e~-~q-~. of the project. interpretive or educational projects. Program) constitutes the formal - I ~q(b) Interpretive ~a~nd educational application for site selection. post-site Subpart H-Inl~e rpr~et~at~ql~an and projects maybe oriented to one or more selection. operation and management. Education research reserves or to the entire research. and education and ~qf~qt~qderpretive system~. Those projects which would awards. Ile Application for Federal ~92~q1~qL70 General~. directly benefit more than one research Financial Assistance Standard Form 424 (a) To stimulate the development of reserve, and. if practicable. the entire (Construction Program) constitutes the Innovative or creative ~8qWe~rpretive and National Estuarine Reserve Research formal application far land acquisition educational projects and materials to Sys tem. shall rec~qi~lve pr~qio~r~qi~qfy and development awards. The enhance pu~2q6~qh~c ~inv~are~ne~ss and consideration for funding.~, application must be accompanied by the understanding of e~2q"~Z~qi~n~e~4qf~4qtre~4q" (c) Proposals. for i~n~qt~e~'rpretive ~qa~nd information ~qmquir~ed in subpart B NOAA may fund ~ql~a~qter~qp~qie~qf~qive and (predesignation) of ~q1hi~s part, subpart C educational activities. Int~e~i~qp~ret~qive and educational pr~q6~qj~qi~q6~qt~qi In ~nati~a~nal of th~qi~qi part and I ~q921~8qM (acquisition and estuarine resear~rh~zes~e~r~ve~qi~s~:w~qI~qll. be educational awards u~ka~qy ~6q0 ~a~0qW~qA~r~qd~i~p~qd evaluated in a~coor~qdan~qhe~-~6qW~8qf~8qt~'~criteria development), and 1 ~q8~0q=32 (~opera~qqon under~-th~qi~qi ~subpar~qi ~qt~o ~0~2q0~qy~qtho~s~e listed below--". and ma~"~n~'~a~'~qge~qi~r~l e~-~-~at)~'as ~opp~ql~qi~c~able.~' designated research re~g~qrerve~s-wi~qt~qh ~q(1) E~du~c~a o~nal or ~qI~n~qt~qe~4q-~qi~qf~qive me~qnts~, Applications ~qf~or development awards-, approved final n~qz~uag~q@~qme~qil p~8q" with for c~o~n~s~qtru~c~qti~o~u projects. or restorative ~he following exception: NOAA (2) Re~qle~2qv~qm~c~ e~'~q6~r ~qimp~(~qi Ito ~qk~qi~serv~e ~8Ct~qiV~qi~qf~qi~qM ~qI~n~V~O~ql~V~qi~D~qS ~qW~n~g~qb~q=~qti~0~n. Must may ~a~a~qw mana~qge~6qme~za or co- ~8qW ~qd~a~n~4qkl~qe~qp~2qp award research award~s~4q%~i~qd~q@~r ~qt~0qWs (3) ~qa~qk~'~n~qg~;~'include a preliminary engineering ~re~qp~o~0qd. subpart to reserves wi~l~0qhout ~qf~qht~qil Educational quality ~qC~e~qj~qg~q@ ~~. ~. - ~ , I ~;All applications must co~n~qt~at~u back up soundness of approa~q6hexp~er~qi~e~n management plans- that ~ql~qm~q@~qve been related tometh~o~qd~a~ql~ogi~as~ql~- data for budge estimates (Federal and designated prior to the *effective date of non-Federal ohms), and evidence that these regulations; In the absence of an (4) Importance t~qo the National the application complies wit' the approved final management p~qlan~q@ Estuad~ne Reserve Research System~: Executive Order 1237~q2~, ~" "I - ~. (~q5) Budget an~qd~qInstit~u~qtiona~ql ~' ~- -"Intergovernmental Review of Feder~qi~al however these reserves ~6q*~0qM lie eligible Capabilities ~qCe~.~2q&~, reasonableness of ~a~m~m~6q"~"~q6~qf~qi~ql~qy ~I~0qf~0qf~0qie first ms.~" In addition. applications for for research awards ~q"6~" b~@ ~'~.~:~dt. su~0qM~c~qlen~cy of logistical support~q@ Pro~qgra two years after the e~6qf~6qfe~2qAve date ~qof ~_~7 acquisition and develop~qm~c~..~, awards these re~qg~qula~qtio~n~a~qL~*~---~8q4~*~qN~'~qQ~_~qP~qJ~qi~q6 and must contain,. (~qb) Educational ~-and ~qh~8qf~8qt~r~ql~4q*e~' t~qi ve~'~-~'f un d s (6) In addition. In the case a~qf long- (1) State Histar~qi~c Pr~es~t-~n~dt~qi~q= Office te~an projects. the ability ~of the state or are avaiIableo~qn~4qA~2qt~8q6~20qW~8q#~40qW~6qHv;~6qi bails to, the grant recipient to support the project comments; any coastal state ~2qe~4qf~4qit~6qit~2qy~q.~q-~2qI~4ql~6ql~qow~2q6~2qv~6qi~qr~q. if the beyond this i~08qWt~24qW fi~6qu~8q@~qii~2qq~2qa ~0q(2) Written apprav~qa~4ql from NCI~12qAA of applicant Is o~4q1~0qh~16qe t~0qh~qa~2qh~q'1~0q1~16qA ~qt~2qh~6qi~0qd~qma~48qe~qn~2qg the draft management plan far initial entity of a research reser~2q@e, tha acquisition and development award~0qis~0q)~q. t~q@ -` Subpart ~6qI~6q-~20qG~qe~qn~2qm~6ql FInanc~2ql~qal ppl~8qic~qant must ~qsu~6qb~44qmit~2qe~qs ~6qi PBX! of the Assistance Provisions and application a letter from the re~8q;~qser~qve ~q'~q,~q. ~. ~. ~q...~. ~q:~ ~q. ~q"~q.~q. ~. ~q.~q, ~q@ ~0q(3) A preliminary~q'engine~qe~6qi~0qin~8qg report manager ind~8qica~4qtir~qig formi~0qd support ~qo~0qf the '~2q1921.8~6q6 App~ql~ql~qcat~ql~qo~qc~6q@~qtn~0qt~qo~qrma~qll~qo~qn. f ~qction projects. or restorative or con~qs~0qtru ~qppli~qcation by the managing entity of (a) Only a coastal state- ~6qiii~qny ~0qip~2qp~4ql 'for activities involving constru~qct~4qi~qo~0qm ~4qy the reserve. These~4ql~0q=~48q6 are provided in Federal financial a~q-~4qisist~qance awards ~0qf ~q.~8qor ~8q1~q921.81 Allowable costs. addition to any other funds available to preacquis~qition~qi, acquisition and a coastal state under the Act. Federal developm~4qint, operation and ~q' ~q* ~q,~q- ~q' (a) Allowable co~q'~qsts ~0q;~0q4ill be interpretation and educational funds * management, and e~4qd~8q=ation and determined In accordance with must be matched equally by the interpretation. A~qr~q.~2q7 coastal state or applicable OMB Circulars and guidance ~0 Federal Register Vol. 55. No. 141 / Monday~ July 23~ 19~90 / Rules and Regulations 299~59 for Federal financial assistance, the dete~qmin~qing the value of the benefits 10. West Florida (Ft. Jefferson to Cedar financial assistance agreement. these foregone by ~the state. in the use of the Key). regulations, and other Department of land. as a result of new restrictions that Louisianian Commerce and NOAA directives. The may be imposed by Reserve designation. ~1~1~. Panhandle Coast (Cedar Key to ~1~,~.~I~o~qb~i~le term "costs" applies to both the Federal The appraisal of the benefits foregone Bay). and ~z~ion-Federal shares. must be made by an independent 12- Mississippi Delta ~q(Mobile Bay to (b) Costs claimed a~s charges to the appraiser in accordance with Federal Galveston~q). award must be reasonable. beneficial appraisal standards pursuant to 1~q5 CFR 13. Western Gulf (Galveston to Mexican a~rd necessary for the proper and part 24 and 1~q5 CF~qR part 11. A state may border). efficient administration of the financial initially use as match land valued at ~4qC~2~q1~.~.~q"~"~O~r~n~i~a~n assistance award and must be incurred greater than the Fed~-~cral share of the 14. Southern Ca~qh~qfor~n~ia ~q[~,~0qMe~y~ican Border to duri~rg the award period. acquisition and development award. Point Concepcion). (c) Costs must not be allocable to or The value in excess of the amount 15. Central C~a~qli~qfom~ia (Point Concepcion to included as a cost of any other required as match for the initial award Cape Mendocino). Fe~qderally-fi~nanced program in either the may be used to match subsequent 1~6. San Francisco Bay. current or a prior award period. supplemental acquisition and Columbian (d) General guidelines for the non- development awards for the national Federal share are contained in estuarine research reserve (see also 17.M~i~iddle Pacific (Cape Mendocino to the Department of Commerce Regulations at Columbia River). ~q1921.20)~. Costs related to land 18~. Washington Coast ~q(Colu~mbia River t~o 15 CFR part 24 and OMB Circular ~2qA~-1~1~0~- acquisition, such as appraisals, legal Vancouver Island). Copies of Circular A~-110 can be fees and surveys, may also be used as 1~9. Puget Sound. obtained from the Marine and Estuarine match. Management Division; 1825 Connecticut (3) Operation and Management ~qCr~e~at Lakes Avenue. NW., Suite 714; Washington. . Awards. Generally. cash and in kind 20. Western Lakes (Superior, Michigan. ~2qDC 20235. The following may be used in contributions (directly benefiting and Huron). satisfying the matching requirement: specifically identifiable to operations 21. Eastern Lakes (Ontario, Erie). (~q1) Site Selection and Post Site and management), except land. are Fjord Selection Awards. Cash and in-kind allowable. ZZ. Southern Alaska (Prince of Wales (value of goods and (4) Research~, Monitoring, Education bland to Cook Wet). services directly benefiting and and Interpretive Awards. Cash and in- 23. Aleutian Islands (Cook Inlet to Bristol specifically identifiable to this part of kind contributions (directly benefiting Bay). the project) are allowable. Land may not and specifically identifiable to the scope S~,~,~q5~_~0qA~,~,t~qi~c be used as ma~qt~c~qJ~L of work), except lan~c~qL are allowable. (2) Acquisition and Development 24. Northern Alaska (Bristol Bay to Awards. Cash and in-kind contributions ~qJ ~q921~.~q82 A~n~qmdm~ent~a to ~qf~qi~n~ar~tc~qla~ql Demarcation Point). are a~ql~qlowable. In general~. the fair market ~a~ss~i~stan~c~o ~awa~r~4qf~4qt ~qI~n~suJ~qar value of lands to be included within the Actions requiring an amendment to ~qM Hawaiian Islands~. research reserve boundaries and ~. ~. ~*~1~, the financial assistance award. such as 2~a. Western Pacific Island. acquired pursuant to the Act. with other a re~qqi~iest for additional Federal funds. 27. Eastern Pacific Island. than Federal funds, may be used as revisions of the approved project budget match. However, the fair market value Appendix U to Part 921~q-Typolo~qgy of of real property a~ql~qlowable as match Is or original scope of work. or extension National Estuarine Research Reserves of the performance period must be limited to the fair market value of ~qi~qi~qi~qil ~sub-tted to NOAA on Standard Form This typology system reflects significant ~6qT~' property interest equivalent to~,~l~oi_ 4~2qN ~:~4qald approved in writing. ~d d~ifferen~'ce~s in estuarine characteristics that required to attain. the level of contr~q@~ql am not necessarily related to regional over such land(s) identified by the state- Appendix Ito Part ~921~q-B~ql~o~qgeo~qgraph~qi~c location. The purpose~'o~qf th~i~qi ~t~q@p~e of and approved by the Federal ~8qPass~qif~qi~cation Scheme classification is to maximize ecosystem -Government as that necessary for the variety in the selection of national estuarine protection and management of the " - - - ~1. N~o~r~%~qhe~r~n Gulf of a ~e ~qtEas ~r~t ~1~0 e research reserves. Priority will be given to national estuarine research reserve.- Sheepscot River). M in ~tp~o ~. ~th important ecosystem t~@pes as yet U~nrepre3e~nted in the reserve system It Appraisals must be performed accordin ~2. Southern Gulf of Maine (Sheepsc~ot River should be noted that any one site may to Federal appraisal standards as to Cape Cod). ~- represent several ecosystem types or detailed ~qin.De~qp~qs~qi~qr~4q@~4q&tof Commerce physical characteristics. regulations at 15 C~qER pa~qj~q@~qi~4qu and the 3. Southern New England (Cape Cod to Class ~qI-E~c~os~ys~t~a~i~r 7~' Uniform Relocat~qi~qm~qi~2qAssistance and Real ~ ~y~pe~s Property A~c~qq~qu~qfs~0qW~qd~4qZ~l~t~4q@ Federal -~o~nd ~- ~- Sandy Hook). -A Group I-Shorelands Federally A~ssi~s ~2q0~6q6 in 1~q5 CFR 4. ~0qKddle Atlantic (Sandy Hook to Cape ~4qA.~,~v~qi~c~u-~qi~t~qi~qme ~qF~qar~e~q@t_W~qoo~qd~qZand~- This type of ~4qt ~q1~q. ~- ~i~. Hatteras]. ~qal hesap~qea~4qke Bay. ec~qo part 11. ~2q7~0q1 v ue~qo ~q' I system consists of single-stemmed species I ~6q4~52qa ~qi~q. ~q, ~. ~2qi~q'~0q@~4qf 5. ~4qC privately donated ~4qq at that have developed under the influence of It st~2qiblis ~2q4~q"~48qA gal d~qonation.~q'as'e C~8qM~q'~qO~0ql~qi~qr ~qXi~4qi~qW t spray. It can be found on coastal uplands such as barrier islands and nden it- ed by aa. Northern Carolinas (Ca~4qp~6qe~0q@ ~q* ~8qindepe ~q* ~8qi ap~2q@~0qi~qi~0qdse ~q. Hatteras to or recent features. responsible official of e state Santee River). beaches. and may be d~qi ~q,vided into the (pursuant to 1~4q5 C~2qFR part ~36q"~2q)~q, may also 7. South Atlantic (Santee River to St. John's following b~0qlomes: be used as match. Land. including ~q- ~q" River). ~q1. ~0ql~0qV~qo~qr~qth~qe~qr~qn Coniferous Forest Bio~2qme: This submerged lands already in the state's a. East Florida (St. John's R~qi ver to Cape is an area of Predominantly evergreens such Canaveral). as the sitk~qa spruce ~0q(~qPi~qc~qe~qa~0q). grand fir (Abies). possession, maybe -used as match to and white cedar (Thu~4qla)~q, with poor f ~0qt~72qh~0qt~8qlm ~0qy an ~q_~0qj~12q+ d certi~6qf~6qt establish a national estuarine research ~q-~q7 West Indian development of the shmb ~0qitnd herb layers. reserve. The value of match for these 9. Caribbean (Cape Canave ~q*ral to Ft~q. but high annual productivity and pronounced ~q9 ~qta ~qte lands will be calcula~q-ted by Jefferson and South). seasonal periodicity. ~0 299~6~0 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 1990 / Rules and Regul~t~io~~~ ~- Moist Temperate (M~e~so~t~ql~;e~r~qmcl~q) heath. shrubs, grasses. sedges. rushes, and F~. ~In~te~r~fida~ql ~A~qf~ud and Sand ~F~ql~a~!s: These Con~i~,~@~qI~er~ouj Forest Eiome~: Found along the herbaceous and dwarf woody plants. areas are composed of unconsolidated. high west coast of North America frcm California C~a~r~nm~en species ~@~nclude a~r~c~t~i~c~q/~a~qlp~ine plants organic content sediments that function as a to ~~q@~a~ska. this area is dominated by conifers. such as E~qmpetru~rn ~n~1~grum and ~qB~cn.~:~q13 aa~L~n~3~, short-term storage area for nutrients and ~has a relatively small seasonal range. high ~t~qhe lichens Cetraria and Cladon~i~a, and organic cart~;~ors. Macrophyte~s are nearly humidity with rainfall ranging from 30 to ~-~50 herbaceous plants such as ~qPo~tcn~til~qla absent in this ecosystem although it may be inches. and a well-developed ~understory of tr~identaa ~qwid Ru~qb~us chamaemoru~s. Common heavily c~o~qi~cnized by ben~th~i~c diatoms, ve~~,~?~.~I~at~ion with an abundance of mosses and spec~.~E~s on the coastal beach ridges of the din~o~qf~qla~ge~ql~lates~, f~i,~'amentou~s blue-green and other moisture-toler~a~nt plants. high arc~,~"~'~c des~zrt inc~l~@~.de Drya~s inter~,~q=~-~qJ~o~ql~i~a green algae. and ch~em~o~synthet~i~c purple 3. Temperate Deciduous Forest Bi~o~i~re: ~T~1 his ~a~nd Sax~ifrag~e opposit~if~o~ql~ia. ~7~1his area can be sulfur bacteria. T~@~is system may support a biome ~is characterized by ~a~qbu~nc~qla~qa eve~,-~qJy divided into two main s~u~q@di~v~i~sion~s: considerable population of ~&as~tropod~s. distributed rainfall. moder:te ternper~atu~r ~'es 1. Low ~qTurd~r~a: characterized by a thick.. bivalves, a~nd~'polychaetes~, and may serve as which exhibit a distinct se s~a~ra~l~l pattern, spongy mat of living a~nd under-ayed a feeding area for a variety of fi;h ~a~nd we~l-d~eve~ql~oped soil b~iot~a and herb and ~-h~rub ve~a~g~e~!at~ion~. often w~it~l~q@ water ~a~nd dotted with wading birds. In sand. the dominant ~qLauna layers. and numerous plan' ~a which produce ponds when not fr~ozer~.; and include the wedge shell Donax. the SC3~q11~o~p ~pu~py ~-~'ru~lts and ~nu~l~s. A distant ~sub-~i~qi~v~ision of 2. High Tundra~: a b~z~!~re area except for a Pecten. tell~qin shells Tel~l~;~na~. the heart urchin Liss b~'~i~a~rie is ~U~qh~:~! pine edaphic forest ~8qe the s~can~ly ~g~i~row~th of lichens and grasses, w~i!~.~qh Echinoca~r~qd~i~a~q= the lug worm Are~r~tic~ola, sand s~~~the~i~s~t~er~n co~ist~d~q] ~qF~ql~a~@n. in which only a un~qderl~q@~ln~qg ice wedges forming raised dollar De~ndrast~er, and the sea pansy Re~n~illa. mail por~-~,~;~.~,~-~n ~c~qf the area is occupied by pc~ql~qy~qg~on~a~ql areas. ~qL~i mud. faunal dominants adapted to low ~2qc I ~X ~216q2m. ~e~g~et~a~t~i~G~n~, a~l~qho~u~gh it h~-~-s large areas E Co~as~t~a~q! This ecosystem i~s an cxy~qg~an levels include the tere~qbell~-~id covered by ed~-~a~ph~ic climax pines. important nesting site for many sea and shore Amphitrite. the boring clam Playdon~. the 4. B~r~l~o~cd~-l~eav~ed E~r~e~r~qgr~ven Subtropical birds. It consists of communities of deep sea scallop ~qI'~qL~acopect~en~. the quahog Forest Bi~a~qmes. The main characteristic of this h,rbaceaou~s, ~qgrami~noid. or low woody plants Mercenaria. the ech~i~u~r~id worm Urechis~, the biome i~s h~i~qsh moisture with less pronounced (shrubs, heath. etc.) on the top or along rocky mud snail Na~ssarius, and the sea cucumber differences between winter and summer. faces exposed to salt spray. There is a Thy~ane. Examples are the hammocks ofF~qlorida and diversity of pla~rl species including mosses, F. ~qIn~te~r~q6~qd~a~ql Algal Be~qd~q@~r T'hes~e are hard the live oak forests of ~t~qhe Gulf and South lic~qhc~r~3, l~qiverwort~s~. and ~'~8qU~;h~qa" plant substrates along the mar~t~i~qm edge that are Atlantic coast3. floral dominants include representatives. dominated by macroscopic algae. usually pines, m~ag~no~ql~las. bays. ~qhollie~s, wild Group ~qU~q-T~.~-~aas~it~qk~a Areas ~thalloid. but also ~qf~qi~qll~-~"~P~a~t~ou~s or 2~u~r~i-~l~lu~qla~r in tamarind. strangler fig. gumbo limbo, and growth form. This also includes the rocky palms. A. Coast~a~ql~A~l~a~r~s~qhes: These are wetla~nd coast t~qidep~ool~s that fall within the ~i~n~qur~tid~al B. Coast ~qS~qh~r~ub~ql~and~qs: 7~q1~i~qls is a trans~i t~io~nal areas dominated by grasses Po~ecea). sedges zone. Dominant fauna of these areas are ~- area between the coastal grasslands and (Cyperaceae), rushes ~qUu~n~r~m~c~eae~q@ cattails barnacles. mussels, per~qiwi~n~qk~4qk~a. ~a~n~p~qm~qo~n~s~s ~, woodlands and ;~a ch ~aracterized by woody ~q(Typ~qhaceae~qL and other ~qgr~ami~noid species and chitons. Three regions an apparent* ~'.~' I species -with multiple stems a few centimeters and is subject to periodic flooding by either 1. Northern latitude ~qR~ac~qky Shares.- It is i~i~. to several meters above the ground salt ~or freshwater. This ecosystem may be &,is region that the community structure is developing under the influence of salt spray subdivided into- (a) Tidal, which ~i~s best developed. The dominant ~alp~qf species and occasional sand burial~. This includes periodically flooded by ei~q&er salt or brackish include Chondru~s at the low tide level, ~qFu~c~cs th!~ket~s~. sc~xub, scrub savanna. h~eat~qhlands, water, (b) non-tidal (freshwater); or ~q(c) tidal and A~sc~iophyt~qhu~n at ~4q&~e ~qm~qi~qd~-t~idal level, and and coastal chaparral. There ~I~a a great - freshwater. These are es~sen~"~al habitats for L~an~y~in~i~n~i~n and other ~k~p~q4~qdil~r~e ~s~qi~qg~g~i~n just variety of shrubland vegetation exhibiting many important estuarine ~ep~'~qeci~v~e of fish and beyond the ~qi~n~te~r~q6dal. although they can be' regional specificity. invertebrates as well as shorebirds and ~qpx~po~s~ed at ~ex~L-e~r~oely ~qiow tides or ~-~qfou~a~qd in 1. Northern Areas. ~8qO~qwract~e~riz~e~qd ~qby waterfowl and serves important ~r~a~ql~es in very deep ~tidepoo~qls. ~1p~ ~.~4 ~~.~.- ~, ~:- I Hud3on~qia~. various er~qi~-~n~ace~c~u~s species~, ~qa~nd shore ~stabiliza~tion~qflood co~ntro~qt water 2~. S~o~u~Lh~e~z~n ~L~o~L~aud~e~s. The ~r~q-m-n~i ties in ~I~ca~ti~o~n. and nutrient transport and thickets of My~r~ica~, Pr~u~n~u~s~.~'~a~n~qd Ron purT this region are red~qw~Ad ~qi~0qk~p~q=~q@~q4~2q@ Ia. 2. Southeast A~qma~qi~. Floral dom~qi~n~an~i~s ~qi~i~i~q0~t~id~e storage. those of-the northern latitudes and possesses ~k~yr~ica~. ~qBacchari~s. and ~qne~j~L~ ~qB. Coastal ~qsw~am~qp~s~.~- ~qI~ql~ese are wet low~qla~ad algae ~c~o~q@~si~s~qdn~qi~qm~q6~s~t~q1~qy~'~.~8qWs~1~n~qg~qI~e~_~1~Ce~qUed or 3.~ Western Areas: A~A ~n~n~s~t~ama areas that support mosses and shrubs filamentous Veen. ~8qW~u~qi~qj~r~qf~qtn~, and red algae. A~r~cotyphylo~s. and Eucalyptus am I ~2qU together with ~q)~ar~qg~s trees such ~a~qi ~qi~q@pre~s~3 or and ~Sl~u~all t~qhal~ql~o~id b~r~qiw~a~qi~l~qi~qg~qie. dominant floral ~s~qp~i ec~qi~e~s.~. gum. 3. ~qr~qm~8q*ca~ql and ~4qa~8q"~b~i~6q6~c~o~qi Latitude~& ~se C. Coastal Mangroves This eo~o~ay~r~qw~qm C. Coastal ~4qC~qm~ss~qA:m~2qA~- T~qh~qis ~&~qm~e. which intertidal in this r~e~qg~qi~c~in ~qi~s~v~ery~a~r~0qW~ac~e~qd ~qmd possesses sand dunes and coastal ~ql~qla~0qW ~qb~a~n experiences regular flooding on either a daily, contains numerous ~c~a~qi~c~a~r~e~o~u~s~1p~p~2p~~le such as low rainfall ~q(~qW to ~3~0 inch" per monthly~, or seasonal basis, has low wave Porolit~qh~o~n and L~i~th~Gt~qI~mu~e~a~ql~qma~s wall as ~ yea] and action~, ~and is dominated by a variety of salt- green algae with calcareous particles such a large amounts of humus in the soil. F~qx~o~ql~4q*~c~2qW tolerant trees. such as the red ma~n~qar~o~v~qe Hal~ime~qda~, and ~n~u~qm~a~r~ous~i~q6~8qf~8qf~8qi~er green. red. succession ~i~s Am~-~, re~su~qlt~u~:~8qV In the presence ~q(Rh~i~z~arp~qho~ra mangle). black ma~n~0qp~ove andbrow~n~al~q8ae of a number of ~s~e~-~nal stages ~a~q( community (A~vicen~ni~a n~i tida~q). ~p~nd the white ~R~L~N-~qW~q@~w development. Dorni~nan~i~v~e~8qWa~U~q6~q6 Includes Croup ~8qM~q-~qSub~q,~q;~q;~qj~q;~6q1 ~qb~8qr~qZ~2q=~s mid-grasses (2 to 4 feet ~tal~ql~q@ such as (I~agunc~ru~qla~ria racemo~sa). It is also an Important habitat for large pop~l~ulat~ion~s of A. su~qb~qad~qal Har~qd~qbott~ams: This system is A~~mophil~la. Agropyron. and C~alam~ov~ilfa~. tell fish. invertebrates. and birds. This type of characterized by a co~n~qn~ql~i~qdated layer of solid grasses ~q1~5 to 8 feet tall), such as Sp~a~rt~qi~n~e~. and ecosystem can be found from ~r~. ~i &I Florida rock or la~i~0qv pieces of rock (neither of biotic trees such as the willow (S~e~ql~qix ~0qW~qL ~8qd~qw~er), to ex~tr~emj~e south Texas to the islands of the Origin~q) and is found in association with (Prunu~qs sp.~q1 and cottonwood ~4qR~qb~4qp~qu~qh~qw Western Pacific. ~0qgeomorpholo~0qg~0qical features ~qs~qu~08qa as submarine delt~qo~qld~qes)~q. This area Is divided Into four D. In~qt~qartidal Beaches. This ~qec~qa~qf~qf~qy~qs~qt~qa~q-~8qM has canyons and fjord~qs.and Is ~qa~qsual~4qly covered regime with the following ~44q"~0q@~8q@~4qa~6qj strand a distinct biota of microscopic an~qi~6q=~8q1~q5~q, with assemblages ~4q9~8qf ~qsp~qonges~q.-sea fans, vegetation~q: bacteria. and unicellular algae along with bivai~q%~qres. hard ~qc~qar~8qals. t~qurLicat~qe~qs~q. and other 1. A~qr~qc~qf~qi~qc~8q/Bo~qir~qea~8ql~q: Elymu~qs; microscopic crustaceans, mollusks~q. and attached organisms~q. A ~q#~24q*~04qf~04qf~04qi~qca~qnt fe~qstu~2qm ~qof ~Z Northeast/West; A~2qmmopbila. worms with a detritus-ba~qsed nutrient cycle. estuaries in many pads ~qOf4h~qe ~8qw~6qw~04qM Is ~qt~0qh~qe 3. Southeast/Cu~4ql~0qf: Uniola; and This area also includes t~4qh~qe driftline oyster ~qr~qe~20q4 a type of x~qa~0qh~08q&~08qW ~8qb~4qi~qrdbot~qt~qo~2qm 4. ~N~qf~qid~q-A~qtlanti~qc/Cul~0qf Sparti~qna patens. communities found at high tide levels on the Composed of assemblages of ~qor~qg~qa~qn~qis~qu~qi~6qs D. Coa~qs~qia~0ql T~4qa~qnd~qi~qtr This ~qe~qc~qo~qs~qly~qstem. which beach. The dominant organisms In this (usually bivalves), It ~ql~qa,~qu~qs~qu~qa~4qU~qY ~4qh~qx~6qm~0qd near an is found along the Arctic and Boreal ~qoc~ql~2qut~qs of ecosystem include cr~qU~qi~qltaceans such as the estuary's mouth in a zone of moderate wave North America. is char~qac~qt-~qf~qir~qed by low mole crab (Emerita)~q. amphipod~qs ~q' action. salt content and turbidity. If ~8ql~0qi~36qOt temperatures~q. a shaft Snowing season and ~0q(Gammaridae), Shoot crabs (Ocy~0qpo~8qde), and levels are sufficient's covering of ~.~q-- some permafrost~q. Producing a low. tr~2qwles~qs bivalve molluscs such as the c~qoquin~qs ~4qf~32qb~qo:~4qnax~0q] microscopic and attached ~qn~qu~qwro~qscc~q1~q)~qlc~q.~qa~4q1~q8~qae~q. mat community made up of~6qm~qo~qs~qa~8qf~8qt lichen& and surf clams (Spisula and Mactra). such as kelp, may also be found. ~0 Federal Register / Vol. ~5~5~ No. 141 / Monday. July 23, 1990 Rules and Regulations 29961 B~, Subtid~al ~qSo~qf~qtb~o~tt~o~i~rs: Major sea and without significant freshwater barrier islands, broken at intervals by inlets. characteristics of t~ql~@~is ecosystem are an i~r~iflow. Water circulation is limited. resulting These bars may be either deposited offshore ~qw~nconsolid~a~ted layer of fine particles of silt. ~L~n a poorly flushed. relatively stagnant body or may be coastal dunes that have become sand. clay. and gravel, high h~,6 ~1~qdro~gen sulfide cf water. Sedimentation is rapid with a great isolated by recent sea level rises. level,, ~a~r~idanaerc~qli~c cod~i~l~io~m, often potential for basin shoaling. Shores are often 4. Tectonic Estuary: These are coastal e~x~@s~t~i~n~g below the surface. Ma~c~rophy~te~s are gently sloping and marshy. indentures that have formed ~t~qh~cu~@h tectonic ~qZ ~0 e~i~, A, er sparse or absent~. although a layer of 7. Perched Coc~s~!~c~ql W~et2~c~,-~7~qd~s: Unique to processes such as sl~ippa~;e along a fault line ~be~n~!~@:c m~icro~al~gae ~may be present if light Pac~i~E~,~.~- islands. th~@~is w~e~qland ~tvpe, found (San Francisco B~ay), fo~l~d~:~n~S~, or movement of le~-~, e~ls a~r~a ~su~@~f~'cie~n~t. The faunal community is above sea level in volcanic crater re~m-na~n~t~3~, ~&~.e earth's bedrock. often ~%~%~r~l~th a large i.~!-~qflow ~d~orni~n~a~ted ~qbv a diverse population of deposit forms as a result of poor drainage of freshwater. ~,~ee~d~e~rs inc~qh~ud~in~g pc~qlychaet~es, bivalves, and ~characterist~Ic~s ~of ~t~he crater rather than from ~5. Volcanic Estuary These coastal bc~d~Je~s ~qb~-~.~;~.~-owi~-~,g crustaceans. sedimentation. Floral assemblages exhibit of open water. a res~i~ql~t of volcanic pr~oc~es'~e~s. ~- C~. S~ub~i~qda~ql P~,~.-~:~7ts: T~qh~;s system ~is found ~Ln d~i~st~4r~ict z~ona~t~;on w~qh~:~l~e the faunal ~. ~a~re depressions or craters that have ~qdi~re~5~c~s~t relatively shallow water (less ~Lhan 8 to ~1~0 cc~ns~t~i~lue~nts may inc~l~.;de freshwater. and/or subsurface connections w~it~q@~i ~L~he meters) below mean low tide. It is an area of brackish. and/or marine species. Example; ocean and may or may not have ~s~'~4q@`~qf~-ce e~x~*~a~t~me~lv high p~rir~n~a~ry production that A~u~nu~'u Island, Ame~dc~an Sar-oa~. c~o~n~t-~i~nuity with streams. These forma ~tio~n~s po~vides~"foo~ql and refuge for a d~iv~~.rsi~ty of 8. A~nc~h~i~a~qh~ne Systems: These small coastal ~re ~u f~a~-~unal groups, especially juvenile and adult e~@~@posu~r~es of brackish water form in lava a, ~n~ique to island areas of volcanic origin. ~qr~l~s~q@. and in some regions, manatees and sea depressions or elevated fossil reefs. have ~. C. Inlet Type: Inlets in various forms are an L~r~i ~. ~t~ur~@les~. Along the North Atlantic and Pacific only a subsurface connection to ~t~qhe ocean. l~e~g~ral part ~a~,~' the estuarine en~v~i~rc~r~u~ne~nt. as coasts, the seagrass Zos~tera marina but show tidal fluctuations. Differing from they regulate. to a certain extent. the velocity predominates. In the South Atlantic and Gulf true estuaries in having no surface continuity and magnitude of tidal exchange, t~qhe degree coast areas, Thalass~ia and Dipla~r~thera with streams or ocean. ~th~is system is of ~m~L~xing, and volume of discharge to the sea. predominate. The grasses in both areas characterized by a distinct biotic community There are four major types of inlets: support a number of epiphytic organisms. dominated by benthic algae such a~s 1. Unrestricted. An estuary with a wide Class ~q1~q1~q-Ph Rh~izoclon~ium, ~q&~,~a mineral encrusting unrestricted inlet typically has slow currents, ~qysical C~qhar~acteri~s~tc~s ~qSchlzoth~rix~. and the vascular plant Ruppia no significant turbulence, ~a~nd receive the full Group ~q1~-~--Ceologic ffect of ocean waves and local disturbances A. Basin Type. Coastal water basins occur maritima. Characteristic fauna. which exhibit e~4q@~rhich serve to modify the shoreline. These in a variety of shapes. sizes, depths, and a high degree of endemicity. include the estuaries am partially mixed. as the open mol.lusks T~qhe~cdoxu~s ne~glectu~3and T. appearances. The eight basic types discussed cariosus, the small red shrimp Metabe~taeus mouth permits the incursion of marine waters below will cover most of the cases: lohe~na and ~qfialocaridi~na rubra. and the fish to considerable distances upstream. I. Exposed Coast. Solid rock formations or Eleotris san~qdwicensi~s and ~qKuh~qlia depending on the tidal amplitude and stream heavy sand deposits characterize exposed ~sandvicensus~. Although found throughout the gradient. ocean shore fronts. which are subject to the world, the high islands of the Pacific are the ~2. ~qRes~tr~ic~te& Restrictions of estuaries can full force of ocean storms. The sand beaches only areas within the U.S. where this system xist in many forms: bars. barrier islands. ell are very resilient although the dunes lying ~s~pi~qM sills, and more. Restricted inlets result can be found. just behind the beaches are fragile and easily B. Basin Structure.- Estuary Basins may in decreased circulation. more pronounced damaged. The dunes serve as a sand storage result from the drowning of a river valley longitudinal and vertical salinity gradients, area, making them chief stabilizers of the (coastal plains estuary). The drowning of a and more rapid sedimentation. However. if ocean shorefro~nt. the estuary mouth is restricted by 2~. She~qf~qte~red Coast- Sand or coral barrie~qm glacial valley (fjord), the occurrence of an depositional features or ~qla~ndC~qI03ures.~the .es.~'provide sheltered offshore barrier (b~ar-,bounded estuary), some incoming tide may be held back until it bu~qUt up~f by n:tural forr tectonic process (tectonic estuary). or areas inside b~a~r or reef where the volcanic activity (volcanic estuary). suddenly breaks forth into the basin as a ecosystem takes on many characteristics of ~1. Coastal plains estuary. Where a,.: tidal wive, ~qor bore. Such currents exert confined wa~qters~q-abunda~qnt ~qm~a~r~i~n. g~qm~ses, profound ~qi~8qf~8qfect~s an the nature of the shellfish. and ~qjuvea~qf~qle fish. Wat~qir movement drowned valley consists mainly-of a single substrate. ~qiurbid~i~t~qi~,~_ a~qnd blota of ~t~qhe~*estua~r~*y. ~q13~reduced. with the ~Eon~seque~nt effects of ~c~qh-nnel. the form of the basin is fairly ~r~m~t~n ~& P~e~r~qma~nen~k Permanent inlets are usually pollution being ~qm~q6~r~e~s~qi~qvere ~qI~n this a~r~va~qi than regular, fo I ~qi simple ~C~q@~qist~a~ql plains , ~@ ~in exposed coastal areas. ~estua~0qg~. When a channel is flooded with ~0~q]~q@pc~q@~ql~te the m~q6~qu~qt~qh~qi~q;~qf major rivers and numerous tributaries, an irregula~qi estuary pe~qf~qini~t riv~qe~q@~i~qWa~ter 1~q6 flow into the sea..' 3, Bar. Bays are larger confined bodies of M~I~M water that are open to the s~qea and receive results. Man~qy~e~~st~uarie~s of the ea~8q6te m"~"U~ni~t~ed Sed~qimen~tat~qi~q6~q@ ~qan~qa~qd~qe~q@osit~qlo~n are all~. strong tidal flow. When ~stratif~qic~atio~4 is States are of this type. A. ~qTemp~o~r~a~t~4qi~qt~4qM~i~a~r~qM~qit~t~e~n~f~q). Te mporary pronounced, the Hushing action is augmented 2~. Fjord- Estuaries that fo in elo~n~qgate~2q4 ~qi~nlet~s~.~qi~qm formed by storms and frequently ~rm by river discharge. Bays vary in size and in steep headlands that alternate with deep U- shift position. de~qpe~nd~qi~qr~qi~qg on* tidal Dow, the type of shore~qfro~nt. ~ I shaped valleys resulting from glacial ~sc~our~qi~r~l~qg depth of the sea and sound waters, the 4. Em~qb~oymen~t A confined coastal water are called fjords. They generally possess frequency of storms, and the amount of body with narrow~.~r~q6str~qic~t~qid inlets and with rocky floors or very thin veneers of sediment~. litt~Or~al transport. a ~s~i~g~r~d~qf~qic~ant freshwater ~I~n~qDow, ca~*~n be with deposition' generally being restricted to D. Bottom C~o~qn~0q@s~qlti~o~j~v~*~qthe bottom classified as an embay~qme~n~t. ~qI~q%e~se areas the head where the main river enters. composition of estuaries attests to the have more restricted inlets than bays, are Compared to total fjord volume~. river vigorous, rapid. and complex sedimentation usually smaller and ~sh~qA~qll~ower~. have l~o~qw tidal discharge is small. But many fiords have pr~ocesse3ch~aracteristic of most coastal action. and are subject to~'~qiedime~ntation. restricted tidal ranges at their mouths. due to regions with low relief. Sediments are ~S. Tidal River~q- Ile lower reach of a coastal ~qs~;~qlls. or upreaching sections of the bottom derived through the hydrologic processes of ~qr~qiveri3~qreferred to as ~4qi tidal river. ~4qT~4qhe which limit free movement of water, often ~qe~6qmi~qon. transport and deposition carried on coastal water segment extends from the sea making river flow large with respect to the by the sea and the stream. or estuary into which the river discharges to tidal prism. The deepest port~qio~qn3are in -the ~q2. Sand: Near estuary mouths, where the a point as far upstream as there is significant upstream reaches. where maximum depths predominating forces of the sea build spits o~0qr salt content in the water, forming a salt front. can range from ~qS~8qW m to 1200 m. while sill other depositional feah~qLre~qs~q. the shores and A combination of tidal action and freshwater depths usually range from 40 m to 1~q50 m. substrates of the estuary are sandy. ~08qne outflow makes tidal rivers weI~0ql~q-~0qf~0qlushed. The 3. Bar-bounded Estuary.- These result from bottom sediments in this area are usually tidal river basin may be a simple channel or a the development of an offshore barrier. such coarse. with a graduation toward finer complex of tributaries, small associated as a beach strand, a line of barrier islands. particles in the head of the estuary. ~0qI~qn the e~8qmbayments marsh~0qfronts, tidal flats. and a ~2qmef formations, a line of moraine debris, or-'- head region and other zones of reduced flow, variety of others. the subsiding remnant3of a deltaic lobe. The fine silty sands an deposited. Sand ~qS. Lagoon: Lagoons are con~0qf~0qlned coastal basin is often partially exposed at low tide deposition occurs only in wider or deeper bodies of water with restricted Wets t~qo the and is enclosed by a chain of offshore ba~qr3or regions where velocity ~q13redu~qced. ~0 Fe~d~r~~l Register / Vol. 55, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, ~1~9~qM / Rules and Regu~la~Lion~ Mu& At the base level of a stream near freshwater influx and a lack of Mons tidal respect to the soil, is subject to considerable its mouth. the bottom is typically composed exchange because of the typically narrow fluctuation. of loose ~T~nud~s, silt and organic detr~itus as a inlet ~c~qm~qme~ctin~g the lagoon to the sea. b. G~r~o~tm~a~lw~a~te~r This is we ~t r contained in result of erosion and transport from ~t~qhe upper Circ~u~qlat~qk~x~L whose major driving force is the rocks below the water table. is usually of stream reaches and organic d~ec~o~qm~p~o~d~i~t~ion. wind. is t~qhe major limiting factor in biological mor~s uniform volume than v~adose water, and just inside the estuary en~tr~ance~, the bottom productivity within lagoons. generally follows the topographic relief of the contains considerable quantities of sand and B. Tides. This is the most important land. being high below hills and sloping into mud. which support a rich fauna. Mud flats. ecological factor in an estuary, as it affects valleys. comm~a~n.~q1y built up in estuarine basins. are water exchange and its vertical range composed of loose, coarse, and fine mud and determines the extent of tidal flats which Group ~4qM~q-C~qhemic~al sand. often dividing the original cha~n~n~e.. may be exposed and submerged with each A. Salinity- This reflects a complex mixture 3. Ro~c~ql~L Rocks usually occur in areas tidal cycle. Tidal action against the volume ~of of salts, the most abundant being sodium where the stream runs rapidly over a steep river water discharged into an estuary results chloride, and is a very critical factor in the gradient with its coarse materials being in a complex system whose properties vary distribution and maintenance of many derived from the higher elevations where the according to estuary structure as well as the estuarine ~ar~qg~a~nism~s Based on salinity. there stream slope is greater. The larger fragments sic ~J~2 magnitude of river flow and tidal range. Tides are two b~e estuar; ~a types and eight are usually found in shallow areas near the are usually described in terms of their cycle different salinity zones (expressed in parts stream mouth. and their relative heights. In the United a of per ~thou~sand-~-pp~t). 4~. Oyster shell: Throughout a major portion States, tide height is reckoned on the b~e is 1. Positive e~stu~ar~qr. This is an estuary in of the world, the oyster reef is one of the average ~ql~ow tide, which is referred to as ~' hich the freshwater influx is sufficient to most significant features of e~atuaries~. usually dat~ta~qm Ile tides, although complex. falls into maintain mixing~, resulting in a pattern of being found near the mouth of the estuary in three main categories: change ~qIn increasing salinity toward the estuary mouth~. a zone of moderate wave action. salt content. ~1. Diurnal: This refers to a daily It is characterized by low oxygen and turbidity. It Is often a major factor in water ~8qk~%~%~q4 that ~c~a~n be observed along the ~mo~qd~lf~q@yin~qg e~s~tuar~qime current systems and shoreline. There Is one high tide and one low concentration In the deeper w~at~er~e and sedimentation. and may occur " an tide per day. considerable organic content in bottom elongated island or peninsula oriented across ~q2~. ~qs~e~n~t~qi~qd~qiu~r~n~a~ql~- This refers to a t~w ~qd~@~1~q1~q7 sediments. the main ~curT~ent. or may develop parallel to rise and ~2qU~qR ~qi~n water that can be observed ~0qL Negative e~stuar~0qr. This Is found In the direction of the ~em~m~ent. along the s~qhore~qh~qm ~qp~qa~qd~cu~ql~qm~qi~qy a~nd ~re~qg~qi~o~x~w~6 when estuary Croup ~q1~q7-Hydro~qgraph~qic ~1 3. w~qi~n~qd~ql~qS~to~n~v rider. This refers to evaporation may exceed freshwater Inflow, A. C~qi~qmu~ql~4qWa~qw Circulation patterns am the ~qf~ql~uct~u~a~4qf~4qt~qm In w~a~ler elevation to wind and resulting ~qi~n ~qi~n~icr~ea~s~ed salinity In t~qh~e ~appe. result of the combined influences of storm events, when Influence of lunar tides part of t~qh~e basis. especially if t~qh~e estuary freshwater flow, tidal action. wind and is less. mouth is re~str~qic~qi~ed ~so that Mal flow In o~c~e~e~0qWc forces, ~qm~8qW ~*~a~qm many functions: C. P~qr~e~s~qhw~a~f~e~r According to nearly ~a~qg t~qh~e inhibited. These are typ~qk~a~qRy ~Y~4qM salty nutrient transport plankton di~spers~a~qL definitions advanced~. it is inherent that an ~q(~qh~qy~qper~qha~ql~qh~4qW~, moderately oxygenated at ecosystem flushing. salinity control, water ~e~qMar~qles need freshwater. w~8qWch is drained depth. and possess b~ut! sediments that are mix~qi~n~q& and more. from the land and measurably dilutes poor In organic content. 1. S~t~r~u~Li~2qf~2qied~- This is typical of estuaries seawater to create a brackish condition. ~& ~qS~a~ql~8qwy zones ~q[exp~t~e~qmed in Ap~q4~qt with a strong freshwater i~sd1~ax and is Freshwater ~qi~ente~r~s an estuary " runoff from a. Hyperhall~u~e~- .greater ~qt~han 40 ppL ~!ommonly found in bays formed from the land either from a surface ~and~ql~qm b. ~qEuh~al~qlne - ~4 ppt to 30 ppL ~ drowned" river valleys. ~qn~ord~a~. and other subsurface source. ~c~.~@~4qM~x~o~qh~al~qln~qw ~3~0 ~qp~qpt to ~0~.~3 ~qP~qF~L ... deep ba~si~q" Then is a net movement of ~@~-~L Sw~qf~a~qw water T~qld~s~'~ql~s water ~qS~owt~ng ~o~qm ~q(~1~q) lax ~2qW~qk~qw-~qgreat~er ~lhaz~qi~q3 ~'~qD pp~t but fres~qb~ura~t~qa outward at the top layer and the ~qw~o~uz~i~qil~qf~n~'~lhe~@ form ~of stream~L~ql~a~0qW less than the a~qd~2q*~qe~nt ~s~u~qba~ql~qi~n~s ~a~qm saltwater at the bottom ~ql~a~qy~e~z~. ~qie~qs~qi~i~8q@~qin a variation ~qf~R ~qY~qE~Zr~o~2qf~2qf Is ~qd~e~qpe~nde~st ~qj~qi~qf~qm~-~,~2q&~w~@ (2) ~qPo~ql~qy~qbal~ql~n~e~q-~qW Apt to ~1~8~q"~L ~ ~- --- net outward transport of surface ~=~q~qga~ni~am~a nature of~4~qh~e ~t and net ~qi~nw~e~p~qd ~tra~qmp~ort ~o~qf bottom degree ~c ~qi~8qH~qn~8qA~j~a~-~C~1~qi~q1 ~6q=~-~,~-~q4e~qg~e~ql~2q@~qa~qI~l~yp~qi~a~nd (4) O~ql~ql~8qph~a~qf~qt~n~q" pp~t to ~O~J ~qP~P~L ~r~gan~ism~& ~2qm~qi~t~qn~qt India develop tic ~ci~o~qo~6q@ and d. L~qim~ee~tic: ~qI~qm~e than ~0~q4 pp~L 2~. ~qA~qb~n-sf~r~at~i~q)~T~Ied~- ~qEs ~~h~u~i~qii~qe~.~aIof this ~q4~4q" an ~qi~n~qi~qf~qf~q]~, I ~, If ~r~q@~qA ~- ~-~4qa~0qp~qb~2qf~2qt~6qs~qi~q@ ~2qAL ~-pH ~8qS~es~qh~o~qw ~q7~qi~qd~s Is ~qi~mdic~ativ~e of th~s pre found when water movement Is sluggish and Th~qis~qr~ef~e~qi~s~l~ot~qb~qa~' mineral richness of a-awns w~a~qf~qt~a~t and fell flushing rate Is low, ~qaltho~qa~6qO there maybe ~qFI~8qA~, i t~6qWh~qis~, b~6q0h~e Into d~u~qa~a ~qi~m~aln~2qS~t~s~q6~o~qd~qi~s~qi sufficient ~c~1~r~cu~qla~t~io~n~to~qp~r~ov~id~e'~qthel~qm~qis for soil and stored b~qe~ql~o~v~qi 1. Aoki: waters with a pH of less ~qt~han ~qU~. a high carrying capacity. This is common to distribution of subsur~qfac~i~qi~'w~a~ter depends an'- ~e- 2~. C~qk~c~g~u~qmeutra~qk A condition where ~T~qhe ~qpH ~: hallow emb~ayments and bays lacking a local c~qa~qm~a~t~e~. topography. and the porosity ranges from 5.5-to 7.4. ~shwater from land and I ~ql~qh~t~qy of the underlying sods ~qa~nd 3. A~qlka~ql~qhw~. Waters ~v~qAt~qli a PH ~2q*~1~6~te~r ~th~im drainage. rocks. There are two main subtypes of 7.4. 3. La~qgoon~a~ql. An estuary of this IIa surface water ~, ~. ~. ..I- ~: ~1p~p~p~2p~p~ w~st t~qh ~- ~qj~o~qH ~q[FR Doc. ~0qW~- I PH ~20-~4qf~4qt ~6qW am Is ~O~r~-~qi~qn ~i~L ~- ~a ~.~1~qW ~1 ed7 characterized by low rates of water . ~qb~i~qT~a~s~e w~a~f~,~q@~. movement resulting from a Ina of ~s~qi~s~u~qffi~cant ab~o~v~qi ~2q%~a weer table. ~I~ts volume w~8qf~8qt ~D~q"~qM ~qW~qM ~qN~X-4~04~1 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX D I Biogeographic Classification and Typology I I I I - I I I I I I Appendix D Biogeographic Classification and Typology Biogeographic Classification Carolinian Region 6. Northern Carolinas Typology Class I - Ecosystem Types Group I - Shorelands A. Maritime Forest-Woodland 3. Temperate Deciduous Forest Biome B. Coast Shrublands 2. Southeast Areas C. Coastal Grasslands 3. Southeast/Gulf Groups 11 A. Coastal Marshes D. Intertidal Beaches E. Interticlal Mud and Sand Flats F. Interticlal Algal Beds Group 111. A. Subtidal Hardbottoms B. Subtidal Softbottoms C. Subtidal Plants Class 11 Group I - Geologic A. Basin 2. Sheltered Coast 3. Bay 5. Tidal River B. Basin Structure D-1 I. Coastal plains estuary 3. Bar-bounded estuary C. Inlet Type 2. Restricted 3. Permanent D. Bottom Composition 1. Sand 2. Mud 4. Oyster shell Group 11 - Hydrographic A. Circulation 2. Non-stratified B. Tides 2. Semidiurnal C. Freshwater 1. Surface water 2. Subsurface water Group III A. Salinity 1. Positive Estuary 3. Salinity Zones c. Mixohaline (1) Mixoeuhaline (2) Polyhaline B. pH Regime 2. Circumneutral D-2 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX E I Species List I I I I I I I I I I Appendix E Species List Over the past 25 years, extensive work on the -systematics of the biota of the NI/WB NERR has been carried out, resulting in a number of papers published in various scientific journal. In addition, lists and description of the biota are to be found in the books listed below. Because of the extensive number of species found in this site, we have not listed them here but refer you to these references. An Annotated Checklist of the Biota of the Coastal Zone of South Carolina by Richard G. Zingmark. 1978. 364 pp. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. Seashore Animals of the Southeast by Edward E. Ruppert and Richard S. Fox. 1988. 429 pp. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. Shallow-Water Maiine Benthic Macroinvertebrates of South Carolina: Species Identification, Community Composition and Symbiotic Associations by Richard S. Fox and Edward E. Ruppert. 1985. 330 pp. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. The following is a list of the number of species in the major taxonomic categories. TAXONOMIC GROUPING NUMBER OF SPECIES Mammals (including marine) 74 Phytoplankton 832 Benthic Marine Algae 358 Marine Fungi 14 Vascular Plants 1494 Saltmarsh Vascular Plants 66 Porifera 26 Cniclaria 123 Ctenophora 5 Rhynchocoela 15 Gastrotricha 26 Kinorhynca 5 Nematoda 139 Polychaeta 279 Hirudinea 23 Marine Mollusks 385 Chelicerata 8 Copepoda 68 Cirripedia 27 E-1 Amphipoda 152 Isopocla 76 Mysiclacea 3 Decapoda 272 Tardigrada 4 Phoronicla 6 Bryozoa 42 Entoprata 8 Echinodermata 21 Chaetognatha 12 Hemichordata 2 Chondrichthyes 36 Osteichthyes 344 Turtles 3 Birds 430 E-2 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX F I Ecosystems I I I I I I I I I I Appendix F Ecosystems Based on the NERRS classification categories, the NI/WB NERR represents a diverse number of ecosystem types. Over the 22 years that the Baruch Institute has been functioning, over 875 papers have been published by Baruch Associates and many of these papers represent studies on some aspect of the NI/WB NERR site. These studies range from the ecosystem level of organization to molecular studies. A few examples of ecological models of the Reserve are represented in Figures 7, 8, and 9. The principal types of ecosystems represented in the Reserve are listed below along with a brief description. Coastal Marshes Wetland areas dominated by grasses (especially Spartina), sedges, rushes, cattails, and other species. These areas are subjected to semidiumal tides. This is a dominant ecosystem on the Reserve. High salinity and low salinity marshes occur. This is an important habitat for estuarine and marine species. Salt marshes have an extremely high rate of primary productivity. Carbon produced by Spartina is highly important in the trophic dynamics of estuaries and coastal waters. Intertidal Systems Various types of intertidal communities are represented in the Reserve, including beaches, mud and sand flats, algal beds, and attached vegetation. Many species are restricted to a specific type of intertidal habitat. This is a dynamic area which is subjected to tidal changes, marked differences in oxygen content, fluctuating thermal regimes, and predation pressures. Organisms living in these intertidal systems exhibit a wide range of morphological, physiological, behavioral, and genetic adaptations. Submerged Bottoms A gradient of bottom types ranging from mud to sand to shelly substratum is represented in the Reserve. Different biotic assemblages are associated with each type. In addition to these substrata, a submerged vegetation ecosystem is also present. F-1 Upland Systems Coastal grasslands and a limited amount of pine edaphic forest are also included in the Reserve. A number of small islands are located within the boundary of the Reserve. One of these islands, Pumpkinseed Island, is one of the best known nesting sites for coastal birds in the southeast. F-2 Figure 6The original North Inlet ecosystem model (Summers and McKellar 1979). This model divides North Inlet into three major subsystems and is still a valid conceptualization. Future enhancements will subdivide this system further by focusing on sediment dynamics, subtidal interactions and plant/animal interactions across subsystems. Figure 7The dynamics of nitrogen and carbon exchange within the tidal creeks of North Inlet were simulated with this model by Childers and McKellar (1987). This model addressed the importance of tidal exchange. Future modeling will emphasize internal exchanges such as, the effects of subtidal remineralization an water column nutrient concentrations and export to marsh and coastal habitats. CARBON BUDGET (gC/M2 /yr) FOREST STREAMS NETI PRIMARY PRODUCTION NET PRIMARY PRODUCTION MARSH MACRO MCRO PHY70- MACRO- SPAR71NA ALGAE ALGAf PLANKTON ALGAE Rod I / MEMO 1125 so ? 63 135/ 1 50\0 t67 Ir 250 540 SPARTINA TIDAL OUTWEL LING MARSH 33 OX 128 -- 00- CREEKS 0 F-W (BURIAL) 52 P= 0-22 3 ox 600 195 LU RE.SPIRATION 1125\ Figure :8. A carbon budget of the North Inlet estuarine system. Values on the outer box are area w ighted for the entire marsh-estuarine system. Values on the inner boxes a:a area weighted for habitat area (i.e., marsh and water column). F-4 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX G . Nomination Letter I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix G. mitlt Turaffita CARROLL A. CAMPBELL, JR. Off i-ce of tke (6j3Vrrnvr POST Orrice Box 11369 GOVERNOR COLLIM*131A 29211 January 24, 1990 Mr. John Knauss Under Secretary of Oceans and Atmosphere National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 5128 14th and Constitution Ave., NW Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Secretary Knauss: on behalf of the State of South Carolina, I am pleased to submit the attached site nominations and applications for preacquisition assistance for the North Inlet - Winyah Bay National Estuarine Reserve Research System (NERRS) and the Ashepoo - Combahee- Edisto (ACE) Basin National Reserve Research System. 'Because these two sites represent different biogeographic classification categories, the State of South Carolina is recommending the sites be managed independently. It is my understanding the State of South Carolina is eligible for up to $50,000 in matching funds for each of the two sites based on proposed changes to your funding regulations. This effort is the result of a large number of dedicated individuals and organizations from both the* private and public sector working together toward common goals. I have personally visited both the North Inlet - Winyah Bay site and ACE site and find them to be of unequaled value due to their pristine quality and diverse and abundant assemblage of natural habitat. The sites should make a significant contribution to the National Estuarine Reserve Research System. I look forward to your favorable review of this application. With best regards, I am 1 erely Car am el Jr. Governor CACjr/tad Attachment 1%erely Car el Jr. G-2 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX H I NOAA Approval of Nomination I I I I I I I I I I I LINIT20 STATUS DIRPARTMIENT OF COMMRACU Appendix H. 'rho Undue =*Orovary #oe Oceans and Atmosphere D.C. 20230 MAR 2 7 IM Honorable Carroll A. Campbell, Jr. Governor of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Dear Governor Campbell: The National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has reviewed and approves the proposal to nominate the North inlet- Winyah Bay and the Ashepoo-Combahee-Edisto (ACE) Basin for inclusion in the National Estuarine Reserve Research System (NERAS). We commend the South Carolina Coastal Council, South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department and trie Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Resources for developing an excellent nomination report that responds accu-ately and substantially to each of the review criteria established in the National Estuarine Reserve Research system regulations. NOAA and South Carolina agree that because the two sites represent different biogeographical classification categories, as identified in the NERRS regulations (Section 921-3), each site will be managed independently, Therefore, each site will be eligible for full Federal funding identified in the regulations. Included within the site nomination package Is an application for Federal assistance to prepare a draft management plan and draft environmental impact statement, NOAA's Marine and Estuarine Management Division is reviewing-the application and will work closely with the South Carolina Coastal Council to ensure that the review is conducted in an expeditious and through manner. I look forward to continued progress in-the development of the ACE Basin National Estuarine Research ReservA and the North Inlet-Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Sincerely, John A. Knauss A"_ IV H-1 ( THE ADMINISTRATOR I I I I I I I I APPENDIX I Public Education Program - Summary of 1990 Activities I I I I I - I I I I I I Appendix 1. Public Education Program Summary of 1990 Activities The diverse Public Education Program offered through the Belle W. Baruch Foundation's Bellefield Nature Center and the Continuing Education Program of the Baruch Institute, University of South Carolina provides many valuable services to the Georgetown community and the State of South Carolina: 1 In 1990, a record number of 35,000 people were served by the education programs sponsored by the Belle W. Baruch Foundation and the Baruch Institute, University of South Carolina. 2. The effects of Hurricane Hugo on programs were still observed in 1990. Visitation to the Bellefield Nature Center and attendance in some programs were down over 1989, primarily as a result of the depressed tourism economy inflicted by the hurricane. Even so, the Nature Center had 15,445 visitors during 1990 and more than 100 people visited the Center on peak days during the summer months. 3. More than 2,900 school children from around the state participated in field studies of salt marsh, pond and forest ecosystems conducted on the Baruch Foundation's property, Hobcaw Barony, in 1990. This figure is the highest recorded since the Nature Center opened in 1982. 4. More than 2,100 children from Georgetown County schools were served by Nature Centers 1990 Outreach Program. 5. Outreach activities also extended to local civic organizations. Programs were presented to over 220 people at their meetings and another 12,000 people were reached through staff members' participation in community events. 6. The education program has gained statewide recognition for its excellence in teacher education in the area of marine science. During 1990, 46 teachers from Williamsburg and Georgetown Counties participated in graduate level marine science courses at Hobcaw Barony. Another 150 teachers participated in workshops presented by Nature Center staff members. Table I Public Tours of Hobcaw Barony 1990 Group Numbers Thursdays General Tour - Open to the public 611 1-16 Brunswick Bird Club 13 3-6 John Wesley Methodist Church 14 Charleston Christian Family 9 McKissick Museum :@-23 1 14 4-17 S=ter Conservation District 8 5-1 Sumter Conservation District 13 5-8 Tilly Swamp Baptist Church 12 5-11 SC Maps Teachers 40 5-22 St. Lukes Lutheran Church 14 8-31 Extra-General Tour 14 9,7 Extra-General Tour 14 9-11 Extra-General Tour 13 9-18 Newcomers Club 14 9-25 Extra-General Tour 13 9-29 Discovery Place 35 10- 3 0 Watercolors Workshop 14 11-6 Watercolors Workshop 14 11-20 Sealviist Res ort L4 TOW 893 1-2 Table 2 Field Studies at the Bellefield Nature Center 1990 D= Group Progl:am No. 1-8 Manning Middle School Plantadon- Heritage 12 2-6 Happy Time Pre-School Exploring.The Nature Center 48 .2-26 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is Plantation Heritage 25 3-1, Socastee Elementary School Exploring'A Pond Community 28 3-2 Socastee High School Salt Marsh, Ecology 17 3-6 Waccamaw Elementary - Conway Salt Marsh. Ecology 31 3-7. Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is PlantationHeritage 30 3-9 St. Andrews Catholic School Plantation Heritage 24 3- 10 Girl Scouts, Myrtle Beach Exploring The Nature Center 20 3-16 Maryville Elementary School PlantadonHeritage 31 3-16 Headstart Exploring The Nature Center 67 3-20 Maryville Elementary School Coastal Forest Ecology 29 3-21 Bamberg District #1 Coastal Forest Ecology 16 3-2 1 Pawleys Island Montessori Exploring @The Nature Center 10 3-22 Andrews Primary Exploring A Pond Community 24 3-23 Myrtle Beach High School Coastal Forest Ecology 11 3-28 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is Plantation Heritage 30 3-27 McDonald Elementary School Life In a Forest 26 3-30 Andrews Academy Exploring A Pond Community 32 3-30 Ferrurn College Careers in Outdoors Ed. 29 3-30 Cub Scouts, Pack 346, Gtwn. Exploring'The Nature Center 12 7 4-10 Charleston Day School Exploring @A Pond Community 25 4- 11 Waccamaw Academy Coastal F@rest Ecology 13 .4-12 Charleston Day School Life In A Forest 30 4-13 Heritage Friendship Life In A Forest 10 4-17 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. ExploringA. Pond Community 29 4-18 Andrews Academy Life In A Forest 13 449 Kensington Elementary School Exploring -A Pond Community 29 4-.19 Florence School District #3 Expl@ring "'Me Nature Center 24 1-3 4-20 Waccamaw Elementary - Conway Exploring A Pond Community 28 4-24 Archibald Rutledge Academy Exploring A Pond Community 19 4-25 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Exploring A Pond Community 30 4-26 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Exploring A Pond Community 30 4-2 7 Greenwood Elementary Exploring The Nature Center 62 4-27 Andrews Academy Coastal Forest Ecology 19 5-1., Deep Creek Elementary Sch. Exploring The Nature Center 55 5-2.. Fleming Middle School Exploring A Pond Community 55 5-3@ Andrews Primary Exploring A Pond Community 24 5-3. Saluda Elementary Exploring The Nature Center 25 5-8 Sullivan's Island Elementary Exploring A Pond Community 27 5-9. Kensington Elementary Exploring A Pond Community 26 5-11 McDonald Elementary Exploring The Nature Center 23 5-15 Myrtle Beach Primary Exploring'A Pond Community 23 5-16 Heathwood Hall Plantation Archeology 64 5-1 7 Maryville Elementary Exploring A Pond Community 25 5-21 Kingstree Jr. High School Exploring The Nature Center 35 5-2.2 Conway Middle School Coastal Forest Ecology 21 5-25 Kingstree Jr. High School Exploring The Nature Center 40 5-25 St.Andrews Catholic School Coastal Forest Ecology 18 5-28 St. James- Santee Elementary School Exploring The Nature Center 40 5-3.0 Conway Christian School Pond Community/Forest Ecol 35 6-5 Adventure Camp (GC Rec. Dept) Exploring A Pond Community 27 615.- Lou The Loggerhead Club Beach Creatures, Reptiles 107 8/21 (Waccamaw House Camp) Alive, & Backbone 6-20 Clemson Univ. Graduate School Belle's Legacy & BNC 14 6-21 USC Coastal Carolina Jr. Scholars Belle's Legacy & BNC 39 6-25 Chapin Memorial Library Exploring A Pond Community 33 6-29 Bright Beginnings Day Care Exploring The Nature Center 18 6-29 L.G. Bahai Institute Exploring The Nature Center 16 7-31 Marion County Elementary Teachers Exploring A Pond Community 19 8-t USC - Coastal Carolina Env. Ed. Class Salt Marsh Ecology 13 8-1.1 L.G. Bahai Institute Exploring -The Nature Center 23 9-26 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Exploring The Nature Center 40 9-26 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Exploring The Nature Center 30 9-27 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Salt Marsh Discovery 25 1-4 9-29 Parents For the Academ. Gifted Rocky Intertidal Zone 37 10-3 Mc Donald Elementary School Exploring A Pond Community 25 10-4 Andrews Primary Exploring A Pond Community 23 10-5 Archibald Rutledge Academy Plantation Archeology 17 10-9 Archibald Rutledge Academy Plantation Archeology 26 10-10 Maryville Elementary Plantation Archeology 24 10-11 West Conway Middle School Salt Marsh Ecology 22 10-16 Byrnes Academy Exploring The Nature Center 10 10-16 Happy Times School Exploring The Nature Center 51 10-17 Kingstree Jr. High Salt Marsh Discovery 25 10-23 Waccarnaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Life In A Forest 26 10-24 Charleston Day School Exploring A Pond Community 27 10-25 Forestbrook Elementary Plantation Heritage 25 10-30 Myrtle Beach High School Salt Marsh Ecology 32 10-31 Leesville High School Salt Marsh Ecology 12 11-1 Waccamaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Exploring A Pond Community 24 11-2 Southside Middle School Plantation Archeology 15 11-6 Chabad Academy Life In A Forest 30 11-7 Waccamaw Elementary - Conway Plantation Heritage 27 11-7 Byrnes Academy Plantation Heritage 15 11-8 Browns Ferry Elementary Exploring The Nature Center 65 11-8 C.E. Murray Plantation Archeology 8 11-9 Andrews Academy Salt Marsh Ecology 21 11-9 Archibald Rutledge Academy Salt Marsh Ecology 18 11-13 Lake City Elementary Salt Marsh Ecology 31 11-15 Pawleys Island Montessori Salt Marsh Discovery 8 11-16 Jonakin Middle School Coastal Forest Ecology 28 11-20 Beck Middle School Plantation Archeology 14 11-21 Maryville Elementary School Plantation Archeology 27 11-27 Lake City Elementary Salt Marsh Ecology 31 11-28 St. Andrews Salt Marsh Discovery 18 11-28 Lake City Elementary Exploring The Nature Center 21 11-29 Waccarnaw Elementary - Pawleys Is. Life In A Forest 25 11-29 Lake City Elementary Exploring The Nature Center 18 12-4 Woodland Park School Life In A Forest 28 11-5 Waccamaw Elementary - Conway Exploring A Pond Community 30 1-5 11-5 Woodland Park School Life In A Forest 28 12-6 Rosemary Elementary Exploring The Nature Center 61 12-7 Archibald Rutledge Academy Coastal Forest Ecology 24 12-7 Woodland Park School Life In A Forest 25 12-12 Williamsburg Academy Exploring A Pond Community 35 12-14 Myrtle Beach FEgh School Salt Mars h Ecology Total 2937 1-6 Table 3 Special Programs At The Bellefield Nature Center 1990 Date Proglarn Numbe 1/28-2/2 Ecology and History of the SC Lowcountry 29 2-13 Bluebird Houses 8 4-25 Springtime In Tle Salt Marsh 14 4-28 Hidden Heroes of the Salt Marsh 21 5-16 Gyotaku 25 5-20 Hidden Heroes of the Salt Marsh 20 5-30 Beach Night Life 25 6-19 Nature Walk In The Hobcaw Forest 3 6-20 Reptiles Alive 51 6-26 Nature Walk In The Hobcaw Forest 2 6-27 Beach Creatures 53 6-28 Beach Night Life 25 7-3 Summertime In The Salt Marsh 10 7-5 Pond Life 8 7-11 Whose Got The Backbone? 14 7-17 Nature Walk In The Hobcaw Forest 5 7-18 Reptiles Alive 13 7-23 Hobcaw Open House 93 7-24 Nature Walk In The Hobcaw Forest 10 7-25 Beach Creatures 6 7-30 Beach Night Life 17 8-1 Whose Got The Backbone? 12 8-7 Nature Walk In The Hobcaw Forest 2 8-8 Reptiles Alive 12 8-15 Beach Creatures 18 9-19 Autumn In The Salt Marsh 8 9-27 Beach Night Life 24 10-3 Coastal Birding 14 10-24 Hobcaw's Woods After Hugo 10 11-13 Winter Birds Total 565 1-7 Table 4 Short Courses 1990 Course Title No of Part' Southern Traditions 21 Life in and Around an Oyster Reef 6 Rice Along the River: Georgetown's Plantation Heritage 37 Migration and Ecology of Songbirds 21 Coastal Ecology Classes for Children (5 sessions) 64 African Influences on Southern Culture 11 Loggerhead Sea Turtles 23 History and Architecture of Downtown Georgetown 7 Light Tackle Fishing in Coastal Waters 14 Man*aging the Coast for the 90's and Beyond 6 Shelling Along South Carolina Shores 22 1 Total 237 1-8 Table 5 Activities and Number of Participants 1988, 1989, and 1990 AcdviW- 1990 Visitors To Bellefield Nature Center 16,636 17,324 15,445 Field Studies 2,457 2,619 2,937 Public Tours 1,027 775 893 Outreach Program 1,353 2,258 2,121 Special Programs 665 650 565 Speaking Engagements 225 361 223 Events - Festivals 10,000 5,500 12,000 Public Lectures, Seminars, Forums 89 250 115 Short Courses 269 262 237 Teacher Education 138 46 196 Totals 32,859 30,045 34,732 1-9 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX J Publications I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix J Publications Since 1969 891 scientific papers and books have been published by Associates of the Baruch Institute. A complete list of publications is available upon demand. Included below is a partial listing of selective publications resulting from the National Science Foundation funded Long-Term Ecological Reserch project. J-1 LTER PUBLICATIONS PUBLISHED OR IN PRESS (Updated 7119/91) Abs. Allen, D.M. and D.L. Barker. 1985. Spatial and temporal distributions of grass shrimp larvae (Palaemonetes spp.) in a high salinity estuary. Am. Zool. 25(4): 63A (abstract) 803. Allen, D.M. and D.L. Barker. 1990. Interannual variability in larval fish recruitment to estuarine epibenthic habitats. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 63: 113-125. Abs. Allen, D.M., E.R. Blood, and F.J. Vemberg. 1985. Long-Term Ecological Research at the North Inlet Estuarine-Marsh Ecosystem, South Carolina: Program description and trend analysis. Estuaries 8(2B):33A 810. Archambault, J.A. and R.J. Feller. In press. Die[ variations in gut fullness of juvenile spot, Leiostomus xanthurus (Pisces). Estuaries Th. Asmus, M. 1991. Ecological modeling of the North Inlet marsh-estuarine system, South Carolina: Models of year-to-year variability. Ph.D. Dissertation. Marine Science Program, University of South Carolina. 723. Asmus, M. and H.N. McKellar, Jr. 1989. Network analysis of the North Inlet saft marsh ecosystem. Chapter 9. In: Network Analysis in Marine Ecology. Methods and Applications. F. Wulff, J.G. Field, and K.H. Mann (eds.). Coastal and Estuarine Studies. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 496. Bildstein, K.L. 1983. Age-related differences in the flocking and foraging behavior of white ibises in a South Carolina saft marsh. Colonial Waterbirds 6: 45-53. 549. Bildstein, K.L. 1984. Age-related differences in the foraging behavior of white ibises and the question of deferred maturity. Colonial Waterbirds 7: 146-148. 690. Bildstein, K.L. 1987. Energetic consequences of sexual dimorphism in white ibises. Auk 104: 771-775. 806. Bildstein, K.L. 1990. Status, conservation, and management of the scarlet ibis, Eudocimus ruber, in the Caroni Swamp, Trinidad, West Indies. Biol. Conservation 54: 61-78. 853, Bildstein, K.L., G.T. Bancroft, T.J. Dugan, D.H. Gordon, R.M. Erwin, E. Nol, LX Payne, and S.E. Senner. In press. Approaches to the conservation of coastal wetlands in the western hemisphere. Wilson Bull. 825, Bildstein, K.L., E.R. Blood, and P. Frederick. In press. The relative importance of biotic and abiotic vectors in nutrient transport in a South Carolina, USA, estuarine ecosystem. Estuaries 782, Bildstein, K.L. and I.L. Brisbin, Jr. 1990. Lands for long-term research in conservation biology. Conservation Biol. 4(3): 301-308. 573, Bildstein, K.L. and M.W. Collopy. 1985. Escorting flight and agonistic interactions in wintering northern harriers. Condor 87: 398-401. 883. Bildstein, K.L., P.C. Frederick, and M.G. Spaulding. In press. Feeding patterns and aggressive behavior in juvenile and adult American flamingos (Phoer)icopterus ruber ruber . Condor J-2 710. Bildstein, K.L., S.G. McDowell, and I.L. Brisbin. 1989. Consequences of sexual dimorphism in sand fiddler crabs: Differential vulnerability to avian predation. Animal Behav. 37: 133-139. 580. Bildstein, K.L., W. Post, P. Frederick, and J.W. Johnston. 1990. Freshwater wetlands and the breeding ecology of white ibises in coastal South Carolina: A lesson for scarlet ibis conservation, p. 57-63. In: Proc. First Intl. Workshop on the Conservation of Scarlet Ibises. P.C. Frederick, L.G. Morales, A.L. Spans, and C.S. Luthin (eds.). ICBP, NY. 790. Bildstein, K.L., W. Post, J. Johnson, and P. Frederick. 1990.. Freshwater wetlands, rainfall, and the breeding ecology of white ibises in coastal South Carolina. Wilson Bull. 102: 84-98. 888. Blood, E.R., P. Anderson, P.A. Smith, K.A. Ginsberg, and C. Nybro. In press. The effects of Hurricane Hugo on coastal soil processes. Biotropica 579. Blood, E.R., W.T. Swank, and T. Williams. 1989. Precipitation, throughfall, and sterriflow chemistry in a coastal loblolly pine stand, p. 61-78. In Freshwater Wetlands and Wildlife, Conf.- 8603101, DOE Symposium Series #61, R.R. Sharitiland J.W. Gibbons (eds.), USDOE Office of Science and Technology Information, Oak Aldge, TN. 773. Blood, E.R., R. Van Dolah, K. Davis, H. McKellar, T. Siccherman, and C. Connelly. 1989. Charleston Harbor water quality, p. 25-35. In: Charleston Harbor: Issues, Resources, Status, and Managment. NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series No. 16. US Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Estuarine Programs Office, Washington, D.C. 847. Blood, E.R. and F.J. Vemberg. In press. Characterization of the physic al, chernical, and biological conditions and trends in Winyah Bay and North Inlet Estuaries: 1970-1985. In Characterization of the Physical, Chemical, and Biological Conditions @--nd Trends in Three South Carolina Estuaries. SC Sea Grant Consortium, NOAA. Abs. Blood, E.R. and T. Williams. 1988. Land-water interfaces: The eff ect of salt water intrusion on blackwater stream chemistry. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. (supple.) 69(2): 75. Th. Bollinger, M.S. 1983. Radium in a salt marsh - tidal inlet system. M.S. Thesis. Department of Geological Sciences, University of South Carolina. Th. Bollinger, M.S. 1986. Radium isotopes in salt marshes and estuarine environments. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Geological Sciences, University of South Carolina. TH. Borrero, F. 1991. Environmental correlates of intraspecific variation in physiological performance, energy balance, and allocation among populations of the marine mussel Geukensia demissa across the intertidal zone. Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Biology , University of South Carolina. 769. Boumans, R. and F.H. Sklar. 1990. A polygon-based spatial (PBS) model for simulating landscape change. Landscape Ecol. 4(2/3): 83-97. Th. Bradley, P. 1991. The influence of oxygen, salinity, and sulfide concentration on the kinetics of NH4+uptake in Spartina afterniflora. The physical characteristics of salt marsh sediments: Ecological implications. Ph.D. Dissertation. Marine Science Program, University of South Carolina. 842. Bradley, P.M. and J.T. Morris. In press. The influence of salinity on the kinetics of NH,, uptake in Spartina afterniflora. Oecologia J-3 Th. Childers, D. 1985. Development and analysis o! a simulation model of saltmarsh water column dynarr@ics. M.S. Thesis. Marine Science Program, University of South Carolina. Abs. Childers, D. and H.N. McKellar, Jr. 1985. Nutrient variability and subsystem interactions in a southeastern saltmarsh. Estuaries 8(2B): 117A (abstract). 613. Childers, D. and H.N. McKellar, Jr. 1987. A simulation of salt marsh water column dynamics. Ecol. Model. 36: 211-238. 616. Chrzanowski, T.H., J. Spurrier, R. Dame, and R. Zingmark. 1986. Processing of microbial biomass by an intertidal reef community. Mar. Ecol. EM Ser. 30: 181-189. 585. Chrzanowski, T.H. and R. Zingmark. 1986. Passive filtering of microbial biomass by Spartina alterniflora. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 22: 545-557 736. Chrzanowsld, T.H. and R.G. Zingmark. 1989. Bacterial abundance, biomass, and secondary production along a forest to ocean landscape gradient. J. EXD- Mar. Blol. Ecol. 125(3): 253- 266. Abs. Chrzanowski, T.H., R.G. Zingmark, and J. Spurrier. 1985. Dynamics of microbial populations in saltmarsh transport studies. Proc. 85th Annual Meeting Am. Soc. Microbiol. p. 233. 715. Clements, L.A., K.T. Fielman, and S.E. Stancyk. 1988, Regeneration by an amphiurid brittlestar exposed to different concentrations of dissolved organic material. J. Lx2. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 122: 47-61. 668. Collopy, M.W. and K.L. Bildstein. 1987. Foraging behavior of northern harriers wintering in southeastern salt and fresh water marshes. Auk 104: 11-16. 802. Costanza, R., F.H. Sklar, and M.L. White. 1990. Modeling coastal landscape dynamics. BioScience 40(2): 91-107. 526. Coull, B.C. 1985. The use of long-term biological data to generate testable hypotheses. Estuaries 8(2A): 84-92. 575. Coull, B.C. 1985. Long-term variability of estuarine meiobenthos. An 11 -year study. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 24: 205-218. 596. Coull, B.C. 1986. A new species of Pseudobradya and the rediscovery and correction of Quinquelaophonte capillata (Wilson) (Copepoda: Harpacticoida). Trans. Am. Microsc. Soc. 105: 121-129. 618. Coull, B.C. 1986. Long-term variability of meiobenthos: Value, synopsis, hypothesis generation, and predictive modelling. Hydrobiologia 142: 271-279. 700. Coull, B.C. 1988. Ecology of the marine meiofauna, p. 18-38. In: Introduction to the Study of Meiofauna. R.P. Higgins and H. Theil (eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 797. Coull, B.C. 1990. Are members of meiofauna food for higher trophic levels - Revisited. Trans. Am. Micros. Soc. 109(3): 233-246. 576. Coull, B.C. and B. Dudley. 1985. Dynamics of meiobenthic copepod populations: A long-term study (1973-1983). Mar. Ecol. Pro-q. Ser. 24: 219-229. J-4 Th. Coutinho, R. 1987. Ecology of macroalgae in North Inlet Estuary, SC. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Biology, University of South Carolina. Abs. Coutinho, R. 1984. Diel variations in photosynthetic responses to light by seaweeds. J. Phycology 20 (supple): 8. Abs. Coutinho, R. 1986. The effects of interactions of light and nitrogen on growth and photosynthesis vs. irradiance (P-1) curves of Ulva curvata. J. Phycology (supple.) 704. Coutinho, R. and Y. Yoneshigue. 1988. Diurnal variation in photosynthesis vs. irradiance curves from 'sun' and 'shade' plants of Pterocladia capillaca (Gmelin) Bomet et Thuret (Gelidiaciaceae, Rhodophyta) from Cabo Frio, Rio de Janerio, Brazil. J. EXD- Mar. Biol. Ecol. 118: 217-228. Abs. Coutinho, R. and R. Zingmark. 1984. Taxonomy, distribution, and seasonality of the macroalgae of North Inlet, SC. J. Phycology 20 (supple.): 55. Abs. Coutinho, R. and R. Zingmark. 1986. Modelling primary production of macroalgae in estuaries. 11. Phycology (supple.) 663. Coutinho, R. and R. Zingmark. 1987. Diurnal photosynthetic responses to light by macroalgae. ,!. Phycology 23: 336-343. Abs. Coutinho, R. and R. Zingmark. 1987. Ecology of macroalgae in North Inlet, SC. J. Phycolo-gy 23 (supple.): 5. 793. Crosby, M.P. 1988. Using bioenergetics of intertidal oyster populations as a measurement of anthropogenic perturbations to shellfish growing waters. J. Shellfish Res. 7: 199-200. 730. Dame, R. 1989. The importance of Spartina afterniflora to Atlantic Coast estuaries. Rev. Aauat. @c[. 1(4): 639-660. 639. Dame, R., T. Chrzanowski, K. Bildstein, B. Kjerfve, H. McKellar, D. Nelson, J. Spurrier, S. Stancyk, H. Stevenson, F.J. Vemberg, and R. Zingmark. 1986. The outwelling hypothesis in North Inlet, South Carolina. Mar. Ecol. Proo. Ser. 33: 217-229. 840. Dame, R.F., N. Dankers, T. Prins, H. Jongsma, and A. Small. In press. The influence of Mussel beds on nutrient cycling in two Dutch estuaries. Estuaries 615. Dame, R.F. and P. Kenny. 1986. The variability of Spartina afterniflora primary production in the euhaline in North Inlet Estuary. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 37: 70-80. 855. Dame, R., J. Spurrier, T. Williams, B. Kjerfve, R. Zingmark, T. Wolaver, T. Chrzanowski, H.N. McKellar, and F.J. Vemberg. 1991. Annual material processing by a saft marsh-estuarine basin in South Carolina, USA. Mar. Ecol. Proo. Ser. 72: 153-166. Abs. Dame, R.F., R. Zingmark, D. McCollum, and T. Wolaver. 1984. Nitrogen uptake and release by oyster reefs: A possible cause of heterotrophic control of autotrophs. Limnol. Oceanoar. 29 (supple.): 73. 720. Dankers, N., R.F. Dame, and K. Kersting. 1989. Oxygen consumption of mussel beds in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Scienta Marina 53: 473-476. 800. De Santo, T.L., S.G. McDowell, and K.L. Bildslein. 1990. Plumage and behavioral development of nestling white ibises. Wilson Bull. 102: 226-238. J-5 839. Dobson, W.E. and S.E. Stancyk. In press. Morphology and chronology of early disc regeneration in the brittlestar Microphiopholis gracillima (Stimpson) (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea). Zoomorphology 830. Dobson, W.E., S.E. Stancyk, L.A. Clements, and R.M. Showman. 1991. Nutrient translocation during early disc regeneration in the bdttlestar.Microphiopholis gracillima (Stimpson) (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea). Biol. Bull. 180: 167-184. 676. Edwards, D. and B.C. Coull. 1987. Autoregressive trend analysis: An example using long-term ecological data. Oikos 50: 95-102. 705. Edwards, D. and J.J. Berry. 1987. The efficiency of simulation-based multiple comparisons. Biometrics 43: 913-928. Abs. Edwards, D.G., R.J. Feller, W.K. Michener, and S.E. Stancyk. 1988. A multidimensional exploration of zooplankton and macrobenthos temporal dynamics in a coastal estuary. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. (supple.) 69(2): 126. Th. Eiser, W.C. 1984. Sheet flow as a component of total water flux in an estuarine marsh. M.S. Thesis. Marine Science Program, University of South Carolina. 612. Eiser, William C., and B. Kjerfve. 1986. Marsh topography and hypsometer characteristics of South Carolina saft marsh basin. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 23(5): 595-605. 755. Ellis, M.J. and B.C. Coull. 1989. Fish predation on meiobenthos: Field experiments using juvenile spot (Pisces). J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 130: 19-32. Th. Ember, L. 1985. Sources of sedimentary organic matter in 5pArtLina-dominated saft marshes. M.S. Thesis, Marine Science Program, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Th. Eskin, R.A. 1985. Population dynamics and ecology of the meiobenthic nematodes of North Inlet, South Carolina. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Biology, University of South Carolina. 687. Eskin, R.A. and B.C. Coull. 1987. Seasonal and three-year variability of meiobenthic nematodes at two estuarine sites. 'Mar. Ecol. Proa aer. 41: 295-303. 624. Feller, R.J. 1986. Immunological detection of.Mercenaria mercenarla in a predator and preparation of size-class specific antibodies. Themeliger 28(4): 341-347. 763. Feller, R.J. In press. Dietary analysis of Penaeid shrimp: The immunoassay approach. Front. Shrimp Res. W.J. Dougherty (ed.). Elsevier. 854. Feller, R.J. In press. Potential applications of immunoassays in studies of flatfish recruitment. Neth. J. Sea Res. 796. Feller, R.J., B.C. Coull, and B.T. Hentschel. 1990. Meiobenthic copepods: Tracers of where juvenile Leiostomus xanthurus (Pisces) feed? Can. J. Fish. Aguat. Sci. 47: 1913-1919. 659. Feller, R.J. and R.B. Ferguson. 1988. Quantifying stomach contents using immunoassays: A critique, p. 295-303. In: Immunochemical Approaches to Estuarine, Coastal and Oceanographic Questions. C.M. Yentsch, F.C. Mague, and P.K. Horan (eds.). Springer-Verlag Coastal Lecture Note Series. J-6 789. Feller, R.J., B.T. Hentschel, and R. Ferguson. 1990. Immunoelectrophoretic assay of mixed species meals: An example using Penaeid shrimp, p. 588-596. Proc. 24th European Marine Biology Syposium. M. Barnes (ed.) Aberdeen University Press. 701. Feller, R.J. and R.M. Warwick. 1988. Energetics. Chapter 13. p. 181-196. In: Introduction to the Study of Meiofauna. R.P. Higgins and H. Theil (eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Abs. Fielman, K.T. and E.R. Blood. 1988. Land-water interfaces: The effect of syzygy on soil ion balance. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. (supple.) 69(2): 132. 852. Fielman, K.T., S.E. Stancyk, W.E. Dobson, and L.A.J. Clements. In press. The effects of arm and disc loss on regeneration by Microphiopholis gracillima (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea) in nutrient-free seawater. Mar. Biol. Th. Flavier, A. 1991. Macroalgal colonization of hard substrates at North Inlet. M.S. Thesis. Department of Biology, University of South Carolina. 578. Fox, R.S. and E.E. Ruppert. 1985. Shallow-water Marine Benthic Macroinverlebrates of South Carolina: Species Identification, Community Composition, Symbiotic Associations. Belle W. Baruch Ubrary in Marine Science, No. 14. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. 841. Frix, M.S., M.E. Hostetler, and K.L. Bildstein. In press. Intra- and interspecis differences in the responses of sand (Uca pugilato and mud (Uca pugnax fiddler crabs to simulated avian predation. J. Crust. Biol. 767. Gardner, L.R. 1990. Simulation of the digenesis of carbon, sulfur, and dissolved oxygen in salt marsh sediments. Ecol. Monogr. 60: 91-111. 779. Gardner, L.R. 1990. Simulation of the diagensis of carbon, sulfur and dissolved oxygen in salt marsh sediments. Ecol. Monoar. (microfiche) See ESA Supplementary Publication Service document #8903. i-1F. 884. Gardner, L.R. 1990. The role of rock weathering in the biogeochemical cycling of phosphorus. Blocieochemistry 11: 97-110. 522. Gardner, L.R. and C. Gorman. 1984. The summertime net transport of dissolved oxygen, salt, and heat in a salt marsh basin, North Inlet, SC. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Science 19: 331-339. 646. Gardner, L.R. and 1. Lerche. 1987. Simulation of sulfate dependent sulfate reduction using Monod kinetics. Math. Geol. 19: 219-239. 775. Gardner, L.R. and 1. Lerche. 1990. Simulation of sulfur digenesis in anoxic; marine sediments using Rickard kinetics for FeS and FeS2 formation. Computer Geosci. 16: 441-460. 817. Gardner, L.R., W.K. Michener, E.R. Blood, T.M. Williams, D.J. Lipscomb, and W.H. Jefferson. 1991. Ecological impact of Hurricane Hugo - Salinization of a coastal forest. Journal of Coastal Research 8: 301-317. 829. Gardner, L.R., W.K. Michener, B. Kjerfve, and D.A. Karinshak. 1991. The geomorphic effects of Hurricane Hugo on an undeveloped coastal landscape at North Inlet, SC. J. Coastal Res. 8: 181-186. J-7 582. Gardner, L.R., P. Sharma, and W. Moore. 1987. A regeneration model for the effect of fiddler crab burrowing on 210 Pb profiles in salt marsh sediments. J. Environ. Radioactivity 5: 25-36. 759. Gardner, L.R., L. Thombs, D. Edwards, and D. Nelson. 1989. Time series analyses of suspended sediment concentrations at North Inlet, South Carolina. Estuaries 12(4): 211-221 728. Gardner, L.R., T.S. Wolaver, and M. Mitchell. 1988. Spatial variations in the sulfur chemistry of salt marsh sediments at North Inlet, SC. J. Mar. Res. 46: 815-836. 707. Gawlik, D.E., M.E. Hostetler, and K. Bildstein. 1988. Napthalene mothballs do not deter mammalian predators at red-winged blackbird nests. J. Field,Ornithol. 59(2): 189-191. 835. Haddad, K.D. and W.K. Michener. In press. Design and implementation of acoastal resource Geographic Information System: Administrative considerations. In: Proceedings, Coastal Zone '91. Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management/ASCE. OTMagoon et al. (eds.). 795. Hentschel, B.T. and R.J. Feller. 1990. Quantitative immunoassay of the proventricular contents of white shrimp (Penaeus setiferous Linnaeus): A laboratory study. 4. Ex . Mar. Biol. Ecol. 139: 85-99. Th. Hunter, J. 1985. Dietary analysis of commercially important juvenile shrimp (Penaeus aztecus [Ives] and P. setiferus [L.1) in saltmarsh tidal creeks. M.S. Thesis, Department of Biology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. 652. Hunter, J. and R. Feller. 1987. Immunological dietary analysis of two penaeid shrimp species from a South Carolina tidal creek. J. ExD. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 107: 61-70. 843. Hwang, Y.H. and J.T. Morris. In press. Evidence for hygrometric pressurization in the internal gas space of Spartina afterniflora. Plant Physiol Th. Jefferson, W.H., Ill. 1990. Factors affecting abundance of mero- and holoplankton in a southeastern estuary. M.S. Thesis, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. 889. Jefferson, W.H., Ill., W.K. Michener, D.A. Karinshak, W. Anderson, and D.E. Porter. In press. Developing GIS data layers for estuarine resource management. Proc., GIS/LIS Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA. 754. Johnston, JW and K. Bildstein. 1990. Dietary salt marsh as a physiological constraint in white ibises breeding in an estuary. Physiol Zool. 63:190-207. 807. Johnson, W.S., D.M. Allen, M.V. Ogburn, and S.E. Stancyk. 1990. Short-term predation responses of adult bay anchovies, Anchoa mitchilli, to estuarine zooplankton availability. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 64: 55-68. Abs. Kenny, P.D., W.K. Michener, and D.M. Allen. 1988. Factors affecting settlement of the American oyster (Crassostrea virginica in a high salinity southeastern estuary. NatI. Shellfish Assoc. 822. Kenny, P.D., W.K. Michener, and D.M. Allen. 1990. Spatial and temporal patterns of oyster settlement in a high salinity estuary. J. Shellfish Res. 9: 329-339. 427. Kjerfve, B. 1982. Calibration of estuarine current crosses. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 15: 553-559. 1-8 587. Kjerfve, B. 1984. Hydrographic considerations in estuarine outwelling studies: An example and definitions. p. 37-47. In: Productivity of the Mangrove Ecosystem: Management Implications. Ong Jin Eong and Gong Wooi-Khoon (eds.). UNESCO/UNDP and Universiti Sains Malaysia. 570. Kjerfve, B. 1986. Circulation and salt balance in a well-mixed estuary. p. 22-29. In: Physics of Shallow Estuaries and Bays. Springer-Verlag. 319. Kjerfve, B. and H.N. McKellar, Jr. 1980. Time series measurement of estuarine material fluxes. p. 341-357. In: Estuarine Perspectives. V.S. Kennedy (ed.).. Academic Press, NY. 433. Kjerfve, B., J.A. Proehl, F.B. Schwing, H.E. Seim, and M. Marozas. 1982. Temporal and spatial considerations in measuring estuarine water fluxes. p. 37-51. In: Estuarine Comparisons. V.S. Kennedy (ed.). Academic Press, NY. 532. Kjerfve, B. and H.E. Seim. 1984. Construction of net isopleths in cross sections of tidal estuaries. J. Mar. Res. 42: 503-508. 337. KjerIve, B., L.H. Stevenson, J.A. Proehl, T. Chrzanowski, and W.M. Kitchens. 1981. Estimation of material fluxes in an estuarine cross-section: A critical analysis of spatial measurement density and errors. Limnol. Oceanoqr. 26: 325-335. 654. Kjerfve, B. and T.G. Wolaver. 1988. Sampling optimization for studies of tidal transport in estuaries. Am. Fish. Soc. Svm. 3: 26-33. 885. Kratz, T.K., B.J. Benson, E.R. Blood, G. Cunningham, and R.A. Dahlgren. In press. The influence of landscape position on temporal variability in four North American ecosystems. Am. Midlands Naturalist 879. Leibowitz, S., F.H. Sklar, and R. Costanza. 1990. Perspectives on Louisiana wetland loss modelling, p. 729-754. In Freshwater Wetlands and Wildlife. R.R. Sharitz and J.W. Gibbons (eds.). US Dept. of Energy, Office of Health and Environmental Research. CONF-8603101. 747. U, Y., J. Morris, and D. Yoch. 1990. Chronic low-level hydrocarbon pollution stimulates plant growth and microbial activity in salt marsh microcosms. J. ADDI. Ecol. 27: 1579-171. 669. Marinelli, R.L. and B.C. Coull. 1987. Structural complexity and juvenile fish predation on meiobenthos: An experimental approach. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 108: 67-82. Th. Martin, J.A. 1990. Chemoreception by white shrimp, Penaeus setiferus: A laboratory and field study of thier response to bait. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. 86 p. Th. McDaniel-Firth, E. 1988. A four-year study of above and below ground decomposition of Spartina afterniflora. M.S. Thesis. Marine Science Program, University of South Carolina. 886. McKellar, H.N., Jr., E.R. Blood, T. Sicherman, K. Connelly, and J. Hussey. 1990. Organic carbon and nutrient dynamics, p. 47-99. In Physical and Ecological Characterization of the CHares1ton Harbor Estuarine System. R.F. van Dolah, P.H. Wendt, and E.L. Wenner (eds.). Final Report to South Carolina Coastal Council. Abs. McKellar, H.N., Jr., T. Jordan, D. Whigham, and D. Correll. 1986. A model of production, mortality, and decomposition in a brackish water cattail marsh. Proc, Eastern Simulation Conf. (abstract) J-9 875. McKellar, H.N., Jr. and W.D. Marshall. 1985. Aquatic. productivity and tidal nutrient exchanges in coastal wetland impoundments in South Carolina, P. 85-102. In Proc., 4th Coastal Marsh and Estuarine Management. C.F. Bryan, P.J. Swank, and R.H. Chabreck (eds.). LSU press, Baton Rouge,LA. 643. McLaughlin, R.A. and W.K. Michener. 1985. RS1: Stats, graphs, and data manipulation. Science Software Quarterly 2(2): 54-61. 692. Medeiros, C. and B. Kjerfve. 1988. Tidal characteristics of the Strait of Magellan. Cont. Shelf &es. 8(8): 947-960. 591. Michener, W.K. (ed.). 1986. Research Data Management in the Ecological Sciences. Belle W. Baruch Library in Marine Science, No. 16. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SO. 597. Michener, W.K. 1986. Data management and long-term ecological research. p. 1-8. In: Research Data Management in the Ecological Sciences. Belle W. Baruch Library in Marine Science, No. 16. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC. Th. Michener, W.K. 1990. Crassostrea virainica settlement and recruitment dynamics in the intertidal zone. Ph.D. dissertation. Marine Science Program, University of South Carolina. 778. Michener, W., D. Allen, E. Blood, T. Hiltz, B. Kjerfve, and F. Sklar. 1990. Climatic variability and saft marsh ecosystem response: Relationship to scale, p. 27-33. In Climate Variability and Ecosystem Response. Proc., Long-Term Ecological Research Workshop. D. Greenland and L.W. Swift. Jr. (eds.). USDA Forest Service General Tech. Rep. SE-65. Asheville, NC. 748. Michener, W.K., D. Cowen, and W.L. Shirley. 1989. Geographic information systems for coastal research. In: Proc., Coastal Zone '89 Conference. Sixth Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Managernin-VASCE. O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, D. Miner, L.T. Tobin, and D. Clark (eds.). Vol. 5: 4791-4805. 611. Michener, W.K., R.J. Feller, and D. Edwards. 1987. Development, management, and analysis of a long-term ecological research information base: Example for marine macrobenthos. p. 173-188. In: New Approaches to Monitoring Aquatic Ecosystems. American Society for Testing and MaterTa-51s, Philadelphia. 890. Michener, W.K. & K. Haddad. In press. Data administration. In: Proc., Symposium on Data Management for Inland and Coastal Field Stations. G.H. La6ff', J.J. Alberts, and J.B. Gorentz. (eds.). W.K. Kellog Biological Station, Michigan State University. 836. Michener, W.K., W.H. Jefferson, D.A. Karinshak, and C. Gilbert. In press. Incorporationg Global Positioning System technology into coastal mapping and research. In: Proceedings, Coastal Zone '91. Symposium on Coastal and Ocean ManagemenVASCE. _53. Magoon et al. (eds.). 874. Michener, W.K. and P.D. Kenny. In press. Spatial and temporal patterns of Crassostrea virainica (Gmelin) recruitment: Relationship to scale and substratum. J. Exr). Mar. Biol. Ecol. Abs. Michener, W.K., P.D. Kenny, and D.M. Allen. 1988. Factors Affecting settlement of the American oyster (Crassostrea virginica in North Inlet, SC. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. (supple.) 69(2): 232. 724. Michener, W.K. and B. Kjerfve. 1987. North Inlet, SC. p. 56-60. IN: The Climate of the Long- Term Ecological Research Sites. David Greenland (ed.). Occasional Paper No. 44. Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, CO. J-10 887. Michener, W.K., B. Kjerfve, L.R. Gardner, E. Blood, M. Cablk, W.H. Jefferson, D.A. Karinshak, and D.F. Spoon. In press. GIS assessment of large-scale ecological disturbances(Hurricane Hugo, 1989). Proceedings, GIS/LIS Annual Conference and Exposition. Atlanta, GA. 577. Michener, W.K., R.A. McLaughlin, and M.F. Marozas. 1985. Development of a data management system for long-term ecological research. Proc., SAS Users Group International. p. 468-471. 821. Michener, W.K., A.B. Miller, and R. Nottrott, (eds.) 1990. Long-Term Ecological Research Network Core Data Set Catalog. Belle W. Baruch Institute, University of South Carolina, Columbia. 340 p. 756. Miller, A.B., W.K. Michener, A. Barnard, and F.J. Vemberg. 1989. Publications of the Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research 1969-1989. Research Bibliography. Baruch Institute Technical Report 89-02. Columbia, SC. 718. Morris, J.T. 1988. Pathways and controls of the carbon cycle in saft marshes. p. 497-510. In: The Ecology and Management of Wetlands. Vol. 1. Ecology of Wetlands. D.D. Hook et al. (Wd's.). Croorn Helm, London. 733. Morris, J. 1989. Modelling light distribution within the canopy of the marsh grass Spartina alterniflora as a function of canopy biomass and solar angle. A2!j2. Forest Meteorol. 46: 349- 361. 844. Morris, J.T. In press. Effects of nitrogen loading on wetland ecosystems with particular reference to atmospheric deposition. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 834. Morris, J.T. and E. Haskin. 1990. A 5-year record of aerial primary production and stand characteristics of Spartina afterniflora. Ecology 71(6): 2209-2217. 823. Morris, J.T., B. Kjerlve, and J.M. Dean. 1990. Dependence of estuarine productivity on anomalies in mean sea level. Limnol. Oceanogr 35(4): 926-930. 809. Myers, P.E. 1990. Space versus other limiting resources for a colonial tunicate, Botrylloides leachii (Savigny), on fouling plates. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 141: 47-52. Abs. Nelson, D. 1982. Suspended particulate transport, North Inlet, South Carolina. Geol. Soc. Am. (abstract) 14: 575. Abs. Nelson, D. 1983. Suspended sediment transport, North Inlet, South Carolina. Geol. Soc. Am. (abstract) 15:103. Abs. Nelson, D. 1983. Resuspension and redistribution of sediments, North Inlet, South Carolina. Estuaries 6: 316. 826. Nehring, S., P. Jensen, and S. Lorenzen. 1990. Tube-dwelling nematodes: Tube construction and possible ecological effects on sediment-water interfaces. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 64: 123-128. 764. Ogburn, V., D.M. Allen, and W.K. Michener. 1988. Fishes, shrimps, and crabs of the North Inlet Estuary, SC: Results of a four-year LTER seine and trawl survey. Baruch Technical Report 88-01. 750. Ornes, W.H. and D.I. Kaplan. 1989. Long-term macronutrient status of tall and short forms of Spartina alterniflora in North Inlet Estuary, South Carolinw, USA. Mar. Ecol. Prog. aer.55: 63-72. J-11 709. Palmer, M.A. 1988. Epibenthic predators and marine meiofauna: Separating predation, disturbance, and hydrodynamic effects. Ecology 69: 1251-1260. 328. Palmer, M.A., B. Kjerfve, and F.B. Schwing. 1980. Tidal analysis and prediction in a South Carolina estuary. Contrib. Mar. Scl. 23: 17-23. 731. Quick, P. and T.L. De Santo. 1989. Flight speeds and energy requirements for white ibises (Eudocimus A!@@ flying to foraging sites. Auk 106: 141-144. 876. Pearlstine, L., H.N. McKellar, Jr., and W. Kitchens. 1985. Modelling the impacts of a river diversion on bottomland forest communities in the Santee River floodplain, SC. Ecol. Modell. 29: 283-302. 610. Petit, D.R. and K.L. Bildstein. 1986. Development of formation flying in juvenile white ibises (Eudocimus A!Ng). Auk 103: 244-246. 675. Petit, D.R. and K.L. Bildstein. 1987. The effect of group size and location within the group on the foraging behavior of white ibises. Condor 89: 602-609. 877. Pickett, J., H.N. Mckellar, Jr., and J. Kelley. 1989. Community composition, leaf mortality, and net primary production in a tidal freshwater marsh in South Carolina. in Freshwater Wetlands and Wildlife. R.R. Sharitz (ed.). Dept. of Energy Symp. Ser. No. 61, 5`SDOE Office of Sci. Tech. Inf., Oak Rldge, TN. 873. Pinckney, J. and R.G. Zingmark. In press. Effects of tidal stage and sun angles on intertidal benthic microalgal productivity. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ler. Th. Piyatiratitivorkul, S. 1988. The life history and bioenergetic relations in the grass shrimp, Palaemonetes RIL@ Holthuris. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Biology, University of South Carolina. Th. Powell, W.E. 1985. Groundwater flow patterns beneath a forest - high marsh transect at North Inlet, South Carolina. M.S. Thesis. Department of Geological Sciences, University of South Carolina. 881. Ring, S. and F.H. Sklar. 1989. Simulating the long-term impacts of coastal development and landscape changes on the ecology of the Waccamaw River, SC, p. 3581-3587. In Proc., Coastal Zone '89 Conference, 6th Symp. on Coastal and Ocean Management. O.T. Magoon et al. (eds.). Vol. 5. 838. Scholz, D.S., L.A. Matthews, and R.J. Feller. In press. Detecting selective digestion of meiobenthic prey by juvenile spot Leiostomus xanthurus (Pisces) using immunoassays. Mar Ecol. Prog. Ser. 309. Schwing, F.B. and B. Kjerfve. 1980. Longitudinal characterization of a tidal marsh creek separating two hydrographically distinct estuaries. Estuaries 3(4): 236-241. 464. Schwing, F.B., B. Kjerfve, and J.E. Sneed. 1983. Nearshore coastal currents on the South Carolina continental shelf. J. Geophys Res. 88: 4719-4729. 500. Schwing, F.B., B. Kjerfve, and J.E. Sneed. 1983. Sea Level oscillations in a saft marsh lagoon system. Anales del Instituto de Ciencias del Mar Y Limnol2gA 10(l): 231-236. J- 12 837. Service, S.K. and R.J. Feller. In press. Long-term trends of sublidal macrobenthos in North Inlet, South Carolina. Hydrobiologia 581. Sharma, P., L.R. Gardner, W.S. Moore, and M.S. Bollinger. 1987. Sedimentation and bioturbation in a salt marsh as revealed by Pb-210, Cs-137, and Be-7 studies. Limnol. Oceanogr 32(2): 313-326. 870. Shepherd, P. T. Crockett, T. De Santo, and K.L. Bildstein. In press. The impact of Hurricane Hugo on the breeding ecology of wading birds at Pumpkinseed Island, Hobcaw Barony, SC. Colonial Waterbirds 783. Sklar, F.H. and R. Constanza. 1991. The development of dynamic spatial models for landscape ecology: A review and prognosis, p. 239-288. In Quantitative Methods in Landscape Modeling. M.G. Turner and R.H. Gardner. (eds.). Springer-Verlag, NY. 882. Sklar, F.H., R. Costanza, D.L. Childers, E.B. DeBellevue, M.S. Jacobsen, T. Maxwell, an dM.L. White. In press. Developments in regional scale simulation and analysis: Case studies from coastal wetland ecosystems. In: Proc., International Geograph. Union. R.B. Singh (ed.) 880. Sklar, F.H., R. Costanza, and J.W. Day, Jr. 1990. Model conceptualization, p.625-658. In Wetlands and Shallow Continental WAter Bodies, Vol. 1. B.S. Patten et al. (eds.). SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague. Abs. Sklar, F.H. and S. Ring. 1988. Ecosystem modeling using graphic-oriented programming; An introduction to STELLA and the CLESS model. Ecological Society 2f America (supple.) 69(2): 298. 878. Sklar, F.H., M.L. White, and R. Costanza. In press. The Coastal Ecological Landscape Spatial Simulation(CELSS) model: User's guide and results for the Atchafalaya/Terrebone study area. NWRC open file report. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 647. Smith, L.D. and B.C. Coull. 1987. Juvenile spot (Pisces) and grass shrimp predation on meiobenthos in muddy and sandy substrata. J. Exr). Mar. Biol. Ecol. 105: 123-136. 703. Spurrier, J.D. and B. Kjerfve. 1988. Estimating the net flux of nutrients between a salt marsh and a tidal creek. Estuaries 11(l): 10-14. 595. Stancyk, S.E. and R.J. Feller. 1986. Transport of non-decapod larvae in estuaries: An overview. Bull. Mar. Sci. 39(2): 257-268. 385. Summers, J.K. and H.N. McKellar, Jr. 1981. The role of physical forcing functions in an estuarine model of carbon exchange with the sea. ISEM Journal 3: 71-101. 686. Swift, L.W. Jr., and E.R. Blood. 1987. Drought impact research at two LTER sites. Proc., Southeastern Drought Symp. SC State Climatology Office Publ. G-30. 725. Turner, M.G., R. Costanza, and F.H. Sklar. 1989. Methods to evaluate the performance of spatial simulation models. Ecol. Model. 48: 1-18. 623. Uncles, R.J. and B. Kjerfve. 1986. Transverse structure of residual flow in North Inlet, South Carolina. Estuaries 9: 39-42. 634. Vemberg, F.J. 1988. The function of a pristine estuarine ecosystem. p. 15-24. In: The Ecology and Management of Wetlands, Vol. 1. Ecology of Wetlands. D. Hook et al. (ed;-) Croorn Helm. j- 13 788. Vernberg, F.J., R.G. Zingmark, R.F. Dame, S.E. Stancyk, B.C. Coull, R.J. Feller, D.M. Allen, K.L. Bildstein, E.R. Blood, L.R. Gardner, T. Williams, F.H. Sklar, H.N. Mckellar, Jr., D. Childers, and W.K. Michener. 1989. Long-term ecological research on the North Inlet forest-wetlands-marine landscape, Georgetown, SC, p. 53-76. In: Barrier Island/Saft Marsh Estuaries of the Southeast Atlantic Ocean: Issues, Resources, Status and Management. NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series. No. 12. 708. Watwood, M.E., J. Fitzgerald, W.T. Swank, and E.R. Blood. 1988. Factors involved in potential sulfur accumulation in water and soil from a coastal pine forest. Bio-aeochemistry 6:-3-19. 713. Webster, J., E. Blood, K. Cummings, M. Gurtz, and R.E. Sparks. 1985. Long-term research in stream ecology. Bull. Eco. Soc. Am. 66: 346-353. Th. Whiting, G.J. 1985. Nitrogen cycling in saft marshes: Tidal and gaseous,exchanges. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Biology, University of South Carolina. 564. Whiting, G.J., H.N. McKellar, Jr., B. Kjerfve, and J.D. Spurrier. 1985. Sampling and computational design of nutrient flux from a southeastern US saftmarsh. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 21(3): 273-286. 637. Whiting, G.J., H.N. McKellar, Jr., B. Kjerfve, and J.D. Spurrier. 1987. Nitrogen exchange between a southeastern U.S. salt marsh ecosystem and the coastal ocean. Mar. Biol. 95: 173- 182. 738. Whiting, G.J., H.N. McKellar, Jr., J.D. Spurrier, and T.G. Wolaver. 1989. Nitrogen exchange between a portion of vegetated saft marsh and the adjoining creek. Limnol. Oceanog-r 34(2): 463-473. 766. Wilbur, A.E. and T.J. Hilbish. 1989. Physiological energetics of the ribbed mussel, Guekensia demissa (Dillwyn), in response to increased temperature. J. fx . Mar. Biol. Ecol. 131: 161-170. 588. Wolaver, T., S. Hutchinson, and M. Marozas. 1986. Dissolved and particulate organic carbon in the North Inlet Estuary - What controls their concentrations. Estuaries 9: 31-38. 497. Wolaver, T., W. Johnson, and M. Marozas. 1984. Nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations within North Inlet, South Carolina - Speculation as to sources and sinks. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 19(2): 243-255. 583. Wolaver, T., G. Whiting, B. Kjerfve, J. Spurrier, H. McKellar, Jr., R. Dame, T. Chrzanowski, R. Zingmark, and T. Williams. 1985. The flume design - A methodology for evaluating material fluxes between a vegetated saft marsh and the adjacent tidal creek. J. Exp. Mar, Biol. Ecol. 91: 281-291. 655. Wolfe, D.A., and B. Kjerfve. 1986. Estuarine Variability: An overview. p. 3-17. In: Estuarine Variability. D.A. Wolfe (ed.)., Academic Press, NY. Th. Young, B.L. 1989. Settlement, early mortality, and growth of sessile marine invertebrates. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Biology, University of South Carolina. 784. Young, B.L. In press. Spartina acid zones: Preferred settlement sites of barnacles. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. J- 14 660. Zagursky, G. and R.J. Feller. 1988. Application of immunoblotting dietary analysis, p. 117-129. In: Immunochernical Approaches to Estuarine, Coastai and Oceanographic Questions. C.M. Tentsch, F.C. Mague, and P.K. Horan (eds.). Springer-Verlag Coastal Lecture Note Series. 697. Zimmerman, K.M., S.E. Stancyk, and L.A. Clements. 1988. Substrate selection by the burrowing brittlestar, Microphiopholis aracillima. mar. Behav. Physiol. 13: 239-255. Abs. Zingmark, R. and G. Satcher. 1984. Long-term patterns of phyloplankton standing crop and productivity in a saft marsh estuarine system. J. Phycolo y 20 (supple.): 58. 645. Zinnel, C.A. and M. Marozas. 1986. Evolution of scientific data entry techniques. p. 61-72. In: Research Data Management in the Ecological Sciences. Belle W. Baruch Library in Marine Science, No. 16. WX Michener (ed.). University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. J- 15 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX K Letter from South Carolina Attorney General I Concerning Protective Control I I I I - I I I I I I September 10, 1991 SOUTH Mr. Ole Varmer General Counsel CMOLINA Secretary of Commerce COASTAL 14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. COUNCIL Room 5851 Washington, DC 20230 Ashley Corporate Center RE: S.C. N. - Inlet NERR 4130 Faber Place Suite 300 Charleston, S.C. 294m Dear Mr. Varmer: (8W) 744-5M FAX 744-5847 Thank you for your memorandum of August 26, 19919 William W. Jones, Jr. stating the needs of the NOAA in the above referenced Chairman matter. H, Wayne Beam, M.D. Executive Director On behalf of the Attorney General's office for the State of South Carolina, I address each of the remaining points of contention: 1. The State of South Carolina has adequate management authority over the areas proposed for the NERR site. As shown on the attached Exhibit A, the South Carolina Coastal Council, the state agency responsible for overseeing the project, has full authority over the NERR site. (See Section 48-39-102 et seq., Code of Laws for the State of South Carolina, 1976, as amended.) As it relates to the critical area "environment," there is no question that the state has a legal right of access to those areas for purposes of managing the site and enforcing conditions associated with the federal grant. In terms of access by the state and general public to areas owned by the st'ate, there is a general legal presumption that the state owns all lands below mean high water. This ensures access to the tidelands and marshes which predominate the NERR site. Fast lands held by the Baruch Foundation would require permission for ingress and egress. However, the fast lands and highland portions of the site owned by the Baruch Foundation are legally accessible by the state for research and management pursuant to an easement. Attached Exhibit B is an agreement entered into between Belle W. Baruch Foundation and the University of South Carolina on March 22, 1972. By way of this agreement, the University K- 1 Prinwd an RocycWd ftW has the use of such land as may be required to construct a research facility thereon, and the right-of-way and easement for ingress and egress thereto. Additionally, the University has use of such land so long as the lands are being used for research and other educational purposes. It is my opinion, based upon this agreement and upon the Attorney General's letter of November 13, 1987, Exhibit C provided to you by Dr. Vernberg, that the state has sufficient access to the site to ensure research and management envisioned by the NERR project. 2. The University of South Carolina and Baruch Institute are state entities. (See attached Exhibit D.) Pursuant to state law, the S. C. Coastal Council employs attorneys for the purpose of enforcement of the provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act. However, these attorneys are controlled by the State Attorney General's office. On behalf of the Attorney General's office, I am authorized to convey to you that the State of South Carolina will provide the necessary legal service to ensure proper management and enforcement of the NERR management plan. Any such legal service will be primarily provided by South Carolina Coastal Council legal staff with support from the Attorney General's office. With regard to other questions posed to Mr. Snyder, it appears to me that these matters were adequately dealt with in the August 14, 1991, letter from Dr. Vernberg. Please contact my office should this letter be insufficient for your purposes. Sincerely, C. C. Harness, III General Counsel 0898A(87) cc: Dr. H. Wayne Beam Mr. Christopher L. Brooks Ms. Nancy B. Tecklenburg, Esquire Mr. Steve Snyder Dr. John Vernberg K-2 I I I I I I I APPENDIX L I Organizations Endorsing the North InIet/Winyah Bay Project I I I I I I I I I I I ORGANIZATIONS ENDORSING THE NORTH INLET/WINYAH BAY PROJECT National Science Foundation NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center U.S. Department of Interior South Atlantic Fishery Management Council S.C. Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Nongame and Heritage Trust Section S.C. Water Resources Commission S.C. Marine Educators Association S.C. Sea Grant Consortium Sierra Club South Carolina Chapter S.C. Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology S.C. Environmental Law Project S.C. Aquarium S.C. Coastal Conservation League Nature Conservancy of South Carolina International Center for Public Health Research, USC, McClellanville, SC Georgetown County League of Women Voters College of Charleston, Marine Biology Graduate Program Friends of the Coast DeBordieu Property Owners Association, Inc. I I I I I 0 . I I APPENDIX M WRITTEN AND ORAL COMMENTS I pertaining to the I North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve DEIS/DMP I I I I. I I I I I I I December 5, 1991 Dr. John Vernberg Director, Belle Baruch Institute University of South Carolina COlumbia, SC 29208 Dear John: I am delighted that after all these years North Inlet is going to be recognized with its inclusion into the National Estuarine Research Reserve system. It is certainly a most appropriate designation and will serve to strengthen the NSF-supported work which has been conducted over the past decade. We at the S.C. Sea Grant consortium would be most and education programs to be conducted within the area. I am confident that we can attain a tremendous amount of accomplishment for a small amount of cooperation and effort. I am ready to assist you with the process of nomination and implementation in any way that you deem suitable. Please let me know how we may assist you. Sincerly, Margaret A Davidson Executive DIrector MAD/um Response to Margaret A. Davidson comments noted. The S.C. Sea Grant Consortium will be represented on the NI/WB Advisory Committee creating a formal avenue of communication. Over the Years, Sea Grant has funded research and education projects involving North inlet and every effort will be made by the Reserve to continue and Expand upon these cooperative programs. South Carolina Environmental Law Project December 2. 1991 Ms. Susan Durden National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 714 Washington, DC 20235 Dr. F. John Vernberg Baruch.Marine;Lab P. 0. box 1630 Georgetown SC 29442 Re: North Inlet/Winyah Bay MERR Dear Me. Durden and Dr. Vernberg: The South Carolina Environmental Law Project strongly supports the establishment of the North Inlet/Winyah Say National Estuarine Research Reserve. We urge NOAA to approve the designation of North Inlet and Winyah Bay as a Reserve. I have utilized the natural resources of North Inlet and Winyah Bay for over 30 years,, and for the last 10 years have worked as a concerned citizen and environmental attorney to protect those resourced. Designation of this area as a HERR would help to heighten public awareness of both the extent of these resources. and the potential threats to this estuary. North Inlet has already been recognized by the National Science Foundation, which has included it In its long-term ecological research program. The close proximity of this relatively undisturbed area to Winyah Bay, which has. been Impacted by man's activities yet retain* notable ecological significance. presents abundant research opportunities to provide guidance to natural resource regulatory agencies such as the South Carolina Coastal Council. I have heard many of the reservations 'about this HERR expressed by local hunters and fishermen, who fear that the NERR designation would- lead to restrictions on their, recreational activities. I believe that these reservations are unwarranted. Nothing In the proposed management plan gives any legal authority to restrict public use of these areas beyond that which already exists under present law. As a recreational boater who believes strongly In public access to public trust resources. I would adamantly oppose any attempt to restrict public *access to North Inlet or Winyah Say. As a member of the advisory committee for this proposed NEAR, I know that none of the supporters of this KENN have any intent to restrict public activities in the reserve areas I hope that you will not allow adverse comments based on misinformation about the NERR to Influence your decision on this NERR designation. The North Inlet/Winyah Say area would be a worthy addition to the National Estuarine Research Reserve.System, and I urge you to approve this proposed NERR. Yours very truly, James S. Chandler, Jr. cc: Dennis M. Allen A Project of Energy Research Foundation Response to James S. Chandler Jr. Comments noted: no response required Response to Dana Beach Comments noted: no response required. A TH 14 BOLIN I COASTAL (MMM01A LEAGUE December 2, 1991 Dr. John Vernberg, Director The Bar@ch institute Uni ve sity of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29298 Dear Dr. Vernberg, North Inlet is one of the most pristine marsh and estuary Systems remaining In the United States. It is well-recognized internationally for the research projects and education programs it affords. it would clearly be in the best interest of the State of South Carolina for North Inlet to be included in the National Estuarine Research Reserve Program, and the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League strongly supports this inclusion. Y, [email protected], Executive Director SC Coastal Conservation League Response to T.M. Copeland Comments noted: no response required. IDSOFTHECO-AST P.O. BOX IHAS, COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA 29211 (903) 7"-3847 December 2, 1991 John Vernberg, Ph.D. Director Ba "ch Marine Institute .niversity of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina 29208 Dear Dr. Vernberg: I have Kad the opportunity to visit and become familiar with the North Inlet/Winyah Bay site currently being proposed as an estuarine reserve. I know of no other site on South Carolina's coast or along the coast of our southern Atlantic states which will afford better research opportunities. The site lends itself to the mission of the National Estuarine Research Reserve Program. Not only are the waters and marshes of North Inlet undisturbed, the inclusion of Winyah Bay provides a laboratory of intense interaction between man and nature. The juxtaposition of thesR environments provides research opportunities to explore long term problems currently confronting us. These research opportunities are limited only by the resources available and the ingenuity of the scientific community. I heartily endorse the creation of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay Estuarine Reserve. Sincerely, T. Copeland Chairman Response to Elizabeth A. Day Comments noted: no response required. The South Carolina Marine Educators AssociatiorCs Endommvtt of the Proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve The South Carolina Marine Educators Association (SCMEA) acknowledges am fully supports the University of South Carolina and the South Carolina Coastal Council in their efforts regarding the proposed designation of the North Inkuwinyah Bay area as I National Estuarine Research Reserve. The primary goal of SCMEA. which is a chapter of the National Marine Educators Association, is to provide a commurtications network for these interested in aquatic education throughout South Carolina. This group of over 250 educatom scientists and nartualists fully recognizes the importance of estuarine education and the vital role that it plays in linking together scientists. educators and members of the general public in an effort to increase public.awamness and appreciation of our coastal environment. It is our collective responsibility to educate our youth about the vitally important mle that these fragile estuarine ecosystems play. After all, these young people are our future leaders and the protectors of the environment that all too many of us have, unfortunately, taken for granted. T'herefore. be it known that the South Carolina Marine Educators Association hereby endorses the proposed Nattonal Estuarine Research Reserve plan for the North In let/Winyah Bay system and, through its statewide and national network of educators, scientists and naturalists, the Association wW promote the establishment of this irreplaceable ecosystem as a National Estuarine Research Reserve. Elizabeth A. Day President. SCMEA November 27, 1991 Response to carol Winous Comments noted: no response required. GEORGETOWN COUNTY LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS P. 0. BOX 18 GEORGETOWN, S. C. 29442 No 4 4 7-2 5- -71 tv C- 0 J S S' a, 7 k. r"q 1P 1@01 SOUTH CAROLINA AQUARIUM CITY OF CHARLESTON 116 MEETING STREET CHARLESTON, s.C. 29401 TELEPHONE (803) 724-3784 FACSIMILE (803) 724-3772 December 2, 1991 Ms. Susan Duren NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 714 Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Ms. Durdan: On behalf of the South Carolina Aquarium, we appreciate this opportunity to comment on the designation of the North Inlet area near Georgetown, South Carolina, as a National Estuarine Research Reserve. We Wholeheartedly endorse the designation of this unique biological and cultural resource as a NERR. The area in one of the great natural treasures of South Carolina and the nation. NOAA and South Carolina, through this designation, will be able to offer the public and scientists increased accesss to one of the finest estuarine systems for education and research. The baruch Institute and the Baruch Foundation are leaders in every aspecr of the development of environmental education about our marine and estuarine systems in South Carolina. Many of the public and school marine education programs in South Carolina owe their beginnings to efforts that stem from the work of the Baruch staff. As the NERR system throughout the country has greatly contributed to public understanding of the marine and estuarine ecosystem, the North Inlet NERR has the potential to be a star in the national system, given the past record of the work accomplished by the Baruch staff. The South Carolin Aquarium will be premier environmental education ijnstitution for South Carolina, Without resources throughout the South Atlantic region such as those offered by NOAA's National Estuarine program, however, its mission would be gravely lessened. To adequately continue and strengthen important and we hope that NOAA will recognize this critical role by the designation of North inlet. Sincerely, Henrietta S. Wilson Coordinator cc: Mayor Joseph P. Riley Dr. John Vernber, Baruch Institute Response to Henrietta S. Wilson Comments noted: no response required. SOUTH ATLANTIC FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL I SOUTHPARK CIRCLESUITE 306 CHARLESTON, SC 29407-4699 Telephone (803) 571-4366 Fix (803) 7694520 Response to SUsan Shipman Susan Shipman, Chairman Robert E. Mahood, Executive Director Curtis W. Bostick, Vice Chairman Comments noted: no response required. December 13, 1991 Ms. Susan E. Durden Regional Manager Sanctuaries and Reserves Division Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Management NOS/NOAA 1825 Connecticut Avenue. N.W. Suite 714 Washington.D.C. 20235 Re: Proposed National Estuarine Research Reserve- North Inlet-Winyah Bay, South Carolina Dear Ms. Durden: Ile South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC), one of eight Regional Councils established by the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, is charged with developing and monitoring management plans for fisheries from the territorial waters of North and South Carolina, Georgia and Florida's cast coast offshore to the 2O0-mile limit. In this regard, the SAFMC ensures that the United States obtains the best use of the fishery resources in its geographical area of responsibility. Any loss or degradation of estuarine habitat is of concern to the Council because most offshore fishery resources we directly or indirectly dependant upon these habitat. Recognizing-that all species we dependent on the quantity and environmental quality of their essential habitats, it is the policy of the SAFMC to protect. restore and develop habitats upon which all species fisheries depend. to increase their extent and to improve dark productive capacity for the benefit of present and future generations. For purposes of this policy, habitat is defined to include all those things physical, chemical and biological that are necessary to the productivity of the species being managed. Further, the SAFMC is directed by die Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MFCMA) to consider protection of habitat essential to fisheries under Council jurisdiction. The MFCMA enables the SAFMC to address habitat concerns in two fashions: through the expansion of habitat sections of fishery management plans; and through commenting directly to agencies regarding ongoing or proposed activities affecting essential habitat. The SAFMC. pursuant to the goals and objectives of our habitat policy and our mandate through the MFCMA, endorses the designation of the North Inlet-Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve in South Carolina. The SAFMC feels that the preservation of essential estuarine nursery habitat through the reserve program is consistent with the habitat polcies of the Council and will enhance achievement of the goals and objectives of fishery management plans and amendments to those plans. This program will facilitate needed research and increase public awareness of the vital role estuaries play in supporting inshore, nearshore and offshore fishery resources. Enclosed am copies of our fishery management plans and amendments that include sections identifying important fishery and habitat research several of which am applicable to the North Inlet research reserve program. Conservation and management of our nations fishery resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone is the mandate of the Council. Without wise stewardship of habitat that supports these fisheries, the goals and objectives of fishery management plans approved by the Secretary of Commerce cannot be achieved. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Susan Shipman Chairman enclosure: oc. SAFMC Members SAFMC Habitat AP Kermmerer/Mager SERO Hall NMFS/NOAA Graham DOC/NOAA Vemberg Baruch Inst.USC Response to Robert H. Mitchell, Jr. Comments noted: no response required. DeBordieu Property Owners Association, Inc. Post Office Box 1673 Pawleys Island, S. C. 29585 December 12, 1991 Ms. Susan Durden NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut ave nw, Suite 714 Washington. DC 20235 Re: North Inlet/Winyaw Bay HERR Dear No. Durden: Wendell Hinson, representing the DeBordieu Property owners Association ("DPOA", an independent homeowners association), attended the public hearing recently and reported to us concerns raised at that meeting relating to public access. We have be,briefed from time to time by Stuart Hope. one of two members from DeBordieu on the committee to draft the management plan. DPOA had two main concerns in the beginning. One, that the present public usage of the North Inlet area not be changed and, secondly, that the DeBordieu can I Yates not be subjected to any addtional control over that presently in effect. Mr. Hope has relayed to us the cooperation that was extended to the committee members in answering their concerns and the eforts that were extended to all parties to make the plan address these concerns in very specific language. Specifically. as respects DeBordieu, the plan's language that all traditional uses will not be changed seems to be clear and unambiguous. The fact the DeBordieu canal system was not included in the research reserve answered the other concern we had. We have reviewed the proposed plan and feel that it is something we can and do support. Sincerely your Robert H. Mitchell, Jr. President cc: Dr. F. John Vernberg Stuart Hope Windell Hinson YOUR INDEPENDENT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION Response to Alfred H. Vang Comments noted: no response required. South Carolina Water Resources Commission 1201 Main Street. Suits 1100 Columbia, SC 29201 [1 Telephone (803) 737-O8O0 Alfred H Vang December 2, 1991 Executive Director Dr. John Vernberg Baruch Institute University of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina 29208 Dear Dr. Vernberg: I as writing to support your effort to have North Inlet established as NOAA Moline Estuarine Research Reserve. Over the years I have followed the work fostered by the Baruch Institute. As an agency we have made use of your research and have hired employees who learned their scientific methodology there. The long period of data collection for North Inlet in of the utmost value. It give. us an opportunity for estuarine research that exists In comparable form In few other places. none in the Southeast that I am aware of. Too often I hear in my and of the water business: Let's use it all before it just runs off into the ocean. " What you offer through the many years of data collection is the ability to determine just what it moons to an estuary to receive toss fresh water. Your Information relates to droughts. but it would be the same under any condition that causes low flows. As the water planning agency for South Carolina. the Water Resources Commission must know the estuary needs. Not just an "at first blush" look, but an in depth one with real, long term data support. When there are low flows (freshwater) and animate are stressed. what difference does the quality make then? Doe. the level of pollution. or type (heavy metals) of pollution make any difference? There are many other reasons for which I could personally support North Inlet as a Marine Estuarine Reserve; however. I will keep this to my official capacity. Please let me know it there is anything else I can do. Sincerely, Alfred H. Vang AHV/kan Executive Director Response to Jonathan P. Deason Comments noted: no response required. TAM United States Department of the Interior OffICE 0F THE SECRETARy Washington, DC. 20240 in Reply Refer To: ER 91/984 JAN 2 1992 Ms. Susan E. Durden Regional Manager Sanctuaries and Reserves Division office Of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management National Ocean ServIce/NOAA 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.V., Suite 714 Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear No. Durden: The Department of the Interior (Department) has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Management Plan (DEIS/DMP) for the Proposed North Inlet/Winyah BAY National Estuarine Research Reserve. The Department supports designation of North Inlet/Winyah Bay as a National Estuarine Research Reserve. The Department's Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) In a key resource management agency in the Worth Inlet/Winyah Day geographic area. The FWS has an ongoing long-term Ecological Research project an well as many other educational and research oriented activities which have made many positive contributions to difficult resource management decisions. The establishment of this research reserve will faster the continuation of these Important contributions. The Department agrees that valuable natural resources will be protected for long-term research and education by designation of this research reserve. Moreover, applied research at the reserve Will potentially benefit estuarine resource protection over a wide geographic area. We appreciate the opportunity to comment an the DEIS/DMP for this proposed action and look forward to the future site designation. If you have any additional questions regarding our comments, you may contact Ken Havran In the office of Environmental Affairs at 208-7116. Sincerely, Jonathan P. Deason Director office of Environmental Affairs Response to Dr. Callahan Comments noted: no response required. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Division of Biotic Systems and Resources Washington, DC 20550 Ecosystem Studies Program (202) 357-9598 James T. Callahan E-mail: [email protected] 2 December 1991 Dr. F. John Vernberg. Director Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Bioko and Coastal Research University of South Carolina Coloumbia, SC 29208 Dew Dr. Vernberg; it has come to my attention that application has been made to include the North Inlet/Winyah, Bay system in the National Estuarine, Research Reserve network on behalf of the National Science Foundation's Long-Term Ecolgical Research and Ecosystem Studies Programs, let me add our unqualified and enthusiastic endorsement to that application. The research and education programs of the Baruch Institute, including those having to do with the South Carolina coast. are well recognized at both national and international levels. Iclusion in the NERR network will, undoubtedly. strengthen these programs as, well as contribute substantially to national coastal research efforts. Equally, the NERR designation should have a large positive effect on state county, and locall formal and informal education programs. Of course, the essentiality of first-class basic research to efforts aimed ad improved coastal resource management goes almost without saying. The North Inlet/Winyah Bay system offers an excellent, nearly unequaled, opportunity for long-term comparative research based on the contrast between the two parts of the system. North Inlet (newly pristine) and Winyah Bay (subject to intense bureau activity). Let me conclude by saying; that the North Inlet/Winyah Bay System is an irreplaceable member of the Foundation's LTER network, and will, I am sure, be equally valuable to the National Estuarine Research Reserve network. Sincerely, James T. Callahan, ph. D. Associate program Director Ecosystem Studies GEORGETOWN Post Office Drawer 1270 COUNTY 715 Prince Street Georgetown, South Carolina 29442 SOUTH Telephone (803) 5464189 CAROLINA Fax (803) 546-4730 October 16, 1991 Mrs. Susan Darden Manager of Atlantic & Great Lakes Region Sanctuaries and Reserves Division Office of Ocean and COastal Resources management 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 714 Washington DC 20235 Dear Mrs. Durden: I have r:viewed the -North inlet/Winyah Bay Draft Environmental impact Sta m nt and Draft Management Plan". Georgetown County has a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. This ordinance was modelled after FEMA guidelines and we are regularly in Dected by FEMA to insure compliance in flood prone areas. FEMA continues to express concern the structures an the Baruch property do not comply with our ordinance. The draft report indicates the plan includes additional facilities yet it does not address whether these will conform to local ordinances. This issue places the County between FEMA and the State. Because the property is in a flood zone FEMA expects full compliance. However, the University as an agency of the State may be exempt from local requirements, at Least that appears to be the University's pcsition. I request the issue be resolved so the County will have a clear understanding of our role. second, while I know the purpose of a research facility does not alway reflect the public's interest in water access and recreational interests those needs are clearly evident in Georgetown County. This morning paper reports that boating needs exceed available public facilities. Is it possible for the Plan to consider dedication of some property to open public access while maintaining the integrity Of the Research Reserve? Response to County Administrator, Georgetown County, South Carolina The research laboratory destroyed by Hurricane Hugo is being constructed with support from FEMA and Therefore will conform to FEMA regulations. No plans exist to provide public access by land to accommodate boat usage of the Reserve. Response to Bruce Rippeteau Comments noted: no response required. THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA SOUTH CAROLINA INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY Bruce F. Rippeteau, Ph.D. 27 November 1991 Dr. John Vernberg Belle W. Baruch institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research EWS 609 The University of South Carolina CAMPUS Dear John: The North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve is.nearing reality and I again want to add my strong support to your efforts. Clearly the proposed Reserve would strengthen your very large Baruch program on research in coastal areas. Also it would similarly bolster Baruch and other USC educational programs in Georgetown. Finally, I'm for the Reserve because it would also serve to enhance protection of our submerged riverine, estuarial, and coastal cultural resources from both prehistory and history, for which, under state law, I am responsible. North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve should be favorably acted upon by NOAA, in my opinion. Sincerely, Bruce Rippeteau Director and State Archaeologist /cs 1321 Pendleton Street SC.29208-0071- (803)777-8170- 734-0567- 799-1963 South Carolina James A, Timmerman, Jr. Ph D. Executive Director Wildlife & Marine W Brock Conrad, Jr. Director of Resources Department Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries November 27, 1991 Dr. F. John vernberg 127 South Edisto Ave. Columbia, S. C. 29205 Dear Dr. vernberg: I am writing to support establishing a National Estuarine Research Reserve at North Inlet, Georgetown county. in my work directing our Department's programs to protect endangered and threatened wildlife and critical natural areas, I have long been aware or the difficulties involved In assessing the impacts of development and discharges of various pollutants on natural ecosystems. it to almost impossible to make these assessments without having some "benchmark" area which is one relatively free of disturbance. In my opinion, North Inlet is one such area, and practically the, only one an the northern South Carolina coast. If North Inlet is to fulfill its potential as a control area against which the effects of management practices can be measured, It Is essential that this area be afforded a high level of protection. Designation as a National Estuarine Research Reserve is certainly one way to accomplish this, and probably the best way. Contributing to the value or North Inlet as a reserve to its long history or research and baseline of existing data. The long-standinq program of research carried out at the Baruch Institute has provided an Irreplaceable set of reference data, which provides, In effect, a *calibration" for future research Projects. It is also noteworthy that North Inlet and adjoining properties of the Baruch Institute are part of the *Carolinian - South Atlantic Biosphere Reserve" administered by the U. S. Man and the Biosphere Program (MAB) . MAB is an international program administered by UNESCO concerned with the broad question or sustainable development. The U. S. MAB program in an Interagency consortium administered by the U. S. Department or state. As part of a worldwide Biosphere, Reserve system, the North Inlet Estuary and Baruch Institute lands could be a focus of worldwide attention for future research. I wholeheartedly endorse inclusion of North Inlet Estuary in the NERRS system. Chief, Nongame & Heritage Trust Section Rembert C. Dennis Building P 0. Box 167 Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Telephone: 803-734-3006 Response to Thomas S. Kohlsaat Comments noted. As noted by the commenter, North inilet is part of the man and the Biosphere Program (MAB). Because of the pristine nature of North Inlet and the existence of a long record of research, including an extensive database, the NI/WB Reserve anticipates playing an important role in MAB- related research and educational programs. Response to Robert R. KHer V 1'tif' U1101TED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Comments noted: no response required. T Istional Oneonta and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SEWCE Sou theast Fisheries Science Center Charleston Laboratory P. 0. Box 12607 Charleston, SC 29422-2607 November 27, 1991 F. John Vernberg Director, Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 Dear Dr. Vernberg, This letter Is in support of inclusion of North Inlet in the National estuarine Research Reserve System. North Inlet Is an extremely valuable study site for long term research primarily because of its pristine state and the extensive and long term data base developed to characterize it. There are few, if anyr remaining. If adopted by the Reserve System, North Inlet will become part of a national network that will lead to Strengthening of its research and monitoring programs. This is very important to develop the sophisticated environmental research needed. Our laboratory, as you know, is conducting long term ecological research in North Inlet. It is Imperative that the estuary remain as it is for us to continue this research. Remaining the same means that no further development is allowed but also requires that traditional uses continue. The Reserve System will maintain the estuary as it is. The Reserve System will also enhance the funding of research in this area leading to improved protection of similar estuaries along our coast. All of our citizens will benefit. Sincerely, Robert R. Kifer Laboratory Director A The Nature Conservancy of South Carolina 2231 Devine Street, Suite 100 PO Box 5475 Columbia, South Carolina 29250 803-254-9049 FAX 803-252-7134 November 27, 1991 Dr. John Vernberg Baruch Institute University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 RE: Proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Dear Dr. Vernberg, This letter is to show The Nature Conservancy's support of the proposed National Estuarine Research Reserve status for North Inlet/Winyah Bay. The research and educational activities associated with the NERRS program here will be of great benefit to the citizens of Gerogetown County and the state of South Carolina. The protection of undisturbed estuaries is an important state and national goal. Please call on us if the Conservancy can be of any assistance in the designation process. Sincerely, Patrick Morgan Executive Director Response to Patrick Morgan Comments noted: no response required. Response to Nancy Vinson Comments noted: no response required. SIERRA CLUB South Carolina Chapter wepk@ eopy and P- thr - s 1@s. - -Idde ad @A*-- P.O. Box 12 112 Columbia, SC 29211 (903) 2W9487 December 2, 1991 John Vernberg, Ph.D. Director of Baruch Institute Earth Water & Science Bldg. University of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina Dear Dr. Vernberg; I am writing you in support of the National Estuarine Reserve Site proposed for North Inlet, South Carolina. The educational and tescarch programs associated with a National Estuarine Research Site would be wonderful for South Carolina. Long-term baseline resewch is especially needed with our rapid coastal development. It seems logical to build upon the research and educational foundation already established by the Baruch Institute at North Intel. With no acquisition costs at the North Inlet location, it would seem that NOAA would be making the best use of its funding for a National Estuarine Reserve Site. Sierra Club whole heartedly supports the establishment of a National Estuarine Rcse"c Site at North Inlet, South Carolina. Please keep us advised of your progress. Sincerely, Nancy Vinson Chapter Representative University of South Carolina Columbia, S.C. 29208 Public Health National Center for Public Health Research 99 ville, South Carolina 29458 or 527-1372 December 2, 1991 Dr. John F. Vernberg, Director elle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 Dear Dr. Vernberg: I am writing to you in support of the establishment of a National Estuarine Reserve to encompass the North Inlet area of Winyah Bay. South Carolina is fortunate to have such an area available for preservation, recreation and research. There is desperate need for such an area to serve as a baseline when measuring the effects of man on the balance of South Carolina's coastline and when developing meaningful strategies for management of the coastal zone. Our research and training activities here at the Center address the potential for mosquito- and tick-borne diseases along coastal South Carolina and the effects of the control of pest mosquitoes on the coastal environment. Since development of coastal areas often affects the mosquito\fly production in these areas (often positively), it is important that we have undisturbed areas in which to conduct research and to serve as natural classrooms for demonstrating to students and biological and economical importance of estuarine ecosystems. This Reserve would be a unique national resource and a focus for further development of ecotourism in the Georgetown area. It should be seen as a step to preserve the quality of life now enjoyed by the area's residents. Sincerely, Dwight Williams Dirctor Response to Dwight Williams Comments noted. The Baruch Institute has cooperative research projects with the School of Public Health. Future research dealing with human health and environmental health is important and will be pursued. The Reserve will welcome the opportunity to contineu this interaction especially in the area of vector borne diseases. Graduate Program Marine Biology 205 Fort Johnson Charleston, S.C. 29412 (803) 795-3716 December 2, 1991 Dr. John Vernberg, Director Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology The University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 Dear Dr. Vernberg: This is a letter in support of the proposal to establish A North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Within this system is one of the largest virtually pristine and valuable coastal wetland systems in the southeastern United States. Its value is attested to by the inclusion of the system in the National Science Foundation's Longterm Ecological Research Program. The importance and value of the system has been well documented in the continuing series of publication resulting from the LTER program. I believe that designation as a National Estuarine Research Reserve is entirely appropriate and needed. Please distribute this letter as you see fit. Sincerely yours, Robert Karl Johnson, Director Graduate Program in Marine Biology Participating Institutions: The Citadel, College of Charleston, Marine Resources Division of South Carolina Wildlife & Marine Resources Department, and The Medical University of South Carolina Response to Robert Karl Johnson Comments noted: no response required. Page 2 Ms. Durden October 16, 1991 I appreciate this opportunity for input. Sincerely, Gordon W. Hartwig County Administrator GWB:k1 cc: Mr. David Cottingham Director, Ecology & Environmental Conservation Office U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 6814 Washington, DC 20230 Mr. Steven Synder SC Coastal Council Ashley Corporate Center 4130 Faber Place, Suite 300 Charleston, SC 29405 Mr. F. John Vernberg, Project Manager Belle W. Baruch Institute University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 Response to Federal Emergency Management Agency The new laboratory building on the Reserve site is being constructed with partial funding from FEMA and it conforms to all FEMA regulations and those of Georgetown County and the State of South Carolina. Any future buildings will also Federal Emergency 'Ll4anagernent Agency conform to these regulations and to NFIP requirements. Washinpon, D,C. 20A72 December 9, i9gi Ms. Susan E. Durdan, Regional Manager Sanctuaries and R*servea Division office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management $4tiOnal oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (ROAA) 1925 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., suits 714 Washington, D-C, 20230 Door Ms. Ourdan: This is in response to your request for comments an the Draft Environmental impact statement and Draft Management Plan for North inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Our Regional Office in Atlanta, Georgia reviewed the draft and has provided us with coimant3 which I have attached. our primary concern is that any structures built as research facilities in the Reserve fully comply with the floodplain management requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). AS indicated in the Rogion-s %a orandua, the area is a coastal high hazard area or V-zone subject not only flooding, but also to wave impacts resulting from Hurricanes. both the original laboratories that word destroyed by Hurricane Hugo and the trailers which now temporarily house the labs appear to be constructed In violation of these requirements. Designation of the area as a National Estuarine Research Reserve and the eligibility or the Ross- for Podaral funding makes the plan subject to the requirements of Executive, Order 11988, Floodplain Management (copy attached). At & minimum, this requires that NOAA time the Executive- Order 11988 pXanninq Proceed to "aluate the plan and that any structures built in the Reserve meet the minimum requirements of the HPIP. These issues should he fully addressed in "a rinal EIS and management plan. It you have any questions regarding these comments or require assistance in addressing floodplain management issues, Piss&* call as at 201-646-2711 or contact the Natural and Technological Hazards Division of FEMA's Region IV Office. The address and phone number are. 1371 Peachtree Street, HE, Suit* 700, Atlanta, GOQrgi& 30309, (404) 853-4400. Sincerely, Frank ff. Thomas Assistant Administrator Office of l4sa Reduction Federal insurance Administration EXCERPT OF FEMA LETTER OF OCTOBER 8, 1991, WHICH EXPRESSES THE AGENCY'S ON-GOING CONCERN 7. Baruch Lab-It is unclear as to what the data submitted actually means. The State's legal opinion, number 4439, seems to indicate that the State is required to comply with regulations and ordinances governing construction, but not subject to the enforcement provisions of the local ordinance. Local governing bodies must apply to the courts for injunctive or other relief when it's ordinances are violated. The County Attorney should offer his interpretation of these issues. The County must monitor all development at the Laboratory site to insure the provisions of the local ordinances are being adhered to and provide a status report to this office. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CHARLESTON DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS PO Box CHARLESTON, S C December 9, 1991 Planning Branch Ms. Susan S. Durden, Regional Manager Sanctuaries and Reserves Division Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Mgmt National Ocean Service/NOAA 1825 Connecticut Ave., N.W. - Suite 714 Washington, DC 20235 Dear Ms. Durden: The Charleston District has reviewed the North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Management Plan with particular focus on the relationship of the proposed action to Corps of Engineers activities in the Winyah Bay area. The following observation and recommendation are provided. Due to increasing scarcity of upland dredged disposal sites for Winyah Bay channel maintenance dredging, the S. C. State Ports Authority has recently completed a ranking of twenty (20) alternative dredge disposal sites for potential future use (Winyth Bay Dredged Material Placement Study: Initial Alternative Site Ranking October 1991). Four of the sites ranked are within the proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Because of their effect on wetlands and open water areas. These four sites dropped from initial consideration but there is high probability that these sites will be required in the future as upland disposal sites become even more scarce. In Appendix C of the Draft EIS (Federal Register) it is stated in some detail on page 29942 Sec. 921.1 that habitat manipulation activities will be carefully limited in the proposed reserve. This Section does not specifically mention dredge disposal, but we believe that the four sites referred to above, which have not been designated for dredge disposal to date, would be prevented. Because of the high probability that at least one of these four sites will be necessary for future maintenance of the Federal channel through Winyah Bay to Georgetown, some provision should be incorporated into the Management Plan to allow for the future establishment of disposal sites. The appropriate NEPA considerations could be accomplished at that time. Response to Planning Branch, Department of the Army, Charleston District Corps of Engineers The Management Plan recognized the importance of the Georgetown Port and the continued maintenance of the shipping channel. Page 71 of the Management Plan states: "Under State and Federal guidelines, no dredging or other disturbances of marsh vegetation would be allowed here even if the Reserve did not exist. If these guidelines are changed, the goals of the Reserve would not be altered in that one of the research objectives is to compare ecological responses of a man-influenced estuary (Winyah Bay) with an undisturbed estuary (North Inlet). Hence the establishment of the Reserve would not limit the maintenance of existing shipping channels." The North Inlet/Winyah Bay NERR, therefore, acknowledges the possible future need for dredged material disposal areas within the Winyah Bay portion of the Reserve, whether existing or yet to be identified, and will abide by any decision to develop and use such sites made under State and Federal laws and the SC Coastal Management Program. If provisions for future disposal sites within the boundary cannot be made, then the Charleston District would like to be consulted concerning the adverse impacts that the Reserve would have on the Georgetown Harbor project. We would like to reach some consensus on the Reserve and its potential for adverse impacts before the final EIS is filed. Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft EIS and if you should have any questions concerning this comment and recommendation, please contact Mr. Jim Woody of my staff at 803/724-4254. Sincerely, Richard M. Jackson, P.E. Chief, Planning Branch Copy furnished: David cottingham, Director Ecology and Environmental Conservation Office Dennis Barnett, CESAD-PD-R South Carolina State Ports Authority Dock Road State Pier 31 PO Box 601 Georgetown, South Carolina 29442 Telephone 803/527-4478 November 20, 1991 Dear Dr. Vernberg: As per our telephone conversation today attached you will find the revision as pertains to Industrial and Port Related item under Paragraph B, Section C, on page 70 and 71 of the published Management Plan of the most recent draft to the National Estuarine Research Reserve in North Inlet Winyah Bay. Sincerely, D. Claude Baker Director Enclosure DCS:dts Response to SC State Ports Authority To clarify this section of the management plan the following changes were made. The Management Plan now reads as below: No industrial activities occur or are allowed on Hobcaw Barony, although designated dredge spoil sites have existed elsewhere on B.W. Baruch Foundation uplands bordering Winyah Bay since 1968; these sites are not part of the Reserve. It is not the intent, objective nor desire of the NI/WB NERRS to interfere with the use of these spoil sites by the South Carolina State Ports Authority. The shipping lanes adjacent to the southwestern border of the Winyah Bay portion of the Reserve are used extensively for activities related to industries located in Georgetown, as well as import/export activities centered at the Port of Georgetown. Industries located in Georgetown which are dependent upon the continued use of the Port include Georgetown Street, International Paper, Santee Cement and AKZO Salt, all of which are important to the local and regional economy. In addition, future potential long-term Port users and transit type cargoes under long-term contracts may consist of lumber, ore, scrap metals and general cargo which have been handled in the past. In order to maintain the shipping channel at the authorized depth, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must dredge the channel on a regularly scheduled basis. The creation of the Reserve will not alter the current or future use of any of those areas designated for dredged spoils. The Reserve Draft Management Plan does not call for a change from existing or traditional uses of the areas of the Reserve. It is not the intent, goal nor desire of the Reserve to restrict shipping and dredging activities of the Port of Georgetown which provide a major portion of Georgetown's industrial-based economy. The proposed NI/WB NERR is unique in the U.S. in that no other NERR is located in such close proximity to Federally maintained shipping channels. One of the objectives of the Reserve is to study the relationship between natural ecosystems and these shipping/industrial activities in order to establish an information base for the wise management and coexistence of both in the future. Hence the establishment of the Reserve would not limit the maintenance of existing shipping channels. In addition see the response to the Department of the Army. Charleston District Corps of Engineers in this document. Georgetown Sportfishing Association November 26, 1991 Dr. T. John Vernberg Baruch Institute Univ. of South Carolina Dear Dr. Vernberg, This letter is to confirm my requests for changes to the Drafted Mgm Plan 1. Please refer to P. 38 paragraph 1 concerning public access. The end of the first sentence should say by traditional power boat instead of just the word "boat". Also, refer to my letter to you dated Dec 13, 1990 and your reply of Jan. 3, 1991 whereby you agreed to do this. on P. 38 paragraph 1 the fourth line should read "These traditional Public uses . . . etc 2. On P. 79 see "C" sentence #4 should have an addition after the words NOAA guidelines, "other- wise the entire program iis automatically terminated." 3. To settle the conflicting statements in this Management Plan and the Federal Register we need a statement in our Mgm Plan that our Mgm Plan supercedes the Federal Register. Response to Georgetown Sportfishing Association The changes suggested in points 1, 4, and 5 have been made to clarify this section of the management plan. The question of public access has been addressed in the FEIS/DMP especially in Sections I C 5., II A 4 c(10), and II A 4(8). In addition, see Resolution of SC Coastal Council (Appendix N0 dealing with this issue. Specific guidelines have been established by NOAA to deal with termination (de-designation) of the site and the NIWB plan must conform to these regulations. Hence, point 2 in your letter is not necessary. The guidelines published in the Federal Register govern all of the NERR sites and the NI/WB plan is developed with these guidelines in mind. Georgetown Spofk*ft74@5ociation -Ot ,;f A-P -9 co -6, Response to Catherine Sam McFadden Comments noted: no response required Id-d, Is_tg 29553 46/ ) .W"t) S-v O,d) at),t@' 4@ 6v- 1-66 Arm-) (0 041@ Virginia T. Prevost 102 Buckingham Ave. Summerville, S. C. 29485 Dr. John Vernberg Baruch Institute Columbia, S. C. 29208 Dear Dr. Vernberg, I am writing to express my overwhelming support of the proposed NERR site for the North Inlet/Winyah Bay area in Georgetown, S.C. My husband's family has been in Georgetown for several hundred years and he, being raised there, has utilized the areas of the proposed NERRs designation for recreation all his life. Since we married we have both enjoyed and outstand- ing recreational opportunities provided by these sites. We took forward to the NERRs designation for the area and view it as an opportunity to preserve the habitat for those who wish to continue the traditional recreational uses (fishing, hunting, crabbing, oyster gathering, bird watching, etc.) while providing for the continued traditional economics uses (shipping, commercial fishing, marina operation etc.). Additionally, as an environmental educator and researcher, I view the NERRs designation as an unparalleled opportunity to ensure the continuance of an ongoing study with a data base which probably has few peers anywhere in the country. The preservation of an economic/environmental/recreational re- lationship which has existed since before the turn of the century is a rare opportunity which we cannot afford to miss. Sincerely, Virginia T. Provost Response to Virgina T. Prevost Comments noted: no response required. Response to Cindy & Bob Renkas Comments noted: no response required. December 2, 1991 Susan Durden Natio nal Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Sanct uaries and Reserve DivTon 1825 Connec ticutt Ave. r NW, uite 714 Dear Ms. Durden, We are writing in support of the Draft Management Plan developed to designate North Inlet and Mud Bay (Winyah Bay) in South Carolina as a National Estuarine Research Reserve INERR). Cindy is the Coordinator of the "World of wonders ('*WOW'*) Family Science Program" in Charleston, which is an extremely popular hands-on science education elementary :ge caildrenfand pa t:eriesofor ig their parents to rticipa in t gether. NERR d s n tion o the North Inlet and Winyah Bay area is a wonderful educational opportunity for the children of this area, including those in the WOW Program, to learn more about our estuarine resources. Bob is an avid fisherman and, as such, is excited about the addi- tional research opportunities afforded with NERR status of this area; research which will only benefit those already enjoying the recreational opportunities offered in this area and which will address issues pertinent to the future health and availability of these resources for our children. We urge support the designation North Inlet and Mud Bay as ayoauttional Estuarine Research Reosefrve. Sincerely, 6V, P(,jw Ciif@iv` Renkas Bob Renkas 1@26'Kentwood Circle Charleston, SC 29412 Response to Ginger Ogbum-Malthews Comments noted: no response required. November 27, 1991 Susan Durden NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 714 Washington. DC 202i@ Dear Ms. Durden: I am wn Ling YOU today to urge you to establish the North InIct/Winyah Bay area as part of the National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR). The Georgetown area is in desperate need of such a program to promote education and research. The educational Programs at the Bellefield Nature Center are always booked up within one day of the curriculum being mailed out. and them are always waiting lists for adult and children's educational classes. The word needs to get out to everyone about our unique coastal environment. The NERR program would certainly fill a void that is present here. I was amazed to hear that many children living in the city of Georgetown have never been to a marsh habitat or even the ocean. and they only live 10 miles away! The research that will also come from NERR is also gre3dy needed. With all the demands on our water sources from all citizens and industj Y. we have to increase our knowledge to insure that future generations will have a healthy environment which they can enjoy. We are very lucky to have a place such as North Inlet for all to enjoy and learn about; let's not miss this opportuniW Thank you for your time and consideration into this matter. Sincerely, 2 @34 $., Ginger Ogthum-Maithews 5-C Chapel Creek Villa A Pawleys Island, SC 29585 IL Response to Lee Gordon Brockington Comments noted: no response required. IVEkkO Zj eL CA) IA@ ou-&Cv@c low Response to Susan Service 2F Alov Comments noted: no response required, ok@ ufl@lue PO'( i-r4 r) iY@ rid Oil rdjfo -@Of 10ca Ofecfeofs* Ili of a4ls'-f r_Lar"- -t* 0-5 0- ro"Ce Coon di'-s aj V jr, sd,-I Infaf- 40 ,@4 IeSCI-6@ COnd4A<4ed je- P)O+ I;i@cu -K, 4 44,41@% fcsdarce- CA Response to Cindy Roberts Comments noted: no response required. AJOAA 116 C-6- (61 , e 4, c,+ O'U't . @j.vj, E*@' qiy b. -6 4,,,L R'l Scr ve- K -7 '1 eL c-cf r- hN b Y- e- e -s@t 4- v- c4--, to Y'd G'D Bax r7 Response to Abbie E. Johnson Comments noted: no response required. November 27. 1991 Ms. Susan Durdcn NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave.. NW. Suite 714 Washington, DC 2035 Dear Ms Durden, I WOUld UC to cxprcss my support for the establishment of the Estuarine Reserve Program in North Inlet. South carolina. I frequently use Norh Inlet for fishing and recreation and I believe "he reserve program can only serve to enhance and protect the existing resources for my generation and many to come. I feel my conem regarding public access to North Inlet is adequately addressed by existing state ]a.. Yours Sincerely, Response to William V. Johnson Comments noted: no response required. zve . 9 P" /, Aose '13."- ee e.2 o.* e 7. er cA-, AI&O, -r-7e 7,141 4,v.( ccAvle 11v,4rerrdY, 00 ;7 '1#"e 7*lt- ^;""7 71;w yoAer / , "CAIT- 1-1 #@J m,.vsosc vo Lc7rd-.< he A-4 r oa A.P Ae ywP of d,,6e4 W,;&, @,,v A'47 A` -P'r"&c Response to Lois B. Hammon Comments noted: no response required. November 27, 1991 Ms. Susan Dutte. NOAA Sanctuaries and Rmrve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 714 Washington, DC 2035 Deal Ms Durden. I would like to express =n for the establishment of the Estuarine Reserve Program in Nor-th Inlet. South carolina. IY use Norh Inlet for fishing and recreation and I believe the reserve program can only serve 10 enhance and protect the existing resources for my generation a (D nd Many to come I feel my conern regarding public access to North Intel is adequately addressed by existing state Ia.. Yours Sincerely, Response to Pamelia S. Cromer Comments noted: no response required. J9-- 461 C-4- 19148 46- aat =mono Now &aaL IR Response to Cheryl Lane Watson jlA@ G@ C,j IUL"Oj- @O@m- Comments noted: no response required. U E4L-&t4"c Y@(@ ;u,,, lo-@ 4j a- C 41@f R V@@e- 0- 4Ak - Response to C. Warren Irvin. Jr. Comments noted: no response required. C. WARREN IRVIN, JR.. M.D. 14aG FlKkHIEI@Y ROAD COLUMFHA. A& .,4 4.tu 0'" 4'@ -eol A. *d&"@ 74 W-0 4 @14 &4;Si4 ' Ad rho "'P@ In- A04 e#-4 If lo@ Ark. -A A4 74 -5w 4U ion, E. G. McGregor Boyle 576 Myrtle Avenue Pawleys Island, SC 29585 November 30, 1991 Dr. F. John Vernberg Baruch Institute University of South Carolina Columbia, S. C. 29208 Dear Dr. Vernberg: This letter is written in support of the proposal on behalf of The Baruch Institute to conduct a joint study of the estuaries known as Murrela Inlet and North Inlet on the coast of South Carolina. I have enjoyed and appreciated the recreational value of Murrels Inlet all of my life and have been concerned about the effects of increasing pressure on that habitat. The rising population, in- creased tourism and successful commercial development will put a strain on any environment. In more recent years, I have become familiar with the uniqueness of North Inlet. The abundance of marina life there is a reflection of the relatively pristine conditions. As a resident of Waccamaw Neck and a member of the Town Council of the town of Pawleys Island, I have been encouraged by the quality of research conducted by The Baruch Institute. I feel that the expansion of this work to include Murrels Inlet and compare cond- itions and developments of the two areas could offer significant benefit to the entire region and beyond. Keep up the good work. Sincerely, R. C. McGregor Boyle Response to E.C. McGregor Boyle Comments noted: no response required. Response to Susan G. Robinson Comments noted: no response required. L ol i c, A- J;l f@-- df@ 1 "6, crfi-t 'PW "L At S@t A-) da e aL '@L-t- 134t 4(,v --k-,(Ii L4-z, -4 "A -i - A- ll'a@ kc) J- /ate-xi-i 4- Ir cn a f 1A -A I/ "6. Cl. Stuart C. Hope 12 Lafayette Blvd West DeBordieu Colony Georgetown, SC 29440 Home 803-527-1023 Fax 803-527-1093 November 29, 1991 Ms. Susan Durden NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 714 Washington, DC 20235 Re: North Inlet/Winyaw Bay NERR Dear Ms. Durden, I am on the committee that helped draft the management plan for the proposed NERR and represented the interests of DeBordieu Colony. This is my home and we, here at DeBordieu, were all very much interested in what effect the proposed NERR would have on our right of access and our traditional uses of the waters. One of the reasons I chose to live here was the access to North Inlet area. The committee has been very responsive to the concerns voiced by all members charged with drafting the management plan and I am satisfied that the plan adequately addresses the initial concerns that several members had from different viewpoints. In my opinion, the language is clear and concise and does not take away from the access for traditional uses of this area. Anyone who takes the time to read the management plan will reach the same conclusion. This proposal certainly has my support. With very best regards, Stuart C. Hope Response to Stuart C. Hope Comments noted: no response required. Response to Jane C. Richardson COMMents noted: no response required. A' &J, 71Y c9a-az rA- 4 C N -4-j- -,@ i@@ 6&--L -A@af@ 0ac-l C "19654 Response to Charlotte Trotter Comments noted: no response required. 6 27, es- L >(,Zz Z e 4@ Ic- OD L zx-,- A --z@f -Z Z- Z_ Z 7Z a--(- el- November 27, 1991 Ms. Susan Durden NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 714 Washington, DC 2035 Dear Ms Durden, I would like to express my support for the establishment of the Estuarine Reserve Program in North Inlet, South Carolina. I frequently use North Inlet for fishing and recreation and I believe the reserve program can only serve to enhance and protect the existing resources for my generation and many to come. I feel my concern regarding public access to North Inlet is adequately addressed by existing state law. Yours Sincerely, Response to Joseph B. Hanna Comments noted: no response required. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL CAROLINA COLLEGE OFFICE OF GRANTS AND SPONSORED RESEARCH P. 0. Box 1954 P. O. Box 1954 Conway, SC 29526 Myrtle Beach, SC 29578 Conway (803) 347 3161 Myrtle Beach (803) 448-1481 December 2, 1991 FAX (803) 349-2990 Dr. F. John Vernberg Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research Marine Field Lab P. O. Box 1630 Georgetown, SC 29440 Dear John, I understand that the North Inlet - Winyah Bay system is being considered as a National Estuarine Re- search Reserve and would like to express my support for this proposal. As a member of the biology faculty at Coastal Carolina College I consider the North Inlet/Winyah Bay system to be one of the finest educational and research resources in the southeast. I have often brought my classes to North Inlet or the contiguous upland areas since they provide an excellent concentration of diverse habitats within a relatively small area and can attest to the value of these experiences for my students. Although I have not conducted my research at North Inlet in the past few years, my earlier experiences there have convinced me of the importance of the system as a site for marine and estuarine research. Most recently I have been working in the upper parts of the bay including the tidal fresh- waters of the Waccamaw, Black and Little Poe Doe Rivers. These habitats contain a diverse and interesting community that can provide answers to many interesting questions about the ecology, physiology and genetics of populations living at the freshwater - saltwater interface. I have also been active in various environmental and educational groups in the community which have utilized the area for field trips and other educational activities. Our local Audubon Society has done a great deal of bird watching on and around North Inlet/Winyah Bay. For example, the Litchfield-Pawleys island Christmas Bird Count area, which has been censused annually for nearly 20 years, includes the upper reaches of Winyah Bay). I also know that many area teachers depend on access to North Inlet/Winyah Bay and specially the facilities at Baruch, for environmental education experiences for school children of all grade levels. I have also found that the waters of North Islet and Winyah Bay provide excellent recreational, fishing and shellfish gathering opportunities and have always felt confident that such activities could coexist with research and educational activities. I hope you are successful in having North Islet - Winyah Bay named as a National Estuarine Research Reserve, as that designation will help preserve this beautiful and unique area for the enjoyment and benefit of all of the citizens of the region. Sincerely, Richard H. Moore Professor of Biology C:\CORRES\VERNBERG.L02 Response to Richard H. Moore Comments noted: no response required. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M-62 Ms. Susan E. Burden Sanctuaries and Reserves Division Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource Management National Ocean Service/NOAA 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 714 Washington, DC 20235 Telephone (202)-606-4122 Ms Durden: I am writing to include my comments on the DEIS/DMP for the proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. The Draft Management Plan, as submitted is flawed, in my opinion, in the area of public access. As worded on Page 37 of the Draft Management Plan and Page 29949 Sub Part A (921.1, C) of the Federal Register, I believe that Reserve Management will hamper, if not completely stop, free and unimpeded traditionally use of this area in favor of research despite assurance to the contrary. Traditional use being not only sport hunting, fishing, and shell fishing, but other non consumptive uses as well. Having enjoyed free access to this area, I find this scenario intolerable. In conclusion, I also believe that the State of South Carolina possesses the willpower and resources to protect the North Inlet/Winyah Bay Estuarine System without having to resort to Federal funding and resulting guidelines. Accordinly, I am asking that the proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay Estuarine Research Reserve be withdrawn from consideration. Sincerely, Russell B. Swail cc: David Cottingham Director Ecology and Environmental Conservation Office Rm. 6814 U. S. Dept. of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20235 Response to Russell B. Swail 1.1 The revised wording in the Draft Management Plan is: "Public access to the Reserve will follow existing practices in that the Public has access to the North Inlet and Winyah Bay portions of the Reserve by boat, including power boats. According to the law, no waterways can be restricted to public access. Since there is no evidence that the public's use of the proposed Reserve area threatens the site's ecological integrity, restrictions on access are not proposed or planned." In addition, the wording of the sections on traditional uses has been clarified in response to public comments. For example, "Traditional public uses of the proposed site will not be altered. These uses include boating, fishing, observation of wildlife, swimming and recreational harvesting of oysters and clams as permitted by state laws. Traditional uses of Winyah Bay permitted by state and Federal agencies will continue, including those associated with existing shipping channels" (Executive Summary). 1.2 The wording on Page 29949 Sub Part A (921.1, c) of the Federal Register is "National estuarine research reserves shall be open to the public to the extent permitted under State and Federal law. Multiple uses are allowed to the degree compatible with the research reserve's overall purpose as provided in the management plan (see 921.13) and consistent with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. Use levels are set by the individual state and analyzed in the manangement plan. The research reserve management plan shall describe the uses and establish priorities among these uses. The plan shall identify uses requiring a state permit, as well as areas where uses are encouraged or prohibited. Consistent with resource protection and research objectives, public access may be restricted t certain areas within a research reserve." The regulations in the Federal Register do not require reserve areas to be restricted and the Draft Management Plan does not propose to restrict public access to any waterways (see 1. above). 1.3 The Draft Management Plan describes protection of the site by existing laws. No new laws or restrictive regulations on access are proposed. d Susan Durden NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 714 Washington, DC 20235 Dear Ms. Durden, I am writing to express my support for the proposed National Esturine Research Reserve Site which would be located in the North Inlet/Winyah Bay area of Georgetown, South Carolina. The program would provide much needed funding for research and educational activities already in progress at the site as well as help to maintain the system in as natural a state as possible. In making a decision based on public support of NERRS, please consider that most of the public in opposition are people who do not have the correct information concerning the purposes and goals of the plan. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, E. Scott Kennedy Response to E. Scott Kennedy As a result of meetings with concerned citizens, a better understanding of the NERRS program has resulted. In addition the wording of the Draft Management Plan has been revised to clarify that public access will not be restricted (also see Appendix N, a Resolution passed by the SC Coastal Council which affirms the rights of public access). UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA GEORGETOWN, SC 29442 BELLE W. BARUCH INSTITUTE FOR SCOTT E. CHAPAL MARINE BIOLOGY AND COASTAL RESEARCH RESEARCH DATA MANAGER LONG-TERM ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH PROJECT Marine Field Laboratory P. O. Box 1630 (803) 546 Dear Ms. Durden, In response to the recent local outcry against the establishment of North Inlet. SC as a National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR), I feel compelled to write you to express my professional and private opinion. Some Georgetown sportsmen have concluded that the designation of North Inlet will result in restrictions on their rights to boat, fish, or hunt in the Inlet. The Draft Management Plan calls for no such restrictions and research can be carried out in this area without the imposition of such restrictions on local sportsmen. Research has been conducted in North Inlet since 1969 without the existence of those kinds of restrictions and research can be successfully continued at North Inlet without changes in law which exclude sporting or recreational use of the Inlet. After the designation as a NERR's site, people will continue to be able to fish, clam, oyster, hunt, and boat in North Inlet pursuant to the same state laws that apply everywhere else in South Carolina. No creeks, waterways, oyster reefs or marshes will be closed. This program will not impact the existence of Georgetown industries nor the port itself. The establishment of the reserve will greatly enhance the ability of the Baruch Institute to acquire federal money to conduct research concerning the estuarine resources of South Carolina. The NERR's designation would be provide synergistic collaborative potential with the ongoing Long Term Ecological Research Program through the University of South Carolina. It will also focus national attention on the pristine uniqueness which is the North Inlet Ecosystem by including it in the network of NERR's sites which have been previously established all over the Coastal U.S. These other sites have managed to integrate into local life-styles and economies successfully, lending proof to the notion that these reserves and local traditional uses can coexist. Educational opportunities will evolve from the establishment of North Inlet as a reserve for local children and students, South Carolina undergraduate and graduate students, and for the public as large. In short, the reservations held by local people seem to be unfounded and short sighted. Indeed, the establishment of the reserve can improve the quality of life in and around Georgetown. The involvement of local people in reserve issues and the development of research ideas pertinent to the area could be achieved through the creation of a local citizens advisory committee. We at the Baruch Marine Laboratory very much look forward to the day when North Inlet becomes a National Estuarine Research Reserve. It is our intent to convince the citizenry of Georgetown that the establishment of the reserve will not prevent any traditional uses of the Inlet and that, furthermore, the area and the state of South Carolina will benefit enormously from the designation of North Inlet as a NERR's site. With respect, Scott E. Chapal Response to Scott E. Chapal After reviewing written and oral comments from numerous individuals and meeting with various groups the wording in the Draft Management Plan has been strengthened to clarify that public access will not be denied (also see appendix N for copy of resolution passed by the SC Coastal Council which also support public access. C. Dean Cain, Jr. Response to C. Dean Cain, Jr. arundel Plantation Star Rt. I. Box 238 After reviewing written and oral comments from numerous individuals and meeting Georgetown, SC 29440 with various groups the wording in the Draft Management PlanNafsrbceoepnystorfernesolution clarify that public access will not be denied (also see appendix hgthened to Me. Susan Durden Yassed by the SC Coastal Council which also supports public access: HOAA Sanctuaries and Reserves Division 1825 Connecticut Ave. NW Suite 714 Washington, DC 20235 Dear Ms. Durden: am writing in support of the Proposed NEER Project in North Inlet near Georgetown, SC. As a member of the advisory committee I have seen the formation or the project from the past to the Present and an satisfied of the intent of the project. However, I realize that our committee has some work to be done concerning wording of the intent or the project and the legal interpretation thereof. I'hope that in the next proposed meetinjgl of the advisory board these misconmunicatione can be handled. I understand the fear and impatience the general public has with government in any form in this day and time. I am a marine fisheries manager for the State of South Carolina and have been through many situations to where People have had "traditional" privileges altered or taken away completely. So, rather wrong or 00 right, people don't like to see changes in the present scenerio. I realize the necessity of research and would certainly like to see Baruch become part of NEER. I have worked with the Baruch foundation for several years and know of their renowned research performed in scientific professionalism. Again, I support the 14EER project and intend to work hard for its inception. Sinc rely tq, ly, C. Dean Cai C. House of Representative State of South Carolina R. Linwood Altman Committees; District No. 108-Georgetown County Education and Public Works, Box 164 1st Vice Chairman Pawleys Island, S.C. 29585 Subcommittee on Highways, Chairman Interstate Cooperation, 1st Vice Chairman 434-C Blatt Building State Bidding Procedures, Vice Chairman Columbia, S.C. 29211 Highway Oversight Joint Committee South Carolina Coastal Council, Member Tel. (803) 734-3064 November 29, 1991 Ms. Susan Durden N.O.A.A. Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave. Sutie 714 Washington, DC 20235 Dear Ms. Durden: I am writing in support of the classification of North Inlet/Winyah Bay area under the National Estaurine Reserve Research System. My strong support comes from an equally strong suppoort of my constituency in Georgetown County. This proposal has been properly addressed in well publicized public hearings. Your favorable recommendations will be appreciated by the people of Georgetown County. With kindest regards. Sincerely, R. Linwood Altman Special Note: My support and constituency support is contingent on perpetual access to this area for recreational activities as presently exists. Response to R. Linwood Altman The wording in the Draft Management Plan has been strengthened to emphasize public access to North Inlet via the tidal waterways will not be restricted. In addition the SC Coastal Council has passed a resolution (Appendix N) ensuring public access. The Belle M. Baruch Foundation BELLEFIELD PLANTATION Response to J.E. Halpin P 0. BOX 578 GEORGETOWN. SOUTH CAROLINA 29442 The responsibilities of the private land owner and the Federal/state agencies are described in the Management Plan. For example, public access is addressed in a number of sections and the policy is that access to the Reserve across private land 25 November, 1991 is restricted and subject to existing policies (II A 2, II A 4 c (10), II A 4 e, II A 4 - 7. Mrs. Susan Durden IV B 5 i). Typically Policies were proposed by the Baruch Institute and subject to Manager of Atlantic and Great Lakes Region Sanctuaries and Reserves the approval of the Baruch Foundation. Land use of areas included in the Reserve Division will follow current policies which pre-date the Management Plan. The Management Office Of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Plan reflects the cooperative efforts and responsibilities of agencies and the Baruch 1825 Connecticut Avenue N.W. Foundation (i.e. Sections I and 11). Washington, DC 20235 Dear Mrs. Durden: Subject: Proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Portions of this Proposed Estuarine Research Reserve involves privately owned property. Because of this fact, the following questions are in need of answers: 1. What are the responsibilities Of private land owners In a National Estuarine Research Reserve relative to land use, access across private lands to estuarine areas, etc? 2. What are the responsibilities of the agencies involved in the development of the proposed estuarine research reserve to the private land owners involved? Your reply to these questions will be helpful and appreciated. Sincerely yours, J. E. Halpin Trustee rusts. Please reply to: J. E. Halpin 228 Holiday East Clemson, SC 29631-1455 Response to Maura H. Kenny Comments noted: no response required. November 27, 1991 Ms. Susan Durden NOAA Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW. Suite 714 Washington, DC 2035 Dear Ms Durden, I would like to express my support for the establishment of the Estuarine Reserve Program in North Inlet, South carolina. I frequently use Norh Inlet for fishing and recreation and I believe the reserve program can only serve to enhance and protect the existing'resources for my generation and many to come. I feet my conern regarding public access to North Inlet is adequately addressed by existing state law. Yours Sincerely. Response to Christopher P. Marsh Comments noted: no response required. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL CAROLINA COLLEGE COASTAL CAROLINA COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY P.O. Box 1954 P. O. Box 1954 Myrtle Beach, SC 29578 C , SC 29526 Myrtle Beach (803) 448-1481 C (803) 347-3161 2 December 1991 Dr. F. John Vernberg Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research P. 0. Box 1630 Georgetown, SC 29440 Dear Dr. Vernberg: Ian writing to give my strong support to establishing the North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. I have worked in this area for over seven years and recognize Its uniqueness and value to the region. North Inlet is a valuable resource for our program here at Coastal Carolina College. We use the area for a variety of classes Including Marine Ecology, Wetlands Ecology and Ornithology, and non-traditional classes such as Continuing Education and Marine Science Junior Scholars. Several of the faculty also use North Inlet and the Baruch Marine Lab for our research program. I have been monitoring local littorine populations there for six years, and use the project to train students how to conduct field research. During the past two years I have coordinated the S.C. Shorebird Survey, a state-wide monitoring program sponsored by the S.C. Sea Grant Consortium and S.C. Wildlife and Marine Resources Department. North Inlet is an important area for migratory sandpipers during fall migration, and has critical habitat for the Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), a species protected by the Endangered Species Act. Therefore, the area deserves the recognition that It would receive by becoming part of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System. In summary, I believe that establishment of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve would benefit the local region, as well as the scientific community in general. Sincerely, Christopher P. Marsh Associate Professor Post Office Box 676 Murrells Inlet, S.C. 29576-0676 December 2, 1991 Response to Mr. and Mrs, G.W. De Sousa Comments noted: no response required. Dr. F. John Vernberg P. O.Box 1630 Georgetown, South Carolina 29440 Dear Dr. Vernberg: We wish to express our stron support for the establishment of North lnletlWinyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Past studies of this area show it's impor'tance with respect to education and research programs. The establishment of the reserve will promote these activities without Interfering with the traditional activities that have been carried an in the area. We sincerely hope the reserve status is granted. Very truly yok S,,T Mr. snd Mrs. G. W. De Sousa Response to Franklin H. Spivey Comments noted: no response required. 7601 N. Ocean Blvd., Apt. 3-B Myrtle Beach, SC 29572 Nov. 30, 1991 Dr. P. John Vernberg Baruch Marine Lab P. 0. Box 1630 Georgetown, SC 29440 Dear Dr. Vernberg: I support the designation of North Inlet/Winyah Bay as a National Estuarine Research Reserve. It is my understanding the establishment of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay Reserve will provide additional research dollars for the area, increase the availability of more educational programs, bring National recognition to our unique coastal area and create a means by which the public can participate in collection and measurement of information about the special nature of the area. The National Reserve would contribute greatly to our area. Sinc9zdIy 'P, pi y Franklin H. S6 @ev 7- Response to Stephen Thomas Comments noted: no response required, PO Box 1637 Conway, SC29526 I December 1991 Dr. F. John VtfnbtTg PO Box 1630 Georgetown, SC 29440 Dear Dr. Vernberg: I support the establishment of the North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Fstuarine Research Reserve. I believe that this will help create an unparallel ed research and educational resource for our geographical region. I further understand that the traditional uses of North Inlet and Winyah Bay (such as fishing, oystering, and recreation) will be maintained after this designation. Sincerely, A Stephen Thomas @ M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Written Comments and Responses by Inclividuals 9 c6 w George S. Fogel John Liles P.O. Box 239 Billy Ackerman Arnie Cribb, Jr. Dale Gordon Georgetown. SC 29440 Hy 521 Box 43 267 Rose Avenue P.O. Box 1008 Georgetown. SC 29442 Georgetown, SC Pawleys Island, SC 29585 Robert L. Lumpkin, Jr. McNair Law Firm, PA Mark Anderson Jamings 0. Guerry P.O. Drawer 418 Tony L. Davis 408 Wayne Street Georgetown, SC 29442 P.O. Box 1538 Rt. 2, Box 12C Georgetown, SC 29442 Andrews, SC 29510 Georgetown, SC 29440 John Madison Gerald L. Venton Calvin C. Dawson Glemmle Haimes 4931 S I st Street Rt. 2. Box 157 Kent A. McAllen Murrell's Inlet, SC 29576 Georgetown. SC 29440 David L. Hamilton, Jr. P.O. Box 1585 P.O. Box 1166 Pawleys Island, SC Violet K. Benton Rowena J. Dawson Pawleys Island, SC 29585 4931 S 1st Street Fit. 2. Box 157 Robert 0. McCarter Murrell's Inlet, SC 29576 Georgetown, SC 29440 M.G. Hammon P.O. Box 1305 S Causeway 420 Lorill Street Pawleys Island, SC 29585 Herman Blake John B. Dawson Georgetown, SC 29440 T. McCaskill Mildred T. Blake Rt. 2. Box 158 Bruce Henderson 10 Collins Street Georgetown, SC 29440 29 Husey Drive Pawleys Island, SQ, 29585 Joseph L. Bulls Helyn M. Dawson Pawleys Island, SC 29585 2316 South Bay St. Rt. 2, Box 158 Donna M. Miller Georgetown, SC Georgetown. SC 29440 Billy Hendrick Francis K. Miller Scott Hinds Katherine L. Bull Jimmy Dial Rt. 3. Box 104 Rhonda Morris (6 2316 South Bay Street P.O. Box 2434 CYI Georgetown, SC Pawleys, Island Georgetown, SC Louise D. Murrell B.C. Campbell Dwane P. Dore, Sr. Hugh J. Huggins, Jr. Fit. 2, Box 159 4 Debrook Road P.O. Box 414 179 Wm. Screven Rd. Georgetown. SC 29440 Pawleys Island, SC 29585 Georgetown, SC 29442 Georgetown, SC 29440 Carolyn Norris Michael R. Carter, Sheriff Mr. and Mrs. C.S. Duelley Andrew Jordan 424 Wayne Street Georgetown County Box 8125 Maryville Station Georgetown, SC Georgetown, SC P.O. Box 869 Georgetown, SC 29440 Georgetown. SC 29440 Ronald Jordan Rev. Gene A. Norris Charles C. Clark W.D. Evans, Jr. T.H. Lauretarn Andy K. Owens Anthony L. Fogin P.O. Box 477 P.O. 1, Box 702A James H. Cooper P.O. Box 2227 Pawleys Island, SC 29585 Georgetown, SC 29440 D.B. Crayton Georgetown, SC 29442-2227 Nell Lewis Carolyn A. Owens Harris G. Fletcha III P.O. Box 1679 Steve Crows P.O. Box 711 Pawleys Island, SC 29585 2021 Ashbury St. Pawleys Island, SC 29585 Georgetown, SC 29440 This identical letter was received from 82 individuals. Response to form letter Me. Susan E. Durden 1.1 The revised wording in the Draft Management Plan is: "Public access to the Sanctuaries and Reserves Division Reserve will follow existing practices in that the Public has access to the North Inlet Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource Management and Winyah Bay portions of the Reserve by boat, including power boats. According National Ocean Service/NOAA to the law, no waterways can be restricted to public access. Since there is no 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. evidence that the public's use of the proposed Reserve area threatens the site's Suite 14 ecological integrity, restrictions on access are not proposed or planned." In addition Washington, DC 20235 the wording of the sections on traditional uses has been clarified in response to Telephone (202)606-4122 public comments. For example, "Traditional public uses of the proposed site will not be altered. These uses include boating, fishing, observation of wildlife, Ms. Durden: swimming and recreational harvesting of oysters and clams as permitted by state laws. Traditional uses of Winyah Bay permitted by state and Federal agencies will I an writing to include my comments on the DEIS/DMP for the continue, including those associated with existing shipping channels" (Executive proposed North Inlet/Winyah say National Estuarine Research Summary). Reserve. 1.2 The wording on Page 29949 Sub Part A (921.1, c) of the Federal Register is The Draft Management Plan, as submitted in flawed, in my "National estuarine research reserves shall be open to the public to the extent opinion, in the area or public access. As worded an Page 37 or the permitted under State and Federal law. Multiple uses are allowed to the degree Draft Management Plan and Page 29949 Sub Part A (921.1, c) or the compatible with the research reserve's overall purpose as provided in the Federal Register, I believe that Reserve Management will hamper, management plan (see 921.13) and consistent with paragrapha (a) and (b) of this if not completely stop, free And unimpeded traditional use of this section. Use levels are set by the individual state and analyzed in the management area in favor or research despite assurance to the contrary. plan. The research reserve management plan shall describe the uses and establish Traditional use being not only sport hunting, fishing, and shell priorities among these uses. The plan shall identify uses requiring a state permit, as fishing, but other non consumptive uses as well. Having enjoyed as areas where uses are encouraged or prohibited. Consistent with resource free access to this area, I find this scenario intolerable. protection and research objectives, public access may be restricted to certain areas within a research reserve.- The regulations in the Federal Register do not require In conclusion, r also believe that the State of South Carolina reserve areas to be restricted and the Draft Management Plan does not propose to possesses the willpower and resources to protect the North restrict public access to any waterways (see 1. above). Inlet/Winyah Day Estuarine System without having to resort to Federal funding and resulting guidelines. Accordingly, I am asking 1.3 The Draft Management Plan describes protection of the site by existing laws. No be withdrawn from consideration. new laws or restrictive regulations on access are proposed. Sincerely, Neil Lewis PO Box 1679 Pawley's Island, S.C. 29585 cc: David Cottingham Director Ecology and Environmental Conservation Office Rm. 6814 U.S. Dept. of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20235 Letter from Jay Sims. In addition to sending the above letter, Jay Sims submitted the following comments: 1. The Management Plan has too many loopholes that would allow the public to be barred from creeks and waterways. This area is open to the public now and shoul- remain open unless a natural disaster should occur. (i.e. Hugo). Ms. Susan E. Durden Sanctuaries and Reserve Division 2. If this area is made into a reserve it will condense public pressure into areas already Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource Management overused. National Ocean Service/NOAA 1925 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 3. Retail sales of fishing tackle and supplies of local merchants would be affected Suite 714 hurting the local economy. Washington, Dc 20235 Telephone (202) 606-4122 4. This project has basically been hidden from the public eye for the last severl years Ms. Durden: Many residents did not know about the research reserve, until the November I am writing to include my comments on the DEIS/DMP for the meeting. I would like to know if the Debordieu Colony Club members knew of this proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research reserve since they would be the reserve's neighbor to the north? Reserve. The Draft Management Plan, as submitted is flawed, in my 5. If this is such a great plan then why isn't the highlands of Baruch which has many opinion, In the area of public access. As worded on Page 37 of the Carolina bays included in the Reserve's boundaries. Draft Management Plan and Page 29949 Sub Part A (921.1, c) of the Federal Register, I believe that Reserve Management will hamper, if not completely stop, feee and unimpeded traditional use of this area in favor of research despite assurance to the contrary. Traditional use being not only sport hunting, fishing, and shell fishing, but other non consumptive uses as wall. Having enjoyed free access to this area. I find this scenario intolerable. In conclusion, I also believe that the State of South Carolina possesses the willpower and resources to protect the North Inlet/Winyah Day Estuarine System without having to resort to Federal funding and resulting guidelines. accordingly, I as asking that the proposed North Inlet/Winyah Day Estuarine Research Reserve be withdrawn from consideration. Sincerely, Jay Sines cc: David Cottingham Director Ecology and Environmental Conservation Office Rm. 6814 U.S. Dept. of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20235 Brenda Payne P.O. Box 1608 Pawleys Island. SC 29585 Larry L. Parker Keith Parker and Family Robert F. Roberts Rt. 2, Box 159 Georgetown. SC 29440 Mary L. Roberts Rt. 2. Box 159 Georgetown. SC 29440 Cecil Rogerson Rt. 2, Box 147 Andrews, SC 29510 J. Sale Joe Shroer 411 Front St. Georgetown, SC 29440 Eloise Smith John A. Smith Verna H. Smith Dale Stanley 215 Lilly Conway, SC 29526 William Tanner Chip Taylor 1032 Front St. Georgetown, SC 29440 Edward W. Tuttle Craig F. Young 12 Names are Illegible Bay Orthopaedic Associates General and Pediatric Orthopaedics Sports Medicine 1001 N Fraser Street P O Box 1777 Georgetown, South Carolina 29442 A. Mason Ahearn MD FACS Georgetown Office Wright S. Skinner III MD (803) 5271447 Murrells Inlet Office (803) 357-1004 December 2, 1991 FAX (803) 527-2701 Dear Ms. Durden: This letter is in regards to the DEIS/DMP for the proposed North Inlet Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. The draft managment plan as submitted concerns me greatly in the area of public access. As noted on page 37 of the draft management plan and also page 299 49 sub-part A (921.1, C) of the Federal Registrar the reserve management will definitely impede if not bring to a complete halt the use of this natural estuarine area for sport hunting, fishing, and shell fish gathering. After what has happened in Georgetown County as far as the development of the present sanctuary regions. I am very skeptical in the fact that North Inlet will remain open to the public use if the draft management plan is accepted. I am asking that the proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay Estuarine Research Reserve be withdrawn from consideration because of the potential for the complete loss of control of the area for public use. Thank you for considering my request. Sincerely, Wright S. Skinner, III, M.D. WSS:dm cc: Carol Campbell, Governor of the State of South Carolina Robin Tallon, Representative Response to letter from W. S. Skinner 3.1 See response to letter 1.1. 3.2 See response to letter 1.2. Response to comments from Jay Sims 21 The law clearly states that no waterways can be restricted to public access. 2.2 No changes in usage patterns are expected. 2.3 No evidence presented to support this contention. 2.4 Three public meetings have been held. Each was advertised in two local newspapers and each public hearing received newspaper coverage. Those individuals who attended a public hearing who wanted to be informed of the next meeting requested and received notification by mail. There is no way to know if all the residents of DeBordieu colony know about this project, however, Mr. Hope served on the Advisory Committee as a representative of the DeBordieu Home Owners Association. In addition, some Debordieu homeowners have written letters of support. 2.5 This program pertains to estuarine research reserves. The low small freshwater upland ponds are not considered an essential portion of the North Inlet or Winyah Bay estuarine ecosystems. K (10 zwo4u-c) KAva w,"ow" T%*Ay -rt4m 40"L-Y I- W-VOSM C:.V. 1-140 F-L-A.N V40LCMVK IIAC.67'1-y T*6*,t-.)S@C M"F@l-CbYMM:> lay rt4j3 950NQ%jCM 1@4SrCrUVIL. Mvim" -n4M vJ-PA-j ro+^r %&.tc2 @5@-krz T4M La,4Gt-,W- ce)p; Wommi-i vormars u*r- 1@b WC'Ri4 Wlr&4 T4E 15AQtJC$4 WSTiruTim , 'r#46 ' RIFISr 4DFr r6469 Oacbfftft &--'muSw&,4r ( IbY TV4% 564CW aW RA61590 #-+A*4C3-5) W14IC14 MALC@ft lj$- TI+GE cplPF4*S9LM -T!=k -rU4L WL.&-4. Accata=19.4C.L.,41 % A" AsKiwc. -rj4Akv T-ow Ppamivoisguo Novqri.4 op4LjLr / -49@JY^" ftAy ftS'rijAlqjF,4dL F:l4L4WL^M-r-G4 M&M4511LOR-JIL IML OAALACA.P" OANID :5AP4c=&RA6 Ojj&j. C. c:p&v,CD CoTro#4c*14A6pA W"vjoR*pjMWNr^L pit". 4414- U.S. cmKvPT- dW COP-Ak4-PtCvL ID.C. moss Malcolm B. Fore Jr. 2222 Violet St. Georgetown, S.C. 29440 Telephone (803) 546-9059 Ms. Susan E. Durden Sanctuaries and Research Division Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource Management National Ocean Service/NOAA 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 714 Washington, D.C. 20235 Subject: Draft Management Plan For The Proposed North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Ms. Durden From a local level here in Georgetown, it appears that the Baruch Institute is plotting to use Federal Management policies to further their ambitions of restricting public access to the North Inlet area. For the past twenty five years the Baruch Management has not been favorable to public access in the North Inlet area, and has caused a rightful feeling of mistrust in many of us. I feel that once the Baruch Institute has an option, in the future, North Inlet will be restricted from public use. The North Inlet area is not in any danger of being commercially developed, and the State of South Carolina has sufficient means to protect its resources, and the Baruch Institute has been doing well without being on the Federal payroll. While I am on that subject, the economy is in trouble now because of overspending. Should the Federal offices be looking for more liabilities, and paying saleries and benefits for jobs that already exist within the Baruch Institute. Response to letter from Mr. & Mrs. Fore 1. As stated in the Draft Management Plan, public access cannot and will not be restricted from the tidal waterways. 2. The protected nature of North Inlet was one of the features which make this such an appealing area for a NERR. However, another important function of a NERR is to provide a site for research and teaching. Hence having a NI/WB NERR accomplishs a number of goals. 3. Although some of the attendees at the public hearing held on November 20, 1991, expressed opposition to the establishment of the NI/WB NERR, many others wanted more informationa about the program since most of the attendees did not read the draft management plan or did not attend previous public hearings. Concern was expressed about access to the Reserve. Since the public hearing, the wording concerning access has been modified in the draft management plan to clarify that access to tidal waters is not prohibited. In addition, the Resolution passed by the SC Coastal Council, which is included in the present version of the Draft Management Plan (Appendix N), further supports the accessibility of these waters. Zz qk 7% 0 -J-%4 J"3 MAIL& 4,he p k_z -3 O-C c t i; ;@Lc_ A_,@ "-,C- -ptr4'Ple b@- -*, T_ O\fmc 1,4 Q 4 4 Ar %Cat S, of C. (4-1, "4LL 14,clo-oL.-Jvo wuc@ c)14k; @% 04Z.6:4, J-clr@--,, wALLJ4e(@ AmiA TN411A,..4% 44 L%%.c L-., L 44 V3 9 P4 t4-X t_-T - M% ZsQr ac.4 I -Z ,3Qa I A 'me Li u =C na i wu(Ct Se-jQ evc. c% A-kE rJe%AJ A%c 4- rj '%. C ter z, Danny Stone Rt 6 Box 894 Georgetown, SC 29440 Response to letter from Danny Stone Ms. Susan Durden 5.1 Comments noted. Statements in the Draft Management Plan have been reworded Sa clarifty the points raised by Mr. Stone. National Ocean Service/NOAA 1825 Connecticut Ave. N.W. Provide for traditional multiple uses that are consistent with Reserve research in Suite 714 order to ensure the continuation of existing traditional uses described elsewhere in this Washington, DC 20235 document. (page 24) The following additions were made to the Advisory Committee: representatives Ms. Durden, from SC Waterfowl Association and two representatives from general public. (page 28) Public access to the Reserve will follow existing practices in that the Public has I enjoyed meeting you and Ms. Washington access to the North Inlet and Winyah Bay portions of the Reserve by boat, including power last Wednesday night, Nov 20, in Georgetown. boats. According to the law, no waterways can be restricted to public access. Since I was very impressed with the fact that you there is no evidence that the public's use of the proposed Reserve area threatens the site's were there and were interested in our views ecological integrity, restrictions on access are not proposed or planned. (page 35-36) concerning this project. Research is one of the primary goals of the Reserve, and it is given highest priority in the management plan. Sometimes the success of a research project depends on the First off, let me state that I am study site remaining undisturbed. To prevent trampling or other unnatural physical against this plan in its present form. I disturbances, the researcher may request that signs requesting avoidance study find its' access policy to have to many area be posted. The request would be made to the Reserve Manager and reviewed by the clauses, which in later years might be used to Advisory Committee. Typically, study plots are small and located in infrequently visited or close off areas of North Inlet/Winyah Bay remote areas so that public travel or access patterns would not be disturbed. An under the guise of Research and/or Protectionism. information program will be initiated to inform the public about the importance of the I realize that there may be times when the research sites. (page 41) may be so sensitive that the area needs Traditional public uses of the proposed site will not be altered. These uses include to be closed. But I feel that these areas boating, fishing, wildlife observation, recreational harvesting of oysters and need to be as small as possible and for a clams as permitted by state laws. Seasonal hunting for waterfowl and rails in the tidal short of a period as possible. I also would waterways of the Reserve is a legal activity. Traditional uses of Winyah Bay permitted by like to say to the Advisory Committee that state and Federal agencies will continue, including existing shipping channels. this project is to provide an area for long-term research and to be an area that all sorts Public recreational activities are not allowed on the upland areas of the Hobcaw of recreational activities can take place, both Barony. Since Hobcaw Barony is a designated wildlife refuge, no hunting or trapping is consumptive and non-consumptive. It is not allowed on the upland portions of the property. However, the waterways are open under to be construed as another sanctuary as Baruch state and Federal jurisdiction and used by the public for boating, fishing, swimming and Lakes and South Island are now. We have enough recreational harvesting of oysters and clams. However, seasonal hunting for waterfowl of these in Georgetown County and South Carolina and rails in the tidal waterways of the Reserve is a legal activity. (page 74) already. I urge the committee to remember Access to the Reserve by land will be monitored and controlled and current access policies end regulations will be enforced. As noted previously (see Sect III B) access to the Reserve's waterways by boat is a traditional use and this practice will not be altered. page 84) COMMENTS AND RESPONSES . PUBLIC HEARING Comments expressed at the Public Hearing have been summarized for the sake of brevity and a complete copy of the transcript of the meeting is available upon request from the SC Coastal Council. Mr. Stockly, Georgetown Sportfishing Response to Mr. Stockly Association For the record, Mr. Stockly Comment noted; responded to in written submitted his comments in writing comments section. and these comments are included in the previous section with appropriate responses. Mr. Dean Cain, S.C. Wildlife and Marine Response to Mr. Dean Cain Resources Department I am a regional marine biologist Comment noted; no response necessa ry with SCWMR Department in Georgetown and a member of the NI/WB NERRS Advisory Committee. I am involved in District 9 law enforcement liaison. We have looked at laws concerning this proposal and I am convinced that Baruch neither has the authority nor the privilege to look at limiting our access in the North Inlet based on this plan. I believe that some of the changes referred to by Mr. Stockly have already been made in the plan. Mr.Bunch Response to Mr. Bunch I have been working with wetlands Any new regulations for tidally influenced for the past year. The Army Corps of wetlands will not be changed. The Army Engineers has been working on new Corp's new regulations pertain to definitions of wetlands and new freshwater wetlands. regulations are supposed to come out in January. How will these affect the NI/WB NERRS? Mr. Chasdie, resident of Georgetown Response to Mr. Chasdie When I was a little boy my dad No land will be taken by the federal or carried me to North Inlet. You was state government. Access to the Reserve allowed to go anywhere, any time, any is addressed in the Draft Management M-74 place, out there. All I am concerned is in Plan. the future time. We, the people, are the federal government, we pay taxes for it so why should we give our lands up when we support it. I think we should still be able to come out there as we please. Mr. Huggins, resident of Georgetown Response to Mr. Huggins Expressed concern about access to Comment noted; revised wording Reserve. concerning access has taken place as noted in previous section on written comments. Mr. Danny Stone, Georgetown resident Response to Mr. Danny Stone For the record, Mr. Stone Comments noted; responded to Mr. Stone submitted his comments in writing and in written comment section. these comments are included in the previous section with appropriate responses. Mr. Len Fore, Georgetown resident Response to Mr. Len Fore Suggested everyone at public Comments noted. We have met with the hearing read the DEIS/DMP and write a respondent and have made several letter to somebody, call some elected changes in the draft management plant to officials and tell them how you feel. He help address his concerns. In addition see was not in favor of proposal. the Resolution of the SC Coastal Council dealing with public access (Appendix N). Mr. Malcolm Fore, Georgetown resident Response to Mr. Malcolm Fore The public notice of this meeting Comments noted. The public notice was was hard to find in the newspaper. As far published in the,Georgetown Times and in as I know, it was only in one newspaper. the Coastal Observer, two local papers. How many people here actually read this We have met with the respondent and notice in the Geor-getown Times? He have made several changes in the draft voiced his opposition to plan for reasons management plant to help address his expressed by Danny Stone. He urged concerns. In addition see the Resolution people to contact the Governor at his of the SC Coastal Council dealing with home (number provided). public access (Appendix N). Mr. Andy Jordan, Commercial fisherman. Response to Mr. Andy Jordan Concerned about access to North Comments noted; access issue addressed Inlet. "And I believe it's going to be taken earlier. Role of federal government away from us because if the federal discussed in draft management plan. M-75 government gets involved with it and if we are doing any harm whatsoeveT --- and it's up to them, they decide what kind of harm we are doing." Mr. Paul Kenny, security officer with Response to Mr. Paul Kenny Baruch Foundation and research technician with USC. One of my jobs is to patrol North Comments noted; no response necessary. Inlet - I have never arrested anyone or asked one person to leave North Inlet. There is no legal basis to stop access to North Inlet by water. The management plan was created by an Advisory Committee consisting of Georgetown citizens and not by the Federal government. Mr. Shrower, Georgetown resident. Response to Mr. Shrower I am concerned about access to the Comments noted; wording on access has Reserve. However, the other side of the been changed to reflect his concerns. coin is we have to start worrying about protecting the habitat. We have to start worrying about making sure there is fish there to fish. I would like to see that there is a way where the protection and the research that these people want to do can be done and at the same time where we can fish and where we can be insured that we are not going to get limited on our access. Mr. Jim Ralston, Georgetown resident. Response to Mr. Jim Ralston I agree with'the theme just heard. 1. Comments noted; research and access We need to be concerned about the future addressed in revised management plan. of the resources so we need research. 2. Written comments can be received up We need to be concerned also with access to December 2nd. Comments will be to North Inlet. addressed and a Final Environmental Impact Statement and a revised Draft What are approval procedures from Management Plan will be published before this point on with this project. another public hearing will be held in Georgetown. M-76 Mr. Renny Marsh, Georgetown resident. Response to Mr. Renny Marsh I think right now we are smothered Comments noted; access and ownership with sanctuaries and state sanctuaries and discussed in revised management plan. federal sanctuaries in our area now that we are limited to certain areas that we can even go fishing and hunting anymore. And I know that this is probably a good proposal and a good thing that you are trying to do and all, but I am very concerned because I think this is just one foot in the door to smother us clean out of North Inlet, the public, and it's just one step up the ladder that's going to eventually take all our rights away from over there. Ms. Betsy Haskins, Georgetown resident. Response to Ms. Betsy Haskins I served on the Advisory Comments noted; no response is requi red. Committee as a representative from the League of Women Voters. She spoke in favor of proposal and indicated there are some misconceptions. One concerns the waters of North Inlet. They are public waters and can't be closed to the public. The League of Women Voters supports things like this because we think the public resources, what we have which belongs to all of us, should be maintained for all of us and should be enhanced. And that is the basic aim of this program. Mr. Ed Russ, Georgetown resident. Response to Mr. Ed Russ Expressed concern over access. Comments noted; access and ownership discussed in revised management plan. Mr. Louis Cameron, Georgetown resident. Response to Mr. Louis Cameron I too agree that management is Comment noted; management plan needed, however, we do not need the describes cooperative relationship federal government ruining North Inlet. between local citizens, the Baruch That's the bottom line. Foundation, the Baruch Institute, USC, and state and federal agencies. M-77 PUBLIC HEARING - NOVEMBER 20, 1991 Georgetown, South Carolina Place: Georgetown County Library Georgetown, South Carolina Time: 7:00 P.M. Hearing held by: F. John Vernberg, Director Baruch Institute University of South Carolina H. Stephen Snyder South Carolina Coastal Council Mrs. Dolores Washington Program Specialist Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, NOAA Hearing attended by: 1 . Johny Huggins 27. Terrell Mitchum 2. Jay Sims 28. Rothie Altman 3. Malcolm Fore 29. C.E. Luquire 4. Lin Fore 30. Junior Cooper 5. Michael Chastie 31. Waitus Altman 6. Calvin Richardson 32. Donald Kelly 7. Michael W. Flegel, Sr. 33. Levon Miller 8. Brenda J. Flegel 34. David Gallup 9. Michael H. McDonald 35. Keith Parker 10. Wade Wilder 36. S.E. Miller 11. Roger D. Jolly 37. Dean Cain 12. William Conner 38. Ingell H. Doyle 13. PaulKenny 39. Harold Zobel 14. Bob Glenn 40. R.H. Williams 15. Andy Jordan 41. Danny Norbutt 16. Levain Altman 42. Richard L. Lambert 17. Melvin Haimes 43. Edwin Jayroe 18. Charles E. Foxworth 44. William M. Cribb, Jr. 19. Wendell Hinson 45. Renee Marsh 20. Benjamin L. Blake, Jr. 46. Larry Holladay 21. Benjamin L. Blake, Sr. 47. Danny L. Stone 22. C. Edward Russ 48. Thad Holley 23. Gene Leigh 49. Ray Mahaffy, Jr. 24. Robert Yates 50. Keith Lunsford 25. Jamie Elliott 51. Carl Hanson 26. R. Gary Pope 52. Thomas L. Smith M-78 53. Tommy Watt 54. Wayne Altman 55. Jim Ralston 56. Derek 0. Nesbit 57. Vernon W. Smith 58. Vernie C. Barnhill 59. Mark Schroer 60. Betsy High 61. Bill Nauss 62. Donald Arck 63. Terry Miller 64. Judy Phelan 65. Richard Parker 66. Meg Phelan 67. Frankie S. Lambert 68. Robert D. Smith 69. Robert Lambert 70. Louie E. Cameron 71. Glenn A. Morris M-79 I I I I I I I Appendix N South Carolina Coastal Council Resolution I Concerning Public Access to Waters of North Inlet and Winyah Bay. I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH CAROLINA CCASTAL COUNCIL RESOLUTION Whereas, the South Carolina Coastal Council is appointed by the General Assembly and Governor of South Carolina as tMe designated State agency to implement and manage the State's federally approved coastal zone management program and to coordinate the program with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and Whereas, the National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) Program administered by NOAA is designed to select and protect representative coastal biogeographical regions throughout the nation for the purpo3es of research and education; and Whereas, the Governor of South Carolina has directed the South Carolina Coastal Council, through a site-selection committee, to select for his nomination one or more sites for inclusion in the NERR System; and Whereas, the South Carolina Coastal Council. by and through its committee, selected the North Tnlet/Winyah Bay site in Georgetown County as one of the two NERR sites selected in South Carolina; and Whereas, public coments were received in the development of a management plan for the North "et/Winyah Say NM in which citizens of Georgetown County expressed their concerns in ensuring that the tidal waters of North Inlet and Winyah Bay within the NERR boundary remain open to the public for aCCOS3 and recreational use. Be it, therefore, Resolved, that when the North Inlet/Winyah Say site is designated a National Estuarine ftsearch Reserve (NERR) by N0AAq the following conditions shall govern use of the tidal waters: 1) All tidal waters of the State of South Carolina located within the Reserve must remain oMn to the public for access and tecreational use, subject to rules and regulations of the State; and 2) If public access is limited by actions of any party or any governing body, then the South Carolina Coastal Council. is authorized -to intervene an behalf of Me public by initiating appropriate legal action to restore and maintain access or by Initiating procedures to remove the site from the NERR System. N-1 I I I I I I I Appendix 0 I I Consistency Certification by South Carolina Coastal Council. I I I I I I I I I I OUTH February 24, 1992 ISAROLINA COASTAL COUNCIL Ms. Delores Washington Ashley Corporate Center Sanctuaries and Reserves Division 4130 Faber Place NOAA/OCRM Suite 3W 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW, Rm. 714 Charleston, S.C. 29405 (SM) 744-5838 Washington, DC M235 FAX 744-5847 William W. Jones, Jr. Dear Ms. Washington: Chairman H, Wayne Beam, Ph,0, The South Carolina Coastal Council has reviewed the Draft Executive Director Environmental Impact Statement and the Draft Management Plan for -the North Inlet/Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve and find the plan consistent with.the S. C. Coastal Zone Management Program. The Coastal Council looks forward to working with NOAA, the Belle W. Baruch Institute and the S. C. Wildlife and Marine Resources Department in implementing and managing South Carolina's components to the National Estuarine Research Reserve System. Sincerely, 3 Leder '@! H. Stephen Director of Planning and Certification cc: Mr. William W. Jones, Jr. Dr. H. Wayne Beam Mr. Christopher L. Brooks Dr..;John Vernberg 0-1 A com Pow IMINIIIIIIIIIIIII 3 6668 00000 5555